[Command Prompt]

After listening to coast to coast last night, I had to wonder, why exactly does everyone put up with the completley inadequate explanation of what happened that day?

I mean no disrespect to anyone on this board that lost someone but theres some pretty glaring holes and I was wondering if anyone else has been wondering.

Here's my two main questions:

1. Most engineers agree that it was nearly impossible for the buildings to collapse the way they did.

2. Everyone kinda forgot about this and worried about the "war in iraq" (technically the third) really quickly and more or less added in the "war on terrorism" which then became the "fight for freedom and democracy" all of a sudden, even though terrorism and iraq arn't directly related. Bin Laden was trained by the CIA to kill Iranians but that is niether here nor there since the current war is unrelated. Or is it? I thought the US involvement was to remove saddam and install a democracy so they can benifit from a trading partner (oil), not hunt down terrorists and agents of evil and so forth. Which is what it became all of a sudden when everyone started asking "hey what about bin laden? hows that going?"

I'm so fucking confused at this point, can anyone make sense of this mess?