There’s something to be said for basing views on 9/11 on evidence and not on 9/11 Truth videos but yes, this video does a very good job of presenting the solid facts for further consideration. The latest version of Loose Change (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YsRm8M-qOjQ) covers much of the same material but focusses on some items that the other either left out or perhaps glossed over. The only fault that I see in both is the emphasis put on Steve Jones’ nano-thermite which I suspect may be another Cass Sunstein-type diversion. Nano-thermite (if there is such a thing – it’s been peer-reviewed dontcha know! :o) ) or good-old fashioned thermite could have been used to cut steel beams but the major destructive force would have been the det-cord that is de rigour in controlled demolitions. I’m no expert but why risk the greatest show of the century on unproven technology?
But the evidence that is the endless footage thanks to Youtube, etc, of the buildings being demolished, witness statements to camera such as Barry Jennings and his flight from WTC 7 and the people caught in explosions in one tower when the first plane hit the other building as well as the eyewitness statements of emergency responders published by the NYTs are enough to sink the LIHOP theory.
All of the peripheral evidence – individuals calling a meeting in one of the towers and then mysteriously deciding not to attend, vaults being broken into and emptied, air defence jets being misdirected out to sea, Israelis videoing the destruction and cheering, FBI agents confiscating all CCTV video they can get their hands on, hijacker passport found in good condition, WTC 7 falling into its own footprint – just describe the size of the crime.
Was it possible for 19 hijackers to wire up 3 skyscrapers with explosives and then successfully board and take control of four airliners and steer 3 of them successfully to their targets and somehow avoid all of the traps that the laws of physics would have set for them, such as hitting the ground floor of the Pentagon without digging up the lawn with the engines or making high speed turns at near sea-level altitude without ripping the wings from the aircraft? Of course not!
Was it possible that a cadre of government insiders could organise the wiring up of the towers and possibly even planting explosives in the targetted side of the Pentagon, setup 4 fly-by-wire military aircraft sufficiently large enough to fool the spectators way down below, organise a massive air-defense exercise for the same day to clear the target area and prepare the “incompetency” defense and plant “experts” to set the official narrative on the day? Much more likely in my book.
Consider also that every alleged terror attack since then with the exception of the London Bombings has been shamefully amateurish and now we find that the FBI has actually initiated all of the ones that they busted. Without them, there wouldn’t have been any terror attacks in the US.
(What Operation Gladio has shown is that quality terror comes only from state-owned and operated organisations. The London Bombings have all the hallmarks of a false-flag attack – quality explosives, spit second timing, a controlled narrative thanks to “defective” CCTV, simultaneous exercise for the same event at the same location, initial refusal to allow public inquiry and then later allowing only a highly-controlled review of the events. Because it was a smaller event, it was easier to control but they still managed to screw up their official story. As an aside, allegedly MI5 were facing massive budget cuts but post 7/7, their funding worries ended.)
If my opinion makes me a 9/11 Truther, then I wear the badger proudly but really, I’m just a guy that prefers facts to fiction when it comes to real-life criminal activity.
Peace! x