-------------------------------------------------------
answers:
jonthan say: No it was an insurance scam
-
cosmo say: no
-
Who say: no - it was an outside job with lots of cardboard
-
Keith say: no
-
sojsail say: LOL.
-
Sir-Cumalot say: NO - i doubt it
trouble with the 9/11 debate is it EVOLVED - when things evolve without fact to guide it .....people will generally make up things to force an agenda , then to make them FIT based on a 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9 step removed fact
in this case: the twin towers fell in a inappropriate manner therefore theories are produced after this anomaly using step one as a BASE fact to enforce a theory - Thus giving it some amount of credence in a wishingful thinking mind
the only things you should take from 9/11 are the following :
the towers falling "WAS" very unusual
having 3 towers falling on the sameday within hours of each other - statistically speaking is extremely RARE and within a mathematical equation the probability would be very SMALL of such an event
but the above is not out of the realms of possibly - it's just the possibly is very remote - thus spawning doubt and the need for appeasement . The only thing this should induce within a individual person is scepticism , scepticism is used to be OPEN and digest possibilities around a step one fact ( in the 9/11 case it's mathematical "PROBABILITY " )
the next thing you need to take into account - is appeasement from the authorities ( HUMAN NATURE ) - because they have been suppressive of information this would equate to some form of deception ie: control over what people think or what they want people to think .
The reason why police say " you have the right to remain silent " when arresting people . Is because a defendant can HANG themselves by producing supposed facts or a storyline that are then picked through and disproved by the police to produce a rough TRUTH ( or as close as they can get it )