Correction.Marvin Bush owned the security company that hand the contract for the WTC,not the elevator company.

Here Arjay and Co:

The Bush bro Marvin didn't do anything re: being in charge of security *or elevators. This fella says that he hadn't worked for the company for more than a year anyway, but while there his job had been installing security cameras and such.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sh8hErn2UZU

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sh8hErn2UZU

daggett: <"...we would have to believe that every steel-framed skyscraper in the world is effectively a massive bomb just waiting to collapse explosively to dust and debris, given the slightest jolt...">

If they get a "slight jolt" like an airliner crashing into the building maybe they would fall down too.

I understand that the exterior of the towers was composed of aluminium plates or something - relatively light; which is all the stuff that can be seen fluttering away.

Pynchme the mosquito netting exterior structure was steel and extremely strong.Why did it take 6 yrs for an investigation to be done on WTC 7? It was not included in the original investigation.I did not know that WTC 7 existed until last yr.

You obiviously have not viewed all the evidence.Fire as never before or since has brought down steel/concrete high rise.Buildings have burnt for 17 hrs at much hotter temps and not collapsed.Fire compromises building non uniformly and past videos show buildings falling over but they are nearly all brick and timber.

The only way to bing abuilding down in it's own footprint is through perfectly timed sequenced explosives.As well as explosives they cut the steel with oxy torches.Nano thermite does both.It will cut through steel and explode without the big flashes and noise of C4.

The more you investigate the anomolies arise.Charlie Sheen has asked Obama for a new open investigation.58% if respondents of a questionaire on the Ron Paul site want a new investigation.Obama and Congress should do this now.Let's put all the conjecture to rest by having one,but they are running scared and refuse to answer the questions or even look at the peer reviewed paper of Prof Niels Harrit on nano-thermite.

Put an end to all the lies and have a real investigation.

Arjay: I've looked at all the info I could find on Prof Niels Harrit's thermite biz, including his interviews; pros and cons.

If there was thermite found (and there are arguments against the findings being anything remarkable) he says it would have taken tons of it to make an impact. He says if he'd had to cart it in; it would have taken pallets to move it. That's a huge quantity not only to be taken into each building; but placed as well.

Btw it doesn't cut through steel neatly; it makes a messy burn through metal. Arguments against thermite being used to cut the steel posts are that the cutting was done afterwards during the removal of debris (and the site had pics of that being done).

Anyway, let's assume it did happen: I'd be looking at the owner of the buildings and insurance claims and such. Surely the insurer would be most interested in initiating an independent inquiry anyway - which they are entitled to and equipped to launch.

Why is it that the government is believed to have set it up (if it happened) rather than the building owner/s or some foreign power or just plain terrorists.

Maybe the owner is a terrorist or sympathiser? Mebbe some anti-US ME faction owned the buildings ? Have any of those possibilities been explored ?

Btw I have some respect for Ron Paul; not that I'd necessarily agree with him (he's a bit too conservative on some issues for me; but I believe he's a person who does a decent job). If he is taking these matters seriously (what exactly is he saying?) I'd be interested to get his point of view. Just don't have time right now to chase it up.

Charlie Sheen - haha don't bother. He's a li'l terrorist himself :)

PynchMe,

Compared to all the energy in the enormous violent billowing cloud of debris that both towers became, the respective impact of each of the two planes were just 'slight jolts'.

As I pointed out that article at http://www.debunking911.com/freefall.htm is effectively arguing that the Twin Towers and every other skyscraper and are massive bombs that only needed a jolt, such as from a crashing airplane, and perhaps flames from residual fires from the remaining aviation fuel to trigger them. Read the conclusion to all his/her calculations:

"Now, that's 272 tons of TNT, more or less; five hundred forty one-thousand-pound blockbuster bombs, more or less. That's over a quarter kiloton. We're talking about as much energy as a small nuclear weapon- and we've only calculated the kinetic energy of the falling building. We haven't added in the burning fuel, ..."

Further along he adds:

"You know, I'm betting we have a kiloton to play with here. I bet we have a twentieth of the energy that turned the entire city of Nagasaki into a flat burning plain with a hundred-foot hole surrounded by a mile of firestorm to work with."

There just might be a something in all of that if we were to assume that those buildings were built with only barely enough strength to hold them up. However, they had a massive amount of redundant structural strength and no account whatsoever is made of that in any of those calculations.

If that person "[has] much greater scientific and engineering expertise than [me]", then he is certainly using that expertise not to inform, but to confuse the issue.

You haven't answered my question, PynchMe:

"... if all those images of the twin towers 'collapsing' are not images of those buildings being blown apart, then I would sure like to know what an explosion looks like."

In any case, the impacts of the planes clearly did not trigger the 'collapses' of the two towers. Otherwise they would have collapsed immediately. As it was the damage caused by the impacts was fully absorbed.

(tobecontinued)

(continuedfromabove)

In regard to PynchMe's supposed rebuttal of Dr Niels Harritt, I would sure like to know the sources.

I could well imagine that it would take a number of pallets to move into each of the towers enough explosives to bring down the buildings.

So what?

Is he arguing that there would not have been forklift trucks in the basement of the building to unload the nano-thermite?

Is he suggesting that it would not be possible to make sure that the wrong people would not have been able to look close enough to see what they were?

Also, it seems to me that PynchMe has confused ordinary (macro) thermite with nano-thermite. Until he properly cites his sources, we will have no way of working out to what he is referring.