It may throw some light on _why_ you can never convince most of those folks that their 911 conspiracy theory is questionable.

Here, in very short form, is are two of the biggest _basic_ holes in the USA-insiders-did-it theory (I call it “Theory-B”.):

Let’s assume the theory-b folks are correct about one basic thing implied by their ideas:. That somewhere in the seats of US goverment power there were individuals willing to gruesomely publicaly murder 3000 (and it COULD have been 20,000) USA citizens and put a serious dent in the US economy to further their geopolitical plans (the main one of which, per the Theory-B propogators is to invade Iraq.)

Now, let’s imagine the secret high level planning session you and I (being participants in the plot) are in:

I come in and say,
“I’ve got it all arranged: I have all the ducks in place to blow up the WTC and blame it on Iraqi. I can get explosives in there without being detected. Just give me the word when you’re all set up to do the drum beat for the Iraq invasion.”

You say: “Great!”

I add “– and to cover our tracks I have it all set up to look like the building was brought down not by explosives but by airliners flown by Saudi extremists who took them over with razorblades as hijack weapons.”

At _that_ point you’d probably say something like “What the fuck have you been smoking?” “First of all that’s totally unnecesary: The Amercian public already solidly believes Mulsim terrorists tried to blow up the building in 1993 and will have no trouble at all accepting they finally succeded; if you have ANY worry about that just fake some “discovered” building security camera footage of some known raghead scurrying through the hall with a suspicious packages and some fake invoices of explosives purchases by shady middle easterners.
Second, as a cover story it sucks: It involves getting complicity or undermining airport security. It taxes the public’s credibility that ragheads with razorblades take over our planes, would make us look like assholes for having such lax airport security. And it would make NORAD look like a joke too. And finally, why the fuck would we put _Saudi_ hijackers in there when we want to invade Iraq and maybe Afghanistan? If didn’t think that whole airline thing sucks completely, I’d want us to fake Iraqi’s at the controls.”

In short, the very foundation near the start of the alleged conspiracty of the “Theory-B” breaks down right there with the idea that the planes are “just a cover story” as no cover story was necessary and, even if it was it has that massive inconsistancy of putting Saudis at the controls instead of Iraqies or Afghans if the purpose behind it all was, as the theory-B folks would have us believe, to justify invading Afghanistan and Iraq.

As for how they can believe Theory-B despite it’s hugh holes: I suspect it’s a combination of a deep (and perhaps understandable) emotional hatred of the the government in general and the Bush administration in particular — not wanting to believe there’s ANY truth to the administrations claims — not wanting to even grant them the truth that “yes, as you say, we do have some enemies outside that want to hurt us, and it might be a good idea to try to do something about them” AND, more important, a basic misunderstanding of standards of proof and the difference between speculation and proof and the difference between circumstantial evidence and real evidence.

There is I suspect, a further place these theories can gain a foothold in certain peoples’ minds is this: If they have not been involved in large institutions they have no idea how common institutional incompetance and unimaginable things are — so when they see something like “how could a plane get so close to the pentagon without being deferred” they assume that MUST mean it was deliberate.

They don’t know, to take one of many examples, that in the 80’s a private pilot in a small subsonic plane without any logistics behind him penetrated the entire Soviet air defense and landed at the Kremlin.(The event resulted in the head of the soviet airforce being fired.) And this air space was defended by a truly paranoid trigger-happy regime that had previously shot down an unarmed Korean airliner full of civilain passangers.

To quote Napoléon Bonaparte: “Never ascribe to malice, that which can be explained by incompetence. ”

Similarly –
In his story Logic of Empire (1941) Heinlein declares:
“You have attributed conditions to villainy that simply result from stupidity”. He calls this the “devil theory” of sociology.
Goethe declared: “Misunderstandings and neglect occasion more mischief in the world than even malice and wickedness. At all events, the two latter are of less frequent occurrence.”

So they see all the holes that had to exist for the 911 hijackers to suceed and conclude that it requires too much belief in large scale institutional stupidy to accept so there must be an evil plot to explain it… not understanding how common such failures are.

My two cents.

Hope it’s helpful, if not to the Theory-B crowd, then at least to those, like myself, who are puzzled that a few intelligent and sincere people still believe Theory-B.

Respectfully,
Al

If it doesn’t stand up to the laws of physics, then write a scientific paper detailing the laws of physics that it breaks and get that paper published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal. Why is this so hard for you nuts to understand?

“1. bbc reporting its collaps 20 min before it actually collapsed”

Lots of news agencies did. It was widely considered to be in danger of falling all afternoon.

“with white-hot smoke pouring out”

The color of smoke is not determined by how hot it is.

I understand your cognitive dissonance on this matter. It’s a hard pill to swallow. It took me about 5 years to realize what happened and it is continuously unsettling. You don’t need any report to say that the probability of the official reports stance on the way the building fell is somewhere in the stratosphere.

Spending all your time trying to prove that something has a one in a trillion chance of happening the way it did is just silly. Besides the literally thousands of other anomalies, anecdotal evidence, cover-ups and lies.

Just take a look at the condition of our country, something is not right.

It’s time to wake up.

NIST has declared that the US must simply accept tyranny. These almost religious cult-like beliefs must be accepted regardless of what we know about the physical world. NIST has quite literally openly stated that the sun revolves around the earth. I am fairly certain that if the president went on national tv and said that the sun revlolved around the earth, then the lapdog media would simply accept this as fact and not question it. The debauching of science has officially become the American pastime. How far we have fallen… it is fitting that such a proclamation would come at a time when the US economy is teetering on the edge of collapse. Maybe NIST will blame that on “thermal expansion” as well.

Why should we be surprised that the first time a long-span floor system was exposed to extended heat (remember, the water mains had been severed, which meant the sprinkler system didn’t work) that it failed? Such a scenario hadn’t occurred before. Had the sprinklers worked, the thermal expansion wouldn’t have happened.

Sorry that the explanation for the fall of WTC 7 is so prosaic and ordinary. But if we heed Occam’s Razor, it’s a much more logical and likely scenario than controlled demolition which would require a massive conspiracy to accomplish (a month of prepping the building with the proper charges, etc.) and a cover-up to follow that would require the silence of thousands of people and their complicity in murder.

For a government that can’t keep track of nuclear warheads, can’t keep secret its most sensitive surveillance programs, and hasn’t been able to outfit either the FBI or IRS with modern computer systems, that’s a lot to ask.

Jefferson Flanders

How many different hypotheses did NIST do their computer simulations and modeling for?

The bulk of the folks at NIST are probably decent, serious scientists. But I’ll bet the decision to try and prove a particular hypothesis came from a very small group. With that hypothesis as a given, the scientists involved did their best to lay out the facts. They did, after all, throw out the notion that the fires got very hot. They also threw out the premise that there was any significant structural damage from flying WTC 1 debris. And, they said no to FEMA’s hypothesis that fuel oil tanks caught fire. And they also said no to the notion that cantilevered construction over the Con Ed substation had anything to do with it.

When they eliminated all that, where else could they go? They work for the government. They couldn’t really look at an engineered or controlled demolition scenario — that path is verboten. Everyone laughs at the tinfoil hat crowd, right?

So all they had left was ordinary office fires. They built their computer models and played with them for a LONG time. Eventually, after using the most severe case, they were able to generate a video that purports to show just how this infectious thermal expansion spread up and across the building.

Even then, they couldn’t plug in any numbers that would show the total, rapid, symmetric fall that we all witnessed on the real videos. So their own videos of the simulation they settled on show just the first few seconds. Go look at them… you’d think that WTC 7 was built of pick-up-sticks. It’s so comical and so sad at the same time.

Malcolm Wilhelm:

The molten steel issue has been addressed by NIST and others, and it is most likely that any molten metals, including steel, are the result of post-collapse heat.

http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/canofficefirescauselargesteelcolumnsandb

DiscordStu:

9/11 marked the first time in history anyone had flown modern jetliners loaded with jet fuel into skyscrapers.

matti:

The BBC had admitted its mistake. It wouldn’t be the first time someone misreported during a crisis.

ConspiracyMyButt:

Like many other proposed bizarre CIA-schemes of the 1960s to kill Castro (i.e. exploding cigars, etc.), Operation Northwoods never happened.

richard:

The Larry Silverstein quote (”pull it”) has been clarified by Silverstein and it is not a demolition term.

http://www.debunk911myths.org/topics/Larry_Silverstein

Ron Soldwish:

I read the report. Employing scientific theory means you adopt a hypothesis, test it, and see if it stands up. That NIST has altered its theory on why WTC 7 collapsed should suggest that they are looking for the most logical theory and one supported by physics.

Jefferson Flanders

How come when they released the 1st report they said that there was only a “low probility” of the building colapsing due to fire, (in there own words).
Now years later, after the do “computer simulations”, the determine that fires were the cause. So if i do a computer simulation that im dating Jessica Alba, can we say that is scienticly proven to be true????

And if you also take the time to read the report, they mention twice, that the report is incompete because all of the evidence was destroyed before congress could get involed, i give them credit for that.

Second - This is hardly a fair fight. I’m thinking if the “conspiracy theorists” were given 6 years and 10s of millions of dollars they could produce a much more believable report than this latest offering from NIST. And finally if the CTs had equal mass marketing (a.k.a. CNN, Fox, NBC, etc) to promote their report there would be very few people that would believe the “official” story.

Let’s be careful about declarations of “truth”.

The government appears indicted.

1. There were only 2-3 small fires in WTC, no raging fire that could affect any steel construction or melt pillars
If this building collapsed becuase of fire is it the FIRST in world history (after both wtc’s!). Steel enforced buildings will NOT collapse from office fires every firefighter or static expert (except government sponsored ones) will confirm that.

2. The owner of WTC 7: Larry Page himself went on video shortly after the domolition and said. “we decided to “PULL” the building”.. yes, everybody can check that on youtube. “PULL” has only one meaning in that context: Charges where there and ignited.
This means that charges must have been placed there for weeks before the whole incident, since it cannot be done in a few hours. How did they knew?

3. Why is there no steel for further investigation neither from WTC or WTC7 ?? Allegedly the biggest crime in history but the whole steel was sold and shipped in record time to china. None of it was properly examined.

The white house and very rich individuals control the newsmedia and politics. The most terrible crime organization is currently located in the USA and expands their powers, invading of afghanistan and iraq are no accident. Deteriorating relations with russia and china are neither. Iran will be soon bombed.

You are foolish to think that obama/biden will win.. they will of course not let them. Voting mashines will work for the evil.

You see my american friends, you have the evil in your government and they took control over everything and brainwashing you. But get excited, just sit in front of your TV sets and swallow fox news.

Dont dare to take it to the streets, the world knows already you dont have the will or determination to do that. Nobody expects it anymore from you…

What kind of ridiculous propaganda is this? You people should be ashamed of yourselves for being such intellectual midgets.

Those that ridicule 9/11 truthers fail to realize that their is nothing absurd about the idea of a false flag attack perpetrated by the US military. There is a proven historical precedent in Operation Northwoods which reads like a script for 9/11 and it came directly from the US military’s own records. This is not some cwazy “conspiracy theory” as the poorly informed government sycophants like to say.

On top of that we have many other historical examples of false flag terrorism. This is the CIA’s trade after all. They’ve been doing it for decades to overthrow foreign governments (like Iran) for over 50 years!! And yet we have these morons that will say er, the government would never do something like that or the government is not competent enough to do something like that. These are utterly naive and provably false statements.

So the government (especially one with such an overbearing and expansive military and intelligence apparatus as the US) should always be held in suspicion until they can unequivocally prove the case of 9/11.

And I’m sorry but office fires and “thermal expansion” do not freaking cut it!!

Why don’t they account for the video evidence of massive explosions in WTC7?

One example:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0YvrKfWkxdw

Why don’t they account for the testimony of survivors that described explosions, dead bodies and a blown out lobby inside WTC7 BEFORE the collapse of either of the twin towers??!

One example:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kRaKHq2dfCI

Why don’t they account for the molten pools of metal found at the base of all three towers???!

Why don’t they account for the traces of evaporated steel and chemical traces of thermite?

If it is true that those towers could collapse from some burning office furniture then that should throw the entire world of chemistry, physics and structural engineering on it’s head!!

This is outrageous stuff and it’s outrageous that articles like these should call us “conspiracy theorists” for spotting obvious gaping holes in the story of the government and NIST.

It is amazing that these liars think they can get away with it. The game is over, people are beginning to beleive their own eyes. The lies have been too great. 9/11 was not what they say it was, inside of everyone of us we know the truth. Dig deep summon up some courage, stop licking the hand that enslaves you. STAND

What does the government do when their bogus cover-up doesn’t stand up to the laws of physics? Just change the laws of physics! Yeah, right, a “new phenomenon” that architects and engineers have somehow overlooked for hundreds of years. The first time in history that a building has ever collapsed from fire and it happens three times on the same day? Gimme a bloody break! How stupid do they think we are?

The idea that this report “represents a major blow” to alternative 9/11 research is laughable. NIST is the GOVERNMENT! Gee, now that the GOVERNMENT has released this new report (and we all know they have a record of being sooooo honest) supposedly clearing the GOVERNMENT of wrongdoing by inventing a “new phenomenon” that defies the laws of physics, yeah, I’m sure that will really answer everyones questions!

Jefferson Flanders, are you friggin nuts?

If you want to find out what independent, non-government scientists think about what happened, check out http://www.ae911truth.org/

http://www.prisonplanet.com
http://www.infowars.com
http://www.truthnews.us
http://www.jonesreport.com

If the government hasn´t told the truth in 20 years the 9/11 truth movement will still stand strong!