JWC sent me a link to this documentary video on the World Trade Center attacks. After watching the hour-and-a-half presentation, I feel inclined to side with over 1500 engineers who have weighed the evidence and said that the official story just could not have happened.
It's sad but true that a soundbite mentality deprives many, if not most, of the ability to focus for 90 minutes. But I have provided a couple of shorter videos in a previous post to at least pique (not peak, please) readers' curiosity. Additionally, I believe a sizable segment of my readers are above average and can maintain focus long enough to watch the documentary. (Click on link in first line above.)
After considering the odd fact that two planes brought down three buildings in a totally uncharacteristic fashion, the following possibility occurred to me: A third plane was supposed to crash into the building number seven. When the third plane did not materialize, the plot had unfolded too far, and they felt forced to detonate the charges in building seven.
If my hypothetical proposition were correct, Flight 93, which crashed in Pennsylvania, was meant to crash into WTC 7. Wikipedia says, "Although the evidence remains inconclusive, it is widely presumed the intended target was the United States Capitol Washington, D.C."
Below you will see a map which appears in the Wikipedia article. It shows a sharp turn from its westerly course after the hijackers took over. This makes it look as though it's headed for Washington D.C. But then, there's a course correction that points it in the direction of New York City.
I believe the third turn came shortly before the crash and represents either loss of control as the passengers stormed the cockpit (official story) or evasive action before military planes shot it down (one conspiracy version).
So, does my "conspiracy theory" have merit? I don't have any hard evidence to support it, so I'm just putting it out there for your consideration. And if you think it's an idea that's really out there, that's okay, too.
For an idea of how major media sources suppress the 9/11 conspiracy researchers and writers, see this article:
It's sad but true that a soundbite mentality deprives many, if not most, of the ability to focus for 90 minutes. But I have provided a couple of shorter videos in a previous post to at least pique (not peak, please) readers' curiosity. Additionally, I believe a sizable segment of my readers are above average and can maintain focus long enough to watch the documentary. (Click on link in first line above.)
After considering the odd fact that two planes brought down three buildings in a totally uncharacteristic fashion, the following possibility occurred to me: A third plane was supposed to crash into the building number seven. When the third plane did not materialize, the plot had unfolded too far, and they felt forced to detonate the charges in building seven.
If my hypothetical proposition were correct, Flight 93, which crashed in Pennsylvania, was meant to crash into WTC 7. Wikipedia says, "Although the evidence remains inconclusive, it is widely presumed the intended target was the United States Capitol Washington, D.C."
Below you will see a map which appears in the Wikipedia article. It shows a sharp turn from its westerly course after the hijackers took over. This makes it look as though it's headed for Washington D.C. But then, there's a course correction that points it in the direction of New York City.
I believe the third turn came shortly before the crash and represents either loss of control as the passengers stormed the cockpit (official story) or evasive action before military planes shot it down (one conspiracy version).
So, does my "conspiracy theory" have merit? I don't have any hard evidence to support it, so I'm just putting it out there for your consideration. And if you think it's an idea that's really out there, that's okay, too.
For an idea of how major media sources suppress the 9/11 conspiracy researchers and writers, see this article:
Wikipedia's 9/11 'Edit Wars' | 911Blogger.com - Likewise, readers have repeatedly turned to the article “9/11 Conspiracy Theories.” The article — similarly detailed with 299 footnotes purporting to explain accusations of faked video footage or controlled demolition of the two ... |
No comments:
Post a Comment