9/11 truth now!

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,635198488,00.html

<< "A Brigham Young University physicist said he now believes an incendiary substance called thermite, bolstered by sulfur, was used to generate exceptionally hot fires at the World Trade Center on 9/11, causing the structural steel to fail and the buildings to collapse." >>

 

hahaahahah who is that

 

"Architects & Engineers for 9-11 Truth" .................. http://www.ae911truth.org/

<< "As seen in this revealing photo, the Twin Towers' destruction exhibited all of the characteristics of destruction by explosives: (and some non-standard characteristics)." >>

 

http://counterknowledge.com/category/911-conspiracy-theories/

 

So they are saying that 'when those buildings fell they fell exactly the way buildings fall when they're falling?'

 

Those buildings didn't "fall," but rather "exploded" in a manner that is consistent with a controlled demolition.

 

http://iamthewitness.com/Bollyn/Bollyn-Physical-Evidence-of-Thermite.html

<< "Based on the mass of these iron-rich spheres found in a sample of the dust found in a nearby apartment, Jones estimates (roughly) that about .04 percent of the dust was "iron-rich spherule," which would be "of the order of ten tons." This gives us some idea of how much Thermite (Thermate, etc.) was in the twin towers." >>

http://iamthewitness.com/Bollyn/Bollyn-Thermate-WTC.html

 

Those buildings didn't "fall," but rather "exploded" in a manner that is consistent with a controlled demolition.

Anyone watching video of the WTC collapses will agree that it looks nothing like a controlled demolition. In fact, it couldn't possibly be more opposite.

In a controlled demolition, you'll notice that the uppermost, middle, and lowermost parts of the building all fall at the same time, in perfect unison, almost as if a hole opened up beneath it and the building collapsed into it.

The WTC collapses looked nothing even remotely like a controlled demolition- in fact, you can clearly see when the steel fails, and you can see that the upper floors fall against lower ones, and only then do they collapse- and it progresses downward. You will never see that in a controlled demolition unless they botch it, and I've never found such an example. EVER.

The only people believing the "it looked just like a controlled demolition" line are people that simply haven't looked for themselves. You simply can't compare the two and conclude that the WTC buildings were taken down by controlled demolition.

Besides, if Bush had really wanted a terrorist attack to occur, all he'd have to do is mention it to Bandar Bush and in no time Saudis would be flying planes into buildings. Nothing more complicated than that would have been necessary.

 

Well see the problem is he hasn't looked for himself because he believes what nut jobs on the internetz say. Also a controlled demolition by a Zionist controlled government helps him feed his hate of the Jews.

 

http://www.twf.org/Library/911Unveiled.html

<< "The Executive Director of the 9/11 Commission — a Commission vigorously opposed by the White House — also drafted the Bush administration's pre-emptive war doctrine." >>

 

I get it: You want us to ignore a virtual mountain of evidence which supports the idea that the WTC was destroyed by controlled demolition, on the grounds that it makes Israel look bad.

I'd really like to know just how you intend to go about concealing the well-documented FACT that the USA is being run by treasonous ZIONIST JEWS who owe their first allegiance to the state of Israel.

 

http://www.wtc7.net/videos.html

<< "Each of the following videos shows the entire visible portion of the building falling with a vertical precision otherwise seen only in controlled demolition. Moreover, they show that the collapse took only about 6.5 seconds from start to finish. That rate of fall is within a second of the time it would take an object to fall from the building's roof with no air resistance." >>

 

http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2004/06/291600.shtml

<< What does the word "Al-Qaeda" mean ? In Arabic, "Al-Qaeda" has different meanings, among them "Base", "Ground", "Norm", "Rule", "Fundament", "Grammar". The exact meaning is dependent on the context in which it is used. It depends on the word which follows "Al-Qaeda" in the sentence. "Qawa'ad Askaria" is an Army Base, "Qawa'ad Lugha" stands for Grammar Rules (the Bases of Grammar).

<< "Qa'ada" is the infinitive of the verb "to sit". "Ma-Qa'ad" is a chair. "Al-Qaeda" is the base or fundament of something. "Ana raicha Al Qaeda" is colloquial for "I'm going to the toilet". A very common and widespread use of the word "Al-Qaeda" in different Arab countries in the public language is for the toilet bowl. This name comes from the Arabic verb "Qa'ada" which mean "to sit", pertinently, on the "Toilet Bowl". In most Arabs homes there are two kinds of toilets: "Al-Qaeda" also called the "Hamam Franji" or foreign toilet, and "Hamam Arabi" or "Arab toilet" which is a hole in the ground. Lest we forget it, the potty used by small children is called "Ma Qa'adia" or "Little Qaeda".

<< Those who founded the glorious "International of Islamic Terror, Al-Qaeda, probably knew too little about common use of Arabic language to know that by using this name for their organization, they risked becoming the laughing stock of everybody who speaks the Arabic "public" language. >>

 

"The tales about Goldstein and his underground army, she said, were simply a lot of rubbish which the party had invented for its own purposes and which you had to pretend to believe in." ~ Eric Blair a.k.a. "George Orwell" in the novel "1984."

 

http://911research.wtc7.net/disinfo/deceptions/index.html

<< "There are many red flags in the official story of September 11th that passed right by the vast majority of people. Not the least is that the official story was so quick to emerge. Within hours of the attack Osama bin Laden was presented as the prime suspect. His picture was repeatedly shown on TV alongside images of the devastation in Lower Manhattan, a technique known as Pavlovian conditioning. A list of most of the hijackers was presented within a day of the attack." >>

 

You're an insane conspiracy-monger. I've yet to meet anyone with any serious credentials in politics, engineering, world affairs or anything that can relate yo 9/11 in any way thought of it as anything other than a hilarious example of how gullible people are with conspiracy theories. There isn't enough solid evidence that the US had advance knowledge of the 9/11. It's in the same realm of people who believe we had advanced knowledge of the Pearl Harbor attack. Like any conspiracy theory, people believe it because they want to believe it, not because it's rational.

But then again you probably believe we had prior knowledge of Pearl harbor too

 

i think george bush and dick cheney are just crab people in disguise

 

http://plaguepuppy.net/public_html/collapse update/

<< "How is it possible that this uniquely horrific event has been subjected to so little rigorous investigation or forensic engineering analysis? And what possible innocent motivation could there be for the great haste with which so much irreplaceable physical evidence was destroyed? ...

<< What is especially striking in the collapse of both towers is the enormous volume of material being ejected early in the collapse, and the quantity of shattered steel thrown out ahead of the dust clouds. Much of this broken steel consists of neatly chopped one-story long pieces of the perimeter columns, 14" square steel box columns that are assembled in three-story sections. These columns are also welded to 52" deep plates along each floor, but have somehow been broken free of these at the same time they are chopped up and ejected at high speed. This combination of shattered debris with dust and smoke ejected at high speed makes for a textbook picture of the effects of high explosives ...

<< There are quite a few still pictures showing what can only be described as explosive ejections of material from the towers, pulverized concrete and shattered pieces of the steel perimeter columns thrown out even in the early stages of the collapses." >>

 

http://www.fireengineering.com/inde...ors-opinion/elling-out-the-investigation.html

<< "Fire Engineering has good reason to believe that the 'official investigation' blessed by FEMA and run by the American Society of Civil Engineers is a half-baked farce that may already have been commandeered by political forces whose primary interests, to put it mildly, lie far afield of full disclosure. Except for the marginal benefit obtained from a three-day, visual walk-through of evidence sites conducted by ASCE investigation committee members-described by one close source as a 'tourist trip'-no one's checking the evidence for anything.

<< Maybe we should live and work in planes. That way, if disaster strikes, we will at least be sure that a thorough investigation will help find ways to increase safety for our survivors.

<< As things now stand and if they continue in such fashion, the investigation into the World Trade Center fire and collapse will amount to paper- and computer-generated hypotheticals.

<< However, respected members of the fire protection engineering community are beginning to raise red flags, and a resonating theory has emerged: The structural damage from the planes and the explosive ignition of jet fuel in themselves were not enough to bring down the towers."

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/11/09/n...00&en=46fc4538a058ba4b&ei=5062&partner=GOOGLE

<< "At several points in the tape, fire commanders can be heard speaking with urgency. A commander alerts a colleague that he needs more companies to handle what he is facing in the south tower. The chiefs discuss the need to get more elevators into service, to carry firefighters up and to transport the injured back down.

<< But nowhere on the tape is there any indication that firefighters had the slightest indication that the tower had become unstable or that it could fall.

<< 'Chief, I'm going to stop on 44,' Stephen Belson, an aide to Chief Palmer, tells him at 9:25 as he ascends.

<< 'Take your time,' the chief responds. >>