We may never get the truth, but that doesn't stop some from seeking it. Take Matt McCormick, for example. Some of you who've read my previous articles know that I like to interview Matt, mostly letting him take over the conversation; this one is no exception.

He is a bank of knowledge, and quite possibly the most informed person I'm in direct contact with. This conversation I recently had with him was eye-opening in many ways, just as our past talks have been. It's mostly a one-sided conversation with few interjections from me like "yeah" and "a mine?"

Riveting.

This was the longest talk we've had yet. With that being said, I had to cut a lot out, not because of the lack of importance, but simply because of the lack of time.

I went into this with an objective point-of-view and an open mind. You should read it the same way. Don't automatically write him off as a conspiracy theorist. Consider his thoughts, then formulate your opinion and keep it to yourself.

Enjoy.

B: What would you call yourself?

M: Um…a student. You know, I look at a lot of information about a lot of things. I start to get interested and start investigating. I think that’s a good place for a lot of people to be. Just not to accept things at face value, do your own research. And that’s what I did.

B: So, do you just want to spew?

M: Sure. This was about a year ago. I’m on the Internet and I had seen these things before, but never investigated it. Played some videos on YouTube. I don’t know what it was, but it caught my attention. It seemed like an anomaly. It didn’t fit. You know when you hear something and even talking to people, they say something that doesn’t feel quite right? You get that feeling in your stomach?

B: Yeah.

M: And, of course, now we have these things. Phones. And we can check people’s information very quickly. And the more and more I got into it, these things just started piling up. Then I got into architects and engineers on the towers, 9/11 Truth. These people know what they’re talking about. Structural engineers, civil engineers, airline pilots. They kept spewing out this information and I was just like, ahhh! And if what they’re saying is true, then this other thing has to be fabricated. It’s a lie. And once I started to go out there and consider it for myself, I thought oh my god. All these things are…they’re anomalies. And a lot of time, I’m willing to sit back and have someone explain why I’m wrong and that may be the case; maybe my information just isn’t strong enough. Maybe these other people have an agenda with spewing other information. I’m open. Now, when so-called ‘experts’ in the field talk, I just think they’re lying. Like, when the talk about physics. Now, I have a rudimentary education in physics, but when I hear them talk, I’m thinking no, you’re incorrect. Physics don’t work that way. A lot of things can be misconstrued and argued about. But not science. Not the laws of physics.

I guess that’s where I’ll start. And you and I had this conversation about a month ago. If something falls from the top and hits something on the bottom which is solid, nothing wrong with it – the speed of the falling material, does it continue the same velocity, speed up, slow down, or stop? And I told you that it would slow down, as in both the towers. Now, see, they’re trying to tell us that as the towers came down in a pile-driver effect – they used to call it the pancake effect – but, even with their weird science, they couldn’t explain that so it was abandoned. Now it’s the pile-driver, meaning that the top part just keeps banging and banging levels all the way down. That’s impossible by the laws of physics. I talk to people and they say, oh, the steel was weakened at that point. Yeah, okay, I’ll even give you that one! I don’t think so even with the so-called ‘planes’ and the heat from the fires. But just say that it did. As that top part of the building starts to fall on the perfectly OK floor below the impact area, what’s going to happen to that top part when it hits the bottom part, in terms of physics. It’s going to slow down. What people don’t realize is that as an object falls and hits something, that something is also hitting the object, causing it to slow down or stop completely. For every action that is an equal or opposite reaction. Not only does the top part crush what’s below it, the intact portion below crushes what’s coming down. That pile-driver theory supports that the building must have fallen symmetrically. Look at the videos of the south tower. It’s leaning at a 23-degree angle, which means it’s falling asymmetrically. Again, in terms of how things work, what should have happened to the top of that building? It should’ve fallen right into the street. It didn’t.

I get upset when I realize the extent of what’s called ‘cognitive dissonance.’ That the people’s belief system is so strong that this government wouldn’t do such a thing. They can look at that and it will change their values and ideas about science. Well, it had to be that way because no one could have done what you’re saying. The laws of science rule. If that building was falling at a 23-degree angle, it would have fallen into the street. According to them, it leaned back and started going down but even if that was true, it would’ve eventually stopped. If you take a ball to the top of one of those buildings, it takes ten seconds for that ball to hit the ground. The only thing going against it is air. Those buildings took 11-12 seconds to come down, almost as though there was nothing beneath them. Are you with me on this?

B: I think so.

M: It’s tons of steel and concrete, yet they fall almost in free-fall. The floors below the impact area were designed to withstand 140 MPH winds. Do you think they’re strong? And even though the so-called airplanes hit and there were fires, nothing was wrong with anything below that area. What happened to those? I was looking at the 9/11 Commission report. This was very interesting: they took the collapse to the beginning of the collapse, gave all the reasons why it started and their reason for the rest of the collapse. It was, and I quote, inevitable. Really? Is that a scientific term? It never went further than that. Not according to the laws of physics! It’s not inevitable. You know, you start listening to people on the other side of the argument and they say that it was like the laws of physics were thrown out the window. And I concur! Any person who knows high school physics knows that this can’t happen. I can stop the interview right there. That’s enough to say that these are lies.

B: Then how do you explain it?

M: They were demolished. There were explosives in those buildings. George Pataki, the New York governor, said all the concrete here has been pulverized. It’s covering all of Manhattan. Two to three inches of concrete has been pulverized. When buildings collapse, they do not do that. If you watch the video with a slow-motion camera, there’s jets of stuff being thrown out. Policeman, fireman, you can hear them call out. Whoa! It’s like they were demolishing it with explosions. These are the guys that were there. Who saved us. When I talk to people about this, I ask them how 2-ton steel beams are thrown 600 feet, across the street, two football field length, into other buildings. Tell me! What’s the power behind it? Not a collapse. They found bits and pieces of human beings across the street. How did they get there? From a collapsing building? 3,000 people died that day. They found 238 bodies. The rest were blown to bits. Only 12 bodies could they identify through sight. Most were identified through DNA. One body had 300 different parts of DNA. How does a collapsing building do that? 1,000 people were never identified. A building had collapsed in Taiwan. 20-stories. 119 people were killed, yet they found 116 of them. I know that’s just one building, but typically when a building falls, 10 percent of it is left in the rubble. The World Trade Center had 110 stories, 1 was left.

Then, of course, there’s building 7. No planes. They can’t even argue about that. That building came down at free fall.

B: You said an ember caused that, right?

M: Well, I’m sure there were some fires inside from the burning buildings nearby. But see, for a building to fall-fall, that means there is no resistance. Building 7 was 47-stories. Are you telling me that suddenly, as if by magic, all those steel frames gave out at the same time? The building came down in 6.7 seconds. You want us to believe that? It’s crazy. I got a hundred of these. For building 7, there are videos, people talking in them. Okay, get back! That building’s ready to come down! Making people back away from it. How did they know that building was coming down? Larry Silverstein, the guy that had just purchased the leases to all those buildings in July, was talking to the Chief of Police saying that there has been a lot of loss of life, and thought it just be better to pull the building. Talking about building 7. What does the word pull mean? Well, in demolition terms, it means to explode it. He says it right on camera. Maybe he didn’t mean to say ‘pull,’ but he did. These are anomalies. When they start to add up, you start to question and you get deeper and deeper. But again, I go right back to the laws of physics. I could sit here for an hour and spew out one after the other, but I want somebody who knows something about physics to explain to me how the laws of physics didn’t work that day.

Once steel-frame buildings came around in the 20^th century, do you know how many had fallen from fires prior to 9/11? Zero. Some of those buildings were on fire for 24 hours. Their steels frame remained. Raging fires. When they see dark smoke, firemen know that it’s an oxygen starved fire. Look at them. Black smoke. They’ll say oh, that’s just the kerosene from the jet fuel. Well, the fuel must have exploded on impact if, indeed, it was a commercial airliner with jet fuel. I have things to say about that, too. But on impact, it’s all burnt up. So the only fires that are left are because of office furniture. What else could be on fire? There was a New York fireman in one of those towers, who said we have two small fires, bring us two lines and we’ll knock ‘em down! That’s almost verbatim. Two small fires. These things start to add up. I can see it in your eyes right now. Well, they must’ve been RAGING fires! And even if there were ‘raging’ fires, and those towers came down because of those, steel melts at 4,000-degrees. At their best, those fires were 2,000-degrees. Well, maybe it softened the beams, but now it's under the law of physics. Can’t happen. I just explained it to you. I got a million of them.

B: How many attacks occurred that day?

M: Three. The two on the Twin Towers and one at the Pentagon, then the other plane, Flight 93, crashed in Shankesville, Pennsylvania after the passengers revolted against the supposed hijackers. This stuff just gets weirder. They couldn’t find any evidence of a plane hitting the Pentagon, not even the titanium engine. Everything about that plane was pulverized. If your plane pulverized, don’t tell me that it made a perfectly good hole in the third ring of the building. A CNN reporter, only shown on TV once, but, nevertheless, it’s on YouTube, says I see no evidence of an airplane hitting this building. No seats, no baggage, no wings. Nothing. Same thing happened in Shankesville. No bodies, no blood. They were just picking up pieces of whatever hit that ground. The stories just get wilder, almost like fairy tales. A report comes on claiming that the plane COMPLETELY DISAPPEARED into the mine shaft below the ground. Completely before anyone could show up to see it.

B: A mine?

M: Yeah, right below where it hit. Isn’t that convenient? What child, what adult, what human can look at this and say yeah, it happened. Because nobody questions it. Americans can’t get it into their heads that there are evil people willing to do evil things.

The Pentagon is the most secure building in the world. It has 84 cameras around it. Do you think they took a picture of that plane hitting the building? Of course, but they say that the pictures were too devastating to release. Are you kidding me? We see people falling to their deaths out of the Twin Towers, yet you can’t show us a 767 hitting the Pentagon? It’s because there isn’t a plane hitting the building. What was it? I don’t know. I can give you conjectures, but that’s it.

There were, supposedly, these Saudis who were part of the hijacking team. They found, not one, two of their passports in the rubble in New York City. Perfectly good passports to prove that those were the guys in the airplanes who flew them into the buildings. Okay! You’re telling me that those guys ran the planes through a building, and destroyed the entire thing. What did those guys do? Take the passports out of their pockets and toss them out the rolled down window of the cockpit? Does that make any sense to you, whatsoever? So, here are these anomalies, planes exploding, nothing left but you have a paper passport that survived them? Not one, but two? Then the question comes to mind: why would someone do something like this? Lots of theories. And I guess my whole thing is, people just can’t believe that people of power would do something like this. You know, I had a hard time believing it.

B: We should wrap up for lack of time. Now, I have no certain agenda, here. We can look at all the physics; you simply can't defy them. Taking all these truths, theories, whatever you want to call them, into consideration. Why do you think it happened?

M: They wanted the U.S. to be more involved in the Middle East. More heavy lifting. What PNAC, the Project for the New American Century, thought was necessary to get behind the new American military dominance was another Pearl Harbor-like event. It wasn’t enough to kill three people in the World Trade Center in 1993. Things happen and they go. They needed a bigger one. They got it. There it is. And that’s the short version.

B: What would you say to the people that call you a conspiracy theorist?

M: First, I’d say that’s a pejorative. If we just want to talk facts, I’m okay with that. But when I hear that, you know, my heart rate goes up. I’m thinking I’m being personally attacked. Let’s talk physics. It’s like Bill O’Reilly. He yells and screams at people to get them off topic. I don’t want to be taken off topic. Go ahead and call me that, I don’t care. Can we talk facts now? Back to what we’re talking about, here? Let’s talk answers. Give me some answers to this. And I got a hundred of them.