One thing that is absolutely 100% true and verifiable is that prior to and since 9/11/01 steel framed buildings have never collapsed because of fire. Even last summer a 30 hour inferno burned in Madrid, Spain and yet the steel framed building stood. Now, perhaps WTC-1 and 2 came down because planes hit them hard, but the explanation for how and why WTC-7 collapsed on the afternoon of 9/11/01 is very very implausible. Two small fires caused the big and mighty WTC-7 to collapse?!? Not at all likely, especially considering the melting point of steel is well above what fires burn at and the fires were very small and much larger and longer burning fires like the 2005 Madrid fire did not take down a steel framed building, and you really have to wonder if there actually is anything to this conspiracy talk.
No reason to dismiss 9/11 conspiracies out of hand. Sure, some of them hold no water such as hologram planes, but there are so many inconsistencies on 9/11/01, like WTC-7 collapsing for no reason, like the plane that hit the Pentagon with absolutely no resistence with over 1 hour's notice, like Bush and Rumsfeld and Myers doing nothing to take change and in fact doing nothing at all, like the fact that none of the passenger manifest on the 9/11 planes had any arab names listed, etc. It's just all too bizarre to not look for alternative explantions. Because the official ones do not stand to reason.
There is a lot about 9/11/01 that is worth questioning. Also, the government clearly had a motive to let 9/11 happen, to bolster military spending, to secure fleeting oil supplies in the Middle East and Asia and to further the cause of Israel. The motive was there to let 9/11 happen and based on Bush and Rumsfeld and Myers actions on 9/11/01 and the other unexplainable things that happened that day, the most logical conclusion is that they just sat back and let it happen for their own benefit. |
