Every picture of "Ground Zero" is evidence of explosives used.

[Patriot911]

Every picture of "Ground Zero" is evidence of explosives used.

EVERYTHING but the steel was exploded into a huge pyroclastic cloud of dust BEFORE it even hits the ground.

If everything WASN'T exploded into dust then the rubble pile of the Twin Towers at Ground Zero would have been HUGE and MUCH HIGHER than it was.

Think it through. Even explosives couldn't handle a job of this magnitude.500,000 tons of material turned to dust doesn't sound like conventional demolition explosives to me.

How did the demo team get around radio frequency?
How did the explosives survive the initial blast?

SOMETHING with a magnificent amount of energy pulverized those buildings, but explosives wasn't it. At least not any explosives that we're aware of.

Wow. It must have been something MASSIVE! It would take something like the potential energy of a 110 story building to pulverize all that concrete to dust! What a fucking moron!

Why don't you start quoting moonbat Judy's space beam bullshit now? You've plagerized her before. Why not do it again?

 

[TakeAStepBack]

This message is hidden because Patriot911 is on your ignore list.

Did you say something?


Also, how did the demo team wire the place with explosives with a bomb sniffing dog on the premises?

There are far too many errors with the theory of explosives.

 

[Patriot911]

This message is hidden because Patriot911 is on your ignore list.

Did you say something?


Also, how did the demo team wire the place with explosives with a bomb sniffing dog on the premises?

There are far too many errors with the theory of explosives.

So what do you claim was used? You claim it couldn't have been a natural collapse. Now you're claiming it wasn't explosives. When do you get to the Judy Woods space beam theory? This is so predictable!

 

[CandySlice]

There are only two possible ways that explosives can be used to collapse a building.

Method A (Direct Demolition): requires positioning a massive charge at one side of the base to blow out one side of the foundation causing the building to topple. This method was employed in an attempt to topple a World Trade Center tower in March, 1993, by Ramseh Yousef, and it would have worked if his explosive charge had been positioned in a different (higher) level of the basement parking garage. This method of collapsing a structure is easiest and least costly in terms of materials and human effort but the reason it isn't used in populated areas is obvious.

Method B (Controlled Demolition): requires the strategic positioning of measured explosive charges throughout the structure and wiring them to detonate in precisely timed intervals. The objective of this method, which is comparatively costly and time-consuming, is to effect an implosion of the structure's walls thus producing a totally vertical collapse rather than lateral toppling, which would be catastrophic in a populated area.

Bottom Line: Having learned their mistake from Ramseh Yousef's failed 1993 attempt to topple a WTC tower, if Al Qaeda chose to attack the World Trade Center with explosives logic dictates they would have employed Method A, because direct demolition would have toppled the buildings causing exponentially greater damage in the surrounding areas.

Those who have stubbornly adhered to the theory that the World Trade Center towers were brought down by controlled demolition should ask themselves why the attackers would have chosen to minimize rather than optimize damage to New York City?

The controlled demolition theory simply makes no sense.

Because the truthtards don't believe Al Qaeda was involved, or if they were, they were working under orders of our government. Apparently our government has no problem killing thousands, but has a hard time toppling buildings. Then again, why bother to fly a plane into a building. Imagine the terror of just blowing the buildings with no warning! One minute the towers are there, next thing you know they're gone along with everyone in them!

But like you accurately stated, the truthtard theories simply make no sense.

What blows me away is the overlooked fact of how many people it would have taken to pull off a conspiracy of this size and yet, so far, nobody has talked. In this day and age of public confession, 24 hr news cycles and everybody wanting their 15 minutes a confession of this magnitude would be just too delicious to resist. I may not know too much about demolitions and explosives but I DO know people.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Are you familiar with compartmentalization?

Do you really think that anyone who has the ability to confess anything would do so? Do you have any idea how easy it would be for the powers that be to stifle such a confession?
Look at the Roswell scenario. All of those military personnel were told to keep there mouth shut, and they did. Upon retiring and turning 85 years old, suddenly a few of those soldiers spill the beans about what they saw, what they were told and the ramifications of not following orders..

This will all come out one day. probably in another 40 years when it makes absolutely no difference. Just like the gulf of Tonkin and a host of other crimes.

 

[Patriot911]

What blows me away is the overlooked fact of how many people it would have taken to pull off a conspiracy of this size and yet, so far, nobody has talked. In this day and age of public confession, 24 hr news cycles and everybody wanting their 15 minutes a confession of this magnitude would be just too delicious to resist. I may not know too much about demolitions and explosives but I DO know people.

I agree with you, but I take it one step further. How are you going to get that many people together willing to commit mass murder on a massive scale without anyone blowing the whistle beforehand? Remember, the initial estimates of the people killed was in excess of 10,000 and up to 25,000. The people involved had to know they were dealing with the possibility of that many deaths.

Oh, it's fun for the truthtards to pretend people, especially anyone working for the government, are automatically that evil and will willingly kill people for money or for country. Yet nobody can point out to anyone who suddenly got really rich really quick, and people who are rabid about a cause often times become disillusioned over time. We won't even get into the fact that many of the people in the "standard" conspiracy theories wouldn't be government workers at all.

In summary, a conspiracy of this size would never get off the ground without someone leaking what was about to happen prior to 9/11. And, like you correctly pointed out, a conspiracy of this size wouldn't last much past the first couple months before someone came forward and announced their part in the attack and how it was a conspiracy. Surely they could arrange for immunity for their part in bringing down the "bigger fish" in the conspiracy.

 

[Patriot911]

Are you familiar with compartmentalization?

That might work DURING the attack, but after the attack, everyone involved would know their part and would have talked. After all, they would have been fooled, and not knowingly part of the attack.

Do you really think that anyone who has the ability to confess anything would do so? Do you have any idea how easy it would be for the powers that be to stifle such a confession?

Do you have any idea how easy it would be for the powers that be to stifle you? Why would they let pissants like you get close to uncovering the "truth" when they could just "stifle" you?

Look at the Roswell scenario. All of those military personnel were told to keep there mouth shut, and they did. Upon retiring and turning 85 years old, suddenly a few of those soldiers spill the beans about what they saw, what they were told and the ramifications of not following orders.

I love it when truthtards try to justify one conspiracy theory by bringing up other conspiracy theories as though they are fact!

This will all come out one day. probably in another 40 years when it makes absolutely no difference. Just like the gulf of Tonkin and a host of other crimes.

There was no crime in the Gulf of Tonkin. More lies from you. Were we attacked? Absolutely. North Vietnam has freely admitted they attacked and suffered a defeat. Did the ship involved think they were attacked AGAIN? Absolutely. Were they? No. Did they know that at the time? No. It only came out after everything was analized. By that time LBJ had already addressed Congress.

 

[SFC Ollie]

There are only two possible ways that explosives can be used to collapse a building.

Method A (Direct Demolition): requires positioning a massive charge at one side of the base to blow out one side of the foundation causing the building to topple. This method was employed in an attempt to topple a World Trade Center tower in March, 1993, by Ramseh Yousef, and it would have worked if his explosive charge had been positioned in a different (higher) level of the basement parking garage. This method of collapsing a structure is easiest and least costly in terms of materials and human effort but the reason it isn't used in populated areas is obvious.

Method B (Controlled Demolition): requires the strategic positioning of measured explosive charges throughout the structure and wiring them to detonate in precisely timed intervals. The objective of this method, which is comparatively costly and time-consuming, is to effect an implosion of the structure's walls thus producing a totally vertical collapse rather than lateral toppling, which would be catastrophic in a populated area.

Bottom Line: Having learned their mistake from Ramseh Yousef's failed 1993 attempt to topple a WTC tower, if Al Qaeda chose to attack the World Trade Center with explosives logic dictates they would have employed Method A, because direct demolition would have toppled the buildings causing exponentially greater damage in the surrounding areas.

Those who have stubbornly adhered to the theory that the World Trade Center towers were brought down by controlled demolition should ask themselves why the attackers would have chosen to minimize rather than optimize damage to New York City?

The controlled demolition theory simply makes no sense.

Because the truthtards don't believe Al Qaeda was involved, or if they were, they were working under orders of our government. Apparently our government has no problem killing thousands, but has a hard time toppling buildings. Then again, why bother to fly a plane into a building. Imagine the terror of just blowing the buildings with no warning! One minute the towers are there, next thing you know they're gone along with everyone in them!

But like you accurately stated, the truthtard theories simply make no sense.

What blows me away is the overlooked fact of how many people it would have taken to pull off a conspiracy of this size and yet, so far, nobody has talked. In this day and age of public confession, 24 hr news cycles and everybody wanting their 15 minutes a confession of this magnitude would be just too delicious to resist. I may not know too much about demolitions and explosives but I DO know people.

It's not overlooked, they like to deny that it would take so many people. I would guess it would have taken several thousand to know about it in order to make any of the BS theories happen.

 

[Patriot911]

Because the truthtards don't believe Al Qaeda was involved, or if they were, they were working under orders of our government. Apparently our government has no problem killing thousands, but has a hard time toppling buildings. Then again, why bother to fly a plane into a building. Imagine the terror of just blowing the buildings with no warning! One minute the towers are there, next thing you know they're gone along with everyone in them!

But like you accurately stated, the truthtard theories simply make no sense.

What blows me away is the overlooked fact of how many people it would have taken to pull off a conspiracy of this size and yet, so far, nobody has talked. In this day and age of public confession, 24 hr news cycles and everybody wanting their 15 minutes a confession of this magnitude would be just too delicious to resist. I may not know too much about demolitions and explosives but I DO know people.

It's not overlooked, they like to deny that it would take so many people. I would guess it would have taken several thousand to know about it in order to make any of the BS theories happen.

There were 7,000 FBI agents on the criminal investigation into 9/11. This is an undisputed fact. ALL truthtards claim the FBI covered up 9/11. So it is more than 7,000 regardless of which theory you want to believe.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

The rump rangers ride again......

 

[Patriot911]

The rump rangers ride again......

Ah yes. The troll returns to prove once again he has no response to the complete ass kicking he already received, and thus has been reduced to one line nonsense.

When are you going to show us some more plagerizations you claim to have come up with yourself? The only thing you are an expert at is bullshitting.

 

[Mr. Jones]

Because the truthtards don't believe Al Qaeda was involved, or if they were, they were working under orders of our government. Apparently our government has no problem killing thousands, but has a hard time toppling buildings. Then again, why bother to fly a plane into a building. Imagine the terror of just blowing the buildings with no warning! One minute the towers are there, next thing you know they're gone along with everyone in them!

But like you accurately stated, the truthtard theories simply make no sense.

What blows me away is the overlooked fact of how many people it would have taken to pull off a conspiracy of this size and yet, so far, nobody has talked. In this day and age of public confession, 24 hr news cycles and everybody wanting their 15 minutes a confession of this magnitude would be just too delicious to resist. I may not know too much about demolitions and explosives but I DO know people.

It's not overlooked, they like to deny that it would take so many people. I would guess it would have taken several thousand to know about it in order to make any of the BS theories happen.

And just how many Al Qaeda "terrorists" do you all think it took, to do this attack? Anyone care to guess? I mean it was a very sophisticated operation after all.

 

[Patriot911]

What blows me away is the overlooked fact of how many people it would have taken to pull off a conspiracy of this size and yet, so far, nobody has talked. In this day and age of public confession, 24 hr news cycles and everybody wanting their 15 minutes a confession of this magnitude would be just too delicious to resist. I may not know too much about demolitions and explosives but I DO know people.

It's not overlooked, they like to deny that it would take so many people. I would guess it would have taken several thousand to know about it in order to make any of the BS theories happen.

And just how many Al Qaeda "terrorists" do you all think it took, to do this attack? Thousands I presume? I mean it was a very sophisticated operation after all.

They didn't have to plan a massive fake attack involving thousands, fake an attack, cover up their tracks after the fact, and keep everyone quiet about who was involved. The facts always seem to escape one of your non-existant intelligence.

 

[SFC Ollie]

What blows me away is the overlooked fact of how many people it would have taken to pull off a conspiracy of this size and yet, so far, nobody has talked. In this day and age of public confession, 24 hr news cycles and everybody wanting their 15 minutes a confession of this magnitude would be just too delicious to resist. I may not know too much about demolitions and explosives but I DO know people.

It's not overlooked, they like to deny that it would take so many people. I would guess it would have taken several thousand to know about it in order to make any of the BS theories happen.

And just how many Al Qaeda "terrorists" do you all think it took, to do this attack? Anyone care to guess? I mean it was a very sophisticated operation after all.

I would bet less than 30 knew the entire plan. Maybe 50 or 60 involved at some level.

 

[CandySlice]

What blows me away is the overlooked fact of how many people it would have taken to pull off a conspiracy of this size and yet, so far, nobody has talked. In this day and age of public confession, 24 hr news cycles and everybody wanting their 15 minutes a confession of this magnitude would be just too delicious to resist. I may not know too much about demolitions and explosives but I DO know people.

It's not overlooked, they like to deny that it would take so many people. I would guess it would have taken several thousand to know about it in order to make any of the BS theories happen.

And just how many Al Qaeda "terrorists" do you all think it took, to do this attack? Anyone care to guess? I mean it was a very sophisticated operation after all.

Actually, MrJones, the plot was simplicity itself. And they had YEARS to perfect it. There are so many real events going on as we speak, why focus on this nonsense?

 

[CandySlice]

Are you familiar with compartmentalization?

That might work DURING the attack, but after the attack, everyone involved would know their part and would have talked. After all, they would have been fooled, and not knowingly part of the attack.

Do you really think that anyone who has the ability to confess anything would do so? Do you have any idea how easy it would be for the powers that be to stifle such a confession?

Do you have any idea how easy it would be for the powers that be to stifle you? Why would they let pissants like you get close to uncovering the "truth" when they could just "stifle" you?

Look at the Roswell scenario. All of those military personnel were told to keep there mouth shut, and they did. Upon retiring and turning 85 years old, suddenly a few of those soldiers spill the beans about what they saw, what they were told and the ramifications of not following orders.

I love it when truthtards try to justify one conspiracy theory by bringing up other conspiracy theories as though they are fact!

This will all come out one day. probably in another 40 years when it makes absolutely no difference. Just like the gulf of Tonkin and a host of other crimes.

There was no crime in the Gulf of Tonkin. More lies from you. Were we attacked? Absolutely. North Vietnam has freely admitted they attacked and suffered a defeat. Did the ship involved think they were attacked AGAIN? Absolutely. Were they? No. Did they know that at the time? No. It only came out after everything was analized. By that time LBJ had already addressed Congress.

As I mentioned earlier, it's a pathology. 'Conspiracy theories are the last refuge of the powerless mind. It gives the individual a feeling of control in an uncontrollable world. Let them have their little plots and covert midnight meetings, trench coats and secret docs only THEY are privy to. Without those things they are nothing.'

 

[TakeAStepBack]

It took 20 Al-Qaeda members. Hijackers with boxcutters, and the master of evil doers himself, Osama Bin Laden, to carry out their mission. Bin Laden was in his "underground super complex bunker". Complete with munitions, an HVAC system and a total global terror cell control room.

Remeber Rumsfeld's big talk on TV about the underground complex?

 

[CandySlice]

Are you familiar with compartmentalization?

Do you really think that anyone who has the ability to confess anything would do so? Do you have any idea how easy it would be for the powers that be to stifle such a confession?
Look at the Roswell scenario. All of those military personnel were told to keep there mouth shut, and they did. Upon retiring and turning 85 years old, suddenly a few of those soldiers spill the beans about what they saw, what they were told and the ramifications of not following orders..

This will all come out one day. probably in another 40 years when it makes absolutely no difference. Just like the gulf of Tonkin and a host of other crimes.

One of my favorite theorys, of course, is the Kennedy assassination second, third and 4th gunman postulatons. And trust me, the conspiracy theories started THE NEXT DAY. To date, even with a supposed death bed confession from Santos Traficanti (?), ( 'we should have taken Bobby out') the theory has never been proven. Lets just stick to one ct at a time. You can't prove one ct by raising the spectre of another one. I take it this subject occupies a lot of your time, huh?

 

[CandySlice]

It's not overlooked, they like to deny that it would take so many people. I would guess it would have taken several thousand to know about it in order to make any of the BS theories happen.

And just how many Al Qaeda "terrorists" do you all think it took, to do this attack? Anyone care to guess? I mean it was a very sophisticated operation after all.

I would bet less than 30 knew the entire plan. Maybe 50 or 60 involved at some level.

And that's an average of 59 that couldn't kep their mouths shut.

 

[Liability]

As a SMALL technical note regarding the dopey thread headline, it is probably true that every photograph from ground zero could constitute evidence that explosives had been used.

Piss-poor unpersuasive evidence.

Actually, back here in reality, the photographic, video, eyewitness and forensic analysis evidence of the 9/11/2001 attacks at Ground Zero all suggest, quite reasonably and all but conclusively, that there were no explosives used.