So what else can be debunked in "Debunking 9/11 Myths" by Popular Mechanics?? To explain the collapse of World Trade Center 7 they use an NIST report that has changed how many times?? Now NIST is investigating the collapse yet again. So Popular Mechanics was proven wrong on WTC 7 and anyone who uses Popular Mechanics or NIST's past reports to debunk WTC 7 is also wrong. What else does Popular Mechanics have wrong?? Your thoughts??

Just in case you have to seen it yet: there is an interview with a Durtch controlled demolition expert, Danny Jowenko, on youtube. He is very sure it was controlled demolition, but considers the possibility that it was decided ad hoc by Silverstein to get the terrorism insurance money for the building:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k3DRhwRN06I

Link is to the first of three parts.

Pretty interesting.

But: it kind of opens an escape path for the government: they could say, yes, there was a lie (Breaking News!), it concerns the cover-up of Silverstein's insurance crime, which we did to have a clear-cut picture as far as good guys / bad guys (USA/others) is concerned.

One more reason to keep researching the Pentagon-case.

It's like the quote in my signature. How that doesn't make people go Hmmmmm?? Here's the quote with pictures LoL!!............................

"The only difference between that building


and that building,


is Larry Sliverstein doesn't own

that building!!!!"


Alex Jones talking about the collapse of WTC 7 when the Deutsche Bank Building, The Millenium Hilton Hotel and other buildings closer to the towers did not collapse.