9/11

[Fisherking]

The trouble is that the steel was melted. The buildings pulverised themselves in mid air and came down at free fall speeds in their own footprint. Further, the heating and bending would have to have been uniform throughout the building for all that to occur. There are a great deal of things about the collapse that are highly questionable. Some even defy physics.

I don’t know how they were brought down or who was behind it but the government explanation is insufficient.

[Crandar]

I know nothing about civil-engineering and, to be sincere, I doubt that the destruction of two sky-scrapers would be needed for a sufficient provocation. It looks like an overkill, doesn't it?
That being said, the official War on Terror narrative is definitely fragile and we are presented with a distorted image.

Firstly, I think that the reason behind it are geo-politic interests, like the Iraqi oil being sold and exploited by American companies and not the Iraqi state, not a crusage againt violence and bigotry, and secondly, movies have led us to view wars as a simplified stugggle between us and them.

Well, it usually is more complicated, with temporary alliances, cynical deals under the table, doube agents and conflicting interests.

[Fragony]

The trouble is that the steel was melted. The buildings pulverised themselves in mid air and came down at free fall speeds in their own footprint. Further, the heating and bending would have to have been uniform throughout the building for all that to occur. There are a great deal of things about the collapse that are highly questionable. Some even defy physics.

I don’t know how they were brought down or who was behind it but the government explanation is insufficient.

Demolitian experts here completily ruled out controlled demolition on the Twins, number 4 and 7 are a different story, but wouldn't it be most likely that they already knew this was planned, but were caught by surprise

[a completely inoffensive name]

The trouble is that the steel was melted. The buildings pulverised themselves in mid air and came down at free fall speeds in their own footprint. Further, the heating and bending would have to have been uniform throughout the building for all that to occur. There are a great deal of things about the collapse that are highly questionable. Some even defy physics.

I don’t know how they were brought down or who was behind it but the government explanation is insufficient.

No, the steel did not melt. The molten metal which was found was a slag composed of debris from the tower and aluminum alloy from the plane itself, which does melt at temps far below 800 degrees celcius. What is suspicious about the midsection collapsing under the weight of the top after extensive damage? The bending does not have to be uniform, if a beam or beams broke such that the remaining load exceeded the designed load for the rest, the failure would be cascading and quick. I can run a program to display the first 100,000 prime numbers and MATLAB will show it 'instantly'. But in reality it was generated in a sequence, one at a time.

9/11 truthers are people who are so scared about chaos that they believe all actions must have been directed by some conspiracy in charge of events. The idea that 9/11 was an inside job is more comforting than confronting the idea that death can come at any time for no reason by actors with no interest towards those they effect.