9 scientists find Nano-Thermite Explosive in 9/11 samples | 46 comments (46 topical, 0 hidden)
You seem very excited (none / 0)
1)  "highly reactive thermite material was discovered in these dust samples." No, aluminum and rust were found. Thermite is composed of aluminum and iron oxide (rust). That aluminum and rust were found in 9/11 samples is hardly surprising.

2) If not magic gnomes then who do you think secretly brought in and installed the tons and tons of "thermite" required (not to mention the miles of electric fuse, blasting caps, det cord, etc...).

3) "the one that was created mere hours after the attack" or the obvious time line based on the historical truth. Just because it was easy to figure out after the fact are you saying that renders it improbable?

4) "Investigate" all you want but stop ignoring common sense explanations in favor of your "gnome theory". The WTC towers collapsed after being struck and set on fire by fully loaded jet airliners.

"No, you are a paid blogger assigned to counter anyone that posts something negative about the government or Obama." by Mcamelyne II on 05/17/2011

by Robrob on 04/18/2009 10:10:50 PM EST

[ Parent ]
FBI: No hard evidence connected Bin Laden to 9/11 (none / 0)
With due respect, your MO seems to be to put ridiculous words into other peoples' mouths. The "gnome theory" is all yours, not mine. I don't KNOW what happened. That's the point.

The official conspiracy theory that you take as gospel is not, in fact, "obvious" at all. It's certainly not "easy to find out."  If it was, you'd think the FBI would be able to do so, wouldn't you?

According to your official conspiracy theory, Osama bin Laden was the mastermind of a plot involving 19 hijackers and three planes. If it's "easy to prove," as you assert, you'd think that bin Laden would be formally charged, correct? That's a no brainer, right? But according to the FBI, there is no hard evidence connecting bin Laden with 9/11:

June 6, 2006 – This past weekend, a thought provoking e-mail circulated through Internet news groups, and was sent to the Muckraker Report by Mr. Paul V. Sheridan (Winner of the 2005 Civil Justice Foundation Award), bringing attention to the FBI’s Most Wanted Terrorist web page for Usama Bin Laden.  In the e-mail, the question is asked, “Why doesn’t Usama Bin Laden’s Most Wanted poster make any direct connection with the events of September 11, 2001?”  The FBI says on its Bin Laden web page that Usama Bin Laden is wanted in connection with the August 7, 1998 bombings of the United States Embassies in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, and Nairobi, Kenya.  According to the FBI, these attacks killed over 200 people.  The FBI concludes its reason for “wanting” Bin Laden by saying, “In addition, Bin Laden is a suspect in other terrorists attacks throughout the world.” 

 
On June 5, 2006, the Muckraker Report contacted the FBI Headquarters, (202) 324-3000, to learn why Bin Laden’s Most Wanted poster did not indicate that Usama was also wanted in connection with 9/11.  The Muckraker Report spoke with Rex Tomb, Chief of Investigative Publicity for the FBI.  When asked why there is no mention of 9/11 on Bin Laden’s Most Wanted web page, Tomb said, “The reason why 9/11 is not mentioned on Usama Bin Laden’s Most Wanted page is because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11.” 

 
Surprised by the ease in which this FBI spokesman made such an astonishing statement, I asked, “How this was possible?”  Tomb continued, “Bin Laden has not been formally charged in connection to 9/11.”  I asked, “How does that work?”  Tomb continued, “The FBI gathers evidence.  Once evidence is gathered, it is turned over to the Department of Justice.  The Department of Justice than decides whether it has enough evidence to present to a federal grand jury.  In the case of the 1998 United States Embassies being bombed, Bin Laden has been formally indicted and charged by a grand jury.  He has not been formally indicted and charged in connection with 9/11 because the FBI has no hard evidence connected Bin Laden to 9/11.”


http://www.globalresearch.c a/index.php?context=viewArt icle&code=20060610& articleId=2623

I'm eager to hear how you'd explain that one away? If you can and do, you have a lucrative career awaiting in spin control (if you don't have one already :))   
 

by truthisall on 04/18/2009 10:37:45 PM EST

[ Parent ]
I'm eager to hear how you'd explain that one away? (none / 0)

Because al Quada is an amorphous organization with an ever shifting command and control? Bin Laden was not a member of the cell that crafted the 9/11 plot anymore than it was President Obama who personally took the shot on those three pirates last week.

The al Quada organization, run by Bin Laden, orchestrated 9/11. Nineteen Al Quada members were on the planes, there were many recorded telephone calls from passengers and cockpit recordings describing the events as well. Two planes flew into the WTC and it fell down. What's shocking about that? If they fell without being struck, that might have been a little strange.

P.S.  The "gnomes" references are what I like to call "being facetious" because I have a sense of humor. Some people don't.

P.P.S. Just think how embarrassing it would have been for those gnomes if the impact of the two planes had disconnected the electrical detonators of their charges. That certainly would have been hard to explain when the NYFD found tons and tons of deactivated explosives in the partially burned WTC.

"No, you are a paid blogger assigned to counter anyone that posts something negative about the government or Obama." by Mcamelyne II on 05/17/2011

by Robrob on 04/18/2009 11:19:38 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Building 7 did fall down without being struck (none / 0)
I think it's fair then, to infer that you would think that a steel structure building falling at freefall speed is "a little strange." Especially since a steel frame structure has never before or since collapsed due to fire.

by truthisall on 04/19/2009 11:00:41 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Urban conspiracy myth (none / 0)

You just parroted three well discredited conspiracy falsehoods. No matter how many times they are disproved, conspiracy theorists continue to repeat them. Feel free to show me otherwise. For example:

1) "Fell down without being struck" If I showed you evidence Building 7 was struck as well as set on fire by WTC debris, would it change your mind?

2)  "Freefall speed" How fast is that, how fast did the WTC fall, how fast do you think a collapsing building would fall and assuming there is some dichotomy - can you explain what you infer from it?

3) "A steel frame structure has never before or since collapsed due to fire" If I showed you evidence several steel frame structures have indeed "collapsed due to fire" would it change your mind?

You keep calling for people to look at the facts. If your facts are shown to be incorrect will you change your mind or will you find new and improved facts?

"No, you are a paid blogger assigned to counter anyone that posts something negative about the government or Obama." by Mcamelyne II on 05/17/2011

by Robrob on 04/19/2009 02:18:00 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Bam! (none / 0)

"You keep calling for people to look at the facts. If your facts are shown to be incorrect will you change your mind or will you find new and improved facts?"

I think you have gotten to the very nub of the issue there Rob.

by bfaul on 04/19/2009 03:56:48 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Now we're getting somewhere! (none / 0)
Robrob, I sincerely appreciate your willingness to use reason here. Please share links to any of the assertions you make in your post. It truly WOULD make a difference to me!


1) "Fell down without being struck" If I showed you evidence Building 7 was struck as well as set on fire by WTC debris, would it change your mind?

NIST *itself* blames the collapse on fire:

NIST WTC 7 Investigation Finds Building Fires Caused Collapse

"...Finally, the report notes that “while debris impact from the collapse of WTC 1 initiated fires in WTC 7, the resulting structural damage had little effect in causing the collapse of WTC 7....”

http://www.nist.gov/public_ affairs/releases/wtc082108. html

2)  "Freefall speed" How fast is that, how fast did the WTC fall, how fast do you think a collapsing building would fall and assuming there is some dichotomy - can you explain what you infer from it?

Here's a video series from Architects for 911 Truth: "NIST Finally Admits Freefall"
http://www.youtube.com/watc h?v=V0GHVEKrhng


3) "A steel frame structure has never before or since collapsed due to fire" If I showed you evidence several steel frame structures have indeed "collapsed due to fire" would it change your mind?

Please do show such evidence. I'd be eager to see it. I've been unable to unearth a single example other than WTC 7. NIST itself describes the WTC 7 collapse as an "extraordinary event." Here is some more info. from WTC7.net:

Fires have never been blamed for the collapse of a steel frame high rise before, and there are examples of skyscrapers being ravaged by severe fires. Recent examples of highrise fires include the 1991 One Meridian Plaza fire in Philadelphia, which raged for 18 hours and gutted 8 floors of the 38 floor building; and the 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".


http://911research.wtc7.net /materials/wtc/b7.html

I appreciate the opportunity to engage in rational discussion here.  I'm not kidding. I don't relish the idea that there was some nefarious inside plot to do this. It's a sad thing to contemplate.

by truthisall on 04/19/2009 04:29:35 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Please refer to the bottom post (none / 0)
I don't like how replies get more and more "squeezed" in.

"No, you are a paid blogger assigned to counter anyone that posts something negative about the government or Obama." by Mcamelyne II on 05/17/2011

by Robrob on 04/19/2009 10:35:30 PM EST

[ Parent ]

9 scientists find Nano-Thermite Explosive in 9/11 samples | 46 comments (46 topical, 0 hidden)