"No Planes Hit The Twin Towers" claims ex-CIA agent

[SO16_Saint]

http://neonnettle.com/news/211-ex-cia-pilot-gives-sworn-testimony-that-no-planes-hit-the-twin-towers

 

A former CIA and civilian pilot has sworn an affidavit, stating that no planes flew into the Twin Towers as it would have been physically impossible.

John Lear, the son of Learjet inventor, Bill Lear, has given his expert evidence that it would have been physically impossible for Boeing 767s, like Flights AA11 and UA175 to have hit the Twin Towers on 9/11, particularly when flown by inexperienced pilots:

‘No Boeing 767 airliners hit the Twin Towers as fraudulently alleged by the government, media, NIST and its contractors’, he stated in the affidavit.

‘Such crashes did not occur because they are physically impossible as depicted, for the following reasons: in the case of UAL 175 going into the south tower, a real Boeing 767 would have begun 'telescoping' when the nose hit the 14 inch steel columns which are 39 inches on center.

‘The vertical and horizontal tail would have instantaneously separated from the aircraft, hit the steel box columns and fallen to the ground.

‘The engines when impacting the steel columns would havemaintained their general shape and either fallen to the ground or been recovered in the debris of the collapsed building.

‘No Boeing 767 could attain a speed of 540 mph at 1000 feet above sea level ‘parasite drag doubles with velocity’ and ‘parasite power’ cubes with velocity.

 

• The fan portion of the engine is not designed to accept the volume of dense air at that altitude and speed.
  
• The piece of alleged external fuselage containing 3 or 4 window cutouts is inconsistent with an airplane that hit 14 inch steel box columns, placed at over 500 mph. It would have crumpled.
  
• No significant part of the Boeing 767 or engine could have penetrated the 14 inch steel columns and 37 feet beyond the massive core of the tower without part of it falling to the ground.
  

‘The debris of the collapse should have contained massive sections of the Boeing 767, including 3 engine cores weighing approximately 9000 pounds apiece which could not have been hidden. Yet there is no evidence of any of these massive structural components from either 767 at the WTC. Such complete disappearance of 767s is impossible.'

The affidavit, dated 28th January 2014 is part of a law suit being pursued byMorgan Reynolds in the United States District Court, Southern District, New York.

In March 2007, Reynolds, a former chief economist under the George W Bush administration filed a Request For Correction with the US National Institute of Science and Technology citing his belief that real commercial jets (Boeings) did not hit the WTC towers.

Although many, including the 9/11 Truth movement initially rejected the ‘no-planes’ theory as too outlandish, with proponents such as John Lear it is gathering traction.

Unlike any other form of statement, an affidavit becomes truth in law, if it is not rebutted. It will now be up to critics of the theory to present their evidence and analysis to rebut the statement point by point. If they do not – or cannot – then the US government will by ommisssion be allowing that the account given by the 9/11 Commission is wrong.

The 65 year old retired airline captain and former CIA pilot – who has over 19,000 hours of flight time -- also drew attention to the inexperience of the pilots who allegedly flew the planes:

‘The alleged 'controlled' descent into New York on a relatively straight course by a novice pilot in unlikely in the extreme because of the difficulty of controlling heading, descent rate and descent speed within the parameters of 'controlled' flight.

‘It takes a highly skilled pilot to interpret the "EFIS" (Electronic Flight Instrument Display) display, with which none of the hijacker pilots would have been familiar or received training on, and use his controls, including the ailerons, rudder, elevators, spoilers and throttles to effect, control and maintain a descent.

Lear has, according to his sworn statement, flown over 100 different types of planes during his 40 years of flying and holds more FAA airman certificates than any other FAA certificated airman. He flew secret missions for the CIA in Southeast Asia, Eastern Europe, the Middle East and Africa between 1967 and 1983 then spent 17 years working for several passenger and cargo airlines as Captain, Check Airman and Instructor.

He is a member of Pilotsfor911truth.org, which has consistently argued that it was impossible for jet airliners to have hit the Twin Towers in the way the 9/11 Commission has suggested. The Commission did not take evidence from pilots when it conducted its enquiry into the attacks from 2002 to 2004.

[OldNick]

i dont know about how certain planes look but surely the film of the jets going in has been pawed over by many experts, and so would expect they would have pointed out if the planes were not as stated.

[Whitey Grandad]

Ridiculous suggestion. Aircraft are very flimsy and any debris was ground up into little pieces when the buildings collapsed. Just to say 'I don't think it could have happened so it can't have' is not going to persuade anybody.

[Saint_clark]

Ridiculous suggestion. Aircraft are very flimsy and any debris was ground up into little pieces when the buildings collapsed. Just to say 'I don't think it could have happened so it can't have' is not going to persuade anybody.

 

This is exactly what I said. It's all very well saying that an airplane should do this, this and this on impact in theory. But the only way you'll know for sure what will happen is when it actually happens. That's why scientists do experiments to test their theories.

[Rasiak-9-]

 

This video gives one of the main 9/11 truthers the reaction they deserve. Brilliant stuff.

[Marsdinho]

Ridiculous suggestion. Aircraft are very flimsy and any debris was ground up into little pieces when the buildings collapsed. Just to say 'I don't think it could have happened so it can't have' is not going to persuade anybody.

 

But they apparently managed to "find" one of the "terrorists" passports and a pair of slippers in the debris...the whole plane was smashed to tiny bits, yet a paper passport and some cotton slippers survived....weird.

[Whitey Grandad]

But they apparently managed to "find" one of the "terrorists" passports and a pair of slippers in the debris...the whole plane was smashed to tiny bits, yet a paper passport and some cotton slippers survived....weird.

 

It wasn't 'found', it was handed to a police officer.

 

http://911blogger.com/news/2011-11-14/fbi-agent-dan-coleman-explains-how-passport-911-hijacker-satam-al-suqami-was-found

 

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

 

For a real plane crashing into concrete:

 

[jjsaint]

Cue the tinfoil hat brigade...

[skintsaint]

 

13secs in...looks like a plane to me?

[dubai_phil]

Pap to the Lounge. Paging for Pap to the Lounge please

[badgerx16]

 

13secs in...looks like a plane to me?

 

Isn't CGI great

• 
  

[pap]

Pap to the Lounge. Paging for Pap to the Lounge please

 

Ha.

 

Taking a backseat for a bit, despite the fact there's already been one almighty dereliction of logic.

 

I enjoyed WG's point about flimsy aircraft, particularly as two of them apparently turned two not-so-flimsy skyscrapers into dust.

[OldNick]

Ha.

 

Taking a backseat for a bit, despite the fact there's already been one almighty dereliction of logic.

 

I enjoyed WG's point about flimsy aircraft, particularly as two of them apparently turned two not-so-flimsy skyscrapers into dust.

they found bits of engine in the pentagon as far as i recall

[LVSaint]

Has anyone spent 5 minutes researching expert John Lear?

[so22saint]

a mate of mine was there - he saw planes.

 

then again I do see him at our regular Bilderberg get togethers...

[Huffton]

SO one mans conspiracy theory affadavit over several hundred eye witness accounts. Ok then.

And despite what he says it would be very easy to teach someone to use the autopilot controls enough to get the plane to the building given the complexity of flight sim software available.

[pap]

[Gemmel]

 

No but we have got a couple of these;

 

 

[pap]

No but we have got a couple of these;

 

 

 

That's very flattering, Gemmel.

 

Captain Edmund Blackadder should be an inspiration to us all.

[igsey]

Has anyone spent 5 minutes researching expert John Lear?

 

This one's good: http://science.howstuffworks.com/space/aliens-ufos/john-lear.htm

 

I especially like this bit:

According to dark siders [i.e. Lear], a ruthless "secret government" controls the world. Among other nefarious activities, it runs the international drug trade and has unleashed AIDS and other deadly diseases as population-reducing measures. Its ultimate goal is to turn the Earth and surrounding planets into slave-labor camps. For some time this secret government has been in contact with alien races, allowing the aliens to abduct human beings in exchange for advanced alien technology.

 

I also didn't realise you have to be an engineer and architect to be a pilot.

 

What a pillock.

[Whitey Grandad]

Ha.

 

Taking a backseat for a bit, despite the fact there's already been one almighty dereliction of logic.

 

I enjoyed WG's point about flimsy aircraft, particularly as two of them apparently turned two not-so-flimsy skyscrapers into dust.

 

Fuel, innit. It was the fire that destroyed them. The planes just left a plane-shaped hole in the skin of the building.

[stu0x]

Oh dear...

[Whitey Grandad]

Oh dear...

 

??? Please explain.

[aintforever]

Just some sad old f*cker attention seeking. None of the 9/11 conspiracies add up.

[dubai_phil]

This one's good: http://science.howstuffworks.com/space/aliens-ufos/john-lear.htm

 

I especially like this bit:

 

 

I also didn't realise you have to be an engineer and architect to be a pilot.

 

What a pillock.

 

Bit Igsey, that's a REALLY bad analogy, everyone knows that bit you liked is actually true

[Sheaf Saint]

Has anyone spent 5 minutes researching expert John Lear?

 

I have, a few years back when I had a mini obsession with aliens and UFOs. He wrote a long and detailed report claiming that the US government has been working with 'grey' aliens at a secret underground military complex since the 1960s.

[BlakeySFC]

I've always thought it was a conspiracy myself.

[Sheaf Saint]

Just some sad old f*cker attention seeking. None of the 9/11 conspiracies add up.

 

Maybe not, but then neither does the official report from the 9/11 Commission. It's got more holes in it than a barn full of swiss cheese.

[pap]

Take it from me; if you're genuinely interested in this sort of thing, look somewhere else. When you've got the likes of aintforever feeling qualified to dismiss hundreds of man years of research with a simple one-liner, you know the debate is not going to get a fair hearing.

[cambsaint]

Well I watched the second plane hit live on TV, so it was a mighty good conspiracy to manage that. Whether it was a plane that hit the Pentagon is possibly open to doubt; it may have been embarrassment at allowing a bomb so close.

[Verbal]

hundreds of man years of research.

 

Quoted for hilarity. It seems our resident conspiracy extremist couldn't resist.

 

Research is what researchers do. They go out into the wide oxygenated world and find things out, talk to people first hand, do experiments to test ideas, etc.

 

The obsessive compulsive activity indulged in by conspiracy fantasists never goes further than the boundaries of a computer screen, and consists almost entirely (as in our remarkably unoriginal, gullible friend) of the incoherent fragments of regurgitated mush. It is not and never will be 'research'.

 

Here are the considered views on the absurd claims of the 9/11 of a proper researcher and perhaps America's most famous radical activist, Noam Chomsky.

 

One of the major consequences of the 9/11 movement has been to draw enormous amounts of energy and effort away from activism directed to real and ongoing crimes of state, and their institutional background, crimes that are far more serious than blowing up the WTC would be, if there were any credibility to that thesis. That is, I suspect, why the 9/11 movement is treated far more tolerantly by centers of power than is the norm for serious critical and activist work.

 

In other words, conspiracy fantasists are doing the job of oppressive governments for them, and are left alone and free to make up irrelevant garbage because it suits the powerful to do so.

[pap]

Take it from me; if you're genuinely interested in this sort of thing, look somewhere else. When you've got the likes of aintforever feeling qualified to dismiss hundreds of man years of research with a simple one-liner, you know the debate is not going to get a fair hearing.

 

Quoted for hilarity. It seems our resident conspiracy extremist couldn't resist.

 

Research is what researchers do. They go out into the wide oxygenated world and find things out, talk to people first hand, do experiments to test ideas, etc.

 

The obsessive compulsive activity indulged in by conspiracy fantasists never goes further than the boundaries of a computer screen, and consists almost entirely (as in our remarkably unoriginal, gullible friend) of the incoherent fragments of regurgitated mush. It is not and never will be 'research'.

 

Here are the considered views on the absurd claims of the 9/11 of a proper researcher and perhaps America's most famous radical activist, Noam Chomsky.

 

In other words, conspiracy fantasists are doing the job of oppressive governments for them, and are left alone and free to make up irrelevant garbage because it suits the powerful to do so.

 

Then of course, there's "skint" Verbal. Ten minutes past the hour and he's already onto his first post of three. There's a fair chance that the other two will also appear in this thread, but don't worry, it'll always be a borrowed opinion, never one of his own.

 

Ten past twelve? FFS. I've seen smackheads queueing outside the chemists for methadone with more patience

[Saint in Paradise]

I post the following for you to read and digest. I am not saying if I do or don't think that it is true or false.

However it is interesting for those with open inquiring minds who don't believe everything Govts tell them.

Never believe anything until you yourself have done your own extensive investigation and found out as much

as you can (about any subject,) don't just follow popular ideas.

 

"According to a retired FXX agent specializing in Israeli counter intel: The type of nuclear devices used on 911 were a modified

version of the W-54 nuclear artillery shells that were covertly provided to the Israelis between 1988 and 1998 from US surplus

stockpiles illegally exported during the Bush/Clinton era.

 

Chemical analysis done by DOE Sandi was able to identify the chemical/radiation footprint or fingerprint of the warheads based

on samples taken after 911 of the fallout at ground zero. (Editor’s note: Nuclear weapon use at ground zero is confirmed from

multiple sources)

 

All plutonium based warheads have a chemical fingerprint that can identify the type of design and where the PU was made and

how old it is. This was the 911 blackmail on Bush 1 and 2, the illegal transfer of surplus US nuclear weapons to the Israelis and

why the continued cover up, along with the stolen gold and stock fraud that was going on Wall Street etc. According to file

ENW57.pdf on page 66. (Editor’s note: Document received and confirmed)

 

Only a 2 kiloton device was needed to drop the buildings. A 2 kiloton device will produce a fireball of apx 150 to 200 feet in diameter

at over 4000 degrees Centigrade. Just large enough to melt the I beams of the central core of the building and drop them in place.

The light flash would last less than 1 second and primarily be in the UV light range. Overpressure would only be at 60PSI max and

directed upwards with the blast. See underground effect.

 

Fallout would be minimal and located to within ground zero range only. Radiation would drop to acceptable levels within 72 hrs. after

the blast. Most fall out was trapped in the cement dust thus causing all of the recent cancer deaths that we are now seeing in NYC

amongst first responders. (Editor’s note: Consistent with site data)"

 

For a lot more from the same article:-

 

http://goldenageofgaia.com/2014/05/21/possible-intelligence-leak-russia-opens-files-on-nuclear-911-and-israeli-proliferation/#more-218810

 

.

[aintforever]

Take it from me; if you're genuinely interested in this sort of thing, look somewhere else. When you've got the likes of aintforever feeling qualified to dismiss hundreds of man years of research with a simple one-liner, you know the debate is not going to get a fair hearing.

 

What's your theory then?

[pap]

What's your theory then?

 

Hmm. That's an interesting one.

 

My theory is that you are not worth talking to on these issues. It's based on the evidence of all your posts before.

[Whitey Grandad]

In other words, conspiracy fantasists are doing the job of oppressive governments for them, and are left alone and free to make up irrelevant garbage because it suits the powerful to do so.

 

So perhaps the conspiracy theorists are a conspiracy set up by the government themselves in order to divert attention from what they are really up too?

[pap]

So perhaps the conspiracy theorists are a conspiracy set up by the government themselves in order to divert attention from what they are really up too?

 

I reckon a large proportion of them are started by and propagated by intelligence agencies.

 

Set up a strawman with just enough plausibility, get people onto it then stand back and watch the squabbling. The 9/11 crowd is an excellent example of this. People will argue planes vs no planes, controlled demolition vs nuke vs directed energy weapon. Cheney and neocons vs Mossad. People get so caught up in the meta that they lose sight of the big things they all agree on.

 

I know you quipped in with "fuel, innit?" yesterday. Wasn't sure if that was a serious point; kerosene is what we call paraffin. As sir will know, it's used all over the world for heating and lighting purposes, and a story you don't hear is how paraffin heaters cause fires which turn concrete dwellings into fine dust, because they don't. Yet that's the explanation behind two of the world's largest buildings instantly becoming powder; that a load of paraffin on the top levels of WTC melted steel supports and brought the whole edifice down.

 

My favourite nugget from the official narrative? Pancake theory. The idea that the dusty dispersed mass at the top of the towers somehow put more pressure on the base than the intact mass the buildings supported up until 9/11. Fúcking ridiculous; I laugh every time someone trots that out, especially when they whip out the NIST report.

 

Broad strokes? My money is on a joint operation between hawkish elements of the US and Israeli administrations. The military industrial complex and Israel are the chief beneficiaries. Plus, there's always this:-

 

Edited 22 May, 2014 by pap

[aintforever]

Hmm. That's an interesting one.

 

My theory is that you are not worth talking to on these issues. It's based on the evidence of all your posts before.

 

LOL, only because I rip your hair-brained theories to shreds.

 

It's easy to point out perceived inconsistencies, things that look weird to the layman, things you don't think would have happened. As soon as the finger of doubt is pointed at any alternative theory they usually fall to pieces.

 

Bit like your Lee Rigby episode.

 

Give us your most likely theory, I will try not to laugh.

[JackanorySFC]

I find the whole 9/11 conspiracy b*****s an insult to the families of those that died that day. I watched the whole thing on the big screens at the Daily Echo HQ when working there. Never known an office full of Journo's go so quiet when that 2nd plane hit. A good mate of mine was working for BGC and was on the phone to the NYC Office when it was all happening, says it was the worst thing he has ever had to listen to.

 

Let's have it right, the nutters claiming this as a conspiracy are calling the US Government, Emergency Services, families, witnesses, airlines and God knows who else liars that have somehow, in this age of data management/ traceability, kept it completely quiet? Mental. And, as I originally said, a ****ing insult.

[pap]

LOL, only because I rip your hair-brained theories to shreds.

 

It's easy to point out perceived inconsistencies, things that look weird to the layman, things you don't think would have happened. As soon as the finger of doubt is pointed at any alternative theory they usually fall to pieces.

 

Bit like your Lee Rigby episode.

 

Give us your most likely theory, I will try not to laugh.

 

My theory is that you are not worth talking to on these issues. It's based on the evidence of all your posts before.

[Unbelievable Jeff]

Gotta say I don't think I believe conspiracy theorists on 9/11, although I do find it very interesting to read the theories and also read people debating it, as I am always happy to be won over.

[pap]

I find the whole 9/11 conspiracy b*****s an insult to the families of those that died that day. I watched the whole thing on the big screens at the Daily Echo HQ when working there. Never known an office full of Journo's go so quiet when that 2nd plane hit. A good mate of mine was working for BGC and was on the phone to the NYC Office when it was all happening, says it was the worst thing he has ever had to listen to.

 

Let's have it right, the nutters claiming this as a conspiracy are calling the US Government, Emergency Services, families, witnesses, airlines and God knows who else liars that have somehow, in this age of data management/ traceability, kept it completely quiet? Mental. And, as I originally said, a ****ing insult.

 

Some of the families aren't as insulted as you think.

 

http://patriotsquestion911.com/survivors.html

[Verbal]

So perhaps the conspiracy theorists are a conspiracy set up by the government themselves in order to divert attention from what they are really up too?

 

Not at all. Conspiracy fantasists have always been around - and they've been common as muck since the Enlightenment (ironic, no?). They spring up like ugly weeds all the time. My point is that governments, particularly oppressive ones, have no interest in suppressing them because they are massive diversions from the oppression itself.

 

Look at who governments actually do go after. Not the inconsequential and gullible fools who drone on and on about some memetic fantasy of theirs. They go after Edward Snowden, Wikileaks, Glenn Greenwald and (in his previous incarnation) Paul Greengrass. Why? Because they uncover real government conspiracies, cover-ups and atrocities. They embarrass secretive security and surveillance agencies, and they reveal the colossal extent to which political oversight of these agencies is absent.

 

If you think about it in terms of footprints - rather like a carbon footprint - these investigative journalists and whistleblowers leave huge imprints on the body politik and public opinion. Fantasists like our pet conspiracist, by contrast, leave the collective footprint of Tinkerbell - and, as I hope you know, fairies don't exist.

 

This isn't to say that fantasists have no effect. They do. They corrode and distract from serious journalism and investigation. So when cretins go on about newspapers and the 'Zionist-controlled mass media' pouring millions into a smear campaign against UKIP for example, it's a lie that obscures a much more important truth.

 

It was a newspaper (Guardian, NY Times) not a conspiracy theorist that reported Snowden.

It was a newspaper (Telegraph) not a conspiracy theorist that reported the Westminster expenses scandals (plural)

It was a newspaper (Guardian) not a conspiracy theorist that reported the Trafigura scandal

It was a news magazine (New Yorker) not a conspiracy theorist that uncovered the Abu Ghraib abuse scandal

It was a news magazine (Ash Shiraa) not a conspiracy theorist that uncovered the Iran-Contra scandal

 

And so on and endlessly on.

 

And yet, for all the tons of information brought to the public realm just by Wikileaks and Snowden, how many of these cretinous conspiracy theories were confirmed by these and other revelations? Not a one. Nada. Which is more than a little embarrassing, don't you think?

 

Conspiracy fantasists are accidental patsies - useful idiots to regimes who want to keep things quiet. The regimes didn't create them - but they're manna from heaven to oppressors everywhere.

[Sheaf Saint]

I find the whole 9/11 conspiracy b*****s an insult to the families of those that died that day.

 

If I was a family member of one of the victims, I would be far less insulted about a search for truth than I would be about the blatant untruths presented in the 'official' version of events. You don't even have to scratch the surface of the farcical investigation carried out by the 9/11 Commission to discover it was just a total whitewash designed solely to cover up what actually happened rather than reveal the truth of it. The Commission was headed by a man who co-authored the 2000 PNAC document along with Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld et. al. in which they called for a new policy of pre-emptive strikes against those who might threaten the USA, and numerous researchers who were involved in the 'investigation' have testified that critical evidence was completely ignored or deliberately re-written when the Commission made its final report.

[pap]

Fantasists like our pet conspiracist, by contrast, leave the collective footprint of Tinkerbell - and, as I hope you know, fairies don't exist.

 

Talking about footprints, a genuine 9/11 conspiracy would put you personally in a bad spot, wouldn't it?

 

At best, your work would look like garnish. At worst, outright propaganda.

[Whitey Grandad]

I know you quipped in with "fuel, innit?" yesterday. Wasn't sure if that was a serious point; kerosene is what we call paraffin. As sir will know, it's used all over the world for heating and lighting purposes, and a story you don't hear is how paraffin heaters cause fires which turn concrete dwellings into fine dust, because they don't. Yet that's the explanation behind two of the world's largest buildings instantly becoming powder; that a load of paraffin on the top levels of WTC melted steel supports and brought the whole edifice down.

 

My favourite nugget from the official narrative? Pancake theory. The idea that the dusty dispersed mass at the top of the towers somehow put more pressure on the base than the intact mass the buildings supported up until 9/11. Fúcking ridiculous; I laugh every time someone trots that out, especially when they whip out the NIST report.

 

I'm quite happy (if that's the right word) with the explanation that the fuel from the aircraft started fires on several floors which then weakened the steel-framed structure which then allowed the weight of the floors above to collapse the whole building. The fuel itself would apparently have burned off within a few minutes but the fires continued for another hour or so. Later studies have indicated that a widespread fire extending over three or more floors would have been enough to bring the buildings down. The steel wasn't melted, just softened enough to distort and collapse. The concrete was pulverised during the descent and spread over the city. You won't find stories of paraffin fires causing similar collapses because there have been no comparable incidents.

[Whitey Grandad]

If I was a family member of one of the victims, I would be far less insulted about a search for truth than I would be about the blatant untruths presented in the 'official' version of events. You don't even have to scratch the surface of the farcical investigation carried out by the 9/11 Commission to discover it was just a total whitewash designed solely to cover up what actually happened rather than reveal the truth of it. The Commission was headed by a man who co-authored the 2000 PNAC document along with Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld et. al. in which they called for a new policy of pre-emptive strikes against those who might threaten the USA, and numerous researchers who were involved in the 'investigation' have testified that critical evidence was completely ignored or deliberately re-written when the Commission made its final report.

 

What blatant untruths are these?

[pap]

If I was a family member of one of the victims, I would be far less insulted about a search for truth than I would be about the blatant untruths presented in the 'official' version of events. You don't even have to scratch the surface of the farcical investigation carried out by the 9/11 Commission to discover it was just a total whitewash designed solely to cover up what actually happened rather than reveal the truth of it. The Commission was headed by a man who co-authored the 2000 PNAC document along with Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld et. al. in which they called for a new policy of pre-emptive strikes against those who might threaten the USA, and numerous researchers who were involved in the 'investigation' have testified that critical evidence was completely ignored or deliberately re-written when the Commission made its final report.

 

Not only that, but the only reason the Commission even existed was because of intense pressure from families for an investigation, which up until that point, wasn't deemed necessary by the Bush administration.

 

Why would it be? After all, the self-same agencies that failed again and again in the lead up to 9/11 miraculously managed to identify all 19 hijackers within 24 hours, still deemed the perpetrators, irrespective of the facts.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/1559151.stm

[pap]

I'm quite happy (if that's the right word) with the explanation that the fuel from the aircraft started fires on several floors which then weakened the steel-framed structure which then allowed the weight of the floors above to collapse the whole building. The fuel itself would apparently have burned off within a few minutes but the fires continued for another hour or so. Later studies have indicated that a widespread fire extending over three or more floors would have been enough to bring the buildings down. The steel wasn't melted, just softened enough to distort and collapse. The concrete was pulverised during the descent and spread over the city. You won't find stories of paraffin fires causing similar collapses because there have been no comparable incidents.

 

Ok then, so if jet fuel didn't burn for very long, what fuelled the fires to the point where they were able to melt steel?

 

Office furniture?

[pap]

What blatant untruths are these?

 

19 hijackers, for one.