Oh i see so this is nolonger a debate its down to how many of your m8s agree with you is it ,ive put many questions to you and you fail time and time again to prove any thing you say i could say any of the things that you have as you dont back up any of your statements but like i said before you expect me to do all the thinking and show times dates photographs ,measurements (in tons please) you have shown nothing zip nill of what you proffer to know how about you showing me some proofs account for something anything apart form your pathetic arguments like i was walking my dog near it when it happen so i know .lmao :?:
Look conundrum. You spout off about reason and analytical thought like you have a lock on the market thereof. Let me explain what it is you are missing.
1) The WTC are unlike any other building in the history of the world, save the fact that they are indeed buildings.
2) Eye witnesses, one of which (ITN) is attempting to address some pretty glaring inconsistencies in the whole CT thing you got going on.
3) Whether you wish to accept my word for it or not, I'm Six Nation, related to Mohawk High Steel workers that built the building. I'm also ex Army and have worked in mining. I have an excellent understanding and knowledge of explosives and have worked with them extensively.
4) Again, whether you wish to believe it or not, I am a professional welder/fabricator, I actually have a contract with one of the worlds largest manufacturer of elevators, ThyssenKrupp. They retro'd the elevators in the WTC a few years before 9/11. Not only have I discussed the event at length engineers and architects that know the structure in side and out, I've seen technical computer models, by and for non partisan professionals, who have explained exactly what NIST and the rest of the alaphabet camp have said all along.
5) If you contact your local Fire dept, they will indeed tell that a hydrocarbon fire, will not only weaken any steel structure, it will melt it in the right conditions.
6) This topic has been beaten to death around these parts, so you have to take some ribbing from us Vets when it comes to this silly topic.
3 and 4 are subjective at best, that I understand. None of my credentials make me an expert by any stretch of the imagination. But what you are asserting here is, without a doubt, ridiculous. The monumental scale of an operation of this magnitude would require a great many people to be involved. Would make it inconceivable to maintain secrecy this long without someone breaking ranks. That doesn't even touch on the glaring holes in the theories put for by the people you quote.
Go back and reread the stuff you have posted, then go and read the NIST report or an abbreviation thereof and try to do that with an open mind. You will see, as do most of those that do, that there are far to many variables at play. For it to be an inside job in the sense that you have asserted.
Besides that, Bush is nowhere near smart enough to orchestrate such an complicated event.
