21-09-2013, 03:10 PM
Magda Hassan Wrote:I suppose it is the same in the JFK area. Some think there was another team on the South Knoll. Others don't. Some think there were 2 bodies, 2 autopsies etc. Others don't. Some think there were 2 or more Zapruder films. Or one intact one tampered. Others don't go for that. None of them need support the 'official' story. But there are differences of opinion on what did and did not happen. Same with 911. Some think there were middle eastern hijackers in control of the planes. Others think the planes were remotely controlled. Some think the buildings were a controlled demolition. Others think it was a natural progression. Or that it was a controlled demolition on 7 and maybe not in the towers. Just because thee is no unified theory in these events does not mean the official version is accepted. Just that there are difference on what did and did not happen.
The suppression of the Zapruder film alone shows subterfuge in the JFK case. Taken together, the head motion to the back and left, the Parkland doctor's testament to a large hole in the right rear, and the back wound, show there was at least shooting coming from two directions and that there had to be more than one person involved.
In 2012 the drawings for WTC 7 were finally released due to an FOIA and scrutiny of them shows that the NIST WTC 7 report omitted structural features from their analysis in the area where the report says the collapse initiated. When these features are involved in the analysis the failures are not possible by a large margin. So there is obviously subterfuge occurring here also. The symmetric free fall acceleration for the first eight stories of WTC 7's fall is impossible in a natural collapse, as all of the potential energy is being converted to motion with none left over to crush and deform the building. Thus it is clear this building was brought down via controlled demolition. The next question involves when the charges were set, as it could not have been done on Sept. 11, 2001.
The complex points that you show that some bring up with the Kennedy assassination cloud the much simpler issue I mention above. In both cases there is clear subterfuge and an attempt to hide what actually occurred by officials responsible for explaining what happened. Why?