The Truth: 9/11 Reloaded

September 11, 2001. 5 years on.
5 years back, I remember watching the TV, interrupted by the Breaking News: The World Trade Centre was hit and brought down by what was reported "2 planes hijacked by terrorists".
Now, the movie, "World Trade Center" is out.
There are still videos, pictures and news going around on this catastrophic event. And there are members still investigating on the incident.
On the Zogby Pole, 49% believe it was an Inside Job planned by the VIPs. 66% want the 9/11 investigation reopened.
5 years on, people are beginning to see for themselves and think. I know it does not take one to be a scientist or professional to comprehend. It is pure common sense.
Scientists claim that NO metal building is destroyed in a fire, but in the debris, they found melted metals and no remaining of any plane parts. Besides, it was claimed that the planes were almost out of fuel when they reached the towers. The Meridian Plaza burned for 19 hours without collapsing. Now, how could two towers as tall and as strongly-built as WTC collapse completely in like, an hour for one & 2 hours, the other? And why was the rubble destroyed right after?
Another question. Why did WTC 7 collapse? Only possible answer is it might be hit by the rubbles from the collapsing tower and exploded then collapse. BUT it was a 47-story, steel-framed building. If you see the way it collapsed, it looked more like a controlled demolition.
Also, the Boeing 757 which was claimed to hit the Pentagon in Washington was never there. They found the hole, (a hole so neat and impossible to fit a Boeing 757, plus its impact when hit) but no plane. What actually happened?

"Buildings don't eat planes. That plane, it just vanished. There should have been parts on the ground...Where are the parts?"

-Skarlet

How is it possible when Norad had succesfully intercepted on suspected hijacked planes 67 times during the year prior to 9-11, but not on the very day? Incoincidence, you say? Then how could it be possible that the hijackers got into the cockpit if throughout the chaos, someone at the terminals should have received news and sent help following the transponder, but nothing happened at all?

So many 'IFs'. More research to be done and reports and proof to be found. Until then, should the world or nation put blames on unlawful terrorist acts? Or should we say, even if terrorism followed, it was purely a cause of influence and 'trigger' from one of the world leaders, himself?

*Shrugs*