23 Jan 2023 1:26 pm
Respectfully, over the years, the number of theories has probably numbered into the thousands, and all this time it's been a circular debate of the inside job believer's demanding proof something couldn't or didn't happen, rather than their having to prove it actually did... Again, I can't imagine how the logistics & work involved to cut & drill into concrete and steel structural supports to wire those buildings for a controlled implosion could have gone unnoticed..Vegas » 23 Jan 2023, 10:16 am » wrote: ↑ Interesting. Is it possible that they only needed to implode a partial of the buildings? It's not like they needed to be concerned with safety.
This is where I think a lot of the 911 inside job theorists & believers need to revisit the 1993 World Trade Center attack...
The 1993 attack was committed by the same terrorist organization who attacked us on 911, Al Qaeda.. But the significance of 1993 is downplayed because the results didn't match the intent.. Remember, a large Truck Bomb was detonated in the basement of the North Tower with the goal of it collapsing into the South Tower bringing both down... This would have resulted in far more deaths than what we suffered at the WTC on 911, though there were a small number killed and over 1000 injured...
That is one difference between 1993 and 2001... But I believe the main one is 1993 happened under Bill Clinton, and 2001 was the George W Bush administration... There were no cries of conspiracy that I recall in 1993 when Clinton was in office, and I think it would have played out the same had he been in when 911 occur..