PD - you are correct a conspiracy of this nature would be extremely hard to concieve and to cover up. I agree totally on this point.

The problems for me are some disturbingly unanswered questions that are clearly not answered by claiming that the cover up would be too dificult. Why was the hole in the side of the Pentagon too small for the aircraft that struck the building. How was the metal in that plane able to burn so completely that none of the parts of the plane were recovered inside the building yet all the bodies were recovered. Why did several of the CIA experts interviewed at the crash scene indicate that they smelled cordite when they should have only smelled burning jet fuel. Why did the towers collapse like a demolition and not fall like trees. Why did the third building collapse also like a demolition even though it was not struck.

To say a conspiracy is too difficult, and to explain the reasons why it is too difficult, does not advance any reasonable explanation on these troubling questions. If there was no conspiracy then these questions should be quickly and easily answered. Maybe bodies burn at a higher temperature than metal. Maybe there was cordite stored in one of the offices hit. Maybe the experts are wrong about expecting the buildings to fall like trees.

I have not seen the details of the molten metal and the nanothermite explosives. This seems to be more recent information. My questions are from the original event. Tell me the experts were wrong and give at least some kind of explanation.