Two questions about 9/11...?

Question

1. Did you know that at least one (I've forgotten, but maybe more than one) American military official is on record suggesting to a U.S. president that American forces attack an American target and blame it on some other country so that a war could be fought for some political end?

Question: Does this "beg the question" has a fair investigation been done to verify exactly who was behind 9/11?

2. What were the firefighters doing on the 78th floor if they knew the building could collapse?

Question: Does this "beg the questions" were the Twin Towers built to withstand a plane crash if the FF were confident enough to be on the 78th floor?

And were the Towers really brought down by demolition explosives -- which would mean that some internal American forces were somehow involved in the attacks -- as many reported hearing a sound like demolition explosives before the Towers fell, during initial coverage of the attacks?

Thanks for answering,

Pete

Answer 1

I don't know if this is exactly true or not....but this is what I heard put in simple words:

I heard that President Bush wanted to get oil someway and somehow and FAST. So he told the CIA to do this somehow. The CIA thought of something like what happened 9/11 so there would be an excuse to fight off "terrorism." They got all these extreme Arabs to do this, and President Bush knew something very big was going to happen but he did nothing to stop it. After 9/11 happened, he had an excuse to raid the middle east to get oil.

I can see this as being true because the whole situation seems very shady to me with Bush. I don't hate Bush, and could see where he was coming from, as gas prices would have probably been even higher if nothing had been done. But I think he obviously went about it the wrong way. There had to be some sort of conspiracy between 9/11.

And to those Arabs who slandered Islam and gave it a bad name, I'm NOT saying they had nothing to do with it, but they probably were very happy to be involved with the destruction of America. I think alot of money must have been involved. The Arabs were probably the first to jump on getting credit for this. It makes alot of sense to alot of people.

But then again, no one will probably know the truth until like 30 years later, when politicians finally give you the truth. That happens with alot of big events like this. What are your ideas exactly?

Answer 2

Any crime involving more than one person is a conspiracy. Two of the responders seemed to feel this was not a conspiracy when everyone else including the US government agrees that many people were involved in this crime. It was a conspiracy.

The US administration did not want an investigation and only conceeded to run one after a lot of pressure from victum families. The resulting 9/11 commission report turned out to be a white wash with selected information, inaccurate information, and huge holes in the investigation, including a failure to look into the destruction of WTC7.

Physics professor Steven Jones of BYU was able to show that the most likely cause of the destruction of WTC1, WTC2, and WTC7 were planned demolitions. He and others who promoted this explaination have suffered from persecution professionally. Some are celebrities, others are professionals.

False flag operations are well documented and are typical when countries want to initiate aggression. Look at how Viet Nam was justified.

Answer 3

What's the reason for dragging this up. The buildings are gone, thousands died, hundreds of rescuers perished. Time to move on. There was nobody on the grassy knoll with a detonater.

Answer 4

Doesn't the presence of so many firefighters and so many dead suggest that there was no conspiracy? Wouldn't the number of people needed to be involved in the planning alone rule it out? Such numbers would have meant that someone would have 'leaked' it.