Creative Speculation
In reply to the discussion: The best evidence against a 9/11 conspiracy? [View all]William Seger
(11,082 posts)... is that you have instead accepted a ridiculously distorted version of what that story is. You can't even consider the possibility that hijacking planes and pointing them at buildings is much less difficult than you seem to think, and that that might be the reason why that attack was chosen over all the others considered. You do that despite having no logical reason whatsoever for why the alleged perps would have concocted such a complicated and risky hoax when something much less complicated and risky would have accomplished the same presumed purpose. It seems that JFK conspiracists started that trend (thereby defining modern conspiracism as imagining complex hoaxes for no apparent reason) when they imagined that the best scheme the alleged perps could come up with was to put a second shooter on the grassy knoll in crowded Dealey Plaza and then after implausibly getting away with that, engaged in a ridiculously complicated and risky coverup of where the fatal shot "really" came from. Don't you think a few minutes of thinking should have produced a dozen simpler and safer plots?
I assume that the "feat" you're referring to is the "truth movement's" highly exaggerated version of the slow, wobbly spiral that Hani Hanjour did to lose altitude to hit the Pentagon. That version grossly distorts how easy it actually was -- watch the animation sometime -- and ignores the fact that Hanjour damn near plowed into a bridge and then barely managed to avoid "lawn darting" short of his target. The real "official story" actually supports the notion that Hanjour was a crappy pilot with no experience flying a large jet.
The "official story" IS the official story because it's the one supported by the evidence we have. Declaring all that evidence to be fake just because it desperately wants a different story is the main problem with the "truth movement," because that precedes all the nonsensical and unsupported stories they try to sell.