Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Bush-The Mastermind behind 9/11? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Raymond Duray who wrote (3586)	10/23/2003 1:02:09 PM
From: Patricia Trinchero	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 20039

That article is absolutely mind boggling. I am not a physicist, but the argument for demolition seems quite logical to me. The author proves his points with pictures , scientific data , math equations and the laws of Physics. IT almost brings tears to my eyes...............sad beyond belief. Pat

To: Raymond Duray who wrote (3586)	10/23/2003 7:58:40 PM
From: Sidney Reilly	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20039

There site is very damning of the "official story". I had heard that there were major problems with the buildings that would have cost an enormous amount to correct. The replacement of the sprinkler system for one. The removal and replacement of hazardous materials used in the original construction. It would be revealing to uncover these enormous financial responsibilities to see if there was also a financial motive for their destruction.

To: Raymond Duray who wrote (3586)	10/23/2003 10:47:12 PM
From: Don Earl	Respond to of 20039

I've posted this link in the past, but thought it's a good follow up on the link you posted related to controlled demolition of the WTC towers. The fellow who put the information together had the help of a demolitions expert in the Army Corp of Engineers. home.comcast.net Probably the most interesting aspect of any of the "official" theories is NO mention of controlled demolitions is ever even mentioned, even to discount the possibility. The subject is taboo.