Paul Craig Roberts, PhD – Assistant Secretary of the U.S. Treasury under Ronald Reagan. “Father of Reaganomics.” Former Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal. Currently Chairman of the Institute for Political Economy
and Research Fellow at the Independent Institute.
a.. Essay: “We know that it is strictly impossible for any building, much less steel columned buildings, to ‘pancake’ at free fall speed. Therefore, it is a non-controversial fact that the official explanation of the collapse
of the WTC buildings is false.” http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/…
– from jztz’s link
Just to clarify my personal position: I am not accusing anybody of orchestrating the 9/11 attacks. I have no idea who was behind it, what a motive would be, etc.
I am merely questioning ONE part of the offical story because it doesn’t make sense.
How can the Twin Towers violate the law of inertia? They collapses at the speed of an object falling at free fall in a vacuum. I think some posters here must have a physics or engineering degree and can explain this for me.
Once you explain it, you can post it to all the 9/11 websites, and send it to NITSC for inclusion in their report, since they failed to address that at all. Just ignored that problem (like Thornburg ignoring exotic loans in his economic forecast).
In summary, anybody defending the offical story must be able to explain how the Twin Towers collapsed at the speed of freefall in a vacuum. Zero resistance from lower floors, as if they did not exist, and falling at a speed more akin to controlled demolition.
