Bush admits to explosives use in 911.

[sfx]

Right off the horses mouth, and you still want to deny ?

Come on, give more ridicule and name calling for 911 truther tin foil hats.

YouTube - Did Bush say explosives used on 9/11???


Come on, deny deny deny and ridicule the evidence!

BUSH: planted EXPLOSIVES inside WTC!! | 911Blogger.com



I am putting this in it's own topic because this is clear cut evidence the wtc was brought down by explosives and if you're denying it there must be something wrong with you, total cognitive dissonance!

YouTube - DONALD Rumsfeld pours out word from his mouth by mistake.


Slip of the tongue? Rumsfeld admits that "Flight 93" was shot down


"And I think all of us have a sense if we imagine the kind of world we would face if the people who bombed the mess hall in Mosul, or the people who did the bombing in Spain, or the people who attacked the United States in New York, shot down the plane over Pennsylvania and attacked the Pentagon, the people who cut off peoples' heads on television to intimidate, to frighten -- indeed the word "terrorized" is just that. Its purpose is to terrorize, to alter behavior, to make people be something other than that which they want to be."

[James81]

The World Trade Center was brought down because a giant frikin plane flew into the side of it. As an Engineer, I can tell you that THAT IS ENOUGH. That is PLENTY enough to make a building collapse. This is what I do FOR A LIVING and I am telling you that THAT IS ENOUGH.

And the reason I am being clear on that point is because, well, I'm tired of hearing people who have no education in structure of a building talk about how there had to be other things involved in this to make the building crumble. No, the giant f**king planes that flew into the side of it was plenty enough to bring it down.

****

That being said, however, you CAN make the arguement that the government sat on it's ass and watched it happened. No, I don't think they had a part in it (that's conspiracty theory BS), but to believe they didn't see it coming? Come on, now.

[aggie]

i am not sure what i belive anymore...but i DO believe they saw it coming, i do believe they had relationships, fringe or otherwise, with those involved, and i do believe they saw it coming and it could have been prevented....bush would not have been sitting so calmly on his butt in a classroom and so slow to react.

is all the above, maybe not conspiracy...but a crime against the american people and dispicable: YES!

[royster]

The Twin Towers were designed to withstand the impact of 707's...it was thought possible even multiple impacts. The blue prints for the buildings are no longer available to the public...why 'zat?

The collapse of the towers does not match a 'natural' collapse, particularly since the steel core fell at the same time as the sides. It should have remained standing at least temproarily.

Those who wish to continue defending the "official story" are free to do so, until the agenda of those perpetuating the "official story" no longer need your obedience.

Even the most ardent Big Brother adherants in "1984" were expendable, and eventually were "disappeared".

[Cataclysm]

Originally Posted by James81

The World Trade Center was brought down because a giant frikin plane flew into the side of it. As an Engineer, I can tell you that THAT IS ENOUGH. That is PLENTY enough to make a building collapse. This is what I do FOR A LIVING and I am telling you that THAT IS ENOUGH.

I'm not and Engineer or an Architect but if that's really the case, why didn't the IRS building in Texas collapse after a plane crashed in it?

Granted it's a little piper airplane, but if you compare the size of the airplane to the building, it's much much larger then a 747 and WTC. And following your logic would mean that it should have fallen straight down into its footstep.

I'm having a hard time getting my head around it all.

Thanks,

[aggie]

it is hard to get one's head around. it would seem impossible that the horrific behavior we have reserved for despots of other nations could possible exist among those we have chosen to rule.

but it is so possible...the money, the power, the privilege.

while some have been screaming about the healthcare reform, government control and loss of rights...they have already been sufficiently eroded by the former administration and those before...going back to regan....big business, pharamceutical companies, politicians, etc, etc have been pulling the strings to choreograph to what we have today, for a long, long time.

[sfx]

OOps... slipped of tongue... again... Missile hit pentagon..


Tsk tsk tsk.... those guilty conscience and subconscious thoughts/secrets spilling into the conscious...

YouTube - 9/11 Commissioner slips up, says missile hit Pentagon

[JSB]

Originally Posted by Cataclysm

I'm not and Engineer or an Architect but if that's really the case, why didn't the IRS building in Texas collapse after a plane crashed in it?

Granted it's a little piper airplane, but if you compare the size of the airplane to the building, it's much much larger then a 747 and WTC. And following your logic would mean that it should have fallen straight down into its footstep.

I'm having a hard time getting my head around it all.

Thanks,

The small plane didn't hit the building at 500 mph, and it wasn't filled with 45000 gallons of flammable jet fuel.

I know that 911 Truthers are completely dedicated to their own interpretation of events, so I won't bother trying to change anyone's mind.

personally, I dobelieve that there were elements within the US government psychologically capable of orchestrating such a plot in order to further their own personal agenda (even if it was for "the greater good" in their own warped view), but I do not believe that it was possible to organize a plot of such magnitude without it being discovered and thwarted by other elements within the government and military who would have opposed such a destructive false flag attack on civilians and US military forces.

Also, I have yet to see compelling evidence of explosives, based on real scientific analysis rather than presumed motives.

Anyway, that's my two cents: accept, reject, or ignore it as you choose. I will not be sticking around for the inevitable pointless debate.

[royster]

I wish the rest of the world had your open mind and willingness, JSB.

The debate DOES go on and on, and I'm tired of it.

An OPEN investigation will set it to rest. There is so much resistance to a new investigation, it just adds more suspicion.

It will ALL come out in the wash, eventually.

[royster]

The small plane didn't hit the building at 500 mph, and it wasn't filled with 45000 gallons of flammable jet fuel.

Jet fuel is essentially kerosine. Traveling at 500 MPH, and ejected out of the building to produce dramatic fireballs, it is unlikely the fuel stopped, took the stairs and lolled out the lobby, but that is the explaination of the molten metal seen flowing on the first floor.

The video/photos of molten metal dripping from the sides of the buildings has been explained away as molten alluminum from the planes. Yet thermate's own promotional video shows metal reduced to yellow, glowing liquid, like that seen in several videos.

In 9/11 research, the immediate answers given are the flimsiest. Time allowed them to be changed, but even the 'upgrades' are dubious at their best.

[sfx]

Originally Posted by royster

Jet fuel is essentially kerosine. Traveling at 500 MPH, and ejected out of the building to produce dramatic fireballs, it is unlikely the fuel stopped, took the stairs and lolled out the lobby, but that is the explaination of the molten metal seen flowing on the first floor.

The video/photos of molten metal dripping from the sides of the buildings has been explained away as molten alluminum from the planes. Yet thermate's own promotional video shows metal reduced to yellow, glowing liquid, like that seen in several videos.

In 9/11 research, the immediate answers given are the flimsiest. Time allowed them to be changed, but even the 'upgrades' are dubious at their best.

I think the jet fuels are one of the catalysts to ignite the painted super thermite material on the steel structure that holds the building in place.

Once a fire occurs, it makes igniting the super thermite on the steel structures easily, but also helped by explosives in certain places.

[Jaiysun4]

I too believe that an open, comprehensive, independent and honest enquiry could allow us all to rest in peace, but what are the chances of that!?

Also, we all know not to act like experts in subjects we know very little about. But I have heard famous engineers and professors, explosive experts, whatever, all saying aswell that it couldn't have just been a plane causing it to fall in that manner. So at the end of the day, its impossible to ever know, or even be very justified in believing either way.

However, we should always bear in mind, not the science, but the morality, deceptions, contradictions, vested interests of those involved in this question. This alone, is enough to warrant a seriously raised eyebrow, the science aside.

[Tim Brownson]

LMAO, because Bush has never got things completely wrong before has he?

To call that evidence is insanely naive.

Is it worth looking into? Sure it is.

But only somebody desperate to believe there was a conspiracy the like of which the wold has never seen before, would call it *evidence* of anything other than there was an idiot in charge of the country.

I used to love the whole JFK conspiracy theory almost to obsession. Then one day 5 or 6 years ago the BBC made a documentary using state of the art computer re-enactments to prove the magic bullet theory was indeed plausible. I was crushed.

[Tim Brownson]

Originally Posted by James81

The World Trade Center was brought down because a giant frikin plane flew into the side of it. As an Engineer, I can tell you that THAT IS ENOUGH. That is PLENTY enough to make a building collapse. This is what I do FOR A LIVING and I am telling you that THAT IS ENOUGH.

And the reason I am being clear on that point is because, well, I'm tired of hearing people who have no education in structure of a building talk about how there had to be other things involved in this to make the building crumble. No, the giant f**king planes that flew into the side of it was plenty enough to bring it down.

****

That being said, however, you CAN make the arguement that the government sat on it's ass and watched it happened. No, I don't think they had a part in it (that's conspiracty theory BS), but to believe they didn't see it coming? Come on, now.

James I remember seeing some structural engineers explain how it was highly plausible on a documentary shortly after the event in the UK.

These guys had no axe to grind and just stated that the facts that from an engineering standpoint it was theoretically possible.

[escapee]

Meanwhile, 1093 architectural and engineering professionals and 7107 other supporters including A&E students have signed the petition demanding of Congress a truly independent investigation.

The AE911Truth Petition:
TO THE MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AND
OF THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. Sign the Petition

911 "conspiracy theory" reported on Washington Times, SURPRISEEEE..
Inside the Beltway - Washington Times

[escapee]

Granted it's a little piper airplane, but if you compare the size of the airplane to the building, it's much much larger then a 747 and WTC. And following your logic would mean that it should have fallen straight down into its footstep.

What about WTC 7? It should blow up your brain instantly since it was not hit by a plane.

To all engineers on this board, how possible is it for WTC 7 to collapse at free fall speed with just mild fire and minimal superficial damage?

YouTube - WTC7: NIST Finally Admits Freefall (Part I)

YouTube - WTC7: NIST Finally Admits Freefall (Part II)

YouTube - WTC7: NIST Finally Admits Freefall (Part III)

Watch the videos and make your own conclusion.

[royster]

Karl Rove was in the news, today, admitting "errors" regarding the Iraq war build up.

[jeff3]

Originally Posted by James81

The World Trade Center was brought down because a giant frikin plane flew into the side of it. As an Engineer, I can tell you that THAT IS ENOUGH. That is PLENTY enough to make a building collapse. This is what I do FOR A LIVING and I am telling you that THAT IS ENOUGH.

And the reason I am being clear on that point is because, well, I'm tired of hearing people who have no education in structure of a building talk about how there had to be other things involved in this to make the building crumble. No, the giant f**king planes that flew into the side of it was plenty enough to bring it down.

****

That being said, however, you CAN make the arguement that the government sat on it's ass and watched it happened. No, I don't think they had a part in it (that's conspiracty theory BS), but to believe they didn't see it coming? Come on, now.

Thank you. I'm no engineer but I do build and remodel for a living and what people usually fail to realize is that what these small experiments that seem to prove the total failure and free-fall could not happen that quick are missing is the critical component of mass. These buildings were huge, with concrete floors at every level and when one falls the pancake effect will grow exponentially as the next doubles the weight and each additional floor adds to the mass and velocity of the fall.

Most think you could just make a scale model that was 10 feet tall, throw a plane at it with a few ounces of kerosene and say "Well, it didn't fall down, that proves it to me." Things like this are impossible to replicate on scaled experiments. Even the steel/heat stress test would be impossible to replicate on a small scale because the damage in the towers was spread out over a large area and the steel did not have to totally fail in a localized spot to start the weakening of the backbone of those buildings. Weakening over a large area is just as bad as total failure in a local area, in this case especially because the towers were designed to withstand local damage.

A little building knowledge and some understanding of the dynamics of a catastrophic failure would go a long way toward alleviating many peoples concerns, they simply would not believe everything they read just because they think the .gov is out to get us. Some, however, have already made up their mind or possibly just simply "choose" to believe the conspiracy stuff just because they want to.

[royster]

What is it that people do NOT understand about "The Twin Towers were designed to withstand the impact (and consiquences of) a 707"? Is there some sort of technical lingo we need to add?

Is there something engineers do not comprehend about the fact that NO STEEL-FRAMED BUILDING HAS EVER COLLAPSED FROM FIRE until 9/11...when THREE of them collapsed?

These are not considerations of "belief" or "conspiracy"; these are facts. If the towers "pancaked", where are the pancakes? There were NO floors left intact.

"Belief" seems to be those clinging onto the falacy that a government would do no harm to its own people. The fatality of this beleif is what that government will continue to do if left unaddressed, not held accountable, and continually given a free pass.

[spirit4711]

Originally Posted by royster

What is it that people do NOT understand about "The Twin Towers were designed to withstand the impact (and consiquences of) a 707"? Is there some sort of technical lingo we need to add?

You have proof that this is a true statement?

"Belief" seems to be those clinging onto the falacy that a government would do no harm to its own people. The fatality of this beleif is what that government will continue to do if left unaddressed, not held accountable, and continually given a free pass.

My big problem with statements like these is that a government is not a person. There are rotten apples in any organisation. There's no human designed organisation that has perfect checks and balances to spot all the bad apples. Your assumption is that there are evil forces attacking the innocents. My assumption is that we humans are not flawless.

[royster]

Originally Posted by spirit4711

You have proof that this is a true statement?

In trying to find a neutral website to quote, I found bias on all sides. The following is taken from Eyewitness Reports Persist Of Bombs At WTC Collapse

"A lead engineer who designed the World Trade Center Towers expressed shock that the towers collapsed after being hit by passenger jets.

"I designed it for a 707 to hit it," Lee Robertson, the project's structural engineer said. The Boeing 707 has a fuel capacity of more than 23,000 gallons, comparable to the 767's 23,980-gallon fuel capacity.

Another architect of the WTC, Aaron Swirski, lives in Israel and spoke to Jerusalem Post Radio after the attack: "It was designed around that eventuality to survive this kind of attack," he said.

Hyman Brown, a University of Colorado civil engineering professor and the World Trade Center's construction manager, watched in confusion as the towers came down. "It was over-designed to withstand almost anything including hurricanes, high winds, bombings and an airplane hitting it," he said.

Brown told AFP that although the buildings were designed to withstand "a 150-year storm" and the im pact of a Boeing 707, he said the jet fuel burning at 2,000 degrees Fahrenheit weakened the steel. Brown ex plained that the south tower collapsed first as it was struck lower with more weight above the impact area."

However, 2,000 degrees is incorrect.
FACT: Jet fuel burns at 800º to 1500ºF, not hot enough to melt steel (2750ºF).
Steel is also a very good conductor of heat. It is unlikely residual jet fuel weakened the structure enough to cause a free-fall collapse. As well, the black smoke obvious in all videos clearly indicates a fire burning at low temperatures because it is oxygen-starved.

My big problem with statements like these is that a government is not a person. There are rotten apples in any organisation. There's no human designed organisation that has perfect checks and balances to spot all the bad apples. Your assumption is that there are evil forces attacking the innocents. My assumption is that we humans are not flawless.

"The Nazis" were not a person, yet under that banner a lot of murder and destruction of evidence took place...before anyone "believed" it was occurring.

Again: how many holocausts does it take for people to hold so-called "leaders" accountable, and quit making excuses for them?

[Indy107]

Originally Posted by royster

"Belief" seems to be those clinging onto the falacy that a government would do no harm to its own people.

I'm thinking of the old Star Trek movie. "The needs of the many, outweigh the needs of the few, or one". IF, our government is responsible for 911 - they did it for one reason and one reason only...... Iraqi Oil.

Seven out of the next 10 largest oil fields just happen to be in Iraq. The leaked documents from Cheney's secret energy club show the Iraqi oilfields all mapped out. They said they needed another "Pearl Harbor" for us to invade Iraq. Well - they got it. And if our government is that desperate - to either plan out, assist, or just stand by and allow - 911 to happen, just so we could invade Iraq for their oil.....

What does that say about our current reserves? I see $10 a gallon right around the corner. Peak Oil is here folks, like it or not.

[rei]

royster, i think your last post and the quotes are telling.
hopefully those who have rejected this idea of the structural problem will read that post with an open mind.

as you posted, and as i remember learning from my own research, the buildings were specifically designed to handle and withstand incredible damage, including being hit by an airplane.

also, there is the issue of the rebars. however you spell it. the very strong steel rods running the vertical length of the main tower - they were collected, shipped to another country and melted down before any forensics were performed. seems pretty suspect to me - even if they did that to make room for the rescue operation, they didn't need to ship those strong pieces of metal to another country! (China i think?) they could have moved them without moving them that far.

i think it is also true that Bush's brother was in a high-level position in the security company that was responsible for securing the towers. i don't remember where i heard that, so i won't be providing a source, but i did double-check multiple sources before i filed it away as part of the support for an unthinkable conclusion about 9/11. if someone isn't interested enough to do an online search, that's fine, as i'm not trying to force anyone to believe this stuff. i understand entertaining this as a possibility says something monstrous and atrocious, so i also understand the resistance. it's pretty messed up though.

[royster]

Thank you, rei.
It was one of the Bush brothers...Marvin perhaps, because Neil is still in hiding from the Silvarado Trust scam...who was in control of the security for the WTC. Another Bush brother was responsible for getting another Bush brother into the White House, where the Bush father stayed for a while on the morning of 9/11...having just spoken to the Bin Laden family.

There are too many conspicuous details, which the mainstream media avoided, to be coincidence, and the same names and circles keep popping up. The failure of NORAD and the USAF speaks volumes.

If those persons vehemently trying to protect their belief systems refuse to understand the implications of 9/11 and the earth's future, then there's nothing we can do; ignorance kills us again. And the reason people want to protect their belief structures is to retain their personal comfort and social status, both of which will be removed by the fascists who orchestrated 9/11. Your civil rights are being erroded even as we read this.

It can't happen here, they say?

Their very denial insures it will happen. With blind obedience, without question, and virtually no resistance.

[Tam9]

Originally Posted by sfx

I am putting this in it's own topic because this is clear cut evidence the wtc was brought down by explosives and if you're denying it there must be something wrong with you, total cognitive dissonance!

Even if this is remotely plausible, you'd still have so much else to prove - like covert meetings with terrorists, coordination of agendas with terrorists, who was involved and why, how no one in the government and world agencies (CIA, FBI, Interpol, etc.) noticed all this planning and debauchery, a really good motive - not just something stupid like fear mongering, etc. etc. etc.......

[rei]

Originally Posted by royster

Their very denial insures it will happen. With blind obedience, without question, and virtually no resistance.

i did want to say, i am not sure every person who denies this idea is someone who will blindly follow or blindly accept whatever is being spoonfed. i see some critical thinkers here, that's a good thing - if they apply that same critical thinking to mainstream politics. i would think many of them do.

i agree with the part i quoted, but i agree with it as a general idea. i don't know if the deniers here in this thread necessarily fit that idea though. i would need more info, but most of those who posted here don't seem like they blindly accept things said to them or focus on the positive in a foolhardy way.

others have said it was about oil, i have heard it was about passing the Patriot Act - how they tried to pass similar legislation before, i wanna say when the WTC was hit (or some kind of target for violence) the first time, but it turns out (this is so weird) there was something in the regs that said not enough people had died to pass legislation that restricts civil liberties!! how dumb is it that they set it up so someone could say, hmm, let's up the death count!

i'll be the first one to admit, at first blush the oil profit motivation makes more sense to me. but if you already have tons of money, you may be more interested in creating a greater sense of abusive power for yourself. i dunno. Patriot Act is quite restrictive and laughs at civil liberties under a nice comforting blanket called "National Security."

you're welcome, royster

[ThoughtAddict]

Originally Posted by sfx

Right off the horses mouth, and you still want to deny ?

Come on, give more ridicule and name calling for 911 truther tin foil hats.

YouTube - Did Bush say explosives used on 9/11???

I just watched this video. Bush is discussing information gained from Khalid Sheik Mohammad about what training terrorists are receiving for future attacks. He isn't speaking about the September 11 attacks....

So, yet again, I find myself confused. How is this proof?

[ThoughtAddict]

Originally Posted by rei

i have heard it was about passing the Patriot Act - how they tried to pass similar legislation before, i wanna say when the WTC was hit (or some kind of target for violence) the first time, but it turns out (this is so weird) there was something in the regs that said not enough people had died to pass legislation that restricts civil liberties!! how dumb is it that they set it up so someone could say, hmm, let's up the death count!

i'll be the first one to admit, at first blush the oil profit motivation makes more sense to me. but if you already have tons of money, you may be more interested in creating a greater sense of abusive power for yourself. i dunno. Patriot Act is quite restrictive and laughs at civil liberties under a nice comforting blanket called "National Security."

The PATRIOT Act is one of the most dismal pieces of legislation passed in this country, in my humble opinion. It ranks right up there with the Korematsu case in my mind. It was passed in a period of sheer panic to give the executive branch unnecessary power at the expense of the people.

That said, there is no regulation out there that requires a certain number of people to die before the legislature passes an act. Pieces of the PATRIOT Act had been proposed and voted down before. Much of it was in draft form of a number of senators and congressmen from previous bills that were rejected. After September 11, Congress scrambled to pull together some response that would absolve them of any responsibility. Their solutions were the PATRIOT Act and the Authorization for the Use of Military Force, which provided the President with nearly unlimited power to go after any person or nation who was involved with the terrorist attacks of 9/11. This led, eventually, to the Iraq war....

also, there is the issue of the rebars. however you spell it. the very strong steel rods running the vertical length of the main tower - they were collected, shipped to another country and melted down before any forensics were performed. seems pretty suspect to me - even if they did that to make room for the rescue operation, they didn't need to ship those strong pieces of metal to another country! (China i think?) they could have moved them without moving them that far.

The chain of procession of this debris is clearly documented, first at ground Zero by Protec and later site by Yannuzzi Demolition. The time frame (months) before it was shipped to China was normal. Per Brent Blanchard, Director of Field Operations for Protec Documentation Services.

One fantastic article from M.I.T. engineering professor Dr. Thomas Eager explained that the structural strength of steel is less than 50% at 1200 degrees. Given that jet fuel burns around 1400, Dr. Eager believes that the weakening of the steel caused horizontal beams to sag, which in turn put stress on the angle clips that hold horizontal beams to vertical beams. When one layer falls, the entire building is set to go down...
The article is in the Journal of the Minerals, Metals, and Materials Society, for those interested.

[blossom]

I think the same way as you Royster, in that people are just not willing to contemplate the scary thought that the people who are supposed to have their best interests at heart, are capable of doing something of this magnitude. They rely on the system of denial that the human mind uses to protect itself from the notion that psychopathic personalities don't give a rats arse about anyone...and they are the ones in charge.
There have been countless acts of atrocity throughout history which have proven otherwise, and still people deny it! Denial is what allows these units to get away with it!

[escapee]

others have said it was about oil,

Two reasons, oil and foes of Israel. If the "conspiracy theory" is true, then you have 2 Central Intelligence Agencies involved in this complex false flag operation, namely the CIA and Mossad. Both of which are above the law when it comes to national interest and security.

There is already a report that the "fully liberalized" Iraq oil fields could delay the dreadful peak oil phenomenon a decade.
The Oil Drum | Iraq Could Delay Peak Oil a Decade

MORAL HAZARD ....