04-27-2006, 07:31 AM
geves Wrote:well to join along in this convo. a plane crashing would be more unpredictable then a missle... we have laser guided missles nowadays remember, the US has technology that can get a missle to hit that location and only be off a by a few inches.
you can also choose how big you want the explosion to be, with a missle.
a plane on the other hand...you would only so much control.
the point of the planes hitting the WTC, wasn't just to cause damage to a specific part of the building (remember the vice president was in the pentagon at the time and the "plane" just happened to hit a part of the pentagon that was being reconstructed)
but they were going to "pull" the WTC towers anyways. so it didn't matter as long as the planes hit the building.
you don't want debris from a plane to become some sort of uncalculatable factor, for instance a 8 ton (or whatever) engine flying through a wall and taking out a crap load of important people. i doubt that a engine that big flying at those speeds would be stopped by a few walls, just because the building was made to with-stand explosion & natrual disasters.
so you use a missle, that you can aim to the exact location and only use enough explosive power to affect a certain area.
now i'm not sure how much of this video i believe, but it's easily worth watching.
i was just trying to explain why you would use a missle
I for one don't believe for a second that our own government was involved or allowed it to happen. I would however accept the missle theory and the cover up on the grounds that the government wants us to feel more secure and wouldn't us to go back to Cold War times where we practice missle drills because we'd be made aware of our vulnerability.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
"I'm not a geek, I'm just coolness challenged."
"I'm not a geek, I'm just coolness challenged."