Their testament takes the speed of the planes into account, which was 750 km/h. Kamikaze pilots flew at less than half that speed.

Japan built the Cherry Bomber during WW2, which could go as fast as 1,000 km/h before the pilot killed himself reaching its target.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yokosuka_MXY-7_Ohka#Design_and_development

"The final approach was difficult for a defender to stop because the aircraft gained high speed (650 km/h (400 mph) in level flight and 930 km/h (580 mph) or even 1,000 km/h (620 mph) in a dive. Later versions were designed to be launched from coastal air bases and caves, and even from submarines equipped with aircraft catapults, although none were actually used in this way. The Allen M. Sumner-class destroyer USS Mannert L. Abele was the first Allied ship to be sunk by Ohka aircraft, near Okinawa on 12 April 1945.[6][7] "

All you're saying by this is that it was plausible for people to have such intentions, which I agree with. But I showed that the nature of the attacks was very different, that it wasn't simply a matter of flying airplanes into buildings. Even that part would've been impossible. Note also that the planes would've been intercepted soon after getting off the planned course.

I edited my post but once again, in 2001, hijackers were seen as demanding money. It was never a popular belief they were prepared to kill themselves instead of landing. The voice recordings made note of this. The hijackers told the passengers to stay in their seats and that they will return to the airport. But since they actually killed the pilots first, only they knew it was a suicide mission and wanted to keep everyone deceived.

Hence, it wasn't until the the 4th hijacked plane that the passengers tried to fight back. They received phone calls that the 3 other planes had intentionally crashed, thus it became apparent they were also going to die if they didn't resist instead.

Edit: And the planes were intercepted, but the fighter jets were poorly prepared. They didn't have time to load any ammunition, so they would have had to physically crash into them to bring them down.

https://www.history.com/news/911-heather-penney-united-flight-93

"As confusion enveloped the briefing room, Penney's commanding officer, Colonel Marc "Sass" Sasseville, locked his eyes to hers and said, “Lucky, you’re coming with me.” They scrambled to the pre-flight area and donned their flight suits. There was no time to arm their F-16 fighter jets, so they would be flying this mission virtually unarmed, packing only their undaunted courage."

I also show that something other than plane impact caused the buildings to collapse. The fact that there were apparent plane impacts alongside actual collapses demonstrate that the attacks were far more advanced than any terrorist organization is capable of.

Edit: In regards to your evidence, the building was on fire for an hour. There was debris, but there was also people inside smashing the windows , which was also causing things to blow out.

Terrorists normally claim responsibility for their attacks, often beforehand. If the purpose is to instill people with fear, it's essential to do this rather than distance yourself from it. So can you explain why Bin Laden denied responsibility for the attacks?

Lying is not out of the question. Especially to pass blame onto someone else or avoid capture. That doesn't mean he is guilty, but famous people have always pretended they did nothing wrong. OJ Simpson comes to mind. And of course, George Bush himself lied about the reasons for invading Iraq, yet still acts like it's not his fault.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y23mTSviCZo