Assuming that 9/11 was an inside job, why do it that way? Assuming: Planes hit the WTC, but it was controlled demolitions that brought the towers down. No plane hit the Pentagon, but really a missle. No plane crashed in Shanksville, the hole was faked. Why would that plan make sense? Why have planes AND controlled demolition? While planes alone might not have been as destructive (under our assumptions) why wouldn't the planes alone have been sufficient to blame a terrorist attack? Why shoot a missle at the Pentagon and claim it was a plane? Why not use a plane, or claim the missle was a terrorist missle? Why bother with Shanksville at all if there was no plane, or why not actually crash a plane? What sense does it make to claim a failed attack like that? Now, my prediction is that some people will not actually answer these questions or even try to explain, but simply post video links (which I can't access) and/or otherwise repeat the same things pointing out alleged flaws in the official story. So....forget whatever flaws there may be in the official story, just deal with the issue I'm talking about.