Are you a conspiracy virgin?

[Helene2]

Tonight there is a documentary on BBC2 about 9/11 conspiracy thoeries:

Tonight 9/11: The Conspiracy Files BBC2 9:00PM
9/11: The Conspiracy Files, will try to answer the question that has been doing the rounds on the Internet ever since the hijacked planes crashed into the twin towers of the World Trade Center: "Is it an inside job?"

If you have not yet already watched it, 9/11 Mysteries proves the WTC towers were rigged with explosives and planes were flown into the towers to make it look like a terrorist attack, all for an excuse to invade the middle east. The towers were planned to be demolished, but it would have cost billions. Larry Silverstein bought the lease on the towers 6 months before 9/11, it was the first time they had chamged hands for thirty years. They were a dead duck, they nded millions in renovations, had to be subsidised by the City and were full of asbestos: it was not a shrewd investment at all. As soon as he bought the towers he put a record insurance policy on them, specifically covering them for terorist attacks. Six months later he made $7 billion from from 9/11.
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/silverstein.html

Watch 9/11 Mysteries:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6708190071483512003

[Helene2]

The devil is in the details. The documentary went far and wide and was quite high level. For example they displayed a picture of breaking beams and quoted how steel loses strength at 600C. They ignored that the NIST report itself could only find linited evidence of of SOME steel at 300C.

They ignored that the NIST study did not explain the collapse only the theory leadiing to the collapse, but passed no commentaries on how the actual collapse occured.

They ignored that NIST have stated they have NO explaination for the third collapse. They failed to relate about the passport that passed though the towers unburnt and then by some MIRACLE was picked up by an unknown pedestrian and handed to a cop.

What the documentary did was throw up a lot of chaff and loon theories and ignored in any depth genuine questions.

I am amazed that to this day NIST or some other organization has failed to accuratley model the collapse and show how when the tower stated tilting in one direction, somehow this tilt was corrected and the tower fell straight.

They fail to account how people state that each floor was pulverised and masses of material was ejected, yet when reaching the bottom floors which were capable of sustaining a huge gravity load, somehow with all this pulverisation of each floor and the horizontal ejection of mass, that there was still enough force left to destroy all the floors.

They ignore the flaws in the limited models of fire damage ( 2 for each building ).

And.......most of the people here who dismiss us with question have never read the entire NIST report. I would suggect it makes interesting reading, as doe the 9/11 commision.

9/11 was a day of miracles. The first three buildings of steel to suffer complete collapse.

Never mind the holes in the pentagon, they ignored of failed to explain why the aircraft did a HIGH SPEED turn rather than a straight shot - therefore hitting the side with less people ( due to construction ).

Why? People always love to quote Occams law, yet the simplest act for the Pentagon plane would have been too maintain course. Why this turn? This was not the simplest path....

The devil is in the details. Sure some people believe some aircraft landed and offloaded passengers, but the BBC were sleazy to allow loon theories to obsrtuct the many genuine areas of murkyness.

I myself do not need a "narrative" to explain the day. I simply want well researched facts , and for me the key is the collapse of the twin towers and the unanswered questions there.