"Amanda Angelika" <manic_mandy@hotmail.com> wrote:

In news:170620061833595423%erfc@netcabal.com,
Art Deco <erfc@netcabal.com> typed:

Amanda Angelika <manic_mandy@hotmail.com> wrote:

The only thing I can think of that might have been capable
of disintegrating solid high tensile fire resistant steel
that the WTCs were constructed of would have been
anti-matter devices. IMO it's the only explanation that
makes any sense. 

Just give up thinking, it isn't working out for you.

I used to think the conspiracy theories were simply Islamic
propaganda and basically treacherous anti-American/Us
government lies and simply concocted to spread doubt,
disinformation and division. 

Problem is though there are dozens of videos of the events of
911 showing exactly what happened which leave many unanswered
questions. Even structural engineers are unable to
satisfactorily explain why all those towers fell as they did.

It would be high entertainment to see you try to justify that 
ignorant remark.

After all they were not made of plastic wood and cardboard
like some Hollywood set but a very strong high tensile steel
framework. 

There are no other examples apart from in controlled
explosions for tall building totally collapsing as a result of
fire and yet on 9/11 there were three buildings that collapsed
in that way and one of them wasn't even hit by an aeroplane.

There are examples of tall buildings collapsing under their own 
weight.

There are no other examples of tall buildings being turned into 
torches with a hundred thousand pounds of jet fuel, though.

It's also notable that both the main towers collapsed from the
top down and yet WTC 2 which was hit second and fell first was
hit about half way up. If fire had caused the collapse of the
buildings surely one would expect both towers to have keeled
over at the point of impact and not evenly from the top down
as if in a controlled explosion. 

BWAAAA<choke>AAAAA#@$@!%#<gasp>AAAAHAHA<gag>HAHAHAHAHAHA!

That is a completely fucking idiotic statment.

Seriously, take Deco's advice.  Sheesh.

Incidentally It's also interesting to note that the Empire
State building was hit by a B25 bomber on July 28th 1945
http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=92525&page=1 and although it
suffered some damage is still structurally sound to this day.

You misspelled "irrelevant."

Having seen the events of 9/11 live on TV in the UK IMO the
official explanation is sheer nonsense, a total impossibility.
It simply doesn't add up at all. those towers come down like a
pack of cards as if they were made of match sticks and no one
commentating on the event expected it, it was shocking and
surreal, still doesn't make sense and has never really been 
satisfactorily explained.

You are definitely one of the passionately credulous.  Whoever 
you're parroting all that shit from is either a certifiable 
imbecile or someone who likes to mess with certifiable 
imbeciles' minds.