MSD

It'll take me more time that I can spare at work, but I have gone through that video scene-by-scene and debunked every "fact" presented. I'll try to do the same for TFP this weekend.
As a moderator, I usually exercise a lot of restraint in my responses, but the flash animation that the first link claims is a good place to get started, is a pathetic, asinine attmep at an argument. As far as 9-11 conspiracy "proofs" go, Whether you are just throwing out links or are choosing a roundabout way to out yourself as a racist, the second link adds no credibility to what I assume to be your argument in favor of conspiracy theories.

2.) Simply caved in, but not have caused the both towers to collapse on themselves. As I stated earlier, I'm not an archtect/engineer, but it seems rather odd that the towers collapsed the way they did, considering how high up they were hit.

In fact, I remember when it happened (I was in physics class) and the thought NEVER crossed my mind that the towers would collapse, because it just didn't-- And still doesn't-- Seem possible, considering how they were hit.

I remember there being a video from Osama stating that even he was surprised that the towers caved in as they did, as he was only expecting the floors above the impact point to cave in.

That's my $.02 (A bit late, I know. But better late than never).[/QUOTE]
The WTC towers were built in such a way that nothing other than a straight-down collaps was possible. The basic structure was a steel cage to which steel-reinforced concrete floors were attached with angle brackets. The collapse began when the steel beams deformed (not melted) to the point that a few floors were wrenched loose from the angle brackets. As these floors collapsed, they overloaded the angle brackets of the floors below, causing a domino-effect that continued to the ground. As the internal structural elements collapsed, the outer cage was pulled down along with it. If it were just one or two top floors collapsing, or possibly if the floors that were hit collapsed with no degradation of structural strength from fires, the buildings might have remained standing, but the damage was too widespread.

Nobody quite expected it to happen because we havd never seen fully-fueled planes crash into buildings, causing flash fires that gave way to secondary fires, which heated the structural steel enough to weaken and deform it. To answer the nagging question of "why did the WTC collapse when fire never took a building down before?" the buildings were designed to withstand fires that started in one place and spread over the course of minutes or hours, not an inferno ignited by an accelerant across several floors in only a few seconds.