Maybe, but also not knowing the confirmed date of the attack could have created a helluva time crunch not to mention an embarrassing (and dangerous) bit of evidence lying around if it was postponed or scrubbed. Much smaller buildings similar to other demolition projects (known variables instead of by guess and by golly) often take days or weeks to prepare. However wouldn't it have been poetic justice had the plane crash schedule been moved up a day or two and caught these fantasy "Masters" in a conflagration?

To the point, even if piggy-backing on the plane attack, controlled demolition is just too complicated and risky not to mention redundant. In fact it is more complicated than if the plane attack was utter fiction since far too much would've been beyond any of the traitors control. Do you imagine New York and the whole country would have just shrugged off 4 attack planes, 3 of which hit their targets, but "only" destroying 15 or 20 floors in two towers and killing say 1000 people instead of 3000?

Yeah, it's all pure speculation on my part. I have to confess I find conspiracy theories more interesting than official versions. Same with the JFK & RFK assassinations.

I think you'll find that's exactly why (at least one of the main reasons anyway) a lot of people seem to believe in them. Let's face it, the official version is just too boring, it's just not Hollywood stuff, is it?

i'd like to disagree here.
how is the official version of what happened on sep 11 2001 "boring" and "not hollywood"?
(similar with other events)
it's just that you heard it too many times.
i think i remember goebbels had something to say about that.

honestly, a controlled demolition is definitely much more boring than an airplane crashing into a skyscraper!!!

It's not a question of the "official" version being boring or "not Hollywood stuff". It's the fact that, knowing governments and their agencies have indulged in underhand/unethical/illegal activities, is there any evidence of such involvement in this case? I'm not suggesting that all the government, or any entire agency, was involved. Only that some employees of some three-letter-agency may have been.

I wasn't talking about who was behind it, I'm saying that a lot of people think that it must be more than the "official version" for the same reason, you stated in post #77. You said it yourself, "I have to confess I find conspiracy theories more interesting than official versions." That's the point I was making.

Rather than "more interesting", maybe I should have put "thought-provoking".

While "sinister and shocking" isn't precisely the antithesis of "boring", it certainly behaves like it, and is an obviously powerful instinct or people wouldn't slow down and crane their necks at a highway auto accident. Everyone agrees that News and even Weather "looks for the blood" (or spins it that way) because sudden shock sells. We expect attacks from enemies so it is less shocking than High Treason.

Add a dash of surreptitious, hidden, secret, covered-up, shadow figures organized behind closed doors working to deceive the downtrodden but wary masses and voila! a tasty Feast! It's like Wonder Bread, all puffed up with air, devoid of any real substance but it looks so tasty (to some) when doused in "secret sauce".

You don't believe in "surreptitious, hidden, secret, covered-up, shadow figures organized behind closed doors working to deceive"? Like the ones who claimed Iraq had WMDs, for instance?

There is a world of difference between a handful of liars telling one story and then insisting that one event or condition is true and a group which had to number in excess of 30 people, possibly hundreds, from many walks of life working under the noses of those who would jail or kill them for what would likely take months and millions of dollars who are also prepared to take many difficult steps to cover up any loose ends. When one considers how swiftly the first "demolition team" were identified and tracked down a half a world away just a few years prior, the risk is demonstrably immense, not just in theory but in actual, recent experience.

So, No!, I don't believe some cabal, club or whatever possessed the financial, political and brain power to conceive of such a long term, complicated, exposed, difficult and brilliant plan were also idiotic enough to attempt it. There were far simpler, less risky means to accomplish the same goal.

When your government and its agencies have engineered the overthrow of democratically elected governments, overthrow or assassinations of foreign leaders, and experiments with LSD on unsuspecting people for the purpose of mind control, are my speculations really that unbelievable?

Chile
Mossadegh
MK-Ultra

Three examples.

Funny you bought that up...

What actually happened with that is that the U.S. government failed to make its case for war (to the U. N. Security Council), and then immediately attacked anyway.

Conclusion: they didn't need to go to such lengths to manufacture a reason to go to war or to "escalate the War on Terror". They could always have just done it.

So yeah, I do find it "really that unbelievable" that they would have sacrificed that much in lives, money, effort(?) and security on something that ended up being redundant.

Yes, and we all know who they are. The Bilderberg Group, who are really freemasons, who are really Templars, who are really giant cannibal lizards from another world.

You missed out the Illuminati, SPECTRE, and the Church of the SubGenius. All part of Operation MF.

While I totally recognize that the US government has sanctioned some truly heinous acts, firstly so has every government. You don't imagine yours is exempt do you? However and once again, there is a HUGE difference between perpetrating mayhem and havoc out of sight, especially against perceived external threats or in the case of MKUltra, developing what could be spun as a "humane weapon" IF it managed to get out from secret testing, which of course that one did. That, however is like a parking ticket compared to purposely derailing a train carrying hundreds of schoolchildren to camp - not in the same league by any stretch of the imagination, even before we consider risk of discovery before, during, and after. Cost/Benefit, Mate.