Judy Wood does nothing to prove that some of these things couldn't or shouldn't have happened. She poses questions but does nothing to prove that it couldn't have naturally happened the way it did. She compares certain things with controlled demolitions. If it wasn't a controlled demolition then it wouldn't be comparable in some ways to a controlled demolition. There is nothing controlled in a situation where a plane full of jet fuel is involved is there?  She says the dust particles seem too small but when a question is posed she says she doesn't know how small they would be. These buildings were loaded with spray on asbestos coatings. Some estimate as much or more than 400 tons. That type of thing is removed before a controlled demolition is performed. Maybe that explains the extent of the dust? Maybe that also explains oddities in some of her questions concerning fires, and lack of heat in resulting convection currents. Maybe cars experienced fires because they have gas tanks in them, and there are circumstances which cause fire-less explosions which may explain other "oddities".

Personally I think there is more information to support this as being an act of terrorism not performed by the US gov't.  I do believe however that the government has conspired to hide the extent of intelligence they had prior to 9/11, conspired to hide the health risk in the area during the clean up, and conspired to deceive the public while beating the war drums after 9/11.

As far as conspiracies go I'm far more interested in what our government is currently doing.  For example in regards to Iran, Afghanistan, or Pakistan.

Really.  I missed him, I guess.  Well, anyone (who doesn't violate the TOS) is welcome far as I know.  Used to have a lot of liberal/progressive/lefty types, particularly during the Bush/Kerry campaign in 1994.  They mostly evaporated after that election, though.

Assholes have been banned for repeated assholedness, so I can probably wrap my mind around the idea that Moore was here and is now gone.

Judy Wood is the conspiracy theorist. The response was to the video you posted of her and my reply specifically used her name not yours. Unfortunately most of the questions will never be answered. The event caused a lot of chain reactions, there are many unknowns, and most of the forensic evidence is gone. Hence there will be many questions that will not and probably can no longer be answered.

As to your specific response. The buildings didn't "simply" fall down. There are many reasons for a falling building to create fires. Jets heavily laden with tons of fuel oil apparently started the chain of events for starters. Gas lines gets ruptured, Office buildings often have heating oil tanks, or drums of other chemicals and solvents. Vehicles have fuel tanks which can ignite under certain conditions that do not require impact damage, the list goes on and on.

I specifically mentioned asbestos because its flame retardant and insulating properties may have something to do with why some things burned and others didn't A large portion of the dust contained asbestos since a concrete/asbestos mix was used in the buildings construction to meet certain fire safety standards back when they were built. Also because that was something hidden by the EPA rather quickly. I remember seeing Christine Whitman declaring the area safe for the clean up workers and doubting that to be true at the time.

It doesn't. That's why I specifically stated

as opposed to many who resort to calling people crackpots and such. At this point in time I believe there is more information supporting the theory that it was not a USG planned conspiracy. There are several things that were covered up, but that is the tendency of government  in any case.

I'm sure it is. I certainly hope we have some interesting toys up our sleeve seeing how much money we spend on the military. I just don't think 9/11 would have been deemed a good testing ground for such things. Seems to me there are easier/far less costly ways to sway public opinion when you need to beat the drums of war.

There is no reason that the buildings couldn't 'just fall down' after being damaged in the way they were.  What actually happened did not violate any laws of nature.  To pretend that what actually happened was somehow impossible is a pointless exercise with no resolution.  The number of 'How could that be?' questions on the other side of the argument (that this was a controlled demolition or some other method of intentional destruction abetted by our government) far exceeds those on the 'What you saw with your own eyes is exactly what happened' side of the argument.

I'm afraid magic is the only alternative explanation.  If you believe in that, you're good to go.  For some (not speaking of you specifically, Boobz), the burden of proof has been shifted and it's up to others to prove magic didn't happen.

I can assure you I have devoted all the energy and time the notion deserves.  As in very little.

Smootseas, I could show much in the way of motivation for the USG but most of it would be labeled as conspiracy shit. However, the first step is coming to an understanding with you yourself that there are those people throughout history who have destroyed much of their own populations as well as the promotion of genocide towards others. Then you have to convince yourself that there is nothing the USG will not do to maintain its power to shape the future of the world. If there is something that prevents Americans from becoming ruthless scourges I sure don't know what it is. Seems like the news is full of people like this all throughout our government and yet people seem to think there are actual limits that we will not cross over ... poppycock I say. You do understand what it means when the government controls the media outlets don’t you? First two that popped up for me in my search were Russia and China…

If you are following me, then it is no great leap of faith to understand that a few thousand lives are a drop in the bucket on a national scale let alone on the world stage. The easiest way to dig into motive here is through an analysis of what happened as a result of 911. We got our wars and we got to kill hundreds of thousands of people that had absolutely nothing to do with 911 in anyone’s book. We are if anything a war based society as in we thrive in one ... any war at all will do just fine. How can you go wrong when you sell arms to both sides, hahaha?  And what possible better way could there be to win an unjust war … than to attack people who are not a viable national threat and who are defenseless to American military aggression.  Yep destroy their infrastructure so we can rebuild it for them … so they can then destroy it out of spite (I guess) and we can keep rebuilding it for them.  Who do you think benefits from all of this? The Afghan or Iraqi people … I think not. But in the end, there are a bunch of rich Muslim and American deviants getting a lot richer as a result of the status quo.

Anyway, once you convince yourself that the USG is capable of such dastardly things (as actively practiced around the world against other people) … motive is much easier to distinguish.

And when you actually do that as well as dig into the history of many related things that transpired leading up to and well before 9/11 you may understand that there are people who actually confessed to the planning of the attacks. Maybe you should spend some time looking up names like Khalid Shaikh Mohammed and and Ramzi Yousef. That would be a good place to start, however there is far more information about the 9/11 attacks than just that. The 9/11 commission report is another good read. You may not believe everything in the report because it was a product of the USG however there is plenty of information in it from people who are not the elected officials who lie to us day in and day out. You are doing what ideologues do. You come up with a theory (or take somebody else's) and look for information to support it and most importantly dismiss every piece of information,including much written testimony and court documentation that leads to a very different conclusion. The motive of the 9/11 attacks was formed prior to the attack not afterwards so dismissing all the information we have of things that transpired before the attack is a huge mistake on your part. Yes the investigation was done after the attack but the motive was conceived long before it ever happened. At least eight years before it happened many would say since that is the first time it was attacked by the same organization,some of the people actually confessing to have been involved with the planning of both attacks.

Do you know anything about the history of Al-Qaeda and Osama Bin Laden along with the two above-named mentioned above? If you do you will understand the motives behind much of what transpired. Do you know anything about the history of our foreign policy regarding the Middle East? If you know the history of our foreign policy actions in the region you may understand why some people chose to fight wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. They may or may not have been good reasons, and the results may or may not have accomplished the goals, which may or may not reflect what people were told, but that is just the way the secretive nature of foreign policy goes sometimes. Elected officials may have lied about the real reasons for those actions but it is probably because the real reasons are sometimes best left unsaid. US foreign policy is rooted around US interest and not that of other countries so sometimes it is best left to speculation.

The motives of Bin Laden against the US as a whole are actually rooted upon US troop presence in Saudi Arabia. He said it himself long before 9/11 was ever conceived. I have been given no credible reason to disbelieve that, and several actions that have transpired since he stated it lead me to believe that he meant what he said.

Don't know how that got messed up.....Oh well.

I'm not an architect or demolition expert (or well read in either) so I can't look at the issue from that point of view. All I can do is see where the data comes from that supports such things and most that I have seen is from skeptic sites.

It's not silly because when you look at it, the relationship was actually between papa Bush and Bin Laden's father. Osama became a Saudi exile because he spoke out against the Saudi Royal family. He was stripped of his citizenship and thrown out of the country. As far as the Bush family and their companies, they had big CIA connections, but that does not make them evil. Many companies hire CIA people to work within their ranks and some of them are fronts others are not. That does not make them evil. This country has reasons to do some of those things. Sometimes the results don't always justify the means or meet the goal but that is the way it is. Shit happens and sometimes things go wrong and sometimes people think up stupid things that have poor results. To err is human. I don't defend Bush for many of his decisions because I think he made many poor choices but I do not think he is evil. I simply think some of his ideology is flawed and many of the decisions he made as president were bad decisions. It's not one side or the other for me on every issue, he did some things that will end up being good in the long run and some that will be bad.