Its NOT as complicated as YOU think.
If the American people could be told a viable story about Saudi Arabian hijackers, then the public would never question the event to the degree that it needs.
This was a simple operation. The hijackers DID NOT have to know about the second part of the operation. For all "they" knew, all they had to do was fly the planes into targets for money. Money that went to "their" families.
The second part of the operation was well planned. From insuring the buildings, to allowing our defenses to be lax. These hijackers pretty much flew the planes without having to worry about being shot down. That order wasnt issued until AFTER the damage was done.
As for the towers.
What strategic advantage did middle eastern men have in blowing them up?? Any damage would be a temporary victory followed by a response only the USA could provide. Taking down two pretty much EMPTY buildings wasnt a very strategic target, but when you add explosives to take them down, then the debris is the real problem.
Still, nobody can explain why building 7 fell on its own without massive fires or direct impact of aircraft.. It just simply comes down.
At no time in the history of construction has ANY steel building fell due to fire in much greater heat ranges. Only on 9/11 did two towers come down in free fall speed and one building (7) fall down on its own.
How can anyone not be suspicious about this? Why is it much easier to accept 19 Saudi hijackers were responsible for all of this??
There was great planning involved. We may never know who planned it all but we do know, that we dont have the answers.
Why were all the passports that were found unburned? Were they made out of some magic material exempt from flame? Dont you find that extremely odd?
What of the black boxes?? Why in aviation history were the black boxes not recovered?? Two in each plane, and the 9/11 commission wants us to believe the simply vanished?
Think about it sober.
Nobody wants our government to be involved, but there is NO WAY these terrorists could pull this off without assistance.
And what about the coincedences??
Let me ask you this sober, and give it some thought.
(The pilot of Flight 77 (charles burlingame III) , which allegedly hit the Pentagon on 9/11, was involved in an pentagon exercise planned a year earlier.
The Washington Post reported on 16 September 2001 that the pilot of Flight 77 was former friend-4 fighter pilot Charles Burlingame III, who in his last Navy job, developed anti-terror strategies for the Navy before retiring to fly for American Airlines. He drafted the Pentagon’s emergency response plan in case it was hit by a civilian airliner. Flight 77 allegedly struck the Pentagon. It is not clear which MASCAL Charles Burlingame III authored.
So, the pilot of flight 77, just happens to be the former navy pilot who WORKED at the pentagon before retiring from the navy and started to work for American Airlines as a flight captain.
Burlingame, who was put in charge of the pentagon defense initiative, actually planned for an attack on the pentagon using a jumbo jet and then COINCEDENTALLY it's his aircraft that gets hijacked and flowned into the pentagon?
The year before 9/11, he is working with the pentagon, flying around the pentagon working on strategic defense systems? Systems that were never deployed on 9/11 ?
Then, Burlingames daughter comes out and starts telling people something is wrong with the official story about her dads airplane hijacking and then she meets a mysterious "military" man, begins dating him, then perishes in an unexplained fire in her apartment with this man involved but claiming he locked himself out of the apartment and couldnt get back in to save her??
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/06/nyregion/06fire.html?_r=0
Its easy to say all of this was just a coincedence, thats the easiest way out of it.
TOS.
