- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
"Freefall speed, freefall speed!" Say it over and over, maybe it will mean something.
Look at the unedited video of the collapses and compare them to a controlled demolition. They did not fall in any way close to "freefall speed". When the North tower collapses, in much of the footage, you can still see the internal structure standing AFTER the mass of the debris hit the ground. See http://www.debunking911.com/freefall.htm for a much more complete mathematical analysis.
Show me one article in a peer-reviewed engineering or architectural journal that questions the basic facts as reported in the "official story". You will be looking a long time.
Huricane, you bring up lots of things that are either coincidences or misunderstandings. The passport? Paper is light and survived very well as evidenced by the mounds of it all over Lower Manhattan in the aftermath. No luggage at Shanksville? UA93 hit at 500 miles an hour or so. It's not surprised that there was no luggage sitting there. It's amazing there was anything identifiable at all. Only one shot of the Pentagon? As stated by another poster, chances are there is more footage, interdicted by the FBI. The whole in the Pentagon? An airplane is light, very light, compared to stone and cement. The wings disintegrated. In the earliest photos of the scene, there is metal rubble all around the area. Why didn't the windows break? They were reinforced and stronger than the walls they were in.
Bill Owen, there's no sense arguing with you on this. Every assertion you make can be disproved in any number of ways. 300 people to pull it off? Really? Who planted the bombs? How did they do it without attracting attention during the weeks it would have taken to rig them up? The hundreds of people at American and United Airlines who would have known something was up if the planes weren't real? Or, if they used real planes, did the management of the airlines approve of this plan? Why didn't Larry Silverstein buy a policy that explicitly covered the destruction of both towers, instead of fighting the insurer in court for years? Come on.
Your Manhattan Project analogy is especially weak. Yes, it was a huge project kept out of the press. But it was done by people working for the GOOD of their country. Do you think there are that many people willing to murder their countrymen for fuzzy, ill-defined reasons? Plus, of course, the Manhattan Project was only a secret for less than three years. It's been 6.5 since 9/11...
I will concede that it is possible that GWB, Cheney, et al, knew what was coming and choose to let it happen. But even that's a stretch. Why did Bush sit there with that stupid look on his face and listen to the Goat story if he knew what was going to happen? Is he that good of an actor? Please...
So, while it is technically possible that there is more to the story than has been told, the basic facts of that day stand uncontested by anyone with any real evidence: 19 terrorists stole four planes, crashed two of them into the WTC, the fire caused the floor plates to stretch and fail causing a catastrophic collapse of the structures. WTC 7 was hit by debris and burned for 8 hours and collapsed as well, "in its own footprint" if by "its own footprint" you mean hundreds of feet around in all directions (http://www.debunking911.com/wtc7pile.jpg)...
Look, I know I an not going to convince Bill Owens or any of the other truthers. But anyone who is on the fence, please check out debunking911.com.
