Questions & Answers
1. If the attacks were not carried out by Al Qaeda, it would have taken so many people inside government conspiring that they never would have been able to maintain secrecy. Someone would have come forward by now, wouldn’t they? Answer
2. Doesn’t the collapse of the twin towers from the top down prove that it was not controlled demolition, which is always done from the bottom?
This is a canard frequently used by those who defend the official story. In fact, while bottom-up is the most usual method, the twin towers collapse was caused, allegedly, by impact from the aircraft near the top and resultant fire. It would be necessary to initiate the collapse somewhere around the impact zone in order to use that explanation, so the collapse from the impact zone down supports the scenario that was created. In fact, several things complicate this explanation. First, the collapse of the South tower, while it began at the impact floors, proceeded UP before any movement occurred below the strike zone. The block of 13 floors above the strike zone can be seen to tilt and then begin to disintegrate and collapse before the floors below the strike show any movement. In addition, the North tower antenna can be seen to start down before there is any collapse of floors, indicating that the failure of the core columns precede the failure of the floors - just opposite to the scenario proposed by NIST.
3. Didn’t Osama Bin Laden make a confession video after 9/11 in which he claimed credit and laughed about the successful attack? Answer
4. What possible motive would cause anyone to do such a thing, particularly to their own countrymen? Answer
5. But the U. S. doesn’t do that kind of thing. We are a good country with an honest government. We don’t do false-flag operations to start wars. We are always provoked or attacked, aren’t we? Answer
6. But the huge quantities of jet fuel created a huge inferno that melted the steel of the core columns and caused the collapse, didn’t it? Answer
Top of Page
|
