In article <6phmg.34699$1Z2.27328@newsfe7-win.ntli.net>, manic_mandy@hotmail.com says...

In news:Xns97E964C3FBCECthathillbillyyahooco@130.133.1.4,
John Griffin <thathillbilly@yahooie.com> typed:

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

Well I do have some difficulties with some of the conspiracy
theories for example how did they got they get tonnes and
tones of explosives into the WTCs without being noticed and
without it being subsequently noticed by the thousands of
people working there considering one would think conventional
explosives in the sort of quantities required would be
somewhat bulky.

Do you have a difficulty with the concept of planting all that
shit and then detonating it by flying an airplane into the
building?  For your information, fuses were invented centuries
ago.

But there weren't supposed to be any explosives planted in the building at
all and if there were it would have been quite an undertaking to rig a
building of that size and one imagines requiring access to restricted areas
which means it would have had to have been done by people who could gain
access to such areas.

There was suppose to have been some peculiar things going on,
with the Twin Towers before 9/11, which strongly hint that, yes
explosives could have been rigged up there, because users were not
allowed to know what was exactly going on, then...
And strangely - Bush's brother is responsible for the security of the
Twin Towers, and also for the clean up afterwards.

It would be good to get definite confirmations on this information,
to verify that this is indeed the case.
Just to show that these are facts..

It should be so noted, that the collapse of the Twin Towers does
exactly look like a controlled demolition, did take place.
Now how peculiar is that?

I do know there has been attempts to make the public believe that
fire was the cause of the collapse, even going as far as there being a
documentary presented, which says, Oh, the fire weakened the steel, and
once it started going, nothing could stop it.

But would this also say, that because the topmost floors weren't subject
to the gravity of floors above them, so that the top of the rubble should
be more intact? And does the photographs of the rubble show that this is
the case, at all? No, I don't think so, that we should see topmost floors
with less damage, at the top of the rubble...

Harvey

Note also this video about Thermite
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OotM5Z4ZHRc
Actually it is quite entertaining especially the second half
with the French car LOL

Holy shit...the thermite story resurfaces.  ROTMFFLMMFAO!

Well Wikipedia gives quite a bit of information on Thermite
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermite Basically its a powdered mixture of
Iron Oxide and Aluminium. Neither of those materials are difficult to
acquire, after all Iron Oxide is basically rust and there are numerous
sources of aluminium including beer cans and baking foil. Of course the
other thing about it is thermite can't be detected by sniffer dogs because
Iron oxide and aluminium are common in the urban environment.

It is a substance that could have been planted in someway even as a coating
without arousing suspicion. According to Wikipedia it needs a fair amount of
heat to ignite but obviously there was no shortage of sufficient heat.
-- 
Amanda