The horror of Sept. 11th, 2001

I believe your CBS transcript was in error. The transcript as provided to the September 11th investigation commission showed Paul Wolfowitz making remarks of that character, and both Rice and Rumsfeld shutting him down.

Then the onus is now on you to provide that transcript, Setanta.

Along with an explanation as to why Mr. Rumsfeld took the blame.

You are probably also aware of the following. I would appreciate your opinion of this.

http://www.bollyn.com/game-over-evidence-of-super-thermite-in-the-rubble

The research paper written by an international team of nine scientists led by Dr. Steven E. Jones of Brigham Young University analyzes red-gray chips of a highly-explosive thermitic material "characterized as nano-thermite or super-thermite," which was found in dust samples from the collapsed towers. The paper was published in the Open Chemical Physics Journal and marks a historic breakthrough in the scientific investigation of the explosive collapses of the Twin Towers, although it has not been widely covered by the media outside of Salt Lake City. If we had a truly free press in the United States this important discovery would be front page news and a subject of discussion on every news outlet in the nation.

Finally, intelligent discourse.

Thank you.

I'd be interested to hear the explanation as to how these chips of super thermite, which so readily tested as explosive, survived the initial explosion and fire.

Chips kinda denotes something you can handle. Explosions send particles in many directions, and that goes for the incendiaries too. Detectable evidence as small as ten microns will show what caused a fire.

An explosion of this magnititude will send debris, along with the catalyctic incendiary device/s in all directions. HTH.

So somehow these chips of highly explosive material just flew out of that fireball without igniting?
Then they were tested, and easily ignited leaving residue consistent with super thermite?
Sorry, ain't buyin it.

I don't want you to buy it, my friend. I ain't selling it.

I want you to state your credentials for ignoring scientific factual evidence from a peer-reviewed science journal.

Missed this bit. Apparently an intact driver's licence just flew out from one of the hijacker's pockets, and landed in the street. Remember???

For one thing, drivers licenses aren't made of explosive material.
And a little research indicates that nano-laminated compositions require a little more finesse in application than a spraygun.

So a laminated plastic driver's license will withstand an explosive impact, raging fire, and a building collapse? But a skerrick of explosive nano-thermite will be undetectable??? LOL. Classic.

Late edit; forgot to say that this driver's license was in the pocket of the pilot, or one of the hijackers.

No credentials are required to think for one's self.
Questioning conclusions and asking clarification isn't ignoring evidence, but it ain't the blind acceptance you seem to want.

Granted. Thinking for oneself also requires taking in information, and dissecting that information before thinking.



I don't want anything from you, Wayne. I would appreciate your application of intelligence in matters of importance. If these matters aren't that important to you, then so be it.

Ask any fire man about the strange things that survive fires and explosions, not at all hard to believe the drivers license.
What is curious is that enough of a highly explosive material survived as to permeate all the dust.
I've read the blog, the paper, three articles on nano-laminate thermites, and what I see is a lot of non-specific possibles and a whole lot of questions unanswered.
Especially when the ingredients are the same as paint.

Care to elaborate on that claim, buddy?

According to the German authorities, nano-thermite is an advanced composition not known to any but the upper echelon of science.

I highly doubt that it has any properties associated with paint, other than it is a liquid form.

You didn't know that iron oxide and aluminum are ingredients in paint?

http://asia-sourcing.net/kw-Alcohol-Acid-Iron-Oxide-Red-Aluminium-Powder-Anticorrosive-Paint.html

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof

Maybe they can do a comparison study on anti-corrosive paint as a base line, then I might start to take their science seriously

I know plenty about paint, Wayne. Iron oxide is only present in oxide-rich, oil-based, metal primers. Aluminium hydroxides are flow agents in water-based acrylic paints. A combination of these two elements does not add up to nano-thermite, and if you have two dimes to rub together above your eyebrows, you know that too.

Ask any chemist worth his/her salt if those two possibles could ever result in a detection of nano, and they would smile and send you to the bar for a round of drinks. Try again, my friend.

Doesnt sound odd to me. The world of micro-particules is weird like that... there is always some kind of residue or evidence left of everything that happens.

Since you're so knowledgable, then you are well aware of the large amounts of steel in the world trade center, all coated with anti-corrosive paint.
I see no comparison done, along with your precious paper, ruling out the most obvious. It should be easy to find a sample, the dust must be full of particles.
I also didn't see any supporting evidence as to the reactions of actual thermite to the tests they performed, where is their baseline?
The other thing I can't find, is any actual peer-reviews of this paper posted on an open pee-reviewed web site. But maybe you know where they sre.

If that's what they claimed I wouldn't think it so odd.
They're saying actual chips of a laminate thermite, not residue