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 : Moderate Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Michelino who wrote (15275)	1/14/2005 1:14:17 AM
From: Raymond Duray	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20773

Hi Michelino, Re: I really am perplexed as to why you need these bizarre theories so badly Actually, what you don't understand, and what I do not understand is why the American public are so willing to suspend disbelief in the face of illegitimate and cunning authority. Here's a list of buildings that had raging fires in them for periods of 12 to 24 hours: 1) First Interstate Bank Building, Los Angeles 2) Meridien Plaza Hotel, Philadelphia 3) State Petroleum Industry High Rise, Caracas, Venezuela (Oct. 18, 2004) In each of these instances, the fires that raged were at least one order of magnitude more severe than occurred in the THREE World Trade Center Towers that were demolished on Sept. 11, 2001. I can provide you with URLs on these incidents should you have the interest. Keep in mind that in the 120 year history of steel-framed hi-rise construction, it is suspicious to the extreme that the only three steel-framed high-rises ever to purportedly collapse due to fire came down within an 8 hour period on one day. Calculate the odds of hitting that trifecta! Furthermore, fire testing at labs in England prove beyond a shadow of a doubt in my mind that the purported temperature rise in massive columnar steel elements simply could not have occurred on 9/11. Consider if you will for a moment that credible analysis has been done that shows that if all the assumed 10,000 gallons of kerosene injected into either WTC 1 or 2 were to have burned on one floor, rather than on the six or more levels engaged, that the maximum theoretical temperature rise of that level and all the components therein would have been on the order of 475 degrees Centigrade, far below the temperature at which the columnar steel would have had to have been weakened in order to lose tensile strength sufficient to commence a catastrophic collapse. Furthermore, there was no airplane crash at WTC 7, which collapsed in the standard form of a controlled implosion at 5:20 PM ET on 9/11/01. The mystery of how some small office fires could have brought down a 47 story building has never been successfully explained. On the contrary, the motivation of some under investigation by the SEC in that building at that date is a lead that no prosecutor has followed, in complete disregard for standard criminal investigation. As the saying goes, cui bono? used to be the prosecutor's first question, but not on 9/11/01. But don't take my word for any of this. I don't expect you to believe me. But I do hope that you keep an open mind to the intelligent, sane and cogent arguments presented by a couple of eminent academics, Benjamin De Mott and Dr. David Ray Griffin: commondreams.org interlinkbooks.com interlinkbooks.com *** You know about the only thing I can tell you is that I've struggled since the end of 2001 to get the American public to wake up and understand that they were defrauded by their own government on 9/11/01. I'm appalled that the American public seems to be no better at discerning the trap that is being set for them than were the German people of the 1930s.