Explosives Used on 911 - Here's All the Evidence Needed

[jibbguy]

I guess we should have said "skyscraper" (which are built to entirely different standards). Apparently the largest in that list was "13 stories".

Bldg 7 was "47" ; and the one recently in China was 40 i think . That one burned out of control for over 2 days.. At extremely high heat and didn't even bend, or drop of course. The WTC7 fire was on a maximum of 10 floors for 6 hours (and not all those floors at once), and was mainly the burning of plastic office materials.. A much lower temp fire that should not have even melted aluminum let alone thick steel girders.   

Hey! I know! Why don't we examine the girders to check them? Oops, forget it.... As soon as it could be arranged, they were all shipped out and sold for scrap to India and China (many of them gone within only a few weeks of the event.. And doing so knowing that this scrap contained human remains). A few selected pieces were saved for analysis of course; and the steel did not show signs of being "special" (somehow sub-standard that would allow for a significantly lower melting point). The temperature of those office fires was about 900 degrees too low to melt steel... And not nearly hot enough to significantly weaken it.
_______________________________

Regarding the Pentagon:

Actually most people who have studied that video of the object hitting the Pentagon tend to think it is proof of a cruise missile hitting the building, not an airliner. When blown up the pixels are too coarse to say what it was with any kind of accuracy... But some claim the image is too small to be a 757 by a factor of 3 . That vid that was linked above added the Computer Generated Imagery to suggest a plane...

And why not show us the at least 8 other cameras that would have captured this if there was nothing to hide (including the security cams the FBI confiscated from the nearby gas station and hotel that were never shown publicly)?

That "plane" was reported by the government itself to have made a 360 deg. course change while descending, at nearly 500 MPH, and managed to fly above the parking lot only a few feet above the ground to hit the only side of the Pentagon that had conveniently been strengthened in the previous year (uh, why not just fly straight in, why bother with the very difficult descending circle maneuver?). Professional airline pilots with years of experience say they probably couldn't have done that themselves at that speed with such precision, but we are expected to believe a guy who flunked his pilot training course in a Cessna could.

http://www.pilotsfor911truth.org/

Then there is the famous "Did anyone tell you anything to the contrary!?" comment that Dick Cheney angrily made to a hapless Air Force lieutenant  in  "the bunker" (lol the "undisclosed location" he was hiding in, probably at Andrews AFB)... Witnessed and publicly reported on to the 9/11 Commission by U.S. Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta who was standing right next to him at the time... A lieutenant kept coming up to Cheney every couple minutes and reporting:

"Sir, the plane is 50 miles out".

Then: "Sir, the plane is 30 miles out".

And finally: "Sir, the plane is 10 miles out: Do the orders still stand?"

At which point Cheney turned to the young man and said testily: "Yes they do, did anyone tell you anything to the contrary?!"

The plane or whatever it was that they were talking about, then hit the Pentagon. So... What were these "orders" being talking about? "Don't intercept" perhaps? Mineta did not know what they were. Notice below that it is the Senator who keeps saying there were orders to shoot down the planes, NOT Mineta, who repeatedly says he didn't know what the order was.. Lol even though we can see that Sen. Lee Hamilton was trying to brow-beat Mineta into saying that   :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bDfdOwt2v3Y

Usually there are dozens of fighters always available to protect the country from such an attack... But on 9/11 ... "Coincidentally" there happened to be a "perfect storm" of several Air Force exercises running that same day that had nearly all of those F-16's and F-15's too far away to intercept. And oddly enough, only a couple of months before, for the first time in history, the Vice President of the United States (Dick Cheney) was put in DIRECT TACTICAL AND STRATEGIC COMMAND of our air defenses in the event of a terrorist attack. More strange coinicidence...?

This was unheard of; before it was always a General with vast military and piloting experience who commanded and coordinated our fighter wings.... Not some "chicken hawk" who got several Draft Deferments to stay out of Viet Nam.

In the previous year, 2000, airplanes that were off-course, out of radio contact, and/or with broken radar transponders had been intercepted at least 60 times by U.S. Air Force fighters.... But on this day there were FOUR hijacked airliners and none of them, including one that flew right over our Nation's Capital AND TOOK THE TIME TO DO A 360 deg. CIRCLE, were intercepted?

Wow. What are the odds of all this stuff happening? Amazing coincidences, huh?...

Lol the official story is sounding more and more like a wacky conspiracy theory    

[WilbyInebriated]

Anyway, I think I am going to take my own advice and leave you people to your fringe opinions.  As long as I do not hear about this crap in my daily life, I am happy.  You will never convince anyone who matters with this crazy stuff.  I really don't care if you spend the rest of your life with these views, and I am sure you equally do not care what I think, so what's the point?

didn't you have an intricate plan that involved NOT posting here anymore?

[Cap-Z-ro]

Not to mention the photo of a small round missile sized hole in the side of the Pentagon, taken before the wall collapsed.

Forget the plant...we got a Bush to burn.

Regards...

[WilbyInebriated]

OK, here is the whole quote:

"I remember getting a call from the fire department commander, telling me that they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire, and I said, 'We've had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it.' And they made that decision to pull and then we watched the building collapse."

Larry Silverstein is being interviewed by PBS here, by a documentary crew.  So it is not like he was surprised by a reporter.  He is describing what happened for a documentary.

So your position is that he just slipped up and made a confession, and did it twice. (He used "pull" twice.)  Silverstein is not an idiot, mind you.  He is a smart guy to get to where he was.

So let's examine what he said.  Right before the "pull it" phrase, he mentions that there has been such terrible loss of life, and because of that, the smart thing was to "pull it."  How is blowing up his own building a logical follow up to the comment on loss of life?  It makes a lot more sense to interpret "pull it" as to cease firefighting operations, and therefore risk no more firefighters lives.

You can still debate what it means, but do not tell me it is obvious from context what he said.  It makes more sense the other way.

terrible loss of life in building 7? LOL you're fucking funny man...
the context is obvious. it makes no sense your way.

as far as qualifying my statement or withdrawing it, i suggest then that you do the same with your "evidence" statement.

[utilitarian]

didn't you have an intricate plan that involved NOT posting here anymore?

Yes, but I am only human and have my failings.

So, are you sticking by your word and reassessing your view in light of evidence of other steel buildings being destroyed by fire?