BBC reports WTC 7's collapse before the event took place.

[Mac]

Based on my observations of what goes on in the world, it is highly improbable that AQ planned these attacks. They cannot even plan suicide bomb attacks properly.
Only one organization has in the past conducted such a precise operation. The Israeli government at Entebbe.

Oh my God Expat! Didn't anybody tell you that you are not allowed to even think such thoughts?

[Pilot_adam]

Based on my observations of what goes on in the world, it is highly improbable that AQ planned these attacks. They cannot even plan suicide bomb attacks properly.

I couldn't have said it any better

Adam

[Floats]

adam I understand what your saying. Maybe their wasnt a 4th plane that crashed into that field. Then what did?

I wasnt at the field, Im also not an accident investigator. Maybe conspiracy theorists should run an experiment of crashing an airplane staight down at highspeeds and see just how much recognizable wreckage there is.

They also could not find any recognizable wreckage from the 2 airplanes that went into the world trade centre, and we know without a doubt they did.

floats

[Dash-Ate]

Guess which of these two steel buildings collapsed in an instant perfect free fall?

Guess


building A



building b

[goates]

Guess which of these two steel buildings collapsed in an instant perfect free fall?

Guess

Talk about comparing apples to oranges.

http://www.911myths.com/html/madrid_windsor_tower.html

[grimey]

Guess which of these two steel buildings collapsed in an instant perfect free fall?

The one that had a 10 story high hole in one side, spanning 1/3rd of the width of the building and 1/4 of the way into the building. Also the building who's outer support columns were each responsible for holding up 2000 sq ft of floor space, 3 of which were likely compromized by the collapse of the north tower.

http://wtc.nist.gov/progress_report_jun ... endixl.pdf

[swede]

Guess which of these two steel buildings collapsed in an instant perfect free fall?

3 of which were likely compromized by the collapse of the north tower.

http://wtc.nist.gov/progress_report_jun ... endixl.pdf

WTC 7 was a building within a building, it was reengineered when they decided to use it as an emergency command centre. WTC 7 was compromised alright, and it had nothing to do with the collapse of the twin towers. In fact, the Marriot hotel was still standing (albeit with major structural damage) between those buildings after they collapsed. The Marriot was far closer to ground zero than WTC 7, it did not collapse because it was not pre wired for a demo. There is no historical record of a steel frame building imploding in it's own foot print due to fire, prior to 911. But then again, the laws of physics were suspended that day.

[Dash-Ate]

This is WTC7 - there is no 10 storey hole.




Like magic!

[grimey]

WTC 7 was a building within a building, it was reengineered when they decided to use it as an emergency command centre. WTC 7 was compromised alright, and it had nothing to do with the collapse of the twin towers. In fact, the Marriot hotel was still standing (albeit with major structural damage) between those buildings after they collapsed. The Marriot was far closer to ground zero than WTC 7, it did not collapse because it was not pre wired for a demo. There is no historical record of a steel frame building imploding in it's own foot print due to fire, prior to 911. But then again, the laws of physics were suspended that day.

So where the laws of common sense, apparently. There was no historical record of a man running a 4 minute mile until Roger Bannister did it. History is irrelevant, physics isn't. The Marriott was almost completely destroyed, there was little left to collapse.

The Marriott hotel, after the WTC 1 & 2 collapse:

http://www.sept11marriottsurvivors.org/ ... image1.php

Yea, lots left to collapse. The top 15 or so floors were completely destroyed.

Dash-Ate: There were 4 sides to WTC-7, that's the north side. The south side faced the north tower. Apparently int elligence and the ability to think has left this argument as well. Or did you not notice the debris field on the OTHER SIDE OF THE TOWER IN YOUR OWN PHOTO?!?!

Also, WTC-3, the Marriott building, wasn't between the north tower and WTC-7. WTC-3 was west of the twin towers. WTC-6 was an 8 story building between the north tower and WTC-7, the remain of it were demolished days later. It was heavily damaged in the collapse of the towers.

Building 6 after 9/11: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YBDcXm7bc24

Awesome research, swede.

[grimey]

This whole arguement just pisses me off, due to the inability of several people to employ critical thinking. If you want to believe that someone else hijacked the aircraft, fine, that's not a huge stretch, but:

1) If WTC 7 was pre-wired for demo, when was it pre-wired? After the planes hit, when there was a shitload of debris around? Or before, where there were a shitload of people in the building? If you believe this is a false dichotomy, please demonstrate how it is.

2) If it wasn't a plane that hit the Pentagon, what was it? What happened to those aboard flight 77, and what happened to the plane? How is your answer simpler, even with a consipiracy, than the plane simply crashing into the Pentagon?

3) If flight 93 was shot down, who did it? If it wasn't shot down, and there's a discrepancy with the wreckage, where are the passengers? If it didn't crash, where's the plane and its passengers?

4) If there was a massive consipiracy, involving perhaps the major news organizations, why has nobody come up and said as much? If they've been kept from coming forward, why are you able to voice your opinion openly?

5) How did a government which is apparently incapable of running a war effectively manage to pull off a consipiracy so vast without a major hitch?

In short, I'm asking how you believe that a government that is apparently led by fools managed to pull one over on the world. Many of you seem to think that there is a cabal of men and women that is infinitely evil and powerful, yet foolish and stupid enough to let evidence leak out about what they did.

They can have stealth aircraft shoot down a jet airliner, without word of it leaking out. They can have US soldiers execute passengers, again, without any word leaking out. They can have a ship or bomber launch a cruise missile against the pentagon, again, without word leaking out. They can corrupt a major news organization into reporting events that haven't happened. So what, 100, 1000, 10,000 people would have to be in on it, and kept quiet?

Or, they can have 19 arabs hijack 4 aircraft, and crash them into 3 buildings and a field. The FDNY can announce 3 hours ahead of time that they know WTC-7 is going to collapse, and have the BBC screw up the reporting by saying it already has.

entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem

Apparently nobody has heard this before.

[goates]

It looks to me like there was lots of damage to WTC7. Just not in the one photo conpiracy nuts like to use. Take note of the first image in the link below where it looks a lot like WTC7 is being hit with debris from the main tower collapsing.

http://www.911myths.com/html/wtc7_damage.html

Edited for speeling...

[Floats]

Well said Grimey!!!

[swede]

Well said Grimey!!!

Do you guys get paid to post this stuff? At the start of this thread there is a lengthy interview of two on duty cops along with two other witnesses, who saw the final seconds of the path of flight 77 (or whatever it was). That trajectory, which they swear on their lives to, is about 60 degrees off the "offical" final flight path. That causes a very, very large problem for the government. Namely, why were a few light standards scattered around on the "official" final path, one of which purportedly caused a cab to have a nasty broken windshield (It was hit by a hundred odd thousands pounds travelling 4 or 5 hundred miles per, please spare me, that post would have done a hell of a lot more damage than that). These light poles were apparently staged along the reported final flight path, along with a smattering of debris that we are expected to believe are the remnants of a 757. The only people who are guilty of non-critical thinking as regards 911, are the sheep who have bought an official explanation of the days events, that is so full of holes that you could drive the Queen Mary through it sideways. As for the BBC reporting WTC 7's demo a half hr. before it happened.. The reason this came to light was because of their reporter standing in NYC reporting it, while WTC 7 was still standing! They made a bit of a booboo you see, and the top of WTC 7 was visible in the backdrop while the reporter was babbling. That clip has since been yanked from the BBC website. It took them 6 years to yank it, but once exposed as more bs, it disappeared real quick. So boys, keep spouting the party line, you may get rewarded some day, if you're not already.

[goates]

As for the BBC reporting WTC 7's demo a half hr. before it happened.. The reason this came to light was because of their reporter standing in NYC reporting it, while WTC 7 was still standing! They made a bit of a booboo you see, and the top of WTC 7 was visible in the backdrop while the reporter was babbling.

So you're saying that reporters never get something wrong? I seem to remember seeing pictures of a burning Air France A340 in Toronto while the reporter was speculating that it might be a Lufthansa plane. Even though the tail was quite visible...

Here's another couple of articles that explain the physics that you seem to think didn't apply that day. Care to prove them wrong?

http://www.counterpunch.org/physic11282006.html
http://www.counterpunch.org/thermo11282006.html
http://www.counterpunch.org/darkfire11282006.html

And I notice once again that you haven't directly responded to any points made by grimey or myself. Just like every other time this comes up...

[grimey]

Well said Grimey!!!

Do you guys get paid to post this stuff?

I just reply to your BS, swede, you're the one who opens these topics up to discussion.

How much do you get paid, cuz I want in on that.

At the start of this thread there is a lengthy interview of two on duty cops along with two other witnesses, who saw the final seconds of the path of flight 77 (or whatever it was). That trajectory, which they swear on their lives to, is about 60 degrees off the "offical" final flight path. That causes a very, very large problem for the government.

No, it doesn't.

http://agora.stanford.edu/sjls/Issue%20 ... versky.htm

"Several studies have been conducted on human memory and on subjects’ propensity to remember erroneously events and details that did not occur. Elizabeth Loftus performed experiments in the mid-seventies demonstrating the effect of a third party’s introducing false facts into memory.4 Subjects were shown a slide of a car at an intersection with either a yield sign or a stop sign. Experimenters asked participants questions, falsely introducing the term "stop sign" into the question instead of referring to the yield sign participants had actually seen. Similarly, experimenters falsely substituted the term "yield sign" in questions directed to participants who had actually seen the stop sign slide. The results indicated that subjects remembered seeing the false image. In the initial part of the experiment, subjects also viewed a slide showing a car accident. Some subjects were later asked how fast the cars were traveling when they "hit" each other, others were asked how fast the cars were traveling when they "smashed" into each other. Those subjects questioned using the word "smashed" were more likely to report having seen broken glass in the original slide. The introduction of false cues altered participants’ memories."

Namely, why were a few light standards scattered around on the "official" final path, one of which purportedly caused a cab to have a nasty broken windshield (It was hit by a hundred odd thousands pounds travelling 4 or 5 hundred miles per, please spare me, that post would have done a hell of a lot more damage than that). These light poles were apparently staged along the reported final flight path, along with a smattering of debris that we are expected to believe are the remnants of a 757.

Ever seen a car accident with a light standard? They're designed to break off at the anchor bolts. Obviously the plane hit the tops of the light standards and knocked them over.

I was unaware that light standards weighed several hundred thousand pounds, that was what hit the car.

Where is the plane, and where are the passengers who were on board?

I'll note that the simulation at the start of the video you posted contradicts the conspiracy theory interpretation of the parking lot security camera footage, which claims to see small low flying cruise missile hit the pentagon, and notes that the jetliner should be huge in the picture. The plane doesn't appear (it shouldn't be expected to, regardless of what it did, as the frame rate of the camera was so low), and certainly doesn't appear to pass overhead of the Pentagon.

The only people who are guilty of non-critical thinking as regards 911, are the sheep who have bought an official explanation of the days events, that is so full of holes that you could drive the Queen Mary through it sideways.

I'm waiting for your rebuttal of the criticism of the conspiracy theories. Name a hole in the official story which cannot be explained.

As for the BBC reporting WTC 7's demo a half hr. before it happened.. The reason this came to light was because of their reporter standing in NYC reporting it, while WTC 7 was still standing!

And? The fire department knew the building was going to collapse due to the damage it had sustained. The circulated a report saying as much. The reporter screwed it up and misread it.

They made a bit of a booboo you see, and the top of WTC 7 was visible in the backdrop while the reporter was babbling. That clip has since been yanked from the BBC website. It took them 6 years to yank it, but once exposed as more bs, it disappeared real quick. So boys, keep spouting the party line, you may get rewarded some day, if you're not already.

Yea, they made a mistake. Just like the initial reports were that a small plane had hit the first tower, rather than a jetliner. That does not mean there is a conspiracy.

[swede]

Your straw man posts get a little old, obviously I wasnt refering to the staged lamp post weighing several hundred thousand pounds, I was refering to the aircraft that supposedly hit it.. (but didn't really)

[grimey]

Your straw man posts get a little old, obviously I wasnt refering to the staged lamp post weighing several hundred thousand pounds, I was refering to the aircraft that supposedly hit it.. (but didn't really)

No straw man, swede, and still, no useful commentary on your part.

Obviously, the plane didn't hit the car, the lamppost did. My comment about the weight of the lamppost was in regard to your complete inability to see the relevance of this. Why do you believe that the post must have done more damage? If the top of the post is hit, the top of it moves quickly. The base doesn't move initially, as it's anchored. By the time the anchor bolts snap, the post has slowed significantly.

Please demonstrate how the damage couldn't have been caused by a lamp post.

As for strawman arguments, do you still think that people are arguing that WTC 7 was brought down by small fires?

That image looks like it took a while to make, how much did you get paid for it?

[grimey]

What happened to the passengers on board the planes you feel didn't crash, swede? Who laid the charges you believe existed in WTC-7, and when where they laid? At the BBC, Who do you believe knew about the building collapse ahead of time, just the reporter? How is this relevant, as the fire department had stated that they knew it was going to collapse?

How have all of these people been kept quiet?

[swede]

What happened to the passengers on board the planes you feel didn't crash, swede? Who laid the charges you believe existed in WTC-7, and when where they laid? At the BBC, Who do you believe knew about the building collapse ahead of time, just the reporter? How is this relevant, as the fire department had stated that they knew it was going to collapse?

How have all of these people been kept quiet?

Well, who says AA flt. 77 neccessarily had any passengers on it? Anyone can print a manifest that could be a complete fabrication. The two police officers who were interviewed who saw that aircraft pass north of the citgo gas station were extremely credible. According to the Kean commission report, that plane passed south of the citgo gas station. Where is the cab driver whose car was hit by a lamp post, why havent the authorities hauled this guy out long ago to debunk what the police are saying, or at least reiterate what happened? WTC7 could have been wired for demolition at any time, during it's refit for instance. The BBC report is not of prime importance, I believe it was brought up to keep attention on the circumstances to do with the buildings collapse. There have been many individuals (in positions to know) who have come out saying that 911 was done from the inside, most have been barraged with media character assassinations and have shut up. I suspect they were threatened to desist, or else.[/i]

[hazatude]

GWYNNE DYER's OPINION

The 9/11 conspiracy theory is back, in
a much more virulent form, and normally
sane people are being taken in
by it.
I’m getting half a dozen earnest
e-mails every day telling me I must
see a film called Loose Change. It has
been around in various versions for
almost two years, but it now seems to
be gathering converts faster than ever.
Well, I have seen it, and I concede it
is a much slicker, more professional
product than other 9/11 conspiracy
films — and therefore more seductive.
But the argument is pure paranoid
fantasy, and it’s rotting people’s
brains.
There have always been two versions
of 9/11 conspiracy theory.
The lesser version held that U.S.
President George W. Bush’s administration
had advance intelligence of
al-Qaeda’s plans, but chose to ignore
the warning because the attacks on
Sept. 11, 2001, suited its purposes.
The greater version insisted that
there was no al-Qaeda involvement —
the attacks were carried out by the
U.S. government.
Until recently, the greater version
was largely confined to the Arab
world, where many people are in complete
denial about any Arab involvement
in the atrocity.
Few Americans took that version
seriously, though many wondered
whether the intelligence lapses had
really been accidental.
Even the lesser conspiracy would
have required the complicity of half a
dozen top people who received the
intelligence and decided to ignore it:
The heads of the CIA and the FBI
(George Tenet and Louis Freeh), the
national security adviser (Condoleezza
Rice), the secretaries of defence and
state (Don Rumsfeld and Colin Powell),
plus of course Vice-President
Cheney and perhaps Bush himself.
It would also have required the permanent
silence (or silencing) of a
dozen lower-level intelligence analysts
who knew the senior people had
seen the information.
I can’t absolutely refute the lesser
conspiracy theory, but I find it
extremely implausible.
The greater conspiracy theory, on
the other hand, is just plain loony —
and yet more and more people are
falling for it in the West, where it was
once the exclusive domain of people
with counter-rotating eyeballs and
poor personal hygiene.
You cannot overstate the impact of a
well-made film.
Loose Change confidently asserts
that New York’s twin towers were
brought down by carefully placed
demolition charges, not by the fires
ignited by the planes that hit them;
that the Pentagon was struck by a
cruise missile and not by a plane at all;
that the fourth “hijacked” plane,
Flight 93, did not crash in a field in
Pennsylvania but landed at Cleveland
airport, where the passengers were
taken into a NASA building and never
seen again.
What about all the calls the passengers
on Flight 93 made on their
phones?
Their voices were cloned by the Los
Alamos laboratories and the calls to
their relatives were faked.
The FBI was in on it, the CIA was in on
it, the U.S. Air Force was in on it, and
North American Aerospace Defence
Command was in on it (but they kept the
Canadians in NORAD out of the loop).
The security companies guarding
the World Trade Center were in on it,
Mayor Rudy Giuliani was in on it, the
Federal Aviation Administration was
in on it, NASA was in on it, the Pentagon
was in on it.
At least 10,000 people were in on it.
They had to be, or it couldn’t have
worked. And more than five years later,
not one of them has talked.
Nobody has got drunk and spilled
their guts.
Nobody has told their spouse, who
then blabbed.
Not one of these 10,000 accomplices
to mass murder has yielded to
the temptation for instant fame and
wealth if only they blow the whistle on
the greatest conspiracy in history.
The Mafia code of silence is nothing
compared to this.
In normal times you wouldn’t waste
breath arguing with people who fall
for this kind of rubbish. But the makers
of Loose Change claim their film
already has been seen by more than
100 million people.
It’s a real problem. Because by linking
their fantasies about 9/11 to the
Bush administration’s deliberate deception
in order to gain support for the
invasion of Iraq, they bring discredit
on the truth and the nonsense alike.
You almost wonder if they are
secretly working for the Bush administration.
Gwynne Dyer is a London-based
independent journalist whose articles
are published in 45 countries.
Don’t fall for
this loony logic
Gripping film on 9/11 is slick — but sick
GWYNNE DYER
CANADIAN PRESS FILE PHOTO
A fireball explodes from the World Trade Center after a plane hit the towers on 9/11.
REUTERS
A 2,000-year-old burial cave in
Jerusalem.
A17-RL#1

[grimey]

What happened to the passengers on board the planes you feel didn't crash, swede? Who laid the charges you believe existed in WTC-7, and when where they laid? At the BBC, Who do you believe knew about the building collapse ahead of time, just the reporter? How is this relevant, as the fire department had stated that they knew it was going to collapse?

How have all of these people been kept quiet?

Well, who says AA flt. 77 neccessarily had any passengers on it? Anyone can print a manifest that could be a complete fabrication. The two police officers who were interviewed who saw that aircraft pass north of the citgo gas station were extremely credible. According to the Kean commission report, that plane passed south of the citgo gas station. Where is the cab driver whose car was hit by a lamp post, why havent the authorities hauled this guy out long ago to debunk what the police are saying, or at least reiterate what happened? WTC7 could have been wired for demolition at any time, during it's refit for instance. The BBC report is not of prime importance, I believe it was brought up to keep attention on the circumstances to do with the buildings collapse. There have been many individuals (in positions to know) who have come out saying that 911 was done from the inside, most have been barraged with media character assassinations and have shut up. I suspect they were threatened to desist, or else.[/i]

So a roughly a thousand people imagined that they had family members on the flight? How many imaginary family members do you have? Why haul the cab driver out, the physical evidence is obvious. Who wired it, why hasn't anyone come forward?

Many people? Cite sources. Name names. I could say that many people think you're the risen Jesus, it's totally irrelevant and without substance when stated in that manner.

You imagine a conspiracy involving tens thousands of people, with no information leaks. This conspiracy has many obvious holes in it which you ignore, or explain away by involving hundreds more people in your conspiracy. A conspiracy that can easily be explained by 19 well funded men carrying out a suicide mission, with few if any holes once you recognize that basic human flaws are present in members of the government, press, and emergency services.

Name a hole in the official story which cannot be explained.

[swede]

Yeah, 19 total putses, pull off the crime of the century, without a hitch. These camel jockeys were lucky to have flown a 150, think about it, they would not have had the foggiest clue about even finding New York after wrestling control from a set of 4 airline crews almost simultaneously in a bloody screaming battle, let alone the absolutely amazing precision flying they carried out that day (save flight 93 shot down over PA) without one single chance to even practice - give me a break!! How stupid do you think I am. Another funny thing is, what has Islam or Osama exactly gained by this crime? Absolutely zero, follow the money, follow those that benefited and you will have your criminals. You are a proponent of the greatest conspiracy theory ever invented, namely the official version of 911. Here is some more interesting material about the suspension of physics on 911..

http://st12.startlogic.com/~xenonpup/sp ... 0Spire.htm

[grimey]

Yeah, 19 total putses, pull off the crime of the century, without a hitch.

Arguement from personal incredulity, and ad hominem. Your inability to concieve of how it was done does not equate to it being impossible, and your opinion of the hijackers has nothing to do with their potention for success.

Also, 4 planes, one didn't hit its target. You definition of "without a hitch" is interesting.

These camel jockeys were lucky to have flown a 150, think about it, they would not have had the foggiest clue about even finding New York

Because a VOR is so hard to tune up? They had instrument ratings.

after wrestling control from a set of 4 airline crews almost simultaneously in a bloody screaming battle, let alone the absolutely amazing precision flying they carried out that day (save flight 93 shot down over PA) without one single chance to even practice - give me a break!!

They were instrument rated pilots, with 727 sim time, and a familiarity with cockpit layout of the aircraft involved. All had ample self defense training, and were armed. Most sat in first class, and the passengers in the rear of the planes were never involved in a "bloody screaming battle", flight 93 excepted. I'll let others comment about their demonstrated skills and required qualifications, I'm not a pilot.

Provide evidence flight 93 was shot down.

How stupid do you think I am.

I don't, I think you have an overly evolved sense of paranoia, an unwillingness to examine evidence which disagrees with your currently held position, and a complete inability to construct a logical argument and defend it.

Another funny thing is, what has Islam or Osama exactly gained by this crime? Absolutely zero, follow the money, follow those that benefited and you will have your criminals.

You mean the several hundred billion dollar hit that the US economy took? Post hoc, ergo propter hoc. Several members of the American government benefitted financially from the war on terror (which I disagree with), therefore, they caused 9/11? What has America gained? A quagmire, 3000 dead soldiers, an inability to access Iraqi oil reliably, alienation of Iran, Venezuala, and other large oil exporters.

Those responsible are people who are quite willing to die for a cause, what makes you think they're looking for an economic benefit?

You are a proponent of the greatest conspiracy theory ever invented, namely the official version of 911. Here is some more interesting material about the suspension of physics on 911..

http://st12.startlogic.com/~xenonpup/sp ... 0Spire.htm

Snip from the link, indicative of the quality of his arguments:

Because this video was taken with a tripod-mounted camera located close to the collapse the image is sharper than the other known footage of the event (seen here). There can be no doubt that the cluster of steel box columns comprising the spire, after surviving the violence of the collapse itself, did in fact disintegrate almost at the moment that it began to fall. I cannot begin to speculate on the kind of technology needed to make this happen, but can say with some certainty that even conventional explosives would not create such a disintegration, and nothing that could happen in a gravitational collapse would resemble this.

And he can say this with some certainty why? He's an electrical engineer. What does that have to do with structural engineering, other than being able to put P. Eng on your business card? I seriously wonder if he still is, or indeed ever was a professional engineer, and therefore bound by certain moral restrictions with associated with portraying himself as an engineer. Where is the evidence to back up this claim? This is an argument from authority fallacy, as well as an argument from personal incredulity. Without evidence to back up this claim and others, it is irrelevant.

I noticed you failed to answer a single question I asked you. Again. It's like arguing with creationists all over... I point out a hole in their theory, so they put forward 50 more things which they think can't be explained by science. I point out why they can be explained, and along come another 50 things. Not once do they address what is wrong with their theory, except to say "well, god did it". Or in this case "it's a conspiracy!"



This is retarded. If you're unwilling to answer the questions I and others have asked, I see absolutely no reason to continue this argument. You will continue to live in your deluded little world, imagining yourself to be a member of some sort of army of light, pulling back the imaginary covers from an imaginary conspiracy that nobody else can see. Don't let reason and common sense hit you in the ass on the way out.

[goates]

swede,

What would would it take to convince you it was not a conspiracy?

[swede]

swede,

What would would it take to convince you it was not a conspiracy?

By "not a conspiracy", I take it you mean no government or inside involvement. If so:

Lets start off with just a few of the amazing coincidences. We had the entire Eastern Seaboard wing of the U.S. airforce, basically on a stand down because, funny as things could be, they were practicing the exact same sort of scenario on 911 as what occured. Then, after the first aircraft hit the trade towers, a second was allowed to loll around the busiest, most protected airspace in the world, for almost an hour, and proceed to smack into the second tower. This on it's face is outrageous and has never been adequately explained - but it would appear that Dick Cheney and his minions assumed control of Norad, while GWB read stories about pet goats. Also, as flight 77 headed for DC, there was no interception, it's absurd.

Then we had the 5 Israeli "movers", who were witnessed celebrating and gesturing wildly as the towers collapsed, were apprehended and then released. I would like to know why they were celebrating when they would have to have known that the primary banking centre of the world was in ruins with their own countrymen dying by scores. Except, another coincidence, several thousands of people failed to show up for work that day.

Then we have the collapse of building 7, to this day it has not been adequately explained, and the tapes of Larry Siverstein the owner, saying we made the decision to "pull" the building. We have the twin towers, vaporizing and free falling. Demo parlance for controlled implosion, which is precisely what happened.

Then we have the coincidence of the passengers on Flight 93, calling away on cell phones on an aircraft flying low level at over 400kts. This is not possible, but that day it was.

We have the extreme lack of any physical evidence at the scene of the Pentagon crash, and credible eye witness reports contrary to the offical report.
How is it that every data and voice recorder from every 911 destroyed aircraft, is either missing or unobtainable, thats another coincidence I need explained.
I don't proclaim to be any sort of expert on what happened precisely, but the sheer amount of totally unexplained, outrageous anomalies of 911, have to cause any person capable of any semblance of critical thought, to question the government version. If these can be explained by something other than the mechanics illustrated, straw man pull em down arguments, I would change my mind. That does not appear to be forthcoming. The basis of law is evidence, and there is precious little to confirm any of the findings of the Kean commission.
I will not argue this further because I get tired of repeating myself. Read up and become educated.