re: new doubts on wtc collapse/grant62
I'm challenging the official explanation miles.
Whether the building was dropped by planted explosives is a hypothetical projection if one finds the official explanation unacceptable or dubious.
There may be other hypothetical projections and even other explanations.
But the official story sucks.
And the outcome of the 9/11 events was speedily capitalised upon to progress an illegitimate political and military agenda. The very next day in fact, Bush began to execute the Afghanistan and Iraq agendas.
There's also an overt attempt to force-feed the official line on the WTC collapses and to wipe away any challenge to the official line:
