Too late Tenoch!
I haven't watched this vid yet, but I've seen a couple of others.
The ones that I saw was full of errors, so I wouldn't be surprised if this one was too. That's not the point though, is it?
4 buildings collapsed in a similar manner on that day. Two had only minor fires and should never have collapsed. There's a newsclip of a fire guy saying that one of the buildings was 'pulled', meaning demolished.
If one of the buildings was 'pulled' and it takes weeks to place the explosives to carry that out properly, the case is made.
As far as planes disappearing from radar is concerned, there were said to have been several simultaneous air force exercises at the time, in which there were imaginary blips and some blips not showing on screen. This is
partly admitted by the official report.
When terrorist attacks coincide with exercises we should all be suspicious. In London there was an exercise involving explosives at train stations on the 7th of July, when the attacks happened. Here's a clip to prove it, a damn good clip too:
http://www.reopen911.org/#London
Click on Peter Boyle
ex-Scotland Yard, testify he was conducting terrorism drills in the exact same stations as the "Bombers".
Exercises are the best way to confuse security services and ensure that an attack can take place.
Then we have the issue of the Israeli spies filming the Twin Towers coming down and partying.
http://ww1.sundayherald.com/37707
It is highly likely that the Israelis knew the specifics of the attack and didn't pass on the information in order that it shouldn't be prevented. US foreign policy since 911 is arguably in Israel's interest (short term interest) so this is plausible.
Then we have the issue with the anthrax attacks that everyone seems to forget. Who was behind that? Go and google it and see what comes up for yourselves.
What about the stock market movements before 911? Don't they indicate that advance knowledge of the attacks was widespread?
Another video of the controlled explosives theory:
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/july2005/060705controlleddemolition.htm
The eyewitness reports of explosions are compelling as is the film evidence and the science of the controlled explosives theory. This is the big one, as far as Im concerned, the rest of the theory relies on our reading newspaper reports and listening to speculation. We can see with our own eyes, however, that controlled demolitions took place. This is undeniable and is supported by the reports of molten steel being found at the sites, several weeks after the attacks. We have argued before about whether the temperature of a jet fuel explosion was sufficient to weaken steel sufficiently for these collapses to occur. The anti-conspiracists point out that the steel only needed to be weakened and not melted, but the fact is that molten steel was found at the sites, so what melted it?
Of course the suicide pilots (I didn't see them with my own eyes but I'll take the view that they existed) were responsible for the plane hits, but they weren't responsible for the the collapses, which cost the majority of the lives.
As far as I'm concerned there's no chance whatsoever that the 911 attack happened as a result of a series of mistakes made by the military and security services and a small group of hijackers, with no foreknowledge by any establishment group.
What the truth is I don't know, and I would dearly like to find out.
. The only way to refute this film is by examining the evidence and proposing specific flaws, which no one here has yet done. 
