All 19 terrorists died on the planes. They weren’t on flight data because they used false names. The BBC has not interviewed them. If they had it would be common knowledge. It’s another lie.

So 19 Muslim Hyjackers not on any flight manifest, controlled by a known CIA asset who lives in a cave in Afganistan, causes NORAD to not intercept not once but 4 times all on the same day by turning off transponders.LOL.

It turns out the BBC have interviewed 7 of these dead suicide hyjackers & two of them still fly for sudi Airlines.

Then, 3, not 2, 3 steel fraimed and Reinforced Concrete skyscrapers defy every known law of physics and have the lighter top bits fall through the path of most resistance lower and much heavier bottom 1 square acre , quater of a mile of over 200,000 + tonnes of ridgid building material at almost freefall speed.

And guess what, the FBI wanted posters only has Osmar Binladen down as a 911 suspect only.

Now, is there anybody who can see a real big fat smelly dump of a lie with the official US Government outragiouse CONSPIRICY THEORY?!

Guess what, burning office furnature & jet fuel in air can not weaken 47 massive steel core collumns in less than 2 hours, because the heat would have conducted up and down the massive core collumns faster than it was put in by the office fire, only one way in , but two ways out by conduction, then there is convection and radiation too.

And if you were to drop the top 20+ floors through sea water they would take over 20 seconds to fall the 1/4 mile at sea level, how can Solid Building offer less resistance than sea water? ITS just PHYSICALLY IMPOSIBLE!!!

Scottie T , would you like to buy a safe sea front apartment in central Bagdad, its only one bomb creater and a few bullet hole but its real cheep and in a good neighbourhood.

Here are a few reasons:
While some of Popular Mechanics methods and analysis are being hotly disputed, it’s conclusions hold much water than any conspiracy theory. And while the conspirators will hold firmly to one aspect of their story, the information that was given by Popular Mechanics on Flight 93 and the Pentagon crash are difficult to debate. Any break down of one aspect of the theory just seems to unravel the entire theory itself. Why it does this brings me to my next reason for not believing the conspiracy…

Why? Why would the United States stage a massive attack on its own population? Like I said before, I’m not a physicist, however, I’ve read many historical books and have a degree in economics. So the two theories that have run rampant on the reason for 9/11 are completely false.
1) I’ve read a lot about the shady things are government has done, through arms sales, CIA supportive coup d’etats. In our post-WWII history we have NEVER needed a good reason for going to war. NEVER. We are masterminds at inflaming poorly gathered intelligence to execute our goals. American administrations do it all the time. Reagan invaded Lebanon without having any attack on our soil. And he did it in the name of a “war on terror.”
2) Referring back to when said I studied economics the second point of the “why” question that doesn’t hold water is the theory this is for oil. That makes no sense. Even if we install a new government they sell the oil. It’s not our governments profit, it’s theirs. Saddam never stopped shipment of oil, and our invasion of Iraq has led to 1/3 less oil compared to pre-war levels being shipped out. Not to mention the securing the oil pipelines is an extremely daunting task now. To send the point home, majority of our oil doesn’t even come from the Middle East! It comes from Canada and Mexico! We would we need to be worried about securing 5% of our oil supply?

The reason for America’s invasion of Iraq was to create modern friendly democratic regimes, and it will fail to do so.

I will end with one last question to the conspiracy theorists. It stems from the principle of Ockham’s razor. The simplest solution is best. Here are two scenarios:

A massive involvement of thousands of Americans in the media government and military are knowingly covering up the fact that 2 drones crashed in the WTC and one missile into the Pentagon and the Twin Towers were laced with hundreds of explosives to be detonated causing the Towers to fall and kill thousands of civilians.

or

19 pissed off Middle Eastern men hijacked four planes.

The simplest solution tends to be the correct one.

GW-Bush will be taken to court one day sooner or later

My primary difficulty with the official conspiracy theory is that steel is ductile which means that when heated slowly by fire, steel will slowly soften and deform. There is no logical reason for a sudden catastrophic collapse. This suggests a sudden loss of strength rather than the gradual loss of strength we expect from heating.
Even if the steel lost enough strength to ‘fail’ that failure would be DEFORMATION, not a fracture.
There is no realistic mechanism for the twin towers to have suddenly disintegrated to dust other than explosives being used to simultaneously sever all of the supporting columns.
Dr Seffen is seriouly in error here and really should retract his absurd paper.

There will be some damage perhaps, but it is just not possible for the larger brick to crush the 3 stacked bricks to dust and rubble using only Gravity.

So if a larger Accrington Brick could not do it - a much lighter brick could not do it either. try it for yourself.

A steel girder structure would be even stronger. We use this type of construction because it is the best strength to weight ratio of any known affordable structure. We could use Titanium but that would be too expensive.

On 911 the top bit was the lightest brick.

The bottom, stronger, heavier 80+ floors were the three stacked bricks, which in reality had a 3 times working load per floor.

So the bottom floor was designed to hold up three times 109 floors which is 327 floors.

The second to top floor was only designed to hold up 3 floors.

Go to AE911truth.org and see the Evidence including the tech drawings:-

http://www.ae911truth.org/

I have to go and do some breast feeding now.

THERE WAS NO WEIGHT TO THE UPPER FLOORS. The floors impacted individually. In order to FEEL the force of the upper floors the upper floors had to actually meet the lower floors.

IT WAS LIKE AN ACCORDION.

It was floor 80 hits floor 79. Both 79 and 80 destroyed. Floor 81 HAS NOT FELT ANY FORCE NOR APPLIED ANY FORCE.

The scrap man stacked the three largest cars one on top of the other.

the big RR first, then the jaguar, and then the escort.

As the man went to stack the mini on top, the mini dropped 10 feet onto the three cars below.

Is there anyone who is not a blooming great ninny would ever consider the mini would ever crush the other three cars to dust and rubble at near freefall speed as though it was falling through clear air?

It is just not physically possible Ever, Never. Unless you use explosives.

The WTC had a 3 times working load built into each tower, the bottom floor was engineered to withstand 3 WTC towers on top, not just 1.

Now please actually read the blooming artice in full - READ IT BOZO!

A concrete block can easily support the weight of 20 blocks on top of it. But drop those 20 blocks from a few inches away, and see what happens.

If you must insist on conspiracy… then at least realize that all you need to do is remove the support on the floor were the planes hit, and let gravity do the rest.

Joe