Why must a person seeking credible answers for obvious questions be considered a “nut”. An obvious conspiracy occurred on 911 and there are many accusations but little evidence that supports the official version of events. The destruction of the Towers is not adequately,or I think, correctly explained by the 911 Commission. Building 7 is ignored altogether. The fact that Boston, New York (arguably the most important city in the world), Philadelphia, Baltimore, Pittsburg, Washington D.C., nuclear power plants, dams, bridges, Norfolk Naval Base etc. were conveniently left unprotected by Norad whose primary duty is to protect our airspace on the day the terrorist chose to act, deserves questioning. Whole surveillance systems failed to surveil anything, and the laws of physics were held in abeyance on that particular day. We have video of alleged perpetrators getting lap dances but none of the Pentagon incident. The police and investigative forces of the country almost immediately traced the responsibility to ObL while not providing one iota of forensic evidence adequate for a court trial. It amazes me that there are some who ridicule those who only request answers to basic questions. Why is it nutty to question the official version? Why are academics and scientists respected in fields of study relevant to the phenomena of 911 so discounted? They advance peer reviewed research and facts, but merely being contrary to the official story makes them lunatics. When my questions are answered I will return to the sanity you think I have abandoned.
