Dear David,you cannot answer a question with a question.
I'll put it another way to suit your sensitive psyche.Should our humanity buckle to the forces of despotism in order to save children from landmines?Would these children be happier under the likes of Saddham or Mugabe?

Millions of people suffered during ww2.Do you think the suffering was worth the feedom you have now to disagree with the likes of John Howard,or should we have less landmines and less freedoms?

It is never that simple and there comes a time when we all have to choose a course of action.

• Kevin Ryan ..."Have you ever-found-yourself caught between several hundred million people and their most cherished lies? After writing a letter to a government scientist, pleading with him to clarify-a-report of his work, I found myself in just that situation. The letter was circulated on the internet and for a brief-time I became a reluctant celebrity. Of course I stand behind what I wrote, although it was originally intended as a personal-message, not an open-letter. Since many have asked for clarification, here is my message to all"!

"To me, the report in question represents a decision-point, not just for the US, but for humanity as-a-whole. We're at a point where we must decide if we will live consciously, or literally give-up our entire reality for a thin veneer-of-lies. In the US these lies include cheap propaganda that passes for journalism, police-state-measures that promise security, and mountains of debt that paint-a-picture of wealth. Additionally we've adopted many implicit self-deceptions, like the idea that we'll always enjoy a limitless share of the world's resources, no matter where these are located or who might disagree".

"All people lie to themselves, it's one of the most important things we've yet to accept about our own nature. We lie to ourselves to justify our-past-actions, to protect our self-image, and to promote ourselves relative to others. This lying is at the root of many of our problems (eg nationalism/racism). Until we see this, and strive to understand if not-control it, the resulting problems will continue unchecked and the outcome will be certain".

"Any organism or society that makes self-deception its modus-operandi will make many bad, and ultimately fatal, decisions. The day will come when we're collectively fooling ourselves in such-a-way that we essentially trade everything we've for what's behind our fantasy curtain. It appears that day is near, the official conspiracy theory of 9/11 is a key-part of our current self-deception. More importantly, this story may be our last chance to see just how critical our situation is so that we can all stop, and begin working together to solve the real problems we face"!

Kevin Ryan ..."These problems, for US and world as a whole, amount to growing storm-of-factors including environmental changes, resource depletion, and growth in resource usage. Undoubtedly secret Energy-Taskforce report (May 2001) would verify this, and help us to understand that our government is responding to some of these threats with a carefully laid-out-plan. This plan assumes that people cannot rise above their own natural, ego-based self-deception, and therefore few-of-us will survive the coming storm".

"In essence, they're betting against us. Anyone who honestly looks at the evidence has difficulty finding anything in the official-story of 9/11 that is believable. It's not just one or two strange twists or holes in the story, the whole thing is bogus from start to end. In my previous job I was in a position to question one part, the collapse of three tall buildings due to fire. But this isn't really a chemistry or engineering problem, and may be best approached initially through statistics".

"The three WTC buildings in question weren't all designed the same way and weren't all hit by airplanes. The only thing they seemed to have in common, relatively small and manageable fires, as indicated by the work of firefighters right up to the moment of collapse. From the government's report we know that only a small percentage of the supporting columns in each of the first two buildings were severed, and that the jet fuel burned off in just a few minutes. To follow the latest 'leading hypothesis', what are the odds that all the fireproofing fell-off in just the right-places, even far from the point of impact"?

"Without much test-data, let's say it's one in-a-thousand. And what are the odds that furnishings converged somehow to supply highly directed forced-oxygen-fires at very precise points on the remaining columns? Is it another one in-a-thousand? What is the chance that those points would then all soften-in-unison, and give-way perfectly, so that the highly dubious 'progressive global collapse' theory could be born?

Personal decision... http://www.911citizenswatch.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=557&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0

UQ Wire...Underwriter speaks-out on WTC Study... http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0411/S00177.htm
UQ Wire...9/11 Whistleblower Kevin Ryan fired... http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0411/S00239.htm

A chain is only as strong as it's weakest link and thus a building is ony as strong as it's weakest floor.The difference between a chain and a building is at that the top floors don't matter.The building that was hit lowest in the attack went down first,since the middle and lower links in a building are under the greatest stress from the weight of the floors above.The conspiricies theories don't cut it.Controlled implosion takes hundreds of strategically placed explosives installed by hundreds of core drilled holes.Did no one notice their installation?

Steel was the primary material of structure in the Twin Towers.Steel has good tensile strenght{or strength due to stretching] but is not good under compression.When one floor was compromised the compression forces were too great and thus they came down like dominoes or a collapsing back of cards.It was not the CIA or the FBI.

Could it be the very people who have boasted about their accomplishments?