Nano Thermite found in WTC dust 9/11

Originally Posted by Evilsbane

The Project for the New American Century (a think tank including many eventual Bush Administration figures) mentions that a 'new Pearl Harbor' is needed to reinvigorate military spending (September 2000)

So we caused 9/11 to get more money into weapon spending?
I guess it could be a reason, but not a great one. We didn't really need to buy anything new for attacking Afghanistan (minus replacing spent munitions). The Iraq war I guess you could say did. But it still feels too out there.

Originally Posted by IGNIS

I get the impression that mad hatter just wishes to entertain himself by awaiting a response filled with sources that support conspiracy theories by then disapproving with an elaborate post that literally says "try harder, conspiracy freak."

Originally Posted by Shmehzzie can

I get the impression that he is trying to advocate a fruitful argument here, as that's entirely the point of the SD forum.

Originally Posted by IGNIS

I've yet to see a fruitful argument in this section. A lot of people are too weak to think objectively or simply don't know how to reason. It kind of hurts me when people cite the word "logic." Sometimes it is so clear that they've no idea what that is.

Unfortunately, I've got to go, and I'm not so eager to make an attempt to get a "fruitful argument" started. I'd like to point out that this is not a case of "this is the evidence gathered, therefore there is a conspiracy." I think that what we're dealing here is the lack of ability to consider this event carefully or accept that there is yet a truth to be found. You guys have to make an attempt to start off with a clean slate and know that, like faith, things that are not so blunt are NOT exempt from reason. Never.

Haha, I'm inclined to agree with Shmehzzie can

IGNIS, if you don't think giving real evidence is going to do anything, then did you really think accusing people of closed-mindedness will? Right now you're doing exactly what you say everyone else is going to do.

You complain about the forum, saying you've seen no fruitful arguments, and that people don't know how to reason. Which is more reasonable - to show up, accuse everyone who disagrees with you of being closed-minded, and leave when they ask you to back up your claims, or to show up and give verifiable evidence when people ask you to back up your claims? I'm not here to insult you, and I think if you read any of my old posts you can see that. But right now you're only lowering the level of discourse by showing up and leaving with nothing but a few ad hominem attacks. Please give us something to consider before you accuse us of not considering it.

I'll say it one last time.

The files have long been declassified. There was no conspiracy.

Originally Posted by KillerKat55

So we caused 9/11 to get more money into weapon spending?
I guess it could be a reason, but not a great one. We didn't really need to buy anything new for attacking Afghanistan (minus replacing spent munitions). The Iraq war I guess you could say did. But it still feels too out there.

TBH, I sincerely doubt it too. Still though, if history has taught us anything, it's that the public needs to keep an eye on the leadership. It can't hurt to investigate possibilities.

Originally Posted by KillerKat55

So we caused 9/11 to get more money into weapon spending?
I guess it could be a reason, but not a great one. We didn't really need to buy anything new for attacking Afghanistan (minus replacing spent munitions). The Iraq war I guess you could say did. But it still feels too out there.

I agree. I also think Hell Hawk had a point; if the government was using this as an excuse to start a war, they would have picked a country that was more profitable to take over.

Originally Posted by attackʞɔɐʇʇɐ

I agree. I also think Hell Hawk had a point; if the government was using this as an excuse to start a war, they would have picked a country that was more profitable to take over.

You're thinking purely in terms of money. You must remember that a global superpower would be more interested in gaining strategic advantage. America now has significant military presence in regions it used to have little influence over. Iraq is smack-dab in the middle of the Middle East, for example. Afghanistan is near two nations who have FAIRLY recently gained nuclear weapons. Power and influence is more important than money when it comes to politics.

/devil's advocate

If the PNAC documents are genuine, not quoted out of context, and their relationship to the Bush administration is as significant as conspiracy theorists claim, then the organization would probably be worth looking into. I can fully accept, for example, that the PNAC might have used 9/11 to promote their military agenda.

But that aside there is little in the way of hard evidence that 9/11 was an inside job; at best I would say that someone so motivated could have assisted coordinating the circumstances surrounding the plane hijackings, but I doubt heavily that there was direct involvement on the part of anyone on the "inside" in carrying out any part of the attacks. Certainly not anything that would involve planting bombs in such an important building as the WTC.

The Bush administration's responses to the investigation are, of course, suspicious and I think it's been long enough that everything should be declassified. But I think until we have the evidence (and it's worth searching for, but I doubt any of it will be physical evidence from the wreckage), there's not much worth in making outside conclusions.

"nano thermite", lol.

Time to break this down into a simpler form for everyone who's bothering to still read this or any other 9/11 conspiracy thread.

Nanothermite is a type of thermite made up of very small particles, and thermite is a combustible material that is made of a metal oxidizer and a metal fuel. The team from this study discovered very small red and grey flecks in debris from the site that they believe to be nanothermite. The red oxidizer discovered by this team is iron oxide, also known as rust, one of the most common materials on the planet. The grey fuel discovered was aluminum, also known as the material that made up the facade of the twin towers. Thousands of tons of material - structural parts, office equipment, human remains, etc - were ground into dust by the force of tens of thousands of tons of material falling on them during the collapse of the buildings. The creation of this dust is no surprise to anyone, as there were hundreds and hundreds of cases of lung cancer developed by people living or working near ground zero as a result of inhaling the fumes with these dangerous particles in them.

And so, a public service announcement for everyone in this thread - if you tried and couldn't find iron oxide and aluminum in ANY air sample taken in NYC in mid-September of 2001, you were officially retarded. If you think that the presence of these materials indicated the organized use of "nanothermite" or any sort of "inside job" to bring down the towers, you are without a doubt the dumbest person I have ever had the bad luck to run into. Please cut off your hands and turn them in to the nearest authorities, so that I will never have to read anything that you type and post on the internet ever again.

Originally Posted by andi

If you think that the presence of these materials indicated the organized use of "nanothermite" or any sort of "inside job" to bring down the towers, you are without a doubt the dumbest person I have ever had the bad luck to run into. Please cut off your hands and turn them in to the nearest authorities, so that I will never have to read anything that you type and post on the internet ever again.

Over-react much?

Me, overreact! Never!
What, never?
No, never!
What, never?
Well, hardly ever!

;3

Originally Posted by Evilsbane

You're thinking purely in terms of money. You must remember that a global superpower would be more interested in gaining strategic advantage. America now has significant military presence in regions it used to have little influence over. Iraq is smack-dab in the middle of the Middle East, for example. Afghanistan is near two nations who have FAIRLY recently gained nuclear weapons. Power and influence is more important than money when it comes to politics.

/devil's advocate

The US government already has considerable influence in the middle east via Israel and to a lesser degree Saudi Arabia, and if they wanted more influence there are several other countries that would have worked better for that goal.

Originally Posted by Wrath of Pong

The US government already has considerable influence in the middle east via Israel and to a lesser degree Saudi Arabia, and if they wanted more influence there are several other countries that would have worked better for that goal.

Normally, I'd argue, but andi's explanation of the nanothermite makes the whole conspiracy theory so farfetched that I'd find it difficult to even play devil's advocate and still keep a straight face. So I'll just say "OK".

Originally Posted by Anann

Jet fuel burns so hot that it basically makes metal turn to liquid.

Really? So tell me how is it that planes are able to fly if it burns that hot? Tell me, why is it so hard for anyone to believe that some part of the government may actually be corrupt? We will never know the truth until decades from now, but so far, the evidence points to a failure in the executive branch.

Originally Posted by kman7100

Really? So tell me how is it that planes are able to fly if it burns that hot?

The simple physics behind a jet engine prevent that. The burning exhaust is pushed out of the engine. That push is actually what makes the jet engine work. Furthermore, there are all kinds of cooling systems installed in the engine, and the natural flow of air through the turbofan also helps keep temperatures lower. If the exhaust was somehow not ejected, it would eventually melt the engine.

Tell me, why is it so hard for anyone to believe that some part of the government may actually be corrupt?

Its obvious that part of our government is corrupt. Every government has a corrupt part. However, the only government corruption there is any evidence for are things like tax fraud and getting a BJ from a secretary, not things like mass murdering their own citizens.

We will never know the truth until decades from now,

We have known the truth for nearly a decade actually.

but so far, the evidence points to a failure in the executive branch.

Was Bush a **** up when it came to foreign policy, the economy, and practically everything? Yes. Was Bush a traitor and murderer of his own citizens? No (frankly I don't think Bush was smart enough to plan something like that).

Regardless of the intelligence quote of Mr. Bush nothing of this sort would have succeeded. The Amount of people who would needed to be involved to plan something on this scale would be tremendous and reach to the thousands. From Demolition crews, to family's of faked murdered civilians(According to most theories the flight that was captured before hitting a building actually landed safely), to hundred of government officials, to soldiers, the list goes on and on. Yet no one has stepped forth and claimed "It was me, and these guys, we did it". If this was done as people say, as a plot and as murder then one of the thousands would have come out and admitted it. This is where these theories always fail, the sheer numbers are far to vast for everyone to stay silent, it's impossible.

Some people just don't want to admit that their are people in this world capable of touching them. They want to be vulnerable from the outside, they want to be the moon. So far away, impossible to touch, only a glimpse. So when someone lands on their surface and kicks up dust they protest. It's much nicer to think that their government is betraying them in a vast conspiracy, then to think 19 people destroyed their safety just because they could. It easier to accept an inside job, because no one wants to admit that 19 people can cause the death of 3000.

Andi just killed this agrument dead 3 times before it hit the floor

Originally Posted by Anann

I mean, hell, if you've ever been up in one, you'd know they actually SWAY. These things are not invincible at all.

Most skyscrapers are actually designed to sway, its not a flaw.

Originally Posted by Me on last thread about this.

Ach! Not another one of this!

The government didn't attack the WTC. Why would they do that?

What happened was that terroists hijacking the planes+laws of physics=bye-bye WTC.

That's what happened.

Originally Posted by Puck

Regardless of the intelligence quote of Mr. Bush nothing of this sort would have succeeded.

I meant that as a joke, actually.

Originally Posted by kman7100

Really? So tell me how is it that planes are able to fly if it burns that hot? Tell me, why is it so hard for anyone to believe that some part of the government may actually be corrupt? We will never know the truth until decades from now, but so far, the evidence points to a failure in the executive branch.

You may want to find out how jet engines work before making dumbass assumptions.

You know what happens when all the jet fuel in an airplane catches fire? The goddamn thing blows up and everyone dies.



I never claimed the sway was a flaw, but some people seem to assume the damn things are made like mountains. When in reality, they are more like Jenga towers.

^ I agree and the way the towers fell they pancaked. An exploding jet wouldnt pancake it a controlled explosion near supports or a thing that holds up the building would. Scientists also found an explosive called thermite near the buildings supports. Bush dont get me started on Bush......