September 11, 2025
Tim McGraw wrote:
Hi Ed,
I just read your article on 9/11 propaganda on LRC. Great article. The 9/11 to 9-1-1 “What’s your emergency” link is obvious. Why people don’t see that it was planned that way is odd.
As an aircraft mechanic, I knew the whole government story was bullshit from the get-go. I saw “Harley Guy” get interviewed “live” on TV. I laughed out loud. “Ground Zero”… “fire’s high intensity did structural damage”…LOL I know jet fuel doesn’t burn hot enough to melt structural steel. If it did, jet engines would melt. Airliners don’t fly fast into buildings or any small object like the Twin Towers. One plane was going 500 mph, and the other 585 mph. That’s a mile every 7-9 seconds. The pilot would have NO reaction time to make course corrections to hit a narrow target(s) like the Twin Towers. The collision would have bent some steel girders, maybe, but they wouldn’t break. Besides, the Twin Towers had an outside box of steel girders and an inner box of steel girders supporting the building. No way the building collapses. The Towers were designed for two airplanes to hit each tower and withstand it.
You see the propaganda reasons the government’s story was bullshit. I see the physical reasons the government’s story was BS. Same conclusion, just a different path to get there.
