Smack in a forensic investigation there are things that are considered hard physical evidence and then there's circumstantial evidence, when in the course of said investigation you encounter say millions of tons of pulverized concrete you got some good ,previously hard, hard evidence. At that point we need go no further untill we find the cause of that irrefutable evidenciary fact, the first question asked would be, what turns millions of tons of very strong, very hard, concrete into to dust. Just try and imagine how far down the list of possible causes a tiny speeding aluminum bag full of lamp fuel is. It's on page fifty-seven million right under rabid bunnies with disposable cigarrette lighters.
You know how stupid GeorgeB is right, well the people who did the job on the buildings are even stupider, they could have just lit the fuse and blown up the buildings without the HollyWood stunt of jet airliners and still blamed it on terrorists and avoided all these nasty lingering questions surrounding the complete impossibility of the official line on the whole affair, it would have been controllable and containable, they're the dumbest bunch of greedy murdering bastards you can imagine, this will never go away. But they thought they needed a bigger lie, something like overkill Smack, a vast stupid incident of overkill and it's attentant blowback. Why? It's because the greedy and evil are invariably also in the end stupid, simple as that Smack, nobody has to go any further than that dust.