MAMEWorld Forums - Welcome to the War Room - Re: For the record 9/11 conspiracy theorist

> > The red pill...
> >
> > PART 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UuNg88YAVak
>
> Radiation due to a nuclear device. This would explain the truck loads of dirt they're
> hauling in and out, as well as the constant hosing down of equipment, and is a much
> more logical explanation for the hot glowing molten metal so long after the collapse
> than the thermite (theory).

A nuclear device. Honestly? When radiation spiked in Indiana a few months back, something to the tune of twenty-five people picked it up on home Geigers. INDIANA. I find it difficult to swallow that not one person in New York or Jersey would have picked up on that. It's also the least desirable option I can fathom if you are trying to keep something like this under wraps. And the least controlled. And the most likely to blow the building outward. etc, etc, etc.

Sand/dirt was brought in for the same reason it's brought into any hazmat situation. Tons and TONS of toxic shit floating through the air. Asbestos alone is no joke, even in small amounts, when disturbed. There was enough asbestos in those towers to give the population of Manhattan lung cancer 10 times over if left to the wind. Now on top of the asbestos, think of what concrete is made of. Gypsum, lime, silica...all sorts of things that will tear your innards to shit when inhaled as a dust. There was plenty of dust at that. Those trucks were carting away/covering up air-born death.

The thermite theory is flat busted. It would drip off the side of anything it was strapped to the minute a reaction started.

> As for the idea of a high altitude and fire inside the building being a "forge"?...
> and they say the "conspiracy theorists" are grasping at straws.
>

Because Physics.

> The theory about the planes being edited in due to the plane hitting the south tower
> and the nose of the plane to appear to penetrate all the way through before the
> explosion. Note, that the televised transmission was (I believe) on a 17 second
> delay, and how different shots from different cameras appear to have some
> inconsistency issues. Such as the zoom in from the helicopter camera far from the
> west (the 2nd link talks about this), then it seems to suddenly appear when the plane
> wasn't there when it was zoomed out.
>
> A hologram? Well, they have a Ghost of TuPac so....
>

I knew one of the attendants on the AA flight. My father was working for AA as well, and handled a good deal of internal damage control. I can assure you AA lost a plane into that tower, and 92 people. I don't take personal offense to much of the speculation BS, but I do find anyone denying the loss of life a bit disrespectful.

Btw, to wrap up a previous comment, this is what an aircraft looks like after it hits the Pentagon.