Array: there is always a potential problem in relying on the endorsements of any given individuals because those who refuse to confront the evidence will always find some earlier quotation to discredit the person upon whom you rely.

It is better to stick with the scientific evidence and other evidence that is incontrovertible. The destruction of WTC towers 1, 2 and 7 defy the laws of physics. Buildings cannot fall at free fall speed unless the obstacles to their descent are removed in advance, as Shyam Sunder of NIST admitted. The only way obstacles can be removed is by the use of explosives. These issues have been discussed in a number of peer reviewed scientific journals. Not a single article has been published Ina scientific peer reviewed journal that provides an alternative explanation.

Another good illustration is the alleged use of cell phones calls from the planes. The FBI in the Moussaui trial said those calls did not happen. How then to explain the alleged conversations between Barbara Olsen and her husband? Those calls are the sole source of the Arabs with box utters myth perpetuate by the 9/11 Commission. If the FBI denies they happened then they mustn have been faked. What motive would the alleged hijackers have for faking this and many other calls? None that is consistent with the official conspiracy theory.

Then there is a host of other evidence consistent with this being a job carried out with at the least official complicity. For example the stand down of the air force; the suppression of evidence; Operation Able Danger; etc etc. The best single overview of all the troubling questions is Grifin's book The New Pearl Harbor Revisited. The issues he raises plus the scientific and admitted evidence is the best rebuttal if provocateurs such as Pericles who prefer straw men arguments to confronting the very real questions.

But there's absolutely nothing new here, James O'Neill.

>>The issues he raises plus the scientific and admitted evidence is the best rebuttal if provocateurs such as Pericles who prefer straw men arguments to confronting the very real questions.<<

It is just the same fairy-stories all over again.

Let me suggest this to you. Why don't you propose just one single plausible alternative scenario, in which the requisite amount of explosive can be placed, and the explosion(s) initiated in a manner that agrees with the facts we know - I presume you are prepared to accept that planes flew into the WTC... if not, then there would be a few more questions for you to answer.

Forget for a moment who did it, or why. Just concentrate on the scale of the operation that you propose, and the manner in which it might have been carried out.

No cheating. No waving your arms about saying it was the CIA, or Mossad or Dick Cheney. Just concentrate your mind on the logistics of what would be involved in making it happen.

Then as an afterthought, ask yourself where the people who carried it out are now.

James O'Neill.Pericles knows the truth.He is up on all the latest events like the movie in production 'September Morn.'He could well be a paid agent of dis-information because he follows my comments like a hound dog.If it is all BS why bother commenting?

I agree on using the science but there are many who cannot grasp it.The best site for proving our point is http://debunking911.com/ Their lead picture is of the South Tower pitching at 22 deg.This was NIST's pile driver that crushed the lower floors.The top third of the South Tower should have continued in that vector and fallen over intact.

Instead the top third as video reveals, explodes into dust particles.The energy from this pile driver of NIST could not exert any sizable forces on the lower floors since it had changed direction and soon after exploded into dust.What sort of energy pulverises solid steel and concrete? Jet Fuel fires burn to only half the temps to melt steel yet there is ample video footage showing molten steel pouring from the sides of the towers and described by firemen "flowing like lava down the channel ways."

The morons who are debunking 911 truthers cannot even get their lead picture right.It proves our point.

I've met Prof Niels Harrett ,Prof Steven Jones and our Dr Frank Legge.They with 7 other scientists put out a peer reviewed paper that has not been disputed.That explosive which melted steel and pulverised concrete was Nano-thermite and only the Military had the technology to make it.Neils said that very little was known about it back in 2003.

As for the logistics of getting it into the towers.Bush's brother owned the security company with the contract for this complex and they were also doing extensive renovations on the elevators.Work was been done when the day workers were gone.

A lot of people have deep suspicions now but also many think that 10 yrs on, it does not really matter.We know that it is of the upmost importance.That's why I still donate to http://www.ae911truth.org/

Alas, my cover is blown.

>>He could well be a paid agent of dis-information because he follows my comments like a hound dog.If it is all BS why bother commenting?<<

What on earth shall I do now?

Having dedicated my life, for so long, to obfuscate every piece of the deadly incriminating evidence that Arjay has been promulgating all these years - much to the discomfort of the Military Industrial Complex of International Banksters Bent on Creating the New World Order - I have clearly failed in my mission.

Obviously, the MICOIBBOCTNWO, as they are known in the most intimate of government circles, have no more use for me. I expect my pink slip will be in the mail, with the postmark on the envelope artfully smudged so it can't be traced back to them. They are so cunning like that, you wouldn't believe.

I will, I suppose, have to join all those elevator mechanics, sunning themselves on that tropical paradise, safe from the temptation to contact the press and earn themselves many millions for blowing the whistle... not that it would be any use of course, the MSM are all in on it as well. That's why you can only find this information on tiny blogs, bravely maintained by fearless folk, who know that they will eventually get that 3a.m knock on the door - but they Don't Care...

Fortunately, there are still many millions of us on the MICOIBBOCTNWO payroll, keeping an eye on these dedicated sleuther-truthers. We have to be eternally vigilant. Keeping a secret this big is no easy task.

Still, you never know, they might decide to keep me on. But I bet they will use this as an excuse to cut my pay. Even evil international banksters have to watch the bottom line.

But just before I go...

>>As for the logistics of getting it into the towers.Bush's brother owned the security company with the contract for this complex and they were also doing extensive renovations on the elevators.<<

Hah!

That's exactly what we wanted you to believe...

Notice how Pericles cannot engage in debate on the science of freefall destruction due to the impossibility of fire melting steel columns and NIST's theory of sequential floor collapse due to pile driver that self destructs before any impact is evident.Note that NIST is the US National Institute for Standards and Technology.

Perhaps Pericles,the science is beyond you and thus should stick to your best talents of obsfuscation and deception.

Arjay: I agree with what you say in your last two posts. I also know Harrit, Jones and Legge personally and admire their dedication to determine the truth, often in the face of obscurantist rantings of some of the above commenters. I also follow the 911blogger site which is a fantastic resource for learning more about the science. I also agree that the official conspiracy theory fails to explain what some have called the "energy gap". Fire and gravity do not account for the energy required to pulverize concrete, eject huge steel beams 200 meters, melt steel etc. the only reservation I have is that thermite cannot explain the explosive force required. It can certainly melt steel etc, but that is not a sufficient explanation. Some other force was necessary and there is some useful research going on about that at present. As to how the logistics were managed, that hoary chestnut has been explained in detail in Griffin's book mentioned above.