09-06-2011, 04:46 PM
Jeffrey Orling Wrote:Ed,
I find your "script" overly complex, despite almost unlimited budgets. Coordinating hundreds if not thousands of actors, rehearsals, devices with perfect reliability and a plan that needs to step though the script absent and FUBARs. Not likely to happen.
My (and others) research seems to point to a rather simple means to take down the towers (twins)... and this would accordingly require few "managers" ... few mechanics ... very little "stealth"...and much much less possibility for FUBAR. The "take down" would also end up looking like a "natural collapse" as opposed to a CD and it would destroy most of the evidence of the engineered "take down".
Such an operation would still require covert assets and access to "high tech" demolition devices (mechanics) provided with ordinance etc... by those with access to same (managers).
But who directed the managers... and what were their motives as it seems like there were several???
Jeff, it seems to me your "natural collapse" theory is another version of the CD version of A and E. After all, the intended results were the same. Maybe you are correct.
Your argument solves problems you have with the CD theory: its cost is huge, the mechanics create complexity that can cause things to go wrong, too many people involved (somebody would have talked), etc.
You could have some good points. In some ways, the perps of 9/11 did not need to bring the buildings down to achieve their results to achieve their political agendas. They wanted to bring them down to destroy evidence and to clear the way for the new buildings.
Finally, having spent a lot of time reading at DPF, it appears that the technology to erase memories has now been developed. You can't talk about what you can't remember. Perfect crime.
In sum, I am saying that what you are arguing is not all that important. They destroyed three buildings on live TV. They got away with it. And we are just left arguing about reality.