Im trying to say that there is so much bullshit tied in with 9/11 to think that killing Bin Laden serves us justice is a mockery. There are some serious indiscrepancies with what was reported that day, I really don\'t want to get started I need to go to bed.
As for the airports these days- it\'s over kill. I don\'t think an airplane will ever be successfully hijacked again. Hijacking works on the principal that the hostages think they will live if they cooperate. Hijacked passengers now will already consider themselves dead and fight accordingly.
Let\'s get back to the good stuff.
Wanted to comment on this particular point by wildcoyote first. Two things:
1. I agree with your theory when applied to a situation of 4 or 5 guys hijacking a plane full of passengers a la 9/11. However, what terrorists could do is find flights that fly well below capacity (ideally below 50%), buy all the tickets, and then get enough guys on there to outmuscle the passengers and crew. This would be easiest with a lot of shuttle routes in the western part of the country that routinely fly small planes at low density i.e. 10/30 seats filled. You wouldn\'t get a jumbo jet out of it but you could still wreak plenty of havoc with a smaller plane. Overall it\'s still highly unlikely this would work but so was 9/11.
2. Most of the security that has gone into place in the past 10 years has been due to people trying to blow up planes, not hijack them. Nevertheless, I do tend to agree with you that security is overkill or "security theater" - especially when considering how a country like Israel manages to secure their airports with far less hassle to the passengers.
As for P4B\'s quoted comment, I think it is OK to question many aspects of what we\'ve been told about 9/11. There are a couple of major aspects of the story that I\'m not quite completely convinced about. But I don\'t think that there will ever be enough evidence to prove any theories that stray far from the truth we\'ve been given. I find anyone who proclaims any conspiracy theories to be undeniable truth to be quite unbelievable.
FWIW, here are the top 3 major aspects of the story that I am not 100% sure about. (In reverse order)
3. That American Airlines flight 175 is the plane that hit the south tower. I\'m 98% sure that it was but not 100%. There is some compelling evidence to suggest that it was a different plane. However, I question the credibility of most of the sources espousing this evidence, and there is far more compelling evidence that the story we\'ve been given about Flight 175 is the truth.
2. That the plane impacts were the sole catalyst of the towers collapsing. I\'m about 90% convinced that this is true, but not 100%. All "controlled demolition" theories have holes and seem highly unlikely, but they are not completely implausible either. I acknowledge that I know nothing about physics and that a lot of the stuff out there about controlled demolition theories is probably designed to convince people like me (who know nothing about physics) that controlled demolition is the truth. There is a TON of info about controlled demolition theories out there and a lot of the research seems to come from pretty credible sources. What can I say...I highly favor the media/government story that it was just the planes that did it, but I\'m not completely sold on that story. Sorry.
1. The case of WTC 7 really bothers me. (That\'s the other WTC building that collapsed even though nothing hit it.) What makes this one so hard to understand is that it\'s not even clear what the "company line" is for why this building collapsed. The media, government, and popular opinion unanimously agree that flight 175 hit the south tower and that the plane impacts caused the towers to collapse. I can at least be certain of what I\'m
supposed to believe in those cases. But there doesn\'t seem to be any widely agreed-upon story as to why WTC 7 collapsed. It\'s almost like we\'ve been invited to come up with our own story for this, which is why it\'s hard to know what to make of it. I\'m open to anything here because it\'s not clear what we\'re even supposed to believe in the first place.
Again, I would like to disclaim that I don\'t think that there will ever be enough evidence to prove any theories that stray far from the truth we\'ve been given, and I think that to proclaim any "conspiracy" theory as undeniable truth is quite premature and fanciful at this time.
