i have a question.  i was wondering if youve intentionally exaggerated on the (already ridiculous) claims to highlight their absurdity, or if you believe these things youve said wholly?

R U Kidding Me?

The government is commiting crimes on a daily basis yet are never reported on, WHY IS THAT YOU SAY......BECAUSE THEY OWN THE MEDIA!!! DUH

Can any of you experts who believe in pancake theory for the falling floors explain to me why there were NO FLOORS found at ground zero?? Shouldn't pancake theory imply that the floors, you know, PANCAKED? Thus, shouldn't their be a pile of floors at ground zero? Why was their nothing but powder and tiny shards of steel? And what happened to the massive core of the WTC? Pancake theory would mean that the floors broke from the steel core in the center, and the cores would have still been in tact. Even PBS in their documentary, when they do a digital animation of the pancake collapse, they still show the steel cores in tact as the floors fall. Also, a pancaking collapse would have taken far longer than 10 seconds, because each floor needs time to fall onto the floor below, and knock out all the thousands of steel bolts... For the buildings to have fallen in 10 seconds means virtually NO resistance. Yeah, steel beams that are welded and bolted to the sides, not to mention concrete, glass, and other pieces of solid matter offer no resistance.. hahaha

Where is this huge mash of steel that is supposedly crushing its way through all the mass and all the steel below it, and causing this 10 second collapse? All I see is a large smoke cloud that falls. When you watch the footage, you clearly see that the tower is not "falling." It is tearing itself apart from top to bottom. There are also several explosive squibs projecting out at the speed of 100s of miles an hour ahead of the demolition wave, but that's a whole 'nother story..

Wouldn't logic tell you that if the amount of mass below the impact zone > the amount of mass above it, that would be sufficient to resist any force from the top portion? Here, try this experiment. Drop a paperweight onto your desk. Does your desk collapse? That's what I thought.

You know, the least you could do is get the type of plane correct.  Construction started on 1 WTC more than 13 years before the first 767 flight (and that is being generous considering design specifications would have been finalized long before then).  The plane that hit the pentagon was a 757 not a 747.

I think I said it earlier, but I'm going to say it again.

The issue of thinking up alternative ideas or "conspiracy theories" is secondary.

What matters is looking at what physically happened that day and trying to understand if the government's given explanation is even possible. I honestly don't think it is. Building 7 had much less going on than 5 and 6 as far as fires go, yet that building collapsed into almost free-fall speed right into the ground. Towers 1 + 2 both fell at almost free-fall speed after suffering minor fires for only approximately an hour. There have been large steel buildings that have burned for 18+ hours with fires much larger and on every single floor, and they DID NOT FALL DOWN.

It just doesn't make sense to me. I'm not some conspiracy theorist, and I've never actually questioned the government before, but this all just seems far too absurd for me to believe. The explanation given doesn't reflect what studies and other results of similar activity have shown us. From the Tower's incident to Building 7 to the Pentagon.

How did the terrorist, who was apparently a bad flyer himself, fly the 757 into the Pentagon flying about 15 feet off the ground, straight at it? Even expert pilots say that would be near impossible. He didn't hit anything besides the building...and he hit it perfectly.

Previously in 2001, there were 67 (or so) other flight jackings and other air reports that were all caught by the USA, yet on this day we failed 4 out of 4 times? How does a 757 disappear off of OUR radar in the middle of the USA and we only find it when it's mere minutes away from crashing into the Pentagon? You can't just hide a plane that big and fly it over our central defense Pentagon that easily. It doesn't make any sense.

None of this is explanation from our government is making any sense to me anymore.

You guys can yell at me and throw whatever you want at me, but the real disgrace to those families who were affected by 9/11 is by not searching for the truth and not asking questions.

Here's some food for thought on the topic of the fire weakening the steel in the buildings and causing them to fall so easily: http://www.serendipity.li/wot/other_fires/other_fires.htm

Also, does anyone have an answer as to why temperatures past the melting point of steel were found at ground zero and tower 7 a few days AFTER the fall of the towers? That temperature is much much hotter than fire can reach, and it was still there days after. What sort of explanation is there for this?

I dunno. The problem with most conspiracies is that they take it too far so no one takes it seriously. But there are certain oddities; the plane that ceased to exist on impact (as Metallicube mentioned), no surveillance at all from the Pentagon attack, finding intact passports with the culprits ID on them in the debris and the weirdest of them all, building 7 collapsing for no apparent reason at all.

I'm a very skeptical person by nature but quite a few things don't make much sense in this case.

In other news, Elvis is still alive, the moon landing was staged and green men landed at Roswell......

Pretty sketchy shit, especially all the stuff about the Pentagon and Building 7.

I find it so hard to believe the US government would allow 3,000 people to die just to start a war with the middle east, but there is a lot wrong with what happened. And the part about 1962 where the government was going to fake an attack to start a war with Cuba is crazy!

I don't really know what to think about all this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EfJtsAVoxOA

I'd rather take the testimonies of the people that where actually involved over supposedly experts
What more proof do you guys need?