Former George Bush Chief Economist Says 911 Was An Inside Job

a reply to: HorusChrist

Sky eagle why do you think Obama lied about dumping Bin Laden's body in the ocean? I mean you agree at least that was an obvious lie right? I mean they just didn't want to show pics for proof for some reason . . . maybe you have a theory?

Prove that he lied by providing evidence to us all, that Osama bin Laden's body was not dumped in the sea.

a reply to: HorusChrist

I think they could have kept it secret . . .

How could they have kept a nuclear detonation a secret when half of New York City would have been leveled?

...as it is no one questions while all the ground zero first responders are getting cancer . . . but I don't think it was a nuke just cuz there's no evidence for that like there is for nano thermite controlled demo.

There is no evidence of thermite either.

originally posted by: skyeagle409
a reply to: HorusChrist

I think they could have kept it secret . . .

How could they have kept a nuclear detonation a secret when half of New York City would have been leveled?

...as it is no one questions while all the ground zero first responders are getting cancer . . . but I don't think it was a nuke just cuz there's no evidence for that like there is for nano thermite controlled demo.

There is no evidence of thermite either.

that is a good point, where was the mushroom cloud? like I said there's no evidence of a nuke

thermite was confirmed in the dust long ago tho

originally posted by: skyeagle409
a reply to: HorusChrist

Sky eagle why do you think Obama lied about dumping Bin Laden's body in the ocean? I mean you agree at least that was an obvious lie right? I mean they just didn't want to show pics for proof for some reason . . . maybe you have a theory?

Prove that he lied by providing evidence to us all, that Osama bin Laden's body was not dumped in the sea.

come on now. at long last sir do you have no sense of decency?

a reply to: HorusChrist

No they found iron oxides (rust) and aluminium in the dust

Both were present in large quantity in the WTC ............

I would show you what they found but I can figure out how to insert a JPG..

From the report..


Abstract: We have discovered distinctive red/gray chips in all the samples we have studied of the dust produced by the
destruction of the World Trade Center. Examination of four of these samples, collected from separate sites, is reported in
this paper. These red/gray chips show marked similarities in all four samples. One sample was collected by a Manhattan
resident about ten minutes after the collapse of the second WTC Tower, two the next day, and a fourth about a week later.
The properties of these chips were analyzed using optical microscopy, scanning electron microscopy (SEM), X-ray energy
dispersive spectroscopy (XEDS), and differential scanning calorimetry (DSC). The red material contains grains approximately
100 nm across which are largely iron oxide, while aluminum is contained in tiny plate-like structures. Separation
of components using methyl ethyl ketone demonstrated that elemental aluminum is present. The iron oxide and aluminum
are intimately mixed in the red material. When ignited in a DSC device the chips exhibit large but narrow exotherms occurring
at approximately 430 °C, far below the normal ignition temperature for conventional thermite. Numerous iron-rich
spheres are clearly observed in the residue following the ignition of these peculiar red/gray chips. The red portion of these
chips is found to be an unreacted thermitic material and highly energetic.

a reply to: HorusChrist

thermite was confirmed in the dust long ago tho

That is incorrect. Steven Jones and Richard Gage were caught lying about thermite at ground zero. In fact, I posted the dust sample results from the RJ Lee Group, which found no evidence of thermite in their dust samples.

a reply to: skyeagle409

That is incorrect. Steven Jones and Richard Gage were caught lying about thermite at ground zero. In fact, I posted the dust sample results from the RJ Lee Group, which found no evidence of thermite in their dust samples.

That is false.

Science proves Nano- thermite was found in the WTC, stop lying.

a reply to: wildb

We can take a look here.

RJ Lee Group Dust Sample Report 1

RJ Lee Group Dust Sample Report 2

No evidence of thermite found

a reply to: Informer1958

I am right on the money and it is all there in the dust sample report. In other words, you have no case for thermite.

a reply to: skyeagle409

Lets take a look here.

Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade
Center Catastrophe

www1.ae911truth.org...

a reply to: Informer1958

"AE 911 Truth" has been discredited and is a laughingstock.

originally posted by: Informer1958
a reply to: skyeagle409

Lets take a look here.

Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade
Center Catastrophe

www1.ae911truth.org...

Page five shows the photo.. clearly not dust..

originally posted by: skyeagle409
a reply to: Informer1958

"AE 911 Truth" has been discredited and is a laughingstock.

Yeah sure there all laughingstock.....


Department of Chemistry, University of Copenhagen, Denmark
2
Department of Physics and Astronomy, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT 84602, USA
3
S&J Scientific Co., Provo, UT, 84606, USA
4
9/11 Working Group of Bloomington, Bloomington, IN 47401, USA
5
Logical Systems Consulting, Perth, Western Australia
6
Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, Berkeley, CA 94704, USA
7
International Center for 9/11 Studies, Dallas, TX 75231, USA

a reply to: skyeagle409

RJ Lee group is a laughingstock.. hurricane winds... I have been through 39 hurricanes, there were no hurricane winds in those buildings..

a reply to: wildb

Any thing frm AE 911 Truth is suspect. Let's take a look here as to why Richard Gage, of "AE 911 Truth" is not a credible source regarding thermite.

a reply to: wildb

To show you the rest of the story, let's take a look at the Department of Physics and Astronomy, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT 84602, USA, that you posted.

Brigham Young University doesn't want anything to do with the paper.

A few department chairmen at Jones' university have issued critical statements, though none of these has yet addressed any of the points which Jones made in his paper and at his presentation at BYU. Chairman of the BYU department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Dr. Miller, is on record stating in an e-mail, "I think without exception, the structural engineering professors in our department are not in agreement with the claims made by Jones in his paper, and they don't think there is accuracy and validity to these claims".

The BYU physics department has also issued a statement: "The university is aware that Professor Steven Jones' hypotheses and interpretations of evidence regarding the collapse of World Trade Center buildings are being questioned by a number of scholars and practitioners, including many of BYU's own faculty members. Professor Jones' department and college administrators are not convinced that his analyses and hypotheses have been submitted to relevant scientific venues that would ensure rigorous technical peer review." The College of Engineering and Technology department has also added, "The structural engineering faculty in the Fulton College of Engineering and Technology do not support the hypotheses of Professor Jones."
en.wikipedia.org...

Jones says his paper will pass peer review again. But will it pass peer review in a respected civil engineering journal? Nothing less would be taken seriously.


Letter to the Editor
Refuting 9/11 Conspiracy Theory

April 09, 2006
Dear Editor,

After reading in the Daily Herald the presentations made by Professor Steven E. Jones (BYU Physics) to students at UVSC and BYU, I feel obligated to reply to his "Conspiracy Theory" relating to the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center (9/11/01).

I have studied the summary of the report by FEMA, The American Society of Civil Engineers and several other professional engineering organizations. These experts have given in detail the effects on the Towers by the impact of the commercial aircraft. I have also read Professor Jones' (referred to) 42 page unpublished report. In my understanding of structural design and the properties of structural steel I find Professor Jones' thesis that planted explosives (rather than fire from the planes) caused the collapse of the Towers, very unreliable.

The structural design of the towers was unique in that the supporting steel structure consisted of closely spaced columns in the walls of all four sides. The resulting structure was similar to a tube. When the aircraft impacted the towers at speeds of about 500 plus mph, many steel columns were immediately severed and others rendered weak by the following fires. The fires critically damaged the floors systems. Structural steel will begin to lose strength when heated to temperatures above 1000 degrees Fahrenheit. Steel bridge girders are bent to conform to the curved roadway by spot heating flanges between 800 and 1000 degrees Fahrenheit. It is easy to comprehend the loss of carrying capacity of all the structural steel due to the raging fires fed by the jet's fuel as well as aircraft and building contents.

Before one (especially students) supports such a conspiracy theory, they should investigate all details of the theory. To me a practicing structural engineer of 57 continuous years (1941-1998), Professor Jones' presentations are very disturbing.

D. Allan Firmage

Professor Emeritus, Civil Engineering, BYU

www.debunking911.com...

a reply to: skyeagle409

Lets not, I have no interest in Richard Gaga..

a reply to: wildb

Since he is the head of "AE 911 Truth," it is not prudent to post references from AE 911 Truth."