Study claims 'highly engineered explosive' found in WTC rubble

[daniel3417]

I'm not going to answer for Red but I will take a stab at the clarification for you.

In short .. did Bush organize 9/11 ... NO. BUT did Bush and the Bush administration know what was going to happen, IMO yes. In fact I do believe that there is information that will back that claim up, we just may never see it. There were numerous intellegence reports weeks before the attack that were never looked into. George Tenet testified that he warned Condoleezza Rice that an attack was iminent and that he believed she took the warning seriously, but Rice denies this. Rice does state that they were receiving a "steady" stream of intellegence information but she did not believe the attacks were directed or planned to be directed at America.

The most shocking information I have ever came across myself was an interview done with a Jewish filmaker Aaron Russo. Arron Russo was introduced to Nicholas Rockefeller through a female attorney friend that was also friends with Rockefeller. Aaron Russo made a film titled "late as ****" and Rockefeller had seen the film and wanted to meet Russo. 11 months before 9/11 Russo and Rockefeller were on the phone exchanging ideas and takling as friends when Russo say's Rockefeller told him that

"in the near future, there is going to be an event and out of this event we will go to war in the middle east, we will control the oil in Iraq and run piplines through Afghanistan to the Caspian Sea"

Russo was obviously shocked at this at first but after 9/11 he said that he never spoke to Rockefeller again.

Like Red has stated in a few posts ... it's highly doubtful that anythign we or any other person say's is going to change your beliefs on what happened on 9/11 and the weeks and months leading up to 9/11 but the more information is spread the more people will begin to wonder and start to do their own research and draw their own conclusions.

I have no doubt in my mind that our Government is controlled by a shady group of wealthy bankers and business men who have no morals and values when it comes to human life and only care about one thing. Total control!

A New World Order is on the horizon and the things that are going on today are just the tip of an iceberg that has been long buried under the sea it floats in. The more liberties people seceed the better off the Global Elite are.

I really don't mind the folks that believe in a conspiracy, but I have so many issues with a conspiracy theory:

1) Quite simply, why would Bush not want to stop this? If he wants power, fame, and glory, what better way than to stop a major terrorist attack? Also, did it accomplish his goals? He came under incredible fire after the attacks, and I don't understand how he would have thought that allowing an attack on his country would benefit him.

2) The Government sucks. At everything. Especially keeping secrets.

3) I'm not familiar with the entire story on Rockefeller, but couldn't anyone have said that there would be a terrorist attack that would cause us to finally go to war with countries in the Middle East? To me, that's like predicting that it will rain sometime next month, and it will cause things to get wet.

4) Organizing/allowing this attack "for oil" is a weak argument in my opinion. If the United States was in dire need of oil, I think it would either increase its own production or quite publicly go to war for oil. I don't think it'd be a big secret. The idea that businessmen allowed/organized this attack to make more money is really far-fetched. Said "shady businessmen" are many things, one of which is very smart, and I don't see them starting a war to make more money. There are literally thousands of other things to do that wouldn't start an international incident. The risk is way too high for a businessman.

As for our Government being controlled by businessmen with no morals, I can't attest to that, but I can tell you that a true free-market wouldn't allow such a thing because smart Americans don't shop or buy from companies with greedy owners. But that's another issue.

I'm not one to bash conspiracy theorists because I think it has some legs. But those are some key questions that confirm my belief that 9/11 was a random, senseless terrorists attack.

[JeRmZ]

1) Quite simply, why would Bush not want to stop this? If he wants power, fame, and glory, what better way than to stop a major terrorist attack? Also, did it accomplish his goals? He came under incredible fire after the attacks, and I don't understand how he would have thought that allowing an attack on his country would benefit him.

The Bush family has been traced back to having their hands in the Global Elite's pocket and it's confirmed. Prescott Bush was a director and shareholder of companies that profited from their involvement with the financial backers of Nazi Germany.

The better question to ask would be "Why would he WANT to stop it"?

2) The Government sucks. At everything. Especially keeping secrets.

... This is a major argument from everyone that doesn't believe there could be a cover up. The only defense I have against it is that major media outlets would not report the information in fear of the consequences, you have to remember ... your major media outlets are paid for and funded by many of the Global Elite. Many of the CEO's from major news papers around the world have been in attendance at Bilderberg Conferences.

3) I'm not familiar with the entire story on Rockefeller, but couldn't anyone have said that there would be a terrorist attack that would cause us to finally go to war with countries in the Middle East? To me, that's like predicting that it will rain sometime next month, and it will cause things to get wet.

Sure, I guess ... and then when it doesn't rain next month you look foolish. In this case Rockefeller told Aaron Russo this was going to happen and 11 months later it happened ... I could tell you that your going to hit the lotto next week and at first you'd shrug me off but if you really did hit the lotto next week .... you wouldn't find it a bit odd that I told you about it prior to it happening?

4) Organizing/allowing this attack "for oil" is a weak argument in my opinion. If the United States was in dire need of oil, I think it would either increase its own production or quite publicly go to war for oil. I don't think it'd be a big secret. The idea that businessmen allowed/organized this attack to make more money is really far-fetched. Said "shady businessmen" are many things, one of which is very smart, and I don't see them starting a war to make more money. There are literally thousands of other things to do that wouldn't start an international incident. The risk is way too high for a businessman.

again ... No, the President can't just show up on TV one day and say "ya know I think we need more oil so were going to go ahead and invade the middle east, go to war and take control of what isn't ours. He would need a pretty **** good reason to declare war and trust me, Oil isn't ... Terrorism is!!
As far as the Business men being too smart to start a war to make more money ... go back in history and look at statistics and then come back to me, everyone knows that the best way to make the most money is war. With all the no-bid contract that came out of this some of these guys were rolling in more cash than you and I will ever dream of seeing.

As for our Government being controlled by businessmen with no morals, I can't attest to that, but I can tell you that a true free-market wouldn't allow such a thing because smart Americans don't shop or buy from companies with greedy owners. But that's another issue.

This has nothing to do with Free-Market or shopping and buying. It has everything to do with the people who "fund" our government. The lobbyists and swindlers that put the campaign money in the pockets of the presidential hopefuls.

I'm not one to bash conspiracy theorists because I think it has some legs. But those are some key questions that confirm my belief that 9/11 was a random, senseless terrorists attack.

Definitely wasn't random. This was a well thought out and planned scheme that possibly took years to put together. The real question is .... who put it together? We may never know, since the government and the 9/11 commision do not want us to know. Was OBL used as "the face of terrorism"? Who really funded the "terrorists" of 9/11? Why wasn't this information considered high priority by the 9/11 commision, and rather pushed on the back burner becuase as they put it "it was of no significant importance" who funded 9/11.

Do me a favor and do some research on some of the info I've provided. The Bilderbergs, The Tri-Latteral Commision, The Global Banking Elite, The Federal Reserve ... you'll see where the information get's deep. Some of it is very interesting and very scary

[daniel3417]

Basing far-reaching theories on the unknown existence of some entity called "The Global Elite" isn't a way to support your theory. By the way, I happen to be a part of "The Always Right Initiative" which means that this is no debate.

Neither I nor you can speculate on what investments in which banks mean that someone directly supports them. If we learn anything from the recession, it's that there is a huge chain reaction of money, and there are times when your funding is in a place that you would've never expected. I don't see how every single media outlet could've missed this Nazi-loving story on their most hated president. Why would he want to? I already addressed that... Fame, glory, power... If Bush is so incredibly evil, which he has to be to you, stopping the attack would've been a great way to gain popularity.

You missed my entire point about Rockefeller's Nostradamus prediction. Like, I made my point, and you just re-stated yours. So, I'll make mine again in different wording: To say that a terrorist attack is imminent on the USA and that it will lead to a war is not very profound. It is akin to saying that there will be a slight breeze tomorrow. You may not agree, but let's make new points.

I have to disagree with the oil deal. The preservation of the Union is the president's first job. I know a former Full Bird Colonel who is a professor at Middle Tennessee State University in my hometown who is adamant that if a scarcity of oil ever arises and we can't get cooperation, we'll just take it and make no secret about it. I believe the Colonel. Furthermore, an influx of oil into the market lowers prices, which lowers profit for companies and their owners. So in fact, your conspiracy about a war for oil would cause lesser profits. Indeed, it has everything to do with the free market.

The free market provides these rich businessmen with their money. If they start acting wrongly, the free market punishes them with no more funding. It's very simple and very relevant.

Well, I did say it was a belief, and there is no way you can squarely say it "definitely wasn't" You maybe "definitely believe" it wasn't, but you can't state it as fact. I really don't want to do any research on anything not related to my finals. I'm not a conspiracy theorist.

I think what this really comes down to is people's hatred over the 43rd president. It's an excellent issue to mull over, and one where people can PROVE why Bush is EVIL. I have much more confidence in the voting populous to ever elect an evil man. I also have much more confidence in George Bush than to think he was anything other than another shocked American on 9/11.

[JeRmZ]

I think what this really comes down to is people's hatred over the 43rd president.

Not in my case ...

In my case it's a hatred for a powerful few thinking they have the right to tell me how to live my life and what to or not to believe in, I don't care if you were the 43rd, 22nd, 15th or will be the 100th President of these United States of America. They're all the same to me, a bunch of crooks and liars!

I really don't want to do any research on anything not related to my finals. I'm not a conspiracy theorist.

This part right here stops the discussion with me, if you don't feel the need to research and base an opinion on your own finding's then it is not worth DEBATING any issue with you because you are set to believe whatever the mainstream media feeds you on a daily basis. Continue to live your life day to day under the watchful eye of the government until the day comes to where every liberty that this country was founded on is stripped away from you.

[jessejordan419]

there's just no way that two jets knocked down 3 steel skyscrapers, which also (still) happen to be the only steel skyscrapers to ever collapse due to fire).

but these were the only 2 buildings to be hit with massive jet airliners with an incredible amount of mass and velocity. also, the fires in these buildings was burning jet fuel, not your every day, run of the mill building fire.

I work in construction, and one day I was on a job to repair a building in a chemical plant that had been damaged by a natural gas fire. it may have been a hydrogen fire, but I'm pretty sure it was l.n.g.

the 12" steel I-beams that made up the pipe rack 20 yards away from the fire were twisted into a small spiral. mind you these are 1/2" steel I-beams with 12" in between the top and bottom of the "I". and this was with a chemical with a burning heat much much lower than that of jet fuel.


also, all buildings are built with what are called "fire codes". These ensure that in the event of a fire, the materials will hold for a certain amount of time to allow people to evacuate the building.

If you notice, the buildings sat and burned, for what, like an hour or so before they fell. This was due to the fire codes that allowed the given amount of time for people to evacuate the building.

Then the buildings fell.

To me, what seals the deal is that the buildings exploded OUTWARD with huge chunks of steel being embedded in buildings across the street. The fact that of 3000 victims, less than 300 intact bodies were found, with most victims either still not being identified, or just small fragments of bone big enough to fit inside a test tube being identified. The fact that tiny human remains were found on an adjacent skyscraper roof 5 years later. If the building collapsed, how did they get blown to pieces and land on the roof of a building across the street? ).

Next time you get a chance, find a large piece of concrete that you can still man-handle, haul it up to a height of about 10 feet or so, and then drop it on a concrete slab.

How far and how fast do pieces of the concrete "explode" in all directions. Even the smallest specs of concrete, because these small specs would be huge chunks on a grand scale such as the Twin Towers.

Now multiply this exponentially on a scale of the amount of concrete that makes up just one of those buildings. You're talking about massive massive amounts of mass we cannot even begin to imagine, falling and gaining mass and velocity as they travel downward.

I could go on and on with all the ridiculous things that occurred on 9.11, but I'll stop....for now. I've learned that only those who want to look into it for themselves even care about hearing alternative explanations than what our federal government provided (not even a single mention of WTC7 in the Commission Report, as if it didn't even exist).

I watched Farenheit 9/11 years ago. I've heard the conspiracy theories. I will listen to alternative explanations, even giving them some creedence. However, I take it all with a grain of salt, as I do with the govt. reports.

[RedGoneWILD]

For clarification, do you believe that Bush organized 9/11?

like i've said many times already...i honestly don’t know what to believe...but I do know that I'm not crazy just because I don't nod my head in agreement with every detail of the official story.

I don't think Junior could properly organize the starting positions of a chess board, so I seriously doubt he could organize something as complicated as 9.11. Cheney is the more likely candidate since he was effectively acting president on 9.11, while Junior was reading to 2nd graders in Florida. I think the more likely scenario is what JeRmZ says...they (someone) knew and let it happen. Regardless, I think it's more complicated than 19 flight school flunkies with boxcutters.

Here's some of the things I'm confused about, and i'm hoping some of the military or law guys can help me understand.

How does FAA decide Flight 11 is probably a hijacking at roughly 8:20 AM, but waits 17 minutes to notify NORAD at 8:37AM. 6 minutes later NORAD is told that flight 175 is hijacked, and 3 minutes after that flight 11 slams into WTC1. At roughly 8:55 AM, after arriving at the school, Junior speaks with Condi Rice, our National Security Advisor, and she recalls “[Bush] said, what a terrible, it sounds like a terrible accident. Keep me informed.”

So 35 minutes after the FAA knows of a hijacking, and 12 minutes after NORAD knows that at least 2 planes have been hijacked....Bush and Condi still don't know what's going on? But then again Bush had already seen this "accidental" crash on tv in the school, as he said two different times which nobody thinks is relevant. Why did he even go into the classroom? Why was there absolutely no sense in urgency to do anything when he was told "America is under attack"? Why did the secret service not take him away? America is under attack and our commander-in-chief is reading The Pet Goat to a classroom of 2nd graders.

but these were the only 2 buildings to be hit with massive jet airliners with an incredible amount of mass and velocity. also, the fires in these buildings was burning jet fuel, not your every day, run of the mill building fire.

I’d just like to point out that WTC7 collapsed (47 stories tall steel skyscraper) as well without being hit by an airplane, having it’s firecoating knocked off from the impact, or having a jet fuel fire raging inside.

WTC7 is also the building Giuliani was evacuated from earlier that morning after being informed that the twin towers were going to collapse. Larry Silverstein, who took control of the WTC complex only two months prior (and successfully sued for double the insurance) says in an interview that “the decision was made to pull it”, as well as CNN & BBC both reporting that the building had collapsed before it actually did and other videos with firefighters and newscasters saying that the building would be coming down soon.

also, all buildings are built with what are called "fire codes". These ensure that in the event of a fire, the materials will hold for a certain amount of time to allow people to evacuate the building.
If you notice, the buildings sat and burned, for what, like an hour or so before they fell. This was due to the fire codes that allowed the given amount of time for people to evacuate the building.
Then the buildings fell.

Steel skyscrapers aren’t designed to withstand fire for an hour to allow everybody to safely evacuate before collapsing.

The Deutsch Bank Building, which is a 42 story steel skyscraper (similar to WTC7) located directly south of tower 2, and closer to tower 2 than WTC7 was to tower 1 sustained a 14 story gash (similar to WTC7) from falling debris. In 2007, while dismantling it floor by floor, a fire broke out that covered at least 10 floors for over 7 hours (again, similar to WTC7)…yet remarkably it still did not collapse.

How about the Madrid fire in 2005 or even the Mandarin Hotel fire in China just 3 months ago? These buildings were COMPLETELY engulfed in flames, yet didn’t collapse completely. I understand that I’m not an expert, but how are these fires not relevant?

Next time you get a chance, find a large piece of concrete that you can still man-handle, haul it up to a height of about 10 feet or so, and then drop it on a concrete slab.
How far and how fast do pieces of the concrete "explode" in all directions. Even the smallest specs of concrete, because these small specs would be huge chunks on a grand scale such as the Twin Towers.
Now multiply this exponentially on a scale of the amount of concrete that makes up just one of those buildings. You're talking about massive massive amounts of mass we cannot even begin to imagine, falling and gaining mass and velocity as they travel downward.

My understanding is that most of the concrete in the twin towers was in the six story basement, or foundation of the building, but regardless, I get your point.

However, the dust that was created apparently contains a “super-thermite” as is the main topic of this thread. I still don’t understand why these findings weren’t picked up by any major news outlets other than I guess the scientists are just tin foil wearing loonies who aren’t credible in any way?

[RedGoneWILD]

WTC7

composite picture of the gash sustained...south side of building


fires on east side of building


fires on north side of building


complete and total collapse



Deutsch Bank Building

gash sustained on north face


2007 Fire


Windsor Tower - Madrid 2005

inferno


partial collapse...building completely gutted...still standing



Mandarin Hotel - Beijing Feb. 2009

building completely engulfed in flames

[jessejordan419]

apples and oranges my friend. these buildings weren't slammed with giant airliners loaded with highly explosive jet fuel.

[RedGoneWILD]

apples and oranges my friend. these buildings weren't slammed with giant airliners loaded with highly explosive jet fuel.

did you miss the part where WTC7 wasn't slammed into with giant airliners either? The pictures were about building 7, not the twin towers

can somebody, anybody, PLEEEEEEEASE tell me why Bush & Giuliani's comments are irrelevant? If for no other reason than to shut me up? just please don't tell me they misspoke...

maybe it was Rumsfeld who misspoke when he says flight 93 was shot down...then again, i believe he was telling the truth too

[jessejordan419]

did you miss the part where WTC7 wasn't slammed into with giant airliners either? The pictures were about building 7, not the twin towers

here is this:
http://www.debunking911.com/WTC7.htm

the pic you posted of wtc7 - As pointed out by debunking911.com, the gash in WTC 7's south face lines up with WTC 7's emergency generator fuel distribution system.


http://www.debunking911.com/pull.htm

can somebody, anybody, PLEEEEEEEASE tell me why Bush & Giuliani's comments are irrelevant? If for no other reason than to shut me up? just please don't tell me they misspoke...

maybe it was Rumsfeld who misspoke when he says flight 93 was shot down...then again, i believe he was telling the truth too.

wife's home, so I'll have to get to these later.