Jones and others on this thread have asked the big questions. I certainly do not find fault in the never-ending quest to unravel a clearer picture of who or what was behind the horrific 9/11 events. I freely admit that I'm no expert in what it takes to bring down tall buildings in a covert way. Others, like Jed, OTOH, appear to be more confident in suggesting that the bringing down of huge massive structures like those of the WTC is more straight-forward than some on this list feel comfortable accepting.
If my recent 9/11 essay has evoked within certain Vort members the impression that at times I lack a sufficient amount of propensity to use logic, that my recent 9/11 essay was "anti-scientific" they are absolutely right in the sense that I was expression my personal feelings – a gut reaction. Was that scientific of me? Was it a logical response? No, certainly not. My only defense is to repeat a personal gut feeling, a NON-SCIENTIFIC perception. In matters involving the horrific 9/11 case, admittedly, it's a good idea to get a reasonable handle on who was likely responsible. On that point I suspect few here disagree with the premise that Alkeda possessed sufficient motivation to do us great harm. The unanswered question however seems to revolve around the conjecture on whether Alkeda had "help", presumably from a super-secret western-like organization possessing nefarious motivations, where it is alleged that the real truth of the matter is that they allowed Alkeda to do their nefarious bidding for them. Ah! Now, the plot thickens! If so, where do we go from here. Well, that's the beauty of it all: Anywhere we want to take it, and just about to anyone's doorstep we have a personal beef with, it would seem! It seems to me that for many who have expressed dissatisfaction with the official explanations they are now focusing their interest on individuals who claim they are collecting the necessary scientific evidence to prove the conjecture that there had to have been explosives deliberately planted in the WTC. The point being, once one has convinced themselves that explosives had been deliberately planted, presumably so that they can later be detonated... well, one can then spend the rest of their life speculating endlessly on WHO DID IT! Let me repeat that last point from a slightly different angle: Once one buys into the premise that explosives were deliberately and nefariously planted, speculation on who or what organization was responsible will have a tendency to consume one's sense of outrage. One us likely to feel compelled to spend the rest of their life trying to get to the bottom of the injustice of it all. Jones, I feel compelled to ask the following questions, even though they actually are for anyone who feels more and more convinced that explosives had to have been deliberately planted in the WTC: Do you really think you'll get a satisfactory answer? Do you really think these reports that attempt to prove (scientifically) that explosives had to have been involved will really settle the matter? Will the presumed "scientific proof" clarify everything for you? A lot of innocent people died. It was horrible, we all understand this instinctively. We all continue to suffer from the aftermath of 9/11 in various, and often subconscious ways. For me, I came to the personal conclusion that there are better ways for me to try to transform the world I stand on into hopefully a better place, where something as horrific as another 9/11 event will not likely happen again. I'd rather do that instead of investing what little intellectual and emotional resources I still have left remaining under my command in being consumed in never-ending tantalizing premises of trying to prove the conjecture that explosives had to have been planted in the WTC. No doubt, some will believe I'm behaving naively, if not anti-scientifically. I can live with that. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/zazzle.
