I think it was an inside job because Bush thought that Statue of Liberty is too important but the Twin Towers were faulty and had to be brought down by 2020 anyway as they had major faults...
2007-05-25 07:34:32 · 31 answers · asked by ? 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
I noticed everyone above this ignored the FACT that the twin towers WERE FAULTY as per a 1990 report commissioned by the NY Port Authority. The report concluded that because of the complete saturation of Asbestos in the towers and the changing of US building codes in 1986 the twin towers would need to be leveled and rebuilt or gutted and refurbished by 2013 AND would be condemned by 2020! A very EXPENSIVE proposition for any developer or the city. In 1991 NY started the transfer of the WTC complex into private hands (Larry Silverstein) to shift the re-development costs away from the taxpayers. The WTC was transferred totally into private control in May 2001 when Larry Silverstein signed a 99 year lease on the whole complex after buying outright WTC 1,2 and 7 (the three buildings that fell down on 9/11). After 9/11 Siverstein immediately filed TWO insurance claims for a total of $11.5 billion...those claims were settled this week for $9.5 billion.
Any time an event like 9/11 occurs the first logical step in an investigation is to look at who benefits. I would say Silverstein is definitely benefiting (the insurance companies are rebuilding HIS buildings that HE will collect rent from...sweet deal)...as is the Military-Industrial complex who now has an endless "war on terror" putting TRILLIONS of dollars into their pockets from just the first 6 years of this endless war...the OIL companies aren't doing too bad since 9/11 either.
So what was in it for the Taliban, Iraq and the 1 million Muslims that have been slaughtered since 9/11?
2007-05-25 08:20:28 · answer #1 · answered by Perry L 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
While the Statue of Liberty would be a great symbolic target, there just isn't the possibility of as high of a death toll as there would be at the World Trade Center. The Twin Towers is also a symbolic target, two of the largest buildings in the world, a symbol of American economic power. If you want to kill a lot of people, the Twin Towers would be the correct target. There is no way you can logically make the conclusion: The Twin Towers were the target, so it had to be an inside job.
2007-05-25 07:56:25 · answer #2 · answered by msi_cord 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
the twin towers had 1 thing and that was to make money the statue although famous would not have suited these extremists,no it had to be a body count to shock the world
but answer this if bush had sent their heaviest bombers and blown a terrorists hideout and say killed 200 terrorists the bleading hearts all over the world would howl,yet they dont even whimper that an usa hostage has been brutaly murdered in the so called triangle of death
well why dont they unleash a huge bombardment on the whole triangle area just like dresden got in wwii
i bet the out cry would be that the usa was barbaric yet these terrorists can hack off peoples heads and get away with it
this is a brutal planet indeed
2007-05-25 10:24:09 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
The Statue of Liberty would not have resulted in nearly as many deaths because it wasn't open yet.
Even George Bush wouldn't have been stupid enough to risk an inside job. If he were caught, it would mean going before a firing squad for him and everyone in his administration.
The number of people that would have needed to help plan out such a conspiracy would make such an idea prohibitive. Not only that, he couldn't have been sure that the planes would hit the towers! Not only that, the plane that crashed in Pennsylvania was headed for the Capitol! He planned on taking out all of Congress too???
Are you also going to suggest as well that Bill Clinton was behind the 1993 attacks? Because you can't ignore that. If this really was a conspiracy you would have to tie-in the 93 attacks in some fashion.
I wish you conspiracy buffs would put your energy into proving his many alleged crimes while in office - crimes that could actually get him impeached and jailed rather than waste time squawking about something you can NEVER prove because it did NOT happen!
2007-05-25 07:37:44 · answer #4 · answered by BOOM 7 · 11⤊ 2⤋
i thought you were away on holiday but alas your back with yet another stupid question the statue of liberty represents no strategic value the object of the attacks were to take lives thus the twin towers full of office workers and not an obvious target next you will be asking why they never chose central park doh
2007-05-26 06:52:30 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
The question is why do you bother waking up in the morning with such a negative view of the world? Seek help, friend, before it is too late.
Even as far as these conspiracy theories go this is a pretty lame one. I have still failed to see anything that the President did after 9/11 that could not have been accomplished anyway.
.
2007-05-25 07:46:29 · answer #6 · answered by Jacob W 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
bush plans a mass murder.he hits the world trade center because it has to come down anyway ?
that is your point ?
why not hit a senior citizens center? they are all going to die anyway ?
i dont know about you, but if i was the president, with all those resources, i would have fabracated the whole thing, said the CIA killed the terroists before they could do it. no witnesses, no victims, but i still get to blame terroists.
your plan requires me to find planes, pilolts and passengers willing to die for me, i would have to create a fake history of the terroists to make them look like terroists.picking a building would be the least of my worries.
and the plane that went into the ground ? because that section of land was going to be torn up anyway ?
the pentagon? they were remoldeing it so the president figured they wouldnt mind doing it again since they were right there anyway? think of the OT.
Allah just called. your virgins are ready. please go blow yourself up.
2007-05-25 08:05:40 · answer #7 · answered by Jr. is angry 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Thats my moms favorite question but the thing was the Twin Towers represented the USA's economic power and strength. If they nailed the statue it would have really made us mad but not mad enough.You have to remember they were suppose to hit the White House and Pentigon also. If Bush did it why did he set up an emergancy leader of our country with Europe if something happened to us? I can't believe you people say such far out stuff!
2007-05-25 08:46:07 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋
Larry Silverstein hadn't insured it for terrorist attack, and nobody wanted to demolish it on the cheap. Edit, sorry I forgot to add that you are indeed an idiot, not even funny tastelessness.
2016-05-17 21:35:44 · answer #9 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Oh my. These conspiracies get worse by the day. Why bother with the Statue of Liberty when huge skyscrapers filled with people are a much better hit and easier to aim planes at?
2007-05-25 07:42:03 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 7⤊ 2⤋