what i know is, people who are smarter or just more well versed with thermite than you said there was thermite at ground zero. thats what i know.

Yes I have seen explosives start from the top and take out others beside them. If the charges aren't placed and timed precisely the building will topple instead of collapse on its footprint, which by the way is the industry standard for demolition. The opposite is the dumbaas that's trying to knock the silo over with a sledge one block at a time. Look at that video and tell me again what happens when the Structural Integrity of a building is compromised on one side again.

well conrad people that worked in the trade centers said for over a year there was people messing with the steel, thats ample time to put bombs or whatever they did to weaken the structure of the building. fire damage alone did not cause those buildings to freefall like that.

personally, i would say he needs to go back to school, if he ever went or took any physics classes... there's a thousand real physics scientists they say he's wrong...

read some of this, it helps shed some light on things...

http://debunking911.com/

http://www.popularmechanics.com/military/a49/1227842/

your correct, the two 100 ton planes that hit it at 600MPH fully loaded with fuel helped too..

"It is the first responsibility of every citizen to Question Authority." --Benjamin Franklin

Dr. Joel S. Hirschhorn, PhD, Professor of Metallurgical Engineering, "Clearing our minds of the fear of painful truths is essential to clearing our nation of destructive lies. Otherwise, we stay stuck in a delusional democracy. ... Scholars and professionals ... have established beyond any reasonable doubt that the official account of 9/11 is false." (source)

Dr. Joel S. Hirschhorn, BS Metallurgical Engineering, MS Metallurgical Engineering, PhD Materials Engineering, Professor of Metallurgical Engineering, University of Wisconsin, Madison 1965 - 1978. Senior Staff Member, Congressional Office of Technology Assessment 1978 - 1990. Testified more than 50 times before Congress on technology, science, and environmental issues. Former Director of Environment, Energy and Natural Resources, National Governors Association. Dr. Hirschhorn has been a consultant to industrial and chemical companies, DOE laboratories, state governments, and public interest organizations.

Dr. Hirschhorn says, "Scholars and professionals with various kinds of expertise—including architects, engineers, firefighters, intelligence officers, lawyers, medical professionals, military officers, philosophers, religious leaders, physical scientists, and pilots—have spoken out about radical discrepancies between the official account of the 9/11 attacks and what they, as independent researchers, have learned. They have established beyond any reasonable doubt that the official account of 9/11 is false and that, therefore, the official “investigations” have really been cover-up operations. Thus far, however, there has been no response from political leaders in Washington or, for that matter, in other capitals around the world. Our organization, Political Leaders for 9/11 Truth, has been formed to help bring about such a response. We believe that the truth about 9/11 needs to be exposed now—not in 50 years as a footnote in the history books—so the policies that have been based on the Bush-Cheney administration’s interpretation of the 9/11 attacks can be changed. We are, therefore, calling for a new, independent investigation of 9/11 that takes account of evidence that has been documented by independent researchers but thus far ignored by governments and the mainstream media."

Dr. Hirschhorn's essay, Painful 9/11 Truth, 9/4/07: "Many technical analyses cast doubt on the official explanation of the collapse of three World Trade Center buildings, including those presented by an impressive new group: Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth. More difficult than discovering the truth, however, is convincing most of the public to accept the bitter truth. ... When it comes to 9/11, we face the strong belief that only al-Qaeda caused 9/11. But analyses by many experts reveal the collapse of the three WTC buildings was not caused by the two airplanes exploding into the twin towers. Without getting into details that one can spend many hours examining on a number of websites, the general view is that the buildings were brought down by controlled demolition. If correct, the immediate reaction is like a cosmic big bang. It would have taken considerable effort by a number of people with expertise and access to the buildings to rig them so that they could be intentionally collapsed when the two jets hit the towers. Tough questions flood in: Who could have engineered all this? Could foreign agents accomplish such complex actions - and if they did, why not take credit for it? If Americans did it, why would they intentionally inflict inevitable mass death and devastation? Worse, they seemingly knew about the plan to fly the jets into the towers. Post-9/11, why have the government and official investigations not come to the same controlled demolition conclusion? This makes sense if the government was involved. ... Like other groups, Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth wants a new, honest and comprehensive study that considers all the evidence for controlled demolition. As a former engineering professor with growing skepticism about the official WTC story I share their concerns. First, let the technical truth emerge. Then, if necessary, cope with the inevitable political, conspiracy and other questions. But let us not allow a possible painful truth block the primary task of determining once and for all what caused the collapse of the WTC towers and building no. 7. ... If those that believe the official 9/11 story - especially elected officials - trust their views, then let them support a serious effort to test the validity of the controlled demolition hypothesis. If they fear and reject doing so, then let us see that as suspicious and unacceptable. To sum up, horrific possible answers can cause us to shun a question. But clearing our minds of the fear of painful truths is essential to clearing our nation of destructive lies. Otherwise, we stay stuck in a delusional democracy."

"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing". --Edmund Burke, statesman, 18th century political philosopher, actual quote: "When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle."

that was funny with the silo... Darwin award material...

BULL!
Ever been in a Building that was prepared for Demolition?
I think not!
BTW,got any realistic Links on your assertion?

Here's a terrific NY Times article as found in the IHT. The writer does a great job of debunking controlled demolition:


"The demolition theory has managed to endure what would seem to be enormous obstacles to its practicality. Controlled demolition is done from the bottom of buildings, not the top, to take advantage of gravity, and there is little dispute that the collapse of the two towers began high in the towers, in the areas where the airplanes struck.

Moreover, a demolition project would have required the walls of the towers to be opened on dozens of floors, followed by the insertion of thousands of pounds of explosives, fuses and ignition mechanisms, all sneaked past the security stations, inside hundreds of feet of walls on all four faces of both buildings. Then the walls presumably would have been closed up.

All this would have had to take place without attracting the notice of any of the thousands of tenants and workers in either building; no witness has ever reported such activity. Then on the morning of Sept. 11, the demolition explosives would have had to withstand the impacts of the airplanes, since the collapse did not begin for 57 minutes in one tower, and 102 minutes in the other."

Reposted from JREF

I know it doesn't come general issue in slop buckets. That would be salt peter. I know if I need to destroy a metal object that thermite will do the job. Dynamite and C4 are good for fragmentation or soft structures, armored or reinforced targets require white phosphorus and or thermite, damnit. Gon' ask me Wtf I know about thermite.....

WP for melting Structural Steel?
Know some other jokes?

investigate911.org

lots of interesting things on there.

You wouldn't happen to mean the first attempt to blow up the wtc towers would you? Like from underneath, sorta like kinda weakening the sub structure before the grand diversion where what left of the 200 ton planes hit the towers all the way at the top above the 90th floor but once the smoke cleared long after any fires were extinguished the 3 buildings were down below ground level? Oh and don't forget about the flash before the second plane hit any glass on the building and the shape underneath that isn't normal for a commercial plane which should have some visible color denoting which airline it was that the FAA requires.

The Big Lie: How the minions of the Corporate Oligarchy sold 9/11

Zbigniew Brzezinski (NWO front man) sets the stage for dismantling the U.S. "Democratic Constitutional Republic", by saying that it stands in the way of imperial mobilization necessary to control Eurasia, which is vital in maintaining U.S. hegemony.

The obvious question, if this were true, is why has the U.S. been deindustrialized? Why has the U.S. transferred its manufacturing capacity to China? Why has U.S. policy, which has been supported by both the Republicans and Democrats, been engineered to significantly diminish the capacity of the U.S. to defend itself? Why have the American people permitted their civil servants to bolster America's alleged potential adversary’s ability to challenge the U.S. in warfare? The answer is that "We the People" have been hoodwinked. The democratic aspects of the U.S. stands in the way of the Oligarch's sustainable global hegemony. By transferring manufacturing power to China, it not only cripples U.S. power, it also sets the stage for World War III, which, like World War II, helped to solidify the "Supranational Corporate Oligarch's" power.

"Ever since the continents started interacting politically, some five hundred years ago, Eurasia has been the center of world power. ... The defeat and collapse of the Soviet Union was the final step in the rapid ascendance of a Western Hemisphere power, the United States, as the sole and, indeed, the first truly global power. Eurasia, however, retains its geopolitical importance. Not only is its western periphery—Europe—still the location of much of the world's political and economic power, but its eastern region—Asia—has lately become a vital center of economic growth and rising political influence. Hence, the issue of how a globally engaged America copes with the complex Eurasian power relationships—and particularly whether it prevents the emergence of a dominant and antagonistic Eurasian power—remains central to America's capacity to exercise global primacy. ... it is imperative that no Eurasian challenger emerges, capable of dominating Eurasia and thus also of challenging America. The formulation of a comprehensive and integrated Eurasian geostrategy is therefore the purpose of this book." --Zbigniew Brzezinski, The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives (1997, pages XIII, XIV).

"...as America becomes an increasingly multicultural society, it may find it more difficult to fashion a consensus on foreign policy issues, except in the circumstances of a truly massive and widely perceived direct external threat." --Zbigniew Brzezinski, The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives (1997, page 211).

"It is also a fact that America is too democratic at home to be autocratic abroad. This limits the use of America's power, especially its capacity for military intimidation. Never before has a populist democracy attained international supremacy. But the pursuit of power is not a goal that commands popular passion, except in conditions of a sudden threat or challenge to the public's sense of domestic well-being. The economic self-denial (that is, defense spending) and the human sacrifice (casualties even among professional soldiers) required in the effort are uncongenial to democratic instincts. Democracy is inimical [hostile] to imperial mobilization." --Zbigniew Brzezinski, The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives (1997, page 36).

The following "Orwellian" blueprint from Obama's Foreign Policy Advisor is happening now. "In the technetronic society the trend seems to be toward aggregating the individual support of millions of unorganized citizens, who are easily within the reach of magnetic and attractive personalities, and effectively exploiting the latest communication techniques to manipulate emotions and control reason. Reliance on television—and hence the tendency to replace language with imagery, which is international rather than national..." --Zbigniew Brzezinski, Between Two Ages: America's Role in the Technetronic Era (1970, page 11).

Zbigniew Brzezinski is one of President Barack Obama's Senior Foreign Policy Advisors. He was National Security Advisor to U.S. President Jimmy Carter, Co-chairman of the National Security Advisory Task Force for U.S. President George H. W. Bush (1988), member of the NSC Defense Department Commission on Integrated Long-term Strategy under U.S. President Ronald Reagan, and member of the President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board under Reagan. Brzezinski has advised numerous presidential administrations in Foreign Policy and is Polish Nobility. His background is directly tied to supranational organizations, which are scheming to deindustrialize and strip sovereignty away from the U.S. Brzezinski was cofounder (with David Rockefeller), architect, and first Director of the Trilateral Commission (1973-1976), current member of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), member of the Bilderberg Group, and taught at Columbia University while Obama pursued his Political Science Degree. The CFR, Trilateral Commission, and Bilderberg Group have all been commissioned by the oligarchs of European banking dynasties.

We are being overthrown by an international banking cartel, which is incrementally stealing our freedoms. Such freedoms stand in the way of the criminal conspirator's agenda to create an authoritarian "One World Government", under the United Nations, which they created and will continue to control.

"I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country. Corporations have been enthroned, an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money-power of the country will endeavor to prolong it's reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until the wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed." --U.S. President Abraham Lincoln

Zbigniew Brzezinski with Osama bin Laden, a CIA Black Ops Asset used in False Flag Terrorism against the American people on 9/11. Brzezinski says that "national sovereignty is no longer a viable concept."

"In addition, it may be possible—and tempting—to exploit for strategic political purposes the fruits of research on the brain and on human behavior. Gordon J. F. MacDonald, a geophysicist specializing in problems of warfare, has written that accurately timed, artificially excited electronic strokes 'could lead to a pattern of oscillations that produce relatively high power levels over certain regions of the earth. ... In this way, one could develop a system that would seriously impair the brain performance of very large populations in selected regions over an extended period. ... No matter how deeply disturbing the thought of using the environment to manipulate behavior for national advantages to some, the technology permitting such use will very probably develop within the next few decades.'" --Zbigniew Brzezinski, Between Two Ages: America's Role in the Technetronic Era (page 28).



how much more evidence do you need?

No jokes. There are no f*cking jokes on a grenade range. You need to learn how to read, I said a metal target that has to be destroyed "requires white phosphorus and or thermite." All metal is not structural steel. The military doesn't just have 9mm and 50,000 lb guided munitions there are many different sizes and types of weapons for different purposes.

There is too much in question. Anybody who looks realisticly at the aftermath can deduce that ONE black box was recovered. 1. Pennsylvania, flight 93 or a reasonable facsimile thereof. What would that number of black boxes mean? The deduction that this could be accomplished without 'help' is unreasonable, unrealistic, as highly unlikely as possible without being impossible. The delay to scramble fighters THAT day and the rehearsed response from W or the worst slip of any political tongue in the U.S.

not too mention that just like every other terrorist attack, our military just happened to be conducting drills that day. of what you ask? terrorists hijacking planes and flying them into buildings. so how about that 1, must be just a coincidence that every time there is a terrorist attack our government just happens to be doing a drill of the exact same type of scenario. i find that quite funny.



see that? now heres another controlled demo of a building, looks pretty god damn similar to me!

According to the official theory, the Twin Towers collapsed due to the structural steel being weakened by fire. In other words, they collapsed due to fire. if that's the case, then how come no modern high-rise, before or after 9/11, has ever collapsed because of a fire?? If that's the case, 9/11 would be the first time in history a modern steel building has ever collapsed due to fire or steal weakened by fire.

For example, why didn't this building collapse?



1991 One Meridian Plaza fire in Philadelphia, raged for 18 hours and gutted 8 floors of the 38-floor building. 1988 First Interstate Bank Building fire in Los Angeles, which burned out of control for 3-1/2 hours and gutted 4 floors of the 64 floor tower. Both of these fires were far more severe than any fires seen in Building 7, but those buildings did not collapse. The Los Angeles fire was described as producing "no damage to the main structural members".

Or this one?



Skyscraper in Madrid Spain burned for almost 24 hours, no collapse.

These out of control infernos burned much more longer and much more intensely,
but remained standing.



Compared to this weak, under control smoldering fire, burned less than an hour,
which caused the WTC towers to collapse but the others are standing!??



i call bull$h1t!

Imagine how this planning session between Bush, Rummy and Cheney must have gone:



BUSH: So, what's the plan again?

CHENEY: Well, we need to invade Iraq and Afghanistan. So what we've decided to do is crash a whole bunch of remote-controlled planes into Wall Street and the Pentagon, say they're real hijacked commercial planes, and blame it on the towelheads; then we'll just blow up the buildings ourselves to make sure they actually fall down.

RUMSFELD: Right! And we'll make sure that some of the hijackers are agents of Saddam Hussein! That way we'll have no problem getting the public to buy the invasion.

CHENEY: No, Don, we won't.

RUMSFELD: We won't?

CHENEY: No, that's too obvious. We'll make the hijackers al-Qaeda and then just imply a connection to Iraq.

RUMSFELD: But if we're just making up the whole thing, why not just put Saddam's fingerprints on the attack?

CHENEY: (sighing) It just has to be this way, Don. Ups the ante, as it were. This way, we're not insulated if things go wrong in Iraq. Gives us incentive to get the invasion right the first time around.

BUSH: I'm a total idiot who can barely read, so I'll buy that. But I've got a question. Why do we need to crash planes into the Towers at all? Since everyone knows terrorists already tried to blow up that building complex from the ground up once, why don't we just blow it up like we plan to anyway, and blame the bombs on the terrorists?

RUMSFELD: Mr. President, you don't understand. It's much better to sneak into the buildings ourselves in the days before the attacks, plant the bombs, and then make it look like it was exploding planes that brought the buildings down. That way, we involve more people in the plot, stand a much greater chance of being exposed, and needlessly complicate everything!

CHENEY: Of course, just toppling the Twin Towers will never be enough. No one would give us the war mandate we need if we just blow up the Towers. Clearly, we also need to shoot a missile at a small corner of the Pentagon to create a mightily underpublicized additional symbol of international terrorism -- and then, obviously, we need to fake a plane crash in the middle of nowhere somewhere in rural Pennsylvania.

RUMSFELD: Yeah, it goes without saying that the level of public outrage will not be sufficient without that crash in the middle of ****ing nowhere.

CHENEY: And the Pentagon crash -- we'll have to do it in broad daylight and say it was a plane, even though it'll really be a cruise missile.

BUSH: Wait, why do we have to use a missile?

CHENEY: Because it's much easier to shoot a missile and say it was a plane. It's not easy to steer a real passenger plane into the Pentagon. Planes are hard to come by.

BUSH: But aren't we using two planes for the Twin Towers?

CHENEY: Mr. President, you're missing the point. With the Pentagon, we use a missile, and say it was a plane.

BUSH: Right, but I'm saying, why don't we just use a plane and say it was a plane? We'll be doing that with the Twin Towers, right?

CHENEY: Right, but in this case, we use a missile. (Throws hands up in frustration) Don, can you help me out here?

RUMSFELD: Mr. President, in Washington, we use a missile because it's sneakier that way. Using an actual plane would be too obvious, even though we'll be doing just that in New York.

BUSH: Oh, okay.

RUMSFELD: The other good thing about saying that it was a passenger jet is that that way, we have to invent a few hundred fictional victims and account for a nonexistent missing crew and plane. It's always better when you leave more cover story to invent, more legwork to do, and more possible holes to investigate. Doubt, legwork, and possible exposure -- you can't pull off any good conspiracy without them.

BUSH: You guys are brilliant! Because if there's one thing about Americans -- they won't let a president go to war without a damn good reason. How could we ever get the media, the corporate world, and our military to endorse an invasion of a secular Iraqi state unless we faked an attack against New York at the hands of a bunch of Saudi religious radicals? Why, they'd never buy it. Look at how hard it was to get us into Vietnam, Iraq the last time, Kosovo?

CHENEY: Like pulling teeth!

RUMSFELD: Well, I'm sold on the idea. Let's call the Joint Chiefs, the FAA, the New York and Washington DC fire departments, Rudy Giuliani, all three networks, the families of a thousand fictional airline victims, MI-5, the FBI, FEMA, the NYPD, Larry Eagleburger, Osama bin Laden, Noam Chomsky and the fifty thousand other people we'll need to pull this off. There isn't a moment to lose!

BUSH: Don't forget to call all of those Wall Street hotshots who donated $100 million to our last campaign. They'll be thrilled to know that we'll be targeting them for execution as part of our thousand-tentacled modern-day bonehead Reichstag scheme! After all, if we're going to make martyrs -- why not make them out of our campaign paymasters? ****, didn't the Merrill Lynch guys say they needed a refurbishing in their New York offices?

RUMSFELD: Oh, they'll get a refurbishing, all right. Just in time for the "Big Wedding"!

ALL THREE: (cackling) Mwah-hah-hah!


The Idiocy Behind the '9/11 Truth' Movement
Why the "9/11 Truth" movement makes the Left Behind series read like Shakespeare.

http://www.alternet.org/story/42181?page=3