Yeah, yeah, I know: I've heard that one before and didn't believe it either. Until I read a book where the author gives strong technical proof that it was impossible for the two planes to bring down the two towers and also the third building, WTC-7.

The government claims that the two towers collapsed when the structural steel weakened due to the intense heat of the fires. Jet fuel burns at a temp of 1170F and the max temp of a building fire under ideal conditions is roughly 1800F. Further, the fires from the planes was in the top portion of the buildings, not the base. The "intense heat" to weaken or melt the base structure was an impossibility since heat does not travel downward that well. There were a total of 287 steel columns but only three of them reached a temp of just 482F, where it takes 797F to even soften the steel and 1832F for steel to lose 90% of it's strength. NIST (National Institute for Standards & Technology) had no evidence that any of the columns had lost even 1% of their strength. Photographic evidence shows that the fires had already died down after the initial fireballs which burned off the jet fuel in just a few minutes. Captain Palmer on the 78th floor shortly before the collapse of the South Tower claimed on a clearly heard audio recording that the fire had died down and could be put out easily enough. Similarly film footage shows a woman in the hole created by the aircraft in the North Tower waiving to attract attention. Clearly there was no raging inferno in either building, as the government claimed.

Further, the failure of the base structural elements would have had to occur simultaneously for the buildings to collapse uniformly and fall neatly into their own footprints. The only way that could happen is for a demolition expert to place explosive charges in the base structures and fire them simultaneously. For the towers to fall in the manner claimed by the government is a brazen lie. Looking at film footage one can see steel beams broken neatly into segments of equal length and being blown several hundred feet horizontally. The films show the concrete of the towers pulverized into a pryo-plastic cloud; this does not occur from a fire; only from an explosion. Clearly seen and heard timed explosions disintegrated and pulverized everything uniformly in synchronized symmetrical perfection! Several technical authorities have written reports to that effect.

Later analysis showed steel and molybdenum (melting point 4732F) had also melted. Only something like military grade nano-Thermite could have provided the necessary heat. Even a month after the event, there were pools of molten iron in the base of the towers that were at a temp higher than jet fuel burns; these fires were finally extinguished 12/13/2001.

Then there is the destruction of WTC-7, the Salomon Brothers' Building. It, too, collapsed in a symmetrical manner into it's own footprint, but it was not even hit by a plane. Clearly impossible to explain by a fire. Explosions are clearly visible on film footage. The government is still fumbling for a reasonable explanation. A Dutch demolition expert, Daniel Jowenko, said on Dutch TV 9/11/2006 that the collapse of WTC-7 was without a doubt a controlled demolition.

So why would our government deliberately destroy three prominent buildings and the people therein and offer false testimony about their destruction? That is the crux of the matter. It is speculated that they were looking for a reason to invade a couple mid-east Muslim nations, but that is another story!

Go online and you will find those who agree with the government version of the story and those who do not. The two things that cause me to think the government is lying are the neat vertical collapse of the buildings and the clouds of concrete dust from explosions.

The book author quotes freely from a report "Left-leaning Despisers of the 9/11 Truth Movement: Do you Really Believe in Miracles?", authored by David Ray Griffin, a professional writer, published in Global Research, on 7/6/2010. Griffin cites scientific reports that claim that sulfidation had occurred in the event, but there is no good explanation for the source of the sulfur. This is significant since putting sulfur in thermite turns it to thermate and makes the steel melt at a much lower temp, so the steel will melt at 988F or so instead of 2800F. NIST tried to explain this away by claiming the sulfur came from the drywall in the buildings, but drywall contains calcium sulfate, not elemental sulfur. If the sulfur had come from drywall, there would have been significant amounts of calcium as well. Further, one team of investigators noted that the melted steel had been sulfidized.

The author of the book I read is (Catholic) Fr Paul Kramer and the book is "The Mystery of Iniquity". The book starts out talking of a couple problems within the Catholic Church and moves from there to what the New World Order people plan for us. But if you want to read about the WTC thing, start at Appendix III (page 169), "Government Crimes and Media Lies." The book is not available at Amazon.com; you will have to order directly from the publisher, Unmasking Iniquity Association. They offer it at $20.97 postpaid for a single copy and downward in price for multiple copies.

Sybil Edmonds, an FBI translator, has stated that Osama bin Laden was a CIA agent up until 9/11. A French press agency said that bin Laden was being treated at the American Hospital in Dubai in August 2001 for kidney disease, where he was visited by CIA officials. Another source says bin Laden died of kidney failure shortly thereafter, long before B.O. claimed he had bin Laden assassinated.

The book goes into several other major government lies and offers explanations for them.

This drivel doesn't deserve comment.

I assume this kind of thing is fascinating to you Bob, and I would never be critical of someone who's passionate about anything. But I'm curious if when you read/investigate positions like "9/11 was a conspiracy", do you also devote equal effort in researching the opposing information?

I mean, in cases like what you're suggesting here with 9/11, there are SO MANY credible debunkings available...

Bob, what do you suppose was the government's motive - creating more jobs in the construction industry?

Is Elvis still working at the Burger King in Kalamazoo Michigan?

Lincoln killed John Wilkes Booth. The Titanic sank an iceberg. Hitler is still alive. The moon landing was filmed on Mars. The collapse of the USA is what ended the cold war. The Alfred P. Murrah building bombed Timothy McVeigh.

And so on.

I'm afraid I will be critical of someone who would re-print Osama bin Laden was a CIA agent until 9/11. There may have been a connection when we supported the Taliban against the Russians in Afghanistan.

"Left-leaning Despisers of the 9/11 Truth Movement"

Left leaning? If the govt was behind 9-11 it would have been George Bush's guys. I would guess "right leaners" would be more opposed to that BS. No I don't think for a minute that GWB or his people were involved. Total nonsense the whole thing.

Steel does not have to melt in order for it to fail structurally. The heat can cause the steel to distort and fail. Once all those floors above come crashing down on that floor the "pancaking" continues down to the ground like a runaway elevator falling.