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: Rock_nj who wrote (15876)	9/17/2006 4:31:59 PM
From: Doug R	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20039

bush floats trial balloon on the use of explosives at the WTC: "...Khalid Sheikh Mohammed described the design of planned attacks of buildings inside the U.S. and how operatives were directed to carry them out.... He told us the operatives had been instructed to ensure that the explosives went off at a high -- a point that was high enough to prevent people trapped above from escaping." whitehouse.gov No explosives in the buildings? Now the shrubster would have us believe that somehow the hijackers put them there...right under the very noses of Wirt Walker III and Marvin Bush's security company. It looks like the "no explosives" propagandists on this thread need to try to attack bush for this. img.photobucket.com

To: Rock_nj who wrote (15876)	9/17/2006 7:30:44 PM
From: Don Earl	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 20039

It's almost amazing how weak the official story looks when they try to defend it. The part that's really funny is how they keep referring back to the PM propaganda piece like it's the holy grail on the topic. My personal favorite is how air compressed by the collapse caused concrete to be pulverized and ejected at high velocity 15 stories ahead of the progression of the collapse, in sequence, all the way down the buildings. As Baby Huey used to say, "Duh, that sounds logical.". The one that's really interesting though; is they now claim no seismic equipment picked up the explosions, in spite of the fact the information has been public for 5 years, and anyone who cares to do so may pull up the graphs from the various sites which recorded them. I like this one too: "Clean-up crews found none of the telltale signs of controlled demolitions that would have existed if explosive charges had been used." Really? I don't recall any publicly released statements from the "clean-up crews", one way or the other. Lots of information on gag orders though, and lots of complaints of the evidence being destroyed before any experts could get a look at it.

To: Rock_nj who wrote (15876)	9/18/2006 11:46:16 AM
From: Don Earl	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 20039

PS. RE: "Demolition professionals always blow the bottom floors of a structure first, but the WTC tower collapses began at the upper levels, where the planes hit the buildings." Actually, this isn't true. How they blow a structure depends on the structure. The King Dome in Seattle would make a good example of where sideways blasts were used to create a sort of domino effect. A question in the back of my mind for a long time is if it would even have been possible to implode buildings as tall as the twin towers from the bottom up? You have that massive core built to resist huge shear forces. The debris at the bottom would pile up quickly and irregularly. And if the central core got hung up even a little bit, the building would start to fall sideways. My guess is the buildings were brought down the only way they could have been, and that the bottom up method wouldn't have worked on quarter mile tall, tower type buildings.