“If they had 'found' WMD's in Iraq and not had allowed the WMD's to be independently verified by UN inspectors, who, apart from you, would have believed them?”

Even if they had found WMD, and those WMD had been verified by independent experts , it would have made no difference. It would have taken the left about three months to find some or other pretext to revert to their rabid anti-Americanisms.

Daggett,

You say >> "If they had 'found' WMD's in Iraq and not had allowed the WMD's to be independently verified by UN inspectors, who, apart from you, would have believed them?

Why would they not allow them to be independently verified?

Your whole case that the US govt was behind the 9/11 attacks assumes that they have UNLIMITED capability. That ANYTHING is possible. Therefore, with this unlimited capability they could produce real WMD's for independent analysis. It would not have been a problem of anywhere near the complexity of organising this conspiracy on 9/11.

Thermite,

Firstly thermite does not explode. It is a chemical which burns rapidly at a very high temperature. However it could not be used in building demolition because compared to shaped charges it is very slow and unpredictable. See these videos. I imagine it will be the first time you have ever seen thermite. Demolishing a building roughly inside its footprint requires that the members be cut at exactly the right time. There is no way to guarantee with thermite exactly when, after you have initiated the burn, the steel will be cut.

http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=FEmHJORTlqk
http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=oiRJj2oRWnM&feature=related

compare this with a shaped charge which cuts almost instantly, and with a very big bang.

http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=LudNqf56AFo&feature=related

Paul.L's WMD argument is ludicrous and appears to be designed to waste my time and divert people's attention from the physical evidence and the overwhelming circumstantial evidence that shows that the Bush cabal almost certainly orchestrated the attacks. No-one claimed that those within the Bush administration who orchestrated the 9/11 attacks had unlimited resources.

Those prepared to look, unlike Paul.L, will see huge and gaping holes in the official explanation of the 9/11 attacks. Clearly, whilst massive resources would have been necessary to stage these attacks, they still would have had vastly less than what would have been necessary to completely conceal the evidence that the U.S. Government had orchestrated the attacks everybody.

Likewise with the WMD's I don't see how it would have been possible, even with the massive resources which would have been available to the U.S., to plant evidence of a substantial WMD program in Iraq in such a way that WMD inspectors and other expert observers would not have seen through it.

---

I don't have time to immediately unsplit every hair that Paul.L has split, but I commend the blog entry (http://www.911blogger.com/node/15847) of Kevin Ryan (http://www.ultruth.com/) the celebrated whistle blower, who was sacked for publicly criticising his employers 'investigation' into the causes of the collapses of the WTC buildings, which is further evidence that explosives must have been used.

It includes photos of roasted cars in the WTC basement, the non-metallic parts of many of which had been completely vapourised.

A fireman said of the man who gave him the photos, "I asked him if he saw any molten metal, he told me there were pools of molten metal under the pile and in the basements. He even said that there were spots that water had pooled up and was just bubbling like a pot of boiling water with molten metal underneath, like in the Nat/Geo movies of underwater volcanic lava flows."

The person who took the photos is now dying of cancer as a result of having breathed in so much concrete, asbestos and other poisons which had been pulverised by the explosions.

Dagget,

After humouring you for all this time I find it rather offensive that you would suggest that my contention was ludicrous. Every time I shoot down one of your stupid arguments you ignore it as if it never happened and move on. So in your latest rant we hear nothing about thermite? Why?

In my latest posts I have 1 point, so unsplitting hairs or your supposed difficulty in responding to ALL my points is just RIDICULOUS.

You say " No-one claimed that those within the Bush administration who orchestrated the 9/11 attacks had unlimited resources."

This is absolute BULLS!T. All of the conspiracy NUTS theories RELY upon the fact that ANYTHING they think of could be carried out by the US gov't.

For example the building demolitions. No civilian contractor could have done this without months of preparation time, mountains of explosives, and even still the evidence that the building was demolished would be OBVIOUS. YET you conspiracy nuts conclude that the US gov't could have done it because you assume they have capability that no one else has.

I contend that the capabilities to find fake weapons in Iraq and have them independently verified is a FAR, FAR easier task than hijacking four jets, and killing or hiding their passengers, Demolishing three massive buildings, smashing the pentagon, and have NO REAL evidence show up. So WHY wouldn't they do it.

There IS NO actual evidence of gov't involvement, merely variations on the "the possibilities of it happening this way are remote". Of course that is an entirely subjective judgement, as many people have no problem with the manner in which things occurred, even after reading the nonsense put about by the loonies.

They say 1 in 4 Americans believe in the conspiracy. what a surpise that this number also coincides with the number of retards.

see http://www.911podcasts.com/files/video/south_park_1009.wmv

Paul.L wrote, "So in your latest rant we hear nothing about thermite? Why?"

I didn't write anything about thermite because I simply don't have time to get my head around every imaginable technical aspect related to 9/11. Whatever you imagine you have proven by writing about thermite, there are abundant records of eyewitness accounts of explosions prior to and during to the collapses of the twin towers and WTC7. Here are just some, including actual recordings of explosions:

"9/11 witness heard explosion before south tower collapse" at http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=xBSueewHs9s
"WTC 7 Explosion on Audio (heard by firemen)" at http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=0YvrKfWkxdw
"9/11 - Explosion witness Compilation" at http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=qGx7ci-9KiU
"9/11: Total Proof That Bombs Were Planted In The Buildings!" at http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=8n-nT-luFIw (10 min - incorporates some of the other broadcasts)

The broadcast "9/11 Key Witness Barry Jennings Murdered?" at http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=nguZciLJTj4 decribes the case of Barry Jennings who was interviewed for "Loose Change" and subsequently asked that his interview not be included as threats against his job and other unspecified threats had been made against him. On 19 August just over two months ago he died under mysterious circumstances at the age of 53.

On top of the evidence of explosions, there is abundant evidence of the existence of large pools of molten steel underneath the wreckage of the twin towers for days after the collapse. I gave some evidence of this in my last post and you have not acknowledged that.

Paul.L wrote "They say 1 in 4 Americans believe in the conspiracy. what a surpise that this number also coincides with the number of retards."

I am sure that the proportion of U.S. citizens who believe that the Government was behind the attacks is closer to 50%.

Tell, me Paul.L, do you think that for up to half an our after George Bush admitted he learnt of the attacks (http://www.thememoryhole.org/911/bush-911.htm), he acted as:

A) a 'retard'; or
B) someone who had foreknowledge of the attacks?

Daggett,

1) you were the one who brought up Thermite. I merely pointed out to you that Thermite doesn’t explode.

2) Just because people thought they heard explosions, doesn’t mean the building was demolished. There are a lot of things which can sound like explosions when millions of tonnes of steel is raining down. When very large things like steel beams break they make a big bang, funnily enough. There were also transformers in the building and UPS which could easily have exploded. However seismic recorders situated nearby picked up no evidence of the sort of explosions necessary to drop a building.

3) ALL demolitions of large buildings take the lower floors out first to get the building moving. The collapse of WTC1,2 began at the points where the damage was done. How were the explosives on those floors able to withstand the collision of the jets at 800km/h and the 1100 degree fires which ensued?

4) No structural damage occurred on the floors below the collapse until the falling floors above reached them. This does NOT occur in controlled demolition.

5) Molten steel. Where is the evidence? Certainly no molten steel was retrieved from the site. Secondly there were a lot of other metals on site which could have been in a molten state.

Here is the best article I’ve found so far that deals with your pseudo-scientific claims. READ IT please. It covers ALL of the arguments you have used on this site and answers ALL of them.

You have offered NO actual evidence, only hearsay, speculation and the “how could it have happened like that” pseudoscience of the uneducated or ill-informed.

Bush's reaction proves NOTHING. It certainly doesn’t prove foreknowledge and even suggesting it is SO preposterous that I am wondering if there is ANYTHING you won’t believe/repeat. Just in case you are so obtuse that you think I’m avoiding the question, I think the way George Bush acted for however long it was, was intended to demonstrate that he wasn’t panicking. But regardless, drawing conclusions like this is PURE speculation and has NO MERIT