Comment: Because none of us can actually prove controlled demolition

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: Ron has always used this (see in situ)

Because none of us can actually prove controlled demolition

Yet even the 9/11 Commission admits to the concept of Blowback as a possible motivation for the crime they've tried to pin on dissent against America. At least that is a logical metric Paul can work from. He does in fact use it quite effectively in getting at some truth where it presents itself.

It is pretty safe to say that had not the towers inexplicably disintegrated, the world would be a much different place but the practical reality is that they did actually inexplicably disintegrate and no one can prove why.

Had not the towers inexplicably disintegrated, hundreds of people would have died and as was the case when hundreds of people died in bombings that took place at US embassies in Africa,the US public would have pretty much let out the same kind of collective yawn...maybe, just maybe, since it wasn't the first time the explanation was given that the attacks were motivated by the US refusing to stop protecting the Saudi Royal Family from internal dissent while using Saudi land to orchestrate the bombing and killing of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi children during a time of supposed cease-fire while also supporting Israel in killing of innocent Palestinians at that time, people might have started a debate as to whether or not we should maybe rethink US foreign policy. Instead the towers inexplicably disintegrated and most people were psychologically traumatized and left unable to carry on a rational debate regarding US foreign policy.

Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has. - Margaret Mead