Willi B woundedsamurai1 has a very good point. The twin towers were designed to withstand a jumbo jet impact, and even if the top 20 or 30 floors were damaged how can you explain why the lower 80 floors that were stone cold didn't put up any resistance at all. Oh that's right you cant can you?, you're just going to make fun of me and call me a "conspiracy theorist" Try to look at it again with an open mind, stop putting your decision before the facts.
-1 ( +1 / -2 )
Conspiracy "Dogmatists" - Is ridicule all you have? Best not to waste time trying to figure out if it was a missile that hit the pentagon or a red herring. Look at what's going on in 2011.
-1 ( +1 / -2 )
Pawatan get your facts right. Aircraft use kerosene not gasoline and you'd need a blast furnace to melt steel, otherwise my kerosene heater would have melted the first time I switched it on, don't tell me that's made of Titanium! Also there would have been buckling before the collapse. Then theres building 7 which wasn't even hit by an aircraft, it's a text book controlled demolition and you know it. Super structures like that just don't go from stationary to free fall collapse instantly. They were designed to withstand jumbo jet impacts and fires anyway.
0 ( +3 / -3 )
it seems that human history will end up where it began. "on da banks of de nile"
0 ( +1 / -1 )
Headline should read "U.S. denial intensifying as 9/11 anniversary nears" It'S 10 years on and still no proper explanation how WTC7 was brought down.
-2 ( +0 / -2 )
calling this an "illegal war" does not make him pro Gaddafi. Those petro dollars also gave all Libyans free electricity, water and health care. Gaddafi must surely have had his peoples interests in mind to do that, it's better than most developed countries.
0 ( +0 / -0 )