are you some sort of ****? why would they?
2007-09-11 08:06:28
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
Apply logical principles to the question:
1. What is the motive?
2. Do they have opportunity?
Us Occam's razor:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_Razor
The conclusion that relies on the least number of assumptions is most likely the correct conclusion.
For al Quada to pull it off:
Couple of dozen people to plan and execute
Minimal amount of money required
Minimal amount of equipment required
Minimal amount of expertise required.
Minimal amount of cover up.
Number of assumptions required to reach that conculsion -- Well under 100
For the US Gov't to plan and execute:
Thousands would need to be involved
Money in the amounts that would be hard to hide
Equipment would need to be purchased, installed, etc...
Expertise in demolishing buildings
Extensive cover up. (How come all the folks that work in the WTC never spoke about the disruption from the workers installing the explosives? Surely the tens of thousands of employees were not in on it?)
Number of assumptions required for that explanation -- Thousands, maybe over ten thousand.
If this is for a philosophy discussion, use logic, not emotion. A lot of people believe that it was the Bush administration for emotional reasons, not logical ones.
2007-09-11 08:41:20
·
answer #2
·
answered by cbmttek 5
·
2⤊
0⤋
I don't think they "Planned" it per say.
I think they had Intel on it from Intellegence agencies all over, but they just let it happen.
That way the whole world would buy the Sadaam "Weapons" story without question, and let america Invade Oil monopoly of the world, and can hinder Russia/Iran/China's growth economically and Millitarily.
America was friends with iraq, and knows if it has weapons, or not. So if it supposedly "knows" it has weapons, how could they have not known about an Attack.
I know,i know... allegedly its OSAMA, not Sadaam who was behind it.
But this ties to whether they "planned it"
2007-09-19 00:30:54
·
answer #3
·
answered by AckiLeeZ 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
The US government is incapable of keeping that kind of secret. The Bay of Pigs Invasion was reported in the New York Times the day before it occured. Look at all the politicaly motivated leaks comming out of the CIA and other agencies by people intent on embarrassing G.W.
2007-09-18 16:47:32
·
answer #4
·
answered by james 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
you didn't fall for the loosechange or 9/11.org site conspiracy theories did you? really if you think they did then give your conclusive reasoning....
one point you might want to consider though: this is the u.s. government we are talking about..do you really think that they can not only plan but carry out something that big in just 8 months? the conspiracy idiots want to say it was bush...he was only in office 8 months ! so that means either the government acted really fast or they were planning it during clinton's administration...and we know that the government never acts quickly on anything. remember common sense and the truth are the best ways to fight ignorance
2007-09-11 08:09:42
·
answer #5
·
answered by ?! 6
·
2⤊
0⤋
That is a ridiculous suggestion.
If you think that the U.S/ government planned the attacks on 9/11 who do you not give evidence and conclusive reasoning?
2007-09-11 08:04:31
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
Actually i dont really care if they did or not, but there is A lot of evidence to support that the US did plan the attack
1) look at the pictures of the pentagon attack and notice in all the pictures there is no air plane wreckage at all at the crash sight.
2) when the WTC collaspe looks closly and notice small detonations below where the plane hit.
3) Cell phone wouldnt work at the altittude the planes where flying when they were hijacked.
there is a bunch of other ****, then again people will find all kinds of crap when they believe something is real or not...
Like the Moon landing conspiracy, JFK, and a million other.
2007-09-11 08:13:43
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
3⤋
Yes, one arm of the US government planned the attacks. They were working with the Saudis. They were supposed to puch a couple of holes in alsmost vacant buildings to make a statement against big business. This was to help US relationships with that Saudi faction, namely Ak Qaeda and bin Ladan. This was George W. Bush's faction.
Another arm demolished the buildings to make it worse. This was to destroy the relationship with that faction.
Both factions being minions of different arms of big business, in the end there is only big business to blame.
2007-09-17 04:53:31
·
answer #8
·
answered by i_am_the_fig 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
The 2d airplane replaced into shown flying into the development by way of fact they have been filming the 1st development....and you pronounced 'they say" the airplanes did no longer examine human beings...who're they? did we take the oil? and it wasn't what replaced into began with muslims it replaced into what replaced into began with the country...
2016-10-18 21:47:52
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Reminds me of the ongoing debate whether or not Roosevelt knew of Pearl Harbor and did nothing specifically to get the American people to rally to war because before that, they didn't want to get involved.
Is this the premise behind your claim?
2007-09-17 04:23:39
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
To answer with a question...do you work for Bin Laden?
2007-09-17 07:05:23
·
answer #11
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋