WHAT REALLY HAPPENED 9-11, 2001 IN NEW YORK?


Also watch YouTube, https://www.youtube.com/user/TheHonesty4u 

Was it really a terror attack? I don’t think so, and I will show you why!

Listen in English here.

Listen to the player by clicking the play button.
Please write a comment in Swedish or English below this article!

Listen in Swedish here.


OBS! Senaste nytt om WTC-katastrofen!

Lyssna på svenska här så får du även ett matematiskt bevis!

You can also watch this video! Do I have to say more?
http://iamisatthedoors.wordpress.com/2013/09/13/shocking-evidence-reveals-possible-cgi-animation-glitch-durring-a-2001-live-news-broadcast-of-plane-hitting-tower/
world-trade-center
We have all seen the terrible “terror attack” on World Trade Center 9/11, 2001 in TV. Every news station in the world covered the event live.
At least that is what we thought!
What we saw was actually CNN that covered the event and all the other networks borrowed that link from CNN and made their own coverage from the CNN pictures. Nothing wrong with that!
That’s a normal procedure.
But we better keep that fact in mind when we analyze this event. It might be important for our understandings analyzing the facts later on.

We all saw the tremendous smoke coming out from the first tower that was hit by an airplane.
The news directly called it a terror attack and directly talked about an airliner hitting the first tower.
The truth is that no one actually saw what was hitting the first tower!
It was just suddenly exploding there high up in the sky.
Remember here that this tower was almost 500 meter high!
With all the skyscrapers around that place it is almost impossible to get a good view up. At least you will get pain in your neck if you try.

A film team found a spot where they could actually interview a guy and asking him about what happened. The camera was showing his face from below so the viewers could both se him and the smoke coming out from the first tower high above.

Suddenly we all saw a big airliner fly straight in to tower number 2 and explode in there in a terrible sound!
The whole airliner was just absorbed inside the tower and a heavy fire started.
Now the whole world “knew” that it was an airplane that even hit the first tower and we all also knew that this must be a terror attack.

I was just coming in to a pizzeria where the TV was on showing the event with the first tower.
Like most people around the world I guess, I was also shocked over that this actually could happen in a country like USA with all security and air force and everything they are so famous for.
Obviously it did not help against a terror attack!

When my ordered pizza was finished I took it and went home quickly as possible. I ran in to my apartment and turned on the TV. I followed every word and every guess from experts pointing out what they thought or knew.
Suddenly I saw that film team in the street interviewing that guy and saw this huge airplane crash in to the other tower.
My first reaction was, my god this is terrible with all that people killed.

My next reaction was, hmm… this was odd!
This film team really must have been super lucky to be able to catch that event live, just now and just there with a good overview even over the other tower.
What a fantastic coincident!
Well, I saw it with my own eyes like the rest of the world that was watching TV, so I have to accept it!
It really was a fantastic coincident!

I was sitting in front of my TV following every second of the drama when suddenly the first tower collapsed and went straight down in a tremendous smoke cloud.
I thought, what the hell is this?
This can’t happen!
An almost 500 meter tall building can not possibly go straight down like a radio antenna on a car!
C’mon, I’ve actually been in school!
It will fall to one side like a tree.

Short thereafter next tower collapsed in exactly the same way.
I already knew that what I saw was not reality!
byggnad 7 förstörd andra bara skadade

Also building 7 in the World Trade Center complex also fall straight down as my radio antenna on my car.
That very big and high building was not even hit by an airplane!
Building 7 was more than hundred meters away from the twin towers!
Since that day I knew that this story must be a fake.

The only questions were how and why?

Let us investigate the facts here.

Both towers are built with two frames of steel bars.
The inner frame has 47 steel bars.
The outer frame has 236 steel bars. 

We are here talking about massive steel. Extremely big and hard!
It was less then 2 meters between every bar in the outer steel bar barrier.

To know these construction facts are essential because it actually itself proves that no airplane can possibly enter inside this steel barrier. The steel barrier will instead gather the force from the airplane impact in almost the same way a car does when it crash in to something.
Have you ever seen a car that have been absorbed by a building or another car and just vanished inside?
Sorry, that doesn’t happen in reality, just in a movie!
There was not one single part of an airplane anywhere in the World Trade Center area!

The official explanation was that everything melted down and disappeared in the heat of the fire from the airplane fuel.
The explanation is really funny! That’s the best you can say about it!
It is actually stupid and ignorant!
There are actually parts in an airplane, for example in the engines, which does not melt in temperatures created from burning airplane fuel.

Where are those parts?
They are not small parts, so you can’t miss them!

Maybe they were magic parts, which suddenly just disappear by themselves?

Just imagine that you take an egg and throw it with all your power in a sink strainer.
I bet thousand dollars that most of the egg shell will stay outside the strainer.
The tower wall is that “strainer”, so the egg shell (most of the airplane) will fall down to the ground after it hit the wall.
Not one single airplane part was found on the ground!
Make up your own conclusion from that fact!

It was also an airplane hitting the wall of Pentagon this day.
Another “terror attack”, as they said in TV.
Pentagon med bild av skalenligt flygplan

Let us investigate that too!

If you put a real Boeing 757 outside the Pentagon building and compare this huge airplane with the little tiny hole in the wall, everybody with just a bit common sense can understand, that this big airplane can not possibly fit in to that little hole in the wall!
It’s like a puzzle a 3 year old might try to solve!
Grown ups don’t even have to try to understand that it is impossible!

And the same story again, the airplane just got absorbed by the building and not a tiny little piece of an airplane was ever found inside or outside Pentagon.
Last episode of Superman in TV was also fantastic, but a little bit more realistic than the Pentagon episode though.
Wake up folks!
There were no airplanes hitting the towers or Pentagon!

The only airplane we could see in TV was the one hitting the second tower.
But if you run that movie clip in slow motion something strange happen!
Just a couple of meters before the airplane crash in to the wall, left wing of the airplane disappear!
Further away from the building the wing was there, but now closer to the building the wing is gone!
This can not possibly happen in reality, which means that the movie we all saw around the world, was not real!
It was a clever made hologram!
Somebody was a bit sloppy when he made it though!
When you watch the movie in normal speed it is impossible to see the little mistake. Smart, but obviously not smart enough!

So, next question! Who created these illusions?

Well, it was obviously not angry Arabs, terrorists or Osama Bin Laden.
They will use real airplanes or bombs and have no need for making a hologram movie.
Hologram

There is a guy named Larry Silverstein who actually bought the World Trade Center a few months before the “terror attack”.
If I remember it correctly he bought WTC for 800 million dollars.
Shortly thereafter he took insurance worth 5 Billion dollars (not million) on the buildings. He also made a little smart additive in the insurance; “in case of a terror attack” Obviously he had one of these famous crystal balls that can give an insight about the future.
I would like one too!
Well, to say it is likely that he is involved in this scam is probably not a bad guess.

But Larry is not the creator or the reason behind all this. He is just a tool.
The reason is simple to understand. He had absolute nothing to do with the illusion in Pentagon.
So, the conclusion will be that there are more rotten apples in the basket.
Probably somebody with a little bit more ”muscles” than the poor guy Larry.

When there is a scam of any kind it is always money involved.
This time we don’t talk about hundred dollars.
Now we are talking about Billion dollars!
People involved in these amounts are normally not like you and me.
Most of them are psychopaths.
That means people without empathy and normal feelings for other people.
They just don’t care about human lives! They care about dollars and profits!

It is really hard for a normal sane person to put himself in a psychopath’s position and think the way the psychopath thinks. In this case we have to try though, to fully understand the rest of this story and how this tragedy could happen.
As some of us remember, the sitting president in USA at that time, start to lose heavily in public opinions.
The Election Day was getting closer and closer.
A lot of big American military contractors had invested a lot of billions in the sitting president.
If the president would lose, all those contracts and all that invested money risked to vanish. These big billionaires can’t just sit and watch that happen without doing something about it.

The question was, how can we get the losing president to be re-elected?
In a patriotic country like USA it is actually not a difficult task.
Create a scenery that looks like a terror attack, and every man and woman in the country will stand up like one man behind their president!
That was also exactly what happened!
The sitting and losing president got re-elected and the billion dollar contracts were safe!

The contracts were also about weapons. And WTC tragedy was about future money profits and also to get a good reason to attack Iraq and the oil strategic position they have there.

Now 2012 we have a similar situation again, if the support for Barack Obama goes down more. I suspect that something much worse than WTC tragedy can happen again. A new ”terror attack” or some other kind of giant tragedy maybe?
I really hope I’m wrong!

Keep your eyes wide open!

So, the final question in this story will be answered.

What hit the twin towers and how could they fall like an antenna on a car?

The hit itself is just a smoke screen to make you believe that it was an airliner and a terror attack.
I mean, the normal question will be, what else could it be so high up in the sky?
After the smart hologram and movie we were not supposed to doubt it!
They could also have made a hologram over a flying cat that attacks the tower wall, but it would probably have been a little more difficult to explain to millions of TV viewers. With a hologram you can create whatever you like to create.

As you probably already figured out after reading this text, we know already that it was no airplane and it was no terror attack.
It was missiles that hit the buildings, and carefully planned demolition explosions to take the buildings down like car radio antennas!
That also explains why nobody could find one single piece from an airplane in the area. Some missiles are specially designed to just more or less disappear after the explosion. Airplanes can not do that!

The demolition itself was an inside job using Termite explosion technology.
That technology creates oxygen itself to boost the explosion. The temperature will be extremely much higher than burning airplane fuel and it will pulverize almost everything. Put some of these Termite on the steel barrier construction and the tower will go down like a radio antenna on a car.
As you remember from the area after the falling towers, everything was just dust, pulverized.
The whole area around WTC was also full of so called Termite bullets. This bullets are created when steel melt down extremely quick. That will never happen in a normal fire.

Last proof for you, which finally proves that this is a cover up from the beginning to the end.

Maybe you remember the tape recordings from relatives calling their loved ones from the high jacked airliners?
Well, next time you are up in an airplane please try to call me with your cell phone.
If you can hear one single word what I’m saying or if I can hear you, I will directly take down this post!
It is impossible to use a normal cell phone in an airliner because of the speed and the altitude. You need special equipments to make a phone call from an airliner otherwise the sound will be extremely choppy. Maybe it will not even connect at all.

The official recordings were crystal clear! A new slip-up!

What happened to the passengers who actually booked those flights that day?

Nobody will never ever find out, but for sure they are dead!
They might even get killed in those airliners that are missing, but surely not in the air!

I might be wrong about everything in my analyzes about the WTC tragedy, but I can present a lot more evidences than what I have told you here in this text.
Just use your common sense and you will also understand that big airliners will not be absorbed and vanish totally in a building, especially if they can’t even penetrate the steel barriers!
Empire State Building is built more or less in the same way as the twin towers.
More than one plane crashed in to that building and they just fell down to the ground.

I hope you remember my first post here about “false knowledge” and how the guys in the top of the pyramid will let you know, what they want you to know!
The tragedy in WTC is the perfect example of that!
I just hope my “nightmare” about the new election in USA is wrong!

Wake up folks!

/Lasse A.

Annonser

37 thoughts on “WHAT REALLY HAPPENED 9-11, 2001 IN NEW YORK?

  1. Cool blog! Is your theme custom made or did you download it from somewhere?
    A design like yours with a few simple tweeks would really
    make my blog jump out. Please let me know
    where you got your theme. Thank you

  2. Hey there! Someone in my Myspace group shared this site with us so I came to check
    it out. I’m definitely enjoying the information. I’m bookmarking and
    will be tweeting this to my followers! Outstanding blog and outstanding design.

  3. I did consider that my latest post would also be my last, especially as your answer was so grossly unrealistic that I hoped you somehow, eventually, would understand that yourself. But obviously you did not.

    The Pentagon is the headquarters of the Department of Defense and it is not at all surprising that the headquarters do not want to release more security camera footage than necessary.

    Many of all the ”question marks” that you talk about all the time are uncalled for. They are unfounded ( have no facts supporting them ) and are therefore unmotivated. You simply do not comprehend what constitutes a fact.

    Your statement about ”guys” that are ”“paid” or controlled” is ridiculous. Such a large-scale and very complex plot that your statement implies would never work. Furthermore, when you try to explain all the inconsistencies of your unrealistic, unsupported and complex theory with even more unrealistic and complex explanations then that is a sure sign that the theory is just a fabrication. Needless to say, you cannot present any evidence at all. Like I said before, your theory is full of inconsistencies and its getting worse with every explanation you come up with.

    One of the studies that I presented ( Structural Engineering Report No. 07-05/C605c, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering Northwestern University Evanston, Illinois 60208, USA: http://www.civil.northwestern.edu/people/bazant/PDFs/Papers/00%20WTC%20Collapse%20-%20What%20Did%20&%20Did%20Not%20Cause%20It.pdf ) proves through mathematical calculations and seismic records that free fall of the WTC twin towers grossly disagrees with these calculations and records and that controlled demolition most likely did not take place.

    There are no secrets about this report. It is open and accessible to anybody. Any researcher can review the mathematical model, calculations and data being used ( which by the way is a nice feature of science ).

    Your statements on ”official explanations” and ”proof”, etc, are ridiculous. You have no clue what you are talking about.

    Quote from the report:

    ”These conclusions show the allegations of controlled demolition to be absurd and leave no
    doubt that the towers failed due to gravity-driven progressive collapse triggered by the effects
    of fire.”

    / Anders

    • Hi again Anders!

      I asked you if you didn’t find it strange that only one of more than 80 different camera tapes were presented?
      And the one, who was presented, didn’t even show an airplane anywhere, just a big explosion!
      A wild guess will be, that at least 40 of those cameras could show an airliner, if there was an airliner
      hitting the wall.
      I really don’t think that all those cameras were filming some secret documents or other secrets!
      That is complete bullshit for everybody who is capable to use his brain!
      Maybe there was some secret grass outside the building?

      ”…it is not at all surprising that the headquarters do not want to release more security camera footage than necessary.”

      Well, a photo of an airliner I would say would be enough, and that is within what should be necessary in this case.
      The little problem was, that there was no airplane there, that’s why they can’t show an airplane without manipulating
      the film. And they know that they will never get away with that trick!

      And now you tell ME I don’t know what I’m talking about!

      Well, if we have any audience watching this conversation, the only thing I have to do, is to rest my case
      and smile!

      Goodnight and sweet dreams my friend! You will be sleeping forever.

      /Lasse Agerstig

  4. I just did present evidence, from The Skeptics Society, Popular Mechanics and Journal of Engineering Mechanics ASCE, Structural Engineering Report No. 07-05/C605c, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering Northwestern University Evanston.

    And in doing so I proved what I am saying.

    The problem is that you – obviously – do not understand the contents and the significance of material from academic or engineering sources ( or material that is based on such sources ).

    That is your own problem.

    / Anders

    • Hi blind Anders! (just a joke)

      No, you did not prove anything at all!
      You presented a lot of clips that tells a story from the official stand point.
      That is not the same thing as proving anything!
      How do you know that these guys are not ”paid” or controlled to present that opinion?
      You don’t know, right! So what you actually do, is believing a story that can be a fairy tale!

      The ”other side” present opposite facts, that might be a fairy tale too!
      It’s about here you have to start to be skeptic and start to use your own brain!
      If there is a lot of question marks, then you have to ask, WHY are there so many question
      marks?
      It must be a reason!

      Now you have to start turn around every kind of question mark and look at them, not just from
      one side. You have to examine them from many sides.
      When you have done that job, you put all the question marks together and see if ”both sides”
      are happy with the explanations. If they are not, you are the one who have to decide what
      you believe in.

      The mistake you are doing all the time in this endless discussion, is that you just look
      at one side, the official explanations. That will always lead to wrong conclusions!
      ”They” want you to believe in their explanations, because they will gain something from it.
      ”The other side” will not gain anything if you believe in their version.
      The only thing we all will benefit from analyzing this correctly, is the truth!
      The truth is still covered by hundreds of lies!
      WHY?
      The problem is that you don’t WANT to see the truth, for some strange reason.
      So, just have your opinions and live with the lies. It’s up to you!

      We can talk about this till the end of time.
      The question marks still remains and the official explanations will not answer the questions.
      That’s it!
      Almost everyone of your so called proof, I can go against, with just pure logic and common sense.
      Try to find that logic and common sense and go against your own proof! That is the way to see
      if a proof holds water or not.
      If you do like you do, just believe in one fairy tale after another, then of course all your
      proofs will hold water, because you don’t analyze them with a skeptical mind.

      Let’s just take one single event here as an example, so you understand what I’m talking about.
      Don’t you find it strange, why there is only one camera out of 86 who will show the explosion
      in the wall in Pentagon?
      And that official film clip doesn’t even show if it was an airplane, missile or something else
      hitting the wall! It just shows the big bang explosion and nothing else!

      Now YOU use your own common sense and your own logic, and explain WHY we are not allowed to see
      the other cameras filming the same event from all other angles?
      Don’t you think that 85 other cameras from different angles will show what really hit the wall?
      Were all the other cameras recording a porn movie or why are not even adults allowed to see
      them?
      And as you well know, there are lots of people questioning that.
      If the officials want us to know the truth, why don’t they just show us several angles showing
      the so called airplane crushing in to the wall?
      That would be the end of those question marks right away, right?
      Please answer me!
      What is your own logic explanation on that?

      I can’t find any good explanation for that behavior, if it isn’t a cover up, can you?

      /Lasse Agerstig

  5. And that is, even though you may not realize it, just one good example of several regarding what I am saying: You cannot present any evidence that there were missing steel on the ground ( just as you cannot present evidence for your other claims ).

    / Anders

    • I just use my brain, and that is surely enough to understand that it was not steel
      left on the ground from 3 enormous big buildings.
      And above that, you have no evidences in your claims either.

      /Lasse Agerstig

  6. Every claim depend on some logic or evidence that support it ( irrespective of how many years is being spent on studying a subject ). In this case, you cannot present anything that comes even close. That is one of the real problems with your theory and other theories found at “alternative websites”.

    / Anders

    • No! The only problems are guys who can’t see, or don’t want to see, the logic.
      A few meters debris, of almost 500 meters of steel barriers, 47 inner and
      236 outer, times almost 500 meters, is logic to you, right?
      Then you take that times 2! It was 2 towers, remember?
      And now you add Building 7 to that debris! Building 7 was an enormous big building.

      Well, as I said, blind men can’t see!
      Believe what you like Anders!
      End of conversation!

      /Lasse Agerstig

  7. You really should acquaint yourself with these concepts. You may be joking about them in your post above, but I am not. You obviously do not comprehend what logic, reason, evidence and facts are all about, or why these concepts are important. If you had understood these things you would have responded another way to the material that I have presented ( did you even read it? ).

    Many of all your ”question marks” are unnecessary and uncalled for. You should read material from reliable academic/scientific or engineering sources ( or material that are based on such sources ), instead of those ”alternative websites”.

    / Anders

    • Hi!

      Of course I read your stuff you sent me, and I probably read it long before you did too.
      I always read both parts in a conflict. And I also read all the opinions in between before
      I come to my own conclusion.
      That is exactly why I came to the conclusion that WTC event was not a terror attack at all!
      At least not an attack made by some angry Arabs, Usama Bin Laden or other terror groups.

      I started to investigate this already 2001 Anders, and your movie clips and other material
      put together by government controlled guys, I’ve analyze already at least 10 times.
      I’ve turned every stone upside down and I’m hundred percent sure that the so called ”terror
      attack”, is not what you think it is.
      I really don’t know WHY the Twin Towers and Building 7 fell like radio antennas, but it was
      certainly not because of airplanes or fire, or by official’s almost stupid explanations.
      The answer will probably soon be obvious in next war!
      It has something to do with materialization, that’s my guess.

      The beauty of this Anders, is that you are allowed to shut your eyes all day long, if you like.
      But please don’t try to minimize my knowledge about WTC and other things I write about in this
      website. I might have been study it much more thorough than you have, and probably even during
      a much longer time.

      ”You obviously do not comprehend what logic, reason, evidence and facts are all about, or why
      these concepts are important”.
      My answer do that is very simple! Your logic, reason, evidence and facts are the jokes in this case.

      /Lars Agerstig

  8. Hello Lasse.

    I just did prove what I am saying.

    You need to comprehend basic concepts of logic, reason, evidence and facts, and the importance of these concepts.

    / Anders

    • Hello again Anders!

      Okay!
      Good to hear those words coming from you!
      I’m sorry but I can’t understand basic concepts of logic, reason, evidence and facts.
      Especially if they are built on lies!
      The Twin Towers and Building 7 are the only steel construction buildings in the world
      who have ever collapsed!
      Many steel constructed buildings around the world had more intensed fire and was burning
      for a lot longer time than those WTC-buildings.
      Still they were standing!

      It’s also the first time in history, that houses are eating up airplanes and swallow
      them totally.
      It’s the first time in history, that steel can reach melting point below a fire.
      It’s the first time in history, that parts from airplanes that are more or less impossible
      to destroy, just vanish from a small fire.
      And it’s also the first time in history that about 400 hundred from almost 500 meters
      of 47 inner- and 236 outer steel barriers, just get pulverized and disappears from
      the debris.
      But it’s NOT the first time in history, that the Americans and world population got
      totally fooled by some rich psychopathic guys.

      But what do I know about it?
      I can’t understand basic concepts of logic, reason, evidence and facts.

      /Lars Agerstig

  9. Thank you for the films.

    The first film is a documentary, ”Zero: An Investigation Into 9/11”. The film is speculative and contain partially the same claims as the other documentary you presented, but do have some noteworthy contents like the physicist Steven Jones theory on controlled demolition, using thermite or nanothermite. However, the thermite theory has been criticized and I will return to that and other subjects later in this post.

    The second film is an interview with Kevin Ryan about circumstances that sorry to say has no relevance to the actual events concerning the september 11 attacks.

    The third film claims that CNN composited a ”ghost plane footage” and shows how this can be done by means of computer software. Unfortunately, the film cannot present any evidence at all. The claim becomes even more silly considering the several independent footages of the impacts filmed by TV crews as well as by ordinary people.

    The fourth film is a documentary, ”Loose Change: 2nd Edition”, written and directed by Dylan Avery. Just the like first documentary you presented it is speculative. You should be aware that the film’s essential claims have been refuted by scientists and engineers.

    Regarding the scientific and engineering community, I will quote from a few articles that refutes some of the claims that the two documentaries are asserting.

    The Skeptics Society: Thermite and nanothermite: http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/11-09-07/ :

    ”Thermite would leave tons of formerly melted iron blobs, not just microspheres.”

    ”Niels Harritt, Steven Jones and other 9/11 controlled demolition theorists claim to have found nanothermite particles in dust samples from the World Trade Center.
    /…./
    They compared the sudden energy spike of their burning chips with the spikes of known nanothermites, and found that their chips ignited at around 150° C. lower than the known nanothermites, and the energy release was off between their chips and the nanothermites by a factor of at least two. Yet they called this a match for nanothermite!

    Attempts to independently replicate this experiment have been dismal. Mark Basile, who appeared in the acknowledgments of the original study, burned the chips in air, replicating the error of the original experiment and not even measuring the energy released. A chemist named Frédéric Henry-Couannier got another dust sample from the original experimenters and wrote, “Eventually the presence of nanothermite could not be confirmed.” The R.J. Lee Company did a 2003 study on the dust and didn’t find thermitic material.”

    Popular Mechanics: The Pentagon, Big Plane, Small Holes and Flight 77 Debris: http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military/news/debunking-911-myths-pentagon :

    ”When American Airlines Flight 77 hit the Pentagon’s exterior wall, Ring E, it created a hole approximately 75 ft. wide, according to the ASCE Pentagon Building Performance Report. The exterior facade collapsed about 20 minutes after impact, but ASCE based its measurements of the original hole on the number of first-floor support columns that were destroyed or damaged. Computer simulations confirmed the findings.

    Why wasn’t the hole as wide as a 757’s 124-ft.-10-in. wingspan? A crashing jet doesn’t punch a cartoon-like outline of itself into a reinforced concrete building, says ASCE team member Mete Sozen, a professor of structural engineering at Purdue University. In this case, one wing hit the ground; the other was sheared off by the force of the impact with the Pentagon’s load-bearing columns, explains Sozen, who specializes in the behavior of concrete buildings. What was left of the plane flowed into the structure in a state closer to a liquid than a solid mass. ”If you expected the entire wing to cut into the building,” Sozen tells PM, ”it didn’t happen.”

    The tidy hole in Ring C was 12 ft. wide—not 16 ft. ASCE concludes it was made by the jet’s landing gear, not by the fuselage.”

    ”Blast expert Allyn E. Kilsheimer was the first structural engineer to arrive at the Pentagon after the crash and helped coordinate the emergency response. ”It was absolutely a plane, and I’ll tell you why,” says Kilsheimer, CEO of KCE Structural Engineers PC, Washington, D.C. ”I saw the marks of the plane wing on the face of the building. I picked up parts of the plane with the airline markings on them. I held in my hand the tail section of the plane, and I found the black box.” Kilsheimer’s eyewitness account is backed up by photos of plane wreckage inside and outside the building. Kilsheimer adds: ”I held parts of uniforms from crew members in my hands, including body parts. Okay?””

    Journal of Engineering Mechanics ASCE , Vol. 134 (2008), in press: What Did and Did not Cause Collapse of WTC Twin Towers in New York: Structural Engineering Report No. 07-05/C605c: Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering Northwestern University Evanston, Illinois 60208, USA: http://www.civil.northwestern.edu/people/bazant/PDFs/Papers/00%20WTC%20Collapse%20-%20What%20Did%20&%20Did%20Not%20Cause%20It.pdf :

    ”Previous analysis of progressive collapse showed that gravity alone suffices to explain
    the overall collapse of the World Trade Center (WTC) towers. However, it remains to be checked
    whether the recent allegations of controlled demolition have any scientific merit. The present analysis
    proves that they do not. The video record available for the first few seconds of collapse is shown to
    agree with the motion history calculated from the differential equation of progressive collapse but,
    despite uncertain values of some parameters, it is totally out of range of the free fall hypothesis, on
    which these allegations rest. It is shown that the observed size range (0.01 mm—0.1 mm) of the
    dust particles of pulverized concrete is consistent with the theory of comminution caused by impact,
    and that less than 10% of the total gravitational energy, converted to kinetic energy, sufficed to
    produce this dust (whereas more than 150 tons of TNT per tower would have to be installed, into
    many small holes drilled into concrete, to produce the same pulverization). The air ejected from the
    building by gravitational collapse must have attained, near the ground, the speed of almost 500 mph
    (or 223 m/s, or 803 km/h) on the average, and fluctuations must have reached the speed of sound.
    This explains the loud booms and wide spreading of pulverized concrete and other fragments, and
    shows that the lower margin of the dust cloud could not have coincided with the crushing front. The
    resisting upward forces due to pulverization and to ejection of air, dust and solid fragments, neglected
    in previous studies, are found to be indeed negligible during the first few seconds of collapse but not
    insignificant near the end of crush-down. The calculated crush-down duration is found to match a
    logical interpretation of seismic record, while the free fall duration grossly disagrees with this record.”

    / Anders

    • Hi Anders!

      There is absolute nothing in what you are saying that you can prove.
      Just some bad explanations that don’t hold water.

      If you study them one by one they might hold water, but not if you put all the
      question marks together then your explanations fall as a house of cards in
      a stormy day.

      As I said before, it doesn’t matter if I show a blind man a beautiful picture.
      Blind men don’t see!
      And as I also said before, you are allowed to be wrong!
      Even I was wrong too, as I said in ”My weekly thoughts” section.
      I was fooled too, because I didn’t understand it was a double smoke screen with
      Thermite involved, but just as a cover up for the other pulverization weapon.

      End of conversation.

      /Lasse Agerstig

  10. Of course there are lots of people who are better than I when it comes to computers and programming. However, over the years I have been programming some pretty advanced code and I do have some good knowledge about operating systems too. My understanding in this field is pretty good, needless to say.

    It is of course possible for a hacker to break into a system without anybody noticing if he is knowledgeable enough or if he manages to remove traces his visit has created. His chance to break in undetected is much better if he only reads or copies data in the system. Sometimes a visit will remain unnoticed, sometimes not. If not, the hacker may not have removed all traces and the organization he visited will eventually find out about it. The system administrators managing servers and computer systems are quite knowledgeable too and they can often detect intrusions, often soon after they ocurred.

    In this case we are talking about several computer systems belonging to a number of air traffic control centers and a couple of airline companys and not only that; you must manipulate those systems too. Such manipulations in several systems would surely be detected, if not directly at least directly after the attacks ( when those systems surely were examined ).

    The reason I would like you to present reliable material that supports your theory is simply that anybody who make a claim is also expected to provide evidence for the claim. Think about it. I could make a lot of claims, then walk away and let you find the evidence for them. That would be quite ignorant on my part, especially as those claims would not be yours. In other words, these things has got nothing to do with being someones ”servant”.

    I am the only one who has presented any material at all in the form of links. I hope that you do the same.

    Regarding ”free fall”, take another look at the film of the North Tower collapse. You say that you are interested in the ”truth” and if so you really should study it because in several footages you can clearly see that pieces of debris from the tower falls much faster than the collapsing tower itself. This is particularly obvious in the footage that starts at 5:01. I measured the time. It is a little difficult to see exactly when objects hit the ground because of dust and other buildings in the area but the first pieces of debris hits the ground after approximately 7 – 9 seconds and the tower itself after approximately 14 – 16 seconds. These figures can probably be corrected. But it is certainly not a case of free fall: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6fg1jmr3n6w

    / Anders

    • Okay!
      Take a look at this material.
      I don’t think you will change your mind even if the sun will drop down on
      your knee, but anyway!

      This is just a few examples and there are a lot more and even much better and
      more scientific out there, but I don’t have the time to search for it now.
      These should be enough anyway, for a normal intelligent man to lift his eyes
      a bit.

      /Lasse Agerstig

  11. I know that you ”can go on and on all day”. However, all that talking means nothing without evidence supporting your ”ongoing”. Or do you actually believe that claims and evidence are the same thing? Or do you believe that lots of words and examples will compensate for lack of evidence?

    I would like you to present some reliable material – that supports your theory – on the september 11 attacks and the amount of steel on the ground, the conditions inside the towers regarding fire and temperature and the hole in the Pentagon. Start with that, we can discuss the rest of your list later. I would like the material to be from an reliable academic or engineering source ( or similar ).

    Concerning the towers and the “free fall”, take a look at this film ( particularly at 0:19 and 5:01 ). You can clearly see that pieces of debris from the tower falls faster than the collapsing tower itself: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6fg1jmr3n6w

    That film, and other films, should put an end to the free fall-topic. It is obvious that the towers do not collapse in a free fall.

    You ask me this question: ”Give me one single of my explanations that doesn’t hold water?”

    I could give you several. But all right lets take one of them, namely one in your last post about ”computer programming” and ”transmitters and the screens in front of the traffic controllers”.

    I have been working professionally with computers and as a programmer since the 1980s. If you believe that intrusion into computer systems can be done safely without leaving a trace you are wrong.

    Particularly in a case like this it is practically impossible to break into and manipulate several systems belonging to a number of air traffic control centers and a couple of airline companys without anybody noticing.

    How long is your experience in the field of computers and software? Do you really know what you are talking about?

    / Anders

    • Hmm…Anders!

      Puh, you are a stubborn man, which I normally admire in a man.
      But when stubbornness goes over to something more like blindness, I’m not so fond of it anymore.
      Did it never occur to you, that your questions about claims and evidence goes both ways?
      Where are your evidences that the official explanations are true?

      Did you check the temperature or the size of the hole in the Pentagon wall yourself?
      Search in Internet, the facts are all there. I’m not your servant!
      If you find something wrong in my claims or facts, that for example gives evidence that the
      temperature was high enough to melt massive steel, or that the hole in the wall was big enough,
      then let’s discuss it.
      Otherwise let me spend my time with something better, than just explain everything for you.
      And next time you’re up in an airliner, try to call me with your cellphone. If you can, I will
      be really impressed!

      Then I’m getting really worried about your knowledge about computer programming.
      Do you never read a newspaper or watch the evening news in TV?
      Even Pentagon themselves have had leaks in there computer systems for several months without
      knowing about it! The last time I saw that in TV, it was about a young kid who hacked himself
      in to top secret files.
      He was probably good with computers but hardly a professional in a secret spy level!

      Banks, like for example Nordea in Sweden, had a big problem from an intruder.
      They never caught that guy what I know of! So for him it was safely but not for the customers
      in the bank.
      I don’t know about your own skill in programming, but you sure need an updating on what is
      possible or not possible to do. Maybe you even have to realize too, that there are more skillful
      people than you, when it comes to programming.
      Where are your evidences that my claims are impossible?

      I started myself professionally with PC computers in my company 1984, so I guess I know a little
      bit about it.
      But I surely realize that there are millions of people that knows a lot more about computers than
      I do.
      After reading your text here, I know that probably millions of people know more than you too.
      It is rather obvious!

      I will just teach you something here. When it comes to free fall or not, just use your own watch
      and see how long it took for the towers to fall. Then google about falling speed of an apple in
      someones head! I think it was Mr. Newton?
      Maybe you will find a new astonishing thing all by yourself, without having a servant deliver
      proofs on a silver plate for you. Do it yourself!

      As I already said, you are allowed to be both blind and wrong. It’s okay!

      I’m sorry, but if you can’t prove any of your claims, I will not waste my time answering you
      anymore. I’ve presented the facts, or if you prefer to call it claims, already. Either you like
      it or dislike it. It’s up to you!
      To teach blind people, who are too lazy to investigate things for themselves, is not my mission
      in life. I just do my best to open peoples eyes.
      That’s all my friend.
      I’m happy your name is not Copernicus, because in that case planet earth would still be flat as a
      pancake.
      Most scientists in those days never questioned the possibility of planet earth as a round globe.
      Copernicus and a few others did!
      They were not blind!

      Take care!

      /Lasse Agerstig

  12. As always, you are claiming a lot of things, and as always, with no evidence to support your claims.

    All steel is there, obviously, in some form. It is also obvious that the towers do not collapse in a ”free fall”.

    And if you watch closely you will see that the upper part of the South Tower actually lean over when the building start to collapse and continues down like that ( you just do not see the rest of that because of all the dust ): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M6f9Jpfz1Vo

    But can buildings otherwise fall straight down? Yes, of course they can.

    You can also see that both towers start to collapse where the fire is, not a couple of floors below it.

    I suggest that you stop throwing out a lot of claims without checking facts first ( and please do not try to find facts at ”alternative websites” ).

    The rest of your post is extremely unrealistic. You cannot walk around and disconnect transmitters, install prerecorded simulations or replace staff in a number of air traffic control centers and airlines just like that. It does not work. Personnel will notice and object, questions will be asked, security routines will be launched, data from operations like that will remain. Such a large-scale and very complex plot would never work.

    I understand that you are trying to save your theory from failure. But to explain the inconsistencies of an unrealistic, unsupported and complex theory through the invention of even more unrealistic and complex explanations is a sure sign that such a theory is incorrect.

    Your theory is full of inconsistencies and its getting worse with every explanation you come up with.

    / Anders

    • Hej igen och igen och igen Anders!

      I will start from the bottom this time!

      You say,
      ”Your theory is full of inconsistencies and its getting worse with every explanation you come up with.”

      Answer: Give me one single of my explanations that doesn’t hold water?

      You say,
      ”I understand that you are trying to save your theory from failure.”

      Answer: No Anders! I´m trying to make you understand that the official explanation doesn’t hold
      water. And I believe that it is bad that you and other people will believe in a lie constructed by
      people who you are suppose to trust. And also believing in these things because of own lack of knowledge.
      But if you like to believe in lies, it is of course up to you.

      You say,
      ”You cannot walk around and disconnect transmitters, install prerecorded simulations or replace
      staff in a number of air traffic control centers and airlines just like that.”

      Answer: You don’t have to walk around at all! Ever heard about computer programming?
      Everything is computerized, both transmitters and the screens in front of the traffic controllers.
      As you hopefully know, your own computer can be taken over by someone this minute, stealing your personal
      data, passwords to your bank and so on. And you would probably not notice a thing before it is too late.
      You can even install a security program today that instead will open a ”backdoor” in your system half a
      year later from today. Then it can also close that ”backdoor” after the job is done.
      How will you ever find that out?
      Do you really think that this is tricky to do for experts in that field? Wake up man!

      You say,
      ”You can also see that both towers start to collapse where the fire is, not a couple of floors below it.”

      Answer: I’m sorry to say this Anders, but you really have a problem to understand written logic!
      That was actually my whole point, that the collapse started where the fire was.
      As I thoroughly pointed out to you before, it will therefor be impossible for the steel construction
      to melt below the fire. If you have been in school, you probably know that heat goes up and not down!
      That means that the steel construction can’t possibly melt a few floors below the fire.

      That also means that it will be totally impossible for the towers to fall in more or less free fall
      speed. It took about 6,5 seconds to fall down and hit the ground, if I remember it correctly. That is
      more or less the same time it will take to drop a stone 500 meter.
      In the towers you had very hard concrete and steel constructions below the fire, that will lower the falling
      speed extremely much.
      The only way to have that high falling speed is if both concrete and steel will be pulverized in mid air!
      Then it will be no falling resistance that will lower the speed.
      I hope you were not absent from school that day when they taught about gravity. It was an interesting day!

      You say,
      ”All steel is there, obviously, in some form. It is also obvious that the towers do not collapse in a ”free fall”.”

      Answer: Oh, in what form is the steel then? It is obviously not half a kilometer steel barriers from 47 inner
      and 236 outer barriers!
      And maybe you know more about free fall speed or have another kind of stopwatch than the experts that examined
      the movie and measured the exact time?

      For some reason you really don’t want to see facts, like melting temperature for steel, amount of steel, impossible
      pulverizing, collapsing of Building 7 without airplane or airplane fuel, hole in Pentagon wall that is too
      small for an airplane, missing videos from several cameras around Pentagon, impossible cellphone calls from
      an airliner to loved ones, impossible flying skill from a terrorist that couldn’t even handle a small Cessna in a
      good way and now suddenly are a more skillful pilot than fighter pilots and experienced pilots in a Boeing 757.
      The beeper in the airplane going to Pentagon was actually disconnected almost 30 minutes before the so called
      crash i Pentagon. They are probably still searching in the Pentagon wall for airplane parts.
      There are big parts on an airliner that needs much higher melting point temperature than steel, and still they are
      missing.
      I can go on and on all day with facts that doesn’t fit in to the official explanantion.

      Some people just like to be fooled because the truth is sometimes too ugly to handle.

      As I said before, you are allowed to be wrong!
      I don’t think this conversation will lead anywhere, because you really don’t like to analyze the facts.
      Believe what you like.

      Take care Anders!

      /Lars Agerstig

  13. Lasse, you say that you have ”explained already why the official explanation is impossible”. But actually you have not. You have not been able to present any logic reasoning and, above all, no real evidence or facts.

    Regarding the flights you say that ”It was after the take off, it stopped to be normal”. But you should be aware that air traffic controllers are monitoring flights. Also, airlines have a staff who are responsible for monitoring aircraft in flight. This means that any deviation from normal will be recorded, noticed and acted upon. You cannot take airplanes off course just like that.

    Furthermore, you cannot ”get rid of the airplanes and passengers” without leaving traces. Leaving traces is inevitable since we are dealing with four big jets with passengers on board.

    / Anders

    • Sorry Anders, but now you are really blue eyed!

      First of all, steel can’t melt without a certain temperature, and if it does melt,
      it will not just disappear anyway.
      We are talking about a lot of steel here, half a kilometer steel in 47 inner and 236
      outer steel barriers!
      In this case the temperature was about half of the needed temperature to melt steel!
      If the steel is not melted, it is totally impossible for the towers to fall like car
      antennas. And if you use your brain, it is even more impossible to fall in almost free
      fall speed, right? Non melted steel will make a resistance in falling! Simple facts!

      Then again, use your brain, how is it possible that all the steel barriers melted
      exactly at the same second? If it did not melted in the same second, it will bend in
      those barriers who was reaching the melting point first!
      That will also make the building to slowly bend in that direction.
      If that happens there is something called gravity, which will increase the bending even
      more. The building will then fall like a tree and not straight down like a car antenna!
      Explain for me, how steel can be melted or weakened a couple of floors BELOW the actual
      fire? Impossible, right?
      That is real logic, evidence and facts Anders!

      You say,
      ”But you should be aware that air traffic controllers are monitoring flights. Also, airlines
      have a staff who are responsible for monitoring aircraft in flight.”

      Answer: Yes, you are absolutely correct, but once again you are very blue eyed!
      There are several really simple ways to solve that little problem. Just disconnect the transmitter
      from that airplane that is sending out and receive the beep signal a few minutes after take off.
      You can also put in a prerecorded simulation in to the system monitor for the traffic controllers.
      The traffic controllers will then see all the other airplanes but not the prerecorded one that is
      going in wrong direction. The prerecorded airplane will then look absolute normal in the monitor.
      You don’t need much advanced technical knowledge to achieve that, both from the airplane and from
      the traffic controllers monitor.
      You can also put in your own ”blind” staff as traffic controllers that day, week, month or even year.
      There are some careful plannings behind this, you know!
      There are many possibilities.
      And here comes a disturbing question again! Where was the military air force, if they saw these airplanes
      going in wrong directions? Maybe they had a coffee break? Don’t you find that strange?

      You say,
      ”Furthermore, you cannot ”get rid of the airplanes and passengers” without leaving traces. Leaving traces
      is inevitable since we are dealing with four big jets with passengers on board.”

      Answer: I know that the truth is terrible and that we all really don’t like to see the disgusting
      facts around this event. The truth will be the truth though, even if we find it disgusting!

      Once again Anders, you don’t seem to understand what kind of people we are dealing with here.
      These guys fixing this giant drama, are not much different from other mass murderers in our history, like
      Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, Idi Amin, Kim Jong-Il, Saddam Hussein and other psychopaths.
      They don’t think like you and me. They don’t care about human lives as we do.
      They care about money and power!

      When it comes to the passengers, they are for sure dead!
      When it comes to the airplanes, I bet my last dollar that they are up in the air again as bran new,
      but with new ID-numbers. Why should it be any traces? The dead bodies might even not exist anymore!

      As I said before, read a little bit more in alternative websites about all the facts around this event.
      The official explanations don’t hold water!
      If this was a real terror attack you would not find any question marks, just facts!
      In this case, you don’t find any facts that hold water, but you find a lot of unexplained question marks.

      Open your eyes!

      /Lasse Agerstig

  14. The problem is that you cannot present any evidence or facts.

    Even worse, you do not account for all the consequences that your theory implies, like missing airplanes and missing passengers. How do you snatch airplanes from the airports without the airport personnel noticing? Are you going to involve airport personnel too – into the plot? How do you get rid of all the passengers? What about hundreds of their relatives, will they not suspect anything?

    Those are just a few examples, of many, that your theory implies.

    Your theory runs into inconsistency very quickly.

    / Anders

    • Hi Anders!

      A bit hard to understand this, I can see!
      Why do you have to snatch the airplanes without the airport personnel noticing?
      There is absolutely no need for that at all to create this scam!
      It was a normal take off like any other flight.
      It was after the take off, it stopped to be normal.

      I think you have to study this a bit more before you jump in to conclusions.
      A handful of guys was all they needed to do get rid of the airplanes and passengers.
      And don’t forget that many relatives really suspect something fishy in this story.
      But as I said before, you are obviously a better expert in this, than thousands of
      professionals from different professions.

      Where is the evidences that I’m wrong?
      I’ve explained already why the official explanation is impossible.
      There is nothing more I can do to convince you and I have no need for it either.
      You are allowed to be wrong.
      Just read a little bit more and study on alternative websites, then you will know better.

      /Lasse Agerstig

  15. Lasse: ”Where is the airplane in that clip?”

    It is coming in from the right. However, you must be aware that the security camera operates at a lower frame rate which is the reason why fast moving objects may be hard to see. Still, you actually can see the airplane. Lower frame rates is normal in security/surveillance cameras as far as I know.

    Lasse: ”It must probably be the smallest Boeing 757
    ever made in history.”

    That is just because the distance to the camera is great.

    Lasse: ”The puzzle piece doesn’t simply fit in!”

    Oh yes, it does.

    Lasse: ”What you instead can see if you are thorough, is that two film frames are missing from
    that clip!”

    No, I do not see that.

    Lasse: ”How can you be sure about that they were independent?”

    That is the rational judgement when looking at the footages of the impacts. It is also a rational judgement when considering other independent circumstances.

    Lasse: ”If you try to set up a big scenery like this, don’t you think they will hire some people
    that are strictly controlled, to tell the public an official version?”

    No, I do not. Even if we assume that your wild theory is correct it would be extremely stupid to involve a lot of people in the plot because that would greatly increase the risk of leakage.

    Lasse: ”I’ve watched all the pictures on
    the ground and it is certainly not there!”

    Yet another point where we have different opinions.

    Lasse: ”Please explain for me how the steel in Building 7 could melt down and make that building go down
    like a radio antenna too?”

    I just did ( in my last post ). Do you have a better explanation?

    Lasse: ”They are not one or two people, they are thousands!
    An engineer or a professional constructor could not possibly gain anything for themselves to speak
    out that opinion. Instead they risk their own reputation by doing it!”

    Which is exactly the same kind of argument as the UFO people use.

    / Anders

    • Okay, I will let you have your opinion, because it is useless to present question marks
      to someone who won’t be critical to the presented facts.
      You know better than professional constructors, bomb experts, pilots, demolition experts
      journalists and so on.
      As I said, I just rest my case. The proofs speak for it selves. Half a kilometer massive
      steel barriers times 47 inner and 236 outer, is just missing!
      The remaining steel on the ground is probably enough for a small shit house.
      Well, we have to double the amount of steel barriers, because it was two towers.
      And then we still didn’t add the steel in Building 7 which obviously was melting without
      necessary heat.
      Well, you are an expert. I bow to your expertise.

      As I have been saying a couple of times in my life already, ”the worst thing about knowledge,
      is to teach it to people who don’t like to learn”.

      But we are all allowed to stay ignorant. I guess you will think the same way about my opinions.

      Take care!

      /Lasse Agerstig

  16. Hello Lasse.

    Regarding Pentagon and the ”missing” film, take a look at this footage, caught by a Pentagon security camera: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L75Gga92WO8&feature=relmfu

    Regarding the twin towers, there were several independent footages of the impacts filmed by TV crews as well as by ordinary people.

    When also considering other – independent – circumstances there is no other conclusion than that the towers were hit by two airplanes. It is simply a fact.

    So what happened to all debris? It fell – of course – on the ground and were also spread across Lower Manhattan, just as everyone watching TV could see. Did you expect it to create a nice pile? Look at the pictures again. All the rubble is there, including steel remains.

    Falling debris, and particularly the fires falling debris started, is also the cause for the collapse of the nearby 7 World Trade Center building.

    / Anders

    • Hi again Anders!

      You are a funny guy! For some reason you dislike the truth! WHY?

      The link that you sent from cameras in Pentagon I’ve seen already 100 times.
      Where is the airplane in that clip? It must probably be the smallest Boeing 757
      ever made in history.
      Do you really know how big a Boeing 757 is?
      A big object like a Boeing 757 would surely be visible in that movie if it was an
      airliner. It will actually cover most of the screen on the right side.
      Instead it is a very small slim object coming with great speed and boom hit the wall.
      I will bet my last dollar on a missile. That’s what it looks like to me.
      It will also explain the small hole in the wall, where a Boeing 757 can never fit in.
      Even a 5 year old making a puzzle, would never try to put an enormous big object like a
      Boeing 757 in that little hole. The puzzle piece doesn’t simply fit in!

      I’ve never heard anyone measuring the speed of that object, but I would be surprised
      if an airliner can get up to that high speed.
      What you instead can see if you are thorough, is that two film frames are missing from
      that clip!
      That means obviously that someone didn’t want you to see what really happened there!
      Where are the missing frames? Did you never ask yourself WHY?
      And why is the movie so blurry? This is not the beginning of year 1901, this is from
      year 2001! Don’t you think that Pentagon can afford better cameras?
      And where are all the other cameras covering the area?
      Don’t you find it strange? Only one camera?

      You say,
      ”Regarding the twin towers, there were several independent footages of the impacts filmed
      by TV crews as well as by ordinary people.”

      Answer: How can you be sure about that they were independent?
      Ever heard about actors and even payed actors?
      If you try to set up a big scenery like this, don’t you think they will hire some people
      that are strictly controlled, to tell the public an official version?
      The problem is, that the official story doesn’t fit in to reality in this case.
      There are simply too many question marks!

      You say,
      ”So what happened to all debris? It fell – of course – on the ground and were also spread across
      Lower Manhattan, just as everyone watching TV could see. Did you expect it to create a nice pile?
      Look at the pictures again. All the rubble is there, including steel remains.”

      Answer: Yes I expect it to create an enormous pile of steel! Especially as everybody could see
      that the towers fell straight down! It will be spreading a little of course when the debris hit
      the ground, but most of it will create an enormous pile.
      Let’s say that the concrete was totally pulverized and just became dust, which of course can’t
      happen in reality, but let’s say it happened anyway.
      Do you really understand how much steel we are talking about here, from a building that is half
      a kilometer high? Were did it go? Pulverized like the concrete? I’ve watched all the pictures on
      the ground and it is certainly not there! Some is there yes, but you can’t even build a two floor
      building with that!

      You say,
      ”Falling debris, and particularly the fires falling debris started, is also the cause for the
      collapse of the nearby 7 World Trade Center building.”

      Answer: Hahahahaha…sorry for laughing, but I find it funny.
      Please explain for me how the steel in Building 7 could melt down and make that building go down
      like a radio antenna too? Building 7 was 100 meters away from the twin towers! Not nearby!
      There was no airplane fuel there!
      And how about the fire on the roof? Have you ever seen a fire on a roof in any building in the
      world? What will happen to the building? Will they collapse and fall straight down?
      Give me one single example from anywhere on planet earth, where that happened before on a steel
      constructed building!

      I know Anders, that reality can be really ugly and terrible sometimes, but it is still reality!
      There are a lot smarter people than you and me, professional people, that says, ”this is impossible”!
      They are not one or two people, they are thousands!
      An engineer or a professional constructor could not possibly gain anything for themselves to speak
      out that opinion. Instead they risk their own reputation by doing it!
      And as I said, they are probably a lot smarter than you and me!

      I rest my case!

      /Lasse Agerstig

  17. Lasse: ”Hi Anders!”

    Hello !!

    Lasse: ”Well, that is the official explanation. What they actually saw was a hologram!
    Which is also what we all saw in TV from the second tower.”

    The Jules and Gedeon Naudet documentary is not part of an official explanation ( as far as I know ) and was not shown live. The documentary shows American Airlines Flight 11 hitting the North tower. Your claim that ”no one actually saw what was hitting the first tower” is wrong.

    Lasse: ”There was no fire before the first airplane, right?”

    Jules Naudet was recording as firefighters inspected a reported gas leak when the airplane flew right over and slammed into the North Tower.

    Lasse: ”And how come they were filming the twin towers if they were making a documentary.”

    The ones filming the twin towers were TV crews ( obviously ). Clearly, NOT the same as Jules and Gedeon Naudet.

    Lasse: ”You will not find them in the official reports of course, but you will find all the evidence you will ever
    need in alternative websites.”

    Yes, conspiracy and New Age web sites, and the like.

    Lasse: ”What parts did they found?”

    Part of a fuselage, pieces of landing gear, an engine and other stuff.

    Lasse: ”But that was not the main reason for this “terror attack”. The main reason was of course MONEY and POWER and the political situation
    and the already planned attack on “terror”.”

    Are you into that US government conspiracy theory, as so many other folks?

    Lasse: ”Well, search for Judy Wood in YouTube. She will explain for you how the twin towers could just be pulverized in mid air to create that free fall.”

    Judy Wood talks about ”Directed Free-Energy Technology” and is building a case on nothing, just like conspiracy theorists.
    / Anders

    • Hi again Anders!

      It doesn’t matter how much evidences there are in front of your eyes, you will just
      call it conspiracy theories anyway, right?

      There are a bunch of question marks that never have been answered.
      Where are all the debris from almost 500 meter tall buildings?
      It should have been at least about 30 meters high debris left of the buildings on the
      ground.
      But an ambulance parked outside one of the towers, was higher than the amount of debris!
      The 500 meter tall buildings can’t just disappears and get pulverized to complete dust.

      Airplane fuel can’t produce heat enough to melt massive steal constructions, especially
      not under the actual fire.
      Where are at least 50 floors of steal from the inner and outer steel barriers?
      There were 47 inner and 236 outer steel barriers. Where are they?
      Pulverized? C’mon, wake up!

      How can Building 7 go down the same way as the twin towers, like radio antennas?
      No plane hit that building! And Building 7 was a really tall and big building 100
      meters away from the twin towers. Building 7 was totally destroyed like the twin towers,
      although other lower buildings closer to the twin towers, were still standing.
      It doesn’t make sense!
      Where is the debris from a giant house like Building 7?
      Did it melt down too without airplane fuel that time?
      Sorry, it can’t happen in reality! Or better to say, not from an airplane crash.

      How come the hole in the wall in Pentagon was much smaller than the big airliner?
      And still again, the airliner was totally absorbed by the Pentagon wall like if the
      wall was a hungry tiger.
      Exactly the same way as the twin towers!
      What a coincident?
      Hungry houses?
      Maybe the airplane melted down there too, but all the papers still hanging out from
      desks inside the hole was not even burned.
      There are cameras all around Pentagon filming the surroundings 24 hours a day from all
      possible angles.
      Pentagon is actually one of the most guarded and secured areas in USA.
      Why is the film missing, that clearly would have shown an airplane, if there was an
      airplane there at all?
      How about all the other cameras? Broken?

      I’ve study this for a long time, and I can go on and on all day, with more and more
      strange details, that actually wouldn’t be there, if it was a real terror attack.
      A terrorist would also probably have known, that the twin towers were constructed
      to handle an impact of an airliner.
      Empire State Building could, and those buildings were constructed more or less the same way!

      And one little fact more for you! It is the first time in history, a steel barrier construction
      like in the twin towers, falls down like a radio antenna.
      If you like to copy that event in a laboratory, you have to reach the melting point of all
      the steel barriers at exactly the same time! If not, the tower will of course start to bend and
      fall to one side, like a tree.
      That is physics in school for you. I was in school that day!
      Already there we can say, that what actually happened is impossible from an airplane explosion!

      So, sorry Anders, do your home work better!
      I also think that you should listen to my article about conspiracy theories in my page,
      ”My weekly thoughts”. Hopefully it will open your eyes what conspiracy is all about.

      The planet is a nice place, but there are some rotten people on it.
      I wish I’m totally wrong about all my conclusions here, but sad to say, I’m not!

      /Lasse Agerstig

  18. Lasse: ”The truth is that no one actually saw what was hitting the first tower!”

    That is not correct. Several people saw it. And the impact was also caught on video by Jules and Gedeon Naudet while making a documentary on New York firefighters.

    Lasse: ”This film team really must have been super lucky to be able to catch that event live, just now and just there with a good overview even over the other tower.”

    Super lucky? Not really. The towers were twin towers next to each other so when filming the North tower in flames and smoke of course they also caught the second plane hitting the South Tower.

    Lasse: ”An almost 500 meter tall building can not possibly go straight down like a radio antenna on a car!”

    Of course it can. Where did you study physics? Where did you study construction?

    Lasse: ”There was not one single part of an airplane anywhere in the World Trade Center area!”

    That is not correct. There were several pieces of airliner parts on the ground.

    Lasse: ”As some of us remember, the sitting president in USA at that time, start to lose heavily in public opinions.
    The Election Day was getting closer and closer.”

    That is not correct. George W. Bush was president from 2001 to 2009. The attacks were launched on September 11, 2001, only eight months into Bush’s first term as president. The election was not until 2004.

    Lasse: ”It was missiles that hit the buildings, and carefully planned demolition explosions to take the buildings down like car radio antennas!”

    Where is the evidence?

    / Anders

    • Hi Anders!

      You say,
      ”Lasse: ”The truth is that no one actually saw what was hitting the first tower!”

      That is not correct. Several people saw it. And the impact was also caught on video by Jules and Gedeon Naudet while making a documentary on New York firefighters”.

      Answer:
      Well, that is the official explanation. What they actually saw was a hologram!
      Which is also what we all saw in TV from the second tower. There are so many proofs of that in Internet
      from several angles. You can, if you want, make a hologram of a cat or a teddy bear attacking the tower, but that might
      be a little bit harder to explain to people. But I can assure you it will really fool your eyes.

      You have to be skeptic when you hear a story about a film team making a documentary on New York firefighters.
      What a coincident! There was no fire before the first airplane, right? So what will the documentary be about,
      non fire…hehe? Please put two and two together!

      You say,
      ”Lasse: ”This film team really must have been super lucky to be able to catch that event live, just now and just there with a good overview even over the other tower.”

      Super lucky? Not really. The towers were twin towers next to each other so when filming the North tower in flames and smoke of course they also caught the second plane hitting the South Tower”.

      Answer:
      What a coincident that they just found a spot from a perfect angle to be able to see the other ”airplane” (hologram).
      If they were filming that from the other side of the first tower, they would not see any ”airplane” at all.
      It seems like they know already, that it will come a second airplane!
      And how come they were filming the twin towers if they were making a documentary. They were almost 500 meter tall!
      You will get pain in your neck filming that.

      You say,
      ”Lasse: ”An almost 500 meter tall building can not possibly go straight down like a radio antenna on a car!”

      Of course it can. Where did you study physics? Where did you study construction?”

      Answer:
      I study physics in school. And I was good at it too!
      I did not study construction, but I used common sense!
      However, there are already thousands of constructors who made the same conclusions as me.
      I think they know better than both you and me!
      You will not find them in the official reports of course, but you will find all the evidence you will ever
      need in alternative websites.

      You says,
      ”Lasse: ”There was not one single part of an airplane anywhere in the World Trade Center area!”

      That is not correct. There were several pieces of airliner parts on the ground.”

      Answer:
      Yeah sure! What parts did they found?

      You say,
      ”Lasse: ”As some of us remember, the sitting president in USA at that time, start to lose heavily in public opinions.
      The Election Day was getting closer and closer.”

      That is not correct. George W. Bush was president from 2001 to 2009. The attacks were launched on September 11, 2001, only eight months into Bush’s first term as president. The election was not until 2004.”

      Answer:
      Yes, that is correct! And Bush was already loosing heavily in peoples opinion.
      But that was not the main reason for this ”terror attack”. The main reason was of course MONEY and POWER and the political situation
      and the already planned attack on ”terror”.

      You say,
      ”Lasse: ”It was missiles that hit the buildings, and carefully planned demolition explosions to take the buildings down like car radio antennas!”

      Where is the evidence?”

      Answer:
      Well, search for Judy Wood in YouTube. She will explain for you how the twin towers could just be pulverized in mid air to create that free fall.
      See all the clips with her.

      After that start questioning your self. Why are there still so many question marks? Then you will understand that this is a cover-up.

      /Lasse Agerstig

    • Yes, they own almost everything!
      They also own the legal system, or better say, control the persons in it totally.
      That’s why they can get away with it.
      I mean, how else can a pharmaceutical company get a fine in court of swindling 3
      Billion (not million) dollars, and no one have to go to jail?
      They will put me in jail if I repeatedly drive my car to fast, without even hurting anyone!
      That is what they call justice!

Lämna ett svar till Anders Avbryt svar

Fyll i dina uppgifter nedan eller klicka på en ikon för att logga in:

WordPress.com Logo

Du kommenterar med ditt WordPress.com-konto. Logga ut /  Ändra )

Google-foto

Du kommenterar med ditt Google-konto. Logga ut /  Ändra )

Twitter-bild

Du kommenterar med ditt Twitter-konto. Logga ut /  Ändra )

Facebook-foto

Du kommenterar med ditt Facebook-konto. Logga ut /  Ändra )

Ansluter till %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.