RadioBanter - View Single Post

BDK[_7_]

In article ,
says...

"joeturn" wrote in message
...
On May 8, 1:55 am, "Scout"
wrote:
"joeturn" wrote in message

...

On May 7, 9:04 pm, John Smith wrote:
On 5/7/2011 5:12 PM, joeturn wrote:

...
but if they have been combined with barrium they form sphears which
is
a tale tell sign of thermate use.

Jon Bobble spell check that for me mine is broken TIAI;-)

The properties exhibited by thermite bear a signature which absolutely
proves it to be man made.

For example: You can stack a bunch of rocks together and form a wall.
Or, men can cut, polish, etc. rocks into geometric shapes and build a
wall.

You will NEVER be likely to confuse the two stone walls, nor lack
ability to recognize the difference between the two ...

Regards,
JS

Very true and THERMATE was the military patented grade of THERMITE
used for incenterary devices in WWII super quick cutting through armor

So tell me, how exactly did they manage to get several tons of thermite
into
the building, expose the necessary girders, set the devices, and manage
to
control them all with absolutely no one noticing or spilling the beans
later? Further, how exactly do you manage to cause the visible point of
failure to be exactly the aircraft impact site, and how exactly do you
manage to protect the devices from all that damage and fire while still
providing 100% reliability?

Sorry, but seems to me that explanation leaves a lot to be desired and
based
more on conjecture and supposition than actual fact.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Sprayed on Asbestos was used to protect them from the elements.

Sorry, but that doesn't prevent physical damage nor does it prevent heat
damage given a hot enough fire and/or enough time.

So once again, I ask how can you protect them against the impact of an
airliner, subsequent fires and of course be utterly inconspicuous.

The girders are roof members of little consiquence.

I see, so your idea of how to collapse a skyscraper is to collapse the
roof.....and you think the official story doesn't consider reality....

Oh, and FYI, doesn't explain why in at least one case the visible point of
failure is clearly the sight of the impact from the airliner.

They were not worried about being noticed setting the charges

Really?

People running around the building going into private spaces, ripping down
the drywall, scrapping off the fireproofing, hooking massive objects to the
girders, and no one is going to notice, remember and comment about it later?

ROTFLMAO.

,as it
was common practice to do this back then

Right, way back in then Bush knew that several decades later he would be
President and would need an excuse to go to war.

Sheese, and you call the 9/11 commission delusionary.

so the buildings could be
removed easily in a tight area,so as not to do excessible damage to
the surronding structures!

Sorry, but it is NOT common practice, then or now to put demolition charges
in a building unless you are actually in the process of demolishing the
building.

Actually there was no Plane hit nor Fire it was all a smoke
screen.

Right, that explains the eyewitness accounts and video footage of an
airliner running into the building....

Joe is one with the magic kOOkdumb today. As always.

--
BDK- Top of the government shill heap for over 10 years running!