Highly recognized former chief economist in Labor Department now doubts official 9/11 story, claiming suspicious facts and evidence cover-up indicate government foul play and possible criminal implications.
This article lays out clearly all the evidence that the collapse of the buildings on 9/11 was in part due to controlled demolition. They may have a point. But, so what? What does this show? That the attackers were even better organized than previously thought or that the Bushies are covering something up? They probably are, but those buildings did go down and I’m unclear of what the 9/11 doubters are trying to say.