On Thu, 22 Jun 2006 05:04:53 +0000 (UTC), you@somehost.somedomain.aus
(Your Name Here=Harvey) wrote:

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.

Cite?  

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..

As opposed to ko0ky theory-points.  Connect-the-dots, anyone?  

It should be so noted, that the collapse of the Twin Towers does
exactly look like a controlled demolition, 

No, it does not.  Controlled demolitions use carefully timed
explosions to take down toers from the bottom up.  the WTC collapses
occurred from the top down.  

did take place.
Now how peculiar is that?

It's only "peculiar" to uneducated ko0ks.  HTH.  

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.

Your disdain for the facts doesn't refute the facts.  

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 

That is true, you don't think.  

so, that we should see topmost floors
with less damage, at the top of the rubble...

Why? 


ESL! 

-- 
Bookman -The Official Overseer of Kooks and Trolls in AFA-B 
Kazoo Konspirator #668 (The Neighbor of the Beast) 
Clue-Bat Wrangler 
Keeper of the Nickname Lists 
Despotic Kookologist of the New World Order 
Hammer of Thor award, October 2005

"I'd love to kill you in a ring"  - Bartmo gets all touchy-feely 

"****SPV.......  So yes I am an idiot." 

"ASK THE NWS,  YOUR TAX DOLLAR GOES TO THEM NOT TO DR.TURI."
- Mr. Turi explains how to accurately predict hurricanes

Bookman is yet another Usenet fignuten, meaning naysayer and/or
rusemaster of their incest cloned Third Reich.  In other words, you're
communicating with an intellectual if not a biological clone of
Hitler.
- Brad Guth tries to wax "scientific", but invokes Godwin, instead.

WWFSMD?