But where did the Twin Towers go to so quickly?

[Hugh Manatee Wins]

......
That post was directed at Hugh, apologies:)
I actually agreed 100% with your statement, and I definitely find it curious
that the whole mainstream focus on the "truth" movement is on CD.

I was directing that comment to Hugh, saying that forget everything else, 9/11 rests on CD solely

Man, the totalist language here. I ain't sayin' that.
"All liberals"..."all Truthers" ...."all ---"
whole---"
...chill with that confusion language, bro'!

I AM saying that controlled demolition is THE highest value face card in our anti-fascism Truth hand and too many of us don't even realize this.

So don't fold.

The controllers are bluffing and counting on us not realizing what we've got or discouraging us from playing our winning hand in front of the masses.

The controllers were cursed and blessed when they were dealt the controlled demolition by surprise and are stuck having to hide it to keep exploiting it. Just as intended by the perps. Just like Dealey Plaza and OKCity, etc.

They have to keep bluffing.
And this is their Achilles Heel.

[Hugh Manatee Wins]

Take the time to read some of the technical papers at Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth. Avoid Jeff's YouTube clips. (sorry Jeff)

One 8 page paper on the momentum transfer analysis of the Twin Towers concludes that the web of steel beams acts like a spring and as the first floor shifts (collapses) the energy would be transferred to the rest of the building until very soon any real collapse would STOP.

http://www.journalof911studies.com/articles/Journal_5_PTransferRoss.pdf
• Momentum Transfer Analysis of the Collapse of the Upper Stories of WTC 1
Gordon Ross Journal of 9/11 Studies

Yes, it is more likely that if any real collapse happened it would be very brief and then stop as compression and elasticity of the steel is transferred throughout the building to absorb and disperse any generated kinetic energy like a big strong spring.

Put THAT in your pipe and smoke it, NIST.

Some ae911truth.org articles-

http://www.ae911truth.org/techarts.php

Technical Articles

• Mysteries of the Twin Towers —
A Survey of the Available Evidence On the Collapse of the World Trade Center Towers
— Footnotes
Rodger Herbst; BAAE, ME

• Momentum Transfer Analysis of the Collapse of the Upper Stories of WTC 1
Gordon Ross Journal of 9/11 Studies

• Direct Evidence for Explosions: Flying Projectiles and Widespread Impact Damage
Dr. Crockett Grabbe

• Lies about the WTC by NIST and Underwriters Laboratories
Kevin Ryan - U.L. whistleblower - former Site Manager

• Physical Chemistry of Thermite, Thermate, Iron-Alum-Rich Microspheres at Demise of WTC 1 & 2
Jerry Lobdill 6/15/2007

• The Destruction of WTC 7
Vesa Raiskila

• The NIST WTC Investigation -- How Real Was The Simulation?
Eric Douglas, Architect

• Revisiting 9/11/2001 -- Applying the Scientific Method
Prof. Steven E. Jones, Ph.D., Physics

• DR. BAZANT - NIST's 911 FALL GUY
by Gordon Ross, ME [1], June 4, 2007*

• Open Letter to Purdue President France Córdova
Kevin Ryan, B.S. Chem.

• Jones vs. Robertson:
A Physicist and a Structural Engineer Debate the Controlled Demolition of the World Trade Center
Gregg Roberts, Associate Editor, 911Research.com

• Another Structural Engineer Questions WTC Collapses
William Rice, P.E.

• Can Physics Rewrite History?
Chuck Thurston

• Reply to Protec's
A critical analysis of the collapse of WTC towers 1, 2 & 7 from an explosives and conventional demolition industry viewpoint
Jim Hoffman

• NIST's World Trade Center FAQ:
A Reply to the National Institute for Standards and Technology's Answers to Frequently Asked Questions
Jim Hoffman

• Building a Better Mirage
NIST's 3-Year $20,000,000 Cover-Up of the Crime of the Century
Jim Hoffman

• The Destruction of the World Trade Center:
Why the Official Account Cannot Be True
David Ray Griffin

• Another reason the 9/11 fire-mediated collapse theory is wrong
Joseph Smith

• Popular Mechanics' Assault on 9/11 Truth
Jim Hoffman

• Why Indeed Did the WTC Buildings Completely Collapse?
Dr. Steven E. Jones

• Proof That The Thermal and Gravitational Energy Available Were Insufficient to Melt Steel in the Twin Towers and 7 World Trade Center on 9/11/01
Terry Morrone

• Report on Weidlinger Simulation
Leaked WTC Blueprints contain 3D simulations from the Weidlinger report that contradict the NIST repoort of the Twin Tower's destruction

• Engineering News Record: The World Trade Center

• Bad Science: Keith Seffen And The WTC 'Collapse'
Winter Patriot blog 9/14/07

• UK Engineer: WTC 'Collapses' Were 'A Very Ordinary Thing'
Winter Patriot blog 9/11/07

• Explosions or Collapse?

The Semantics of Deception and the Significance of Categories
C. Thurston

• My Response to Ryan Mackey and the Self-Crushing Building Theory, "On Debunking 9/11 Debunking"
by Chuck Thurston

• NIST Data Disproves Collapse Theories Based on Fire
Frank Legge (Ph D) Logical Systems Consulting Perth, Western Australia. flegge@iinet.net.au

• High Velocity Bursts of Debris from Point-Like Sources in the WTC Towers
Kevin Ryan

• Keith Seffen's WTC Collapse Folly: Not Even Wrong
Arkadiusz Jadczyk Nov. 10, 2007

• Analysis of the Mass and Potential Energy of WTC Tower 1
by Gregory Urich December, 2007

• How the Towers Were Demolished
by Gordon Ross

• Collapse of the North Tower of the World Trade Center
Crockett Grabbe © January 18, 2008 University of Iowa & SeaLane Consulting

• Response to NIST on Control Demolition Investigation Failure
Crockett Grabbe © January 13, 2008 University of Iowa & SeaLane Consulting

• Response to NIST on Energy and Momentum
Crockett Grabbe © January 18, 2008 University of Iowa & SeaLane Consulting

• Collapse of the South Tower of the World Trade Center
Crockett Grabbe © December 23, 2007 University of Iowa & SeaLane Consulting

• Science in the Bush: When Politics Displaces Physics
By Dr. Crockett Grabbe and Lenny Charles 9/08/07

• 9/11 and the Twin Towers: Sudden Collapse Initiation Was Impossible
Dec 23, 2007
by Frank Legge, PhD & Tony Szamboti, Mechanical Engineer

• Dr Seffen Paper Proven Ludicrous
by Mick Meany
Feb, 2008

• Extremely high temperatures during the World Trade Center destruction
Steven E. Jones, Jeffrey Farrer, Gregory S. Jenkins, Frank Legge, James Gourley, Kevin Ryan, Danial Farnsworth, and Crockett Grabbe
January 2007

• Engineer Sees Evidence of Extreme Temperatures in WTC Steel
Submitted by Shoestring on Mon, 02/25/2008

• The Sustainability of the Controlled Demolition Hypothesis for the Destruction of the Twin Towers
Tony Szamboti, ME --- May, 2007

• WTC 1 - The Case for Collapse Arrest
Anders Bjorkman - Apr 19, 2008

[8bitagent]

Oh I have no doubt the Alfred P Murrah building had bombs planted, even Terry Nichols has come out and called it a government op with planted explosives.

The issue Hugh, is when you say there's no connections of al Qaeda or hijackers, who you say don't even exist, to the deep state. The very beast you accuse of doing 9/11. This is also what Jeff's point is.

How are we so sure it was literally wired, controlled demolition with floors rigged with classic Vegas style implosion technology?

And "fascism" ain't just a Western thing. Look at the people oppressed in North Korea, China, Saudi Arabia, etc.

[barracuda]

So you are accepting the conspiracy hobbyist viewpoint of JFK research? It seems like a rather broad brush to paint a large group of diverse people with - though clearly that stereotype has a direct parallel with 9/11 CD proponents.

That parallel was what I was pointing out. There are thousands of ways to view the JFK shooting, but after the "lightbulb over the head" moment, most of these viewpoints lead nowhere but to 1.) peer-through-the-blinds paranoia, 2.) impotent distrust of your country, 3.) wheel-spinning.

Do we not have thousands of dedicated and interested people on a global interconnected network? Why should we be restricted from pursuing any course of research we like?

By all means research, but I personally do not require a smoking gun to point "the finger" at the perps. If you do require this, you have a long road ahead as the JFK miasma proves. And I do not feel CD is the most effective way to sell the idea that your government is up to no good, or that 911=false flag.

To put it another way: would any of you really want those who disagree with you to drop everything and agree, based solely on your conviction of being correct?

Yes, actually, perhaps then we could get into the whole "how do I get my country back" thing.

Carnac The Magnificent predicts: until some new info on this topic pops up, the debate will remain highly emotional and go in the same circle. This is fine, as long as you don't mind wasting your time.

Agree completely.

[jingofever]

Ryan Mackey has a fine paper that discusses some of the points in the original post (and much more).

This page has some links discussing microspheres and other arguments from Jones and others.

Frank Greening has some papers here discussing thermite, concrete pulverization and other topics.

[Hugh Manatee Wins]

Dang. I want y'all to remember this, Pan, next time you accuse me of threadjacking or not listening to ble ble ble
I tried to discuss a specific topic. But associational psychology is just how we think.

.....
The issue Hugh, is when you say there's no connections of al Qaeda or hijackers, who you say don't even exist, to the deep state. The very beast you accuse of doing 9/11. This is also what Jeff's point is.

No, I know lots about the network of proxy mujahadeen that the CIA, MI6, and ISI weaponized against the Soviets and still work with.

But on the day of the crime of four jets crashed and three buildings blown up we have NO indication that those people were on the planes or that the planes were really hijacked by human beings.

That's why I protest when you tell us about "who financed 9/11."

This is like me saying I know that there really are commies BUT they didn't shoot JFK using their commie buddy Oswald.

How are we so sure it was literally wired, controlled demolition with floors rigged with classic Vegas style implosion technology?

See my op list or Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth. I won't list it all again here but-
All the characterstics of demolition.
...and...
None of the characteristics of gravity collapse due to fire.

Chemical and metallurgical evidence of thermite to boot.

And "fascism" ain't just a Western thing. Look at the people oppressed in North Korea, China, Saudi Arabia, etc.

Absolutely. Fascism is a male dominance cult. A big one.
But as social animals we tend to take our cues on behavioral norms from the alpha males.
Right now the USG is asserting itself as the world's alpha male and other countries will become more fascist as a protective response.

So we can affect the whole planet from within the belly of the beast by moderating USG fascism. And 9/11 Truth can be a big help in this effort. It already is despite the gloomy muttering of a few.

Many mil-intel people have our values and don't want to work for criminals either.
They can have their best instincts reinforced by our civilian work supporting integrity where an institution cannot allow itself this vulnerability.

[cptmarginal]

So you are accepting the conspiracy hobbyist viewpoint of JFK research? It seems like a rather broad brush to paint a large group of diverse people with - though clearly that stereotype has a direct parallel with 9/11 CD proponents.

That parallel was what I was pointing out. There are thousands of ways to view the JFK shooting, but after the "lightbulb over the head" moment, most of these viewpoints lead nowhere but to 1.) peer-through-the-blinds paranoia, 2.) impotent distrust of your country, 3.) wheel-spinning.

Most seems like the keyword here.

Do we not have thousands of dedicated and interested people on a global interconnected network? Why should we be restricted from pursuing any course of research we like?

By all means research, but I personally do not require a smoking gun to point "the finger" at the perps. If you do require this, you have a long road ahead as the JFK miasma proves. And I do not feel CD is the most effective way to sell the idea that your government is up to no good, or that 911=false flag.

That is not my intention by any means, nor does it seem realistic at all. As you presciently pointed out, 9/11 is obviously a comparatively lesser evil. You don't really see many people demanding for justice in regards to these greater evils, because they have not been emotionally imprinted with a traumatic event.

For me, information gathering itself is the requirement, in order to gain a better understanding of the world around me - and these lines of research have revolutionized my worldview several times over.

A limited hangout would be worthless and actually harmful. Many of the perpetrators will likely remain nameless and faceless to us - they work in an office somewhere at a critical juncture of the corporate control system. And that's a national security issue, of course. All trials are compromised if those who are accused legally control the flow of allowable information.

To put it another way: would any of you really want those who disagree with you to drop everything and agree, based solely on your conviction of being correct?

Yes, actually, perhaps then we could get into the whole "how do I get my country back" thing.

Perhaps another clarification is in order:

"those who disagree with you on this board"

...because the way you have applied it sounds totally appealing (at least in terms of emergency removal of fascists), which was not my intention.

That would be pretty cool, though. If everyone finally heard the alarm bell and reacted accordingly.

[thegovernmentflu]

See my op list or Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth. I won't list it all again here but-
All the characterstics of demolition.

As I've pointed out in the other active CD thread, the twin towers' collapse doesn't have all the characteristics of a standard demolition. In order to initiate a demolition from the point of the planes' impact to make it appear that the crashes caused structural failure, there had to have been explosives present at or near the impact site of the planes. Somehow the planes hit and didn't set off these explosives? Keeping that in mind, I think we can agree that if the towers DID come down by demolition, an utterly unique and previously unseen demolition technique was employed. Any supposition regarding what brand new demolition technique was developed specifically for the event of 911 enters the realm of total speculation. There's nothing wrong with informed speculation, but you really shouldn't act like it's on par with iron-clad proof. You also should avoid making it the crux of your entire argument, unless you're a big fan of being dismissed outright by "debunkers".

[Joe Hillshoist]

I expected quibbling about the exact time of destruction but don't miss the rest of the list of physical evidence in the meantime.

If I drop an object through 1000 feet of thin air and another through 1000 feet of a battleship, which lands first?

orz -

If I drop a 10 story building on a 90 story building how much slower than free fall does it fall?

Quibbling about the time of destruction...

Hugh 15 seconds is 50% more than the the free fall time. Take the free fall time, halve it and add it to the original free fall time. You have time and a half. To me a 50% slower time of collapse means that its significantly slower than free fall.

To me continuing to claim free fall = 50% slower than free fall is inaccurate or dishonest.

[Hugh Manatee Wins]

See my op list or Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth. I won't list it all again here but-
All the characterstics of demolition.

As I've pointed out in the other active CD thread, the twin towers' collapse doesn't have all the characteristics of a standard demolition.

Demolition does in fact have discernable physical characteristics even if it isn't "standard."

From the site I keep referring you to-

http://www.ae911truth.org/



As seen in this revealing photo the Twin Towers' destruction exhibited all the characteristics of destruction by explosions:
1. Extremely rapid onset of “collapse”
2. Sounds of explosions and flashes of light witnessed at the beginning of the "collapse" by 118 first responders
3. Observations of flashes (seen by numerous professionals)
4. Squibs, or “mistimed” explosions, 40 floors below the “collapsing” building seen in all the videos
5. Mid-air pulverization of all the 90,000 tons of concrete and steel decking, filing cabinets & 1000 people – mostly to dust
6. Massive volume of expanding pyroclastic dust clouds
7. Vertical progression of full building perimeter demolition waves
8. Symmetrical collapse – through the path of greatest resistance – at nearly free-fall speed — the columns gave no resistance
9. 1,400 foot diameter field of equally distributed debris – outside of building footprint
10. Blast waves blew out windows in buildings 400 feet away
11. Lateral ejection of thousands of individual 20 - 50 ton steel beams up to 500 feet
12. Total destruction of the building down to individual structural steel elements – obliterating the steel core structure.
13. Tons of molten Metal found by FDNY under all 3 high-rises (What could have produced all of that molten metal?)
14. Chemical signature of Thermate (high tech incendiary) found in slag, solidified molten metal, and dust samples by Physics professor Steven Jones, PhD.
15. FEMA finds rapid oxidation and intergranular melting on structural steel samples
16. More than 1000 Bodies are unaccounted for — 700 tiny bone fragments found on top of nearby buildings

And exhibited none of the characteristics of destruction by fire, i.e.
1. Slow onset with large visible deformations
2. Asymmetrical collapse which follows the path of least resistance (laws of conservation of momentum would cause a falling, intact, from the point of plane impact, to the side most damaged by the fires)
3. Evidence of fire temperatures capable of softening steel
4. High-rise buildings with much larger, hotter, and longer lasting fires have never “collapsed”

In order to initiate a demolition from the point of the planes' impact to make it appear that the crashes caused structural failure, there had to have been explosives present at or near the impact site of the planes. Somehow the planes hit and didn't set off these explosives?

The Twin Towers was designed to easily withstand the equivalent of bombs - a full speed plane hit plus fuel fire - so required lots of thermite and bombs to bring it down, not just a few.

Perhaps the planes did set off some thermite charges upon impact and this is the reason for the tilt of WTC2 just before destruction.

Keeping that in mind, I think we can agree that if the towers DID come down by demolition, an utterly unique and previously unseen demolition technique was employed. Any supposition regarding [b]what brand new demolition technique was developed specifically for the event of 911 enters the realm of total speculation.

[b]The existing demolition technology was totally sufficient for what happened-
Wireless remote control of charges, sophisticated thermite housings to use on beams, military high-explosives, etc.

The 'exactly how' of demolition has some partial speculation but not "total speculation."
That it WAS done is proven by physics and evidence.

This is article from ae911truth.org is a very comprehensive explanation of a four-phase demolition using the evidence available.

Highly recommended-
http://gordonssite.tripod.com/id2.html

• How the Towers Were Demolished
by Gordon Ross

There's nothing wrong with informed speculation, but you really shouldn't act like it's on par with iron-clad proof.

Yes, there is iron-clad proof that there was no "fire-fueled pancake collapse."
Many things cannot have happened due to just those energy sources including this-

You also should avoid making it the crux of your entire argument, unless you're a big fan of being dismissed outright by "debunkers".

It's not the crux of my entire argument but it is a permanent and proven part of it just as the real autopsy of JFK and the Zapruder film both showed he was shot from the front.

Consider the difference between JFK and WTC-
>Everyone knew someone shot JFK.
>Only some of us know the WTC was blown up.

Speaking of energy, one might note how much energy is put into generating disinfo on this topic - "no planes," "energy beams from space," "nukes," etc.

There's an Achilles Heel under all that smoke and mirrors.
This nonsense is meant to make it harder to get others to see with certainty this hidden enormous 9/11 crime.

I'm dismayed to see resistance from people who have seen those photos and don't admit that only explosions can do that.

But I know how pre-biasing and verbal clouding can create blindness to the obvious.

[Hugh Manatee Wins]

Thanks for being on topic, Joe. I appreciate it.

.....
Hugh 15 seconds is 50% more than the the free fall time. Take the free fall time, halve it and add it to the original free fall time. You have time and a half. To me a 50% slower time of collapse means that its significantly slower than free fall.

Where is your "15 seconds" from?

The NIST said 9.something seconds for one tower and 11 seconds for the other.
That is really really close to freefall and probably one of the things they did get close to right-I've watched the videos of the destruction dozens of times now at presentations by Steven Jones and Richard Gage.

The demolition shock wave can be seen racing down the towers and the only reason the debris is shortly behind it coming down is because the debris is being exploded out horizontally hundreds of feet after having been turned into clouds of particulate matter .

So the large arcing trajectory and the wind resistance slow the arrival of the debris.
But the demolition wave to the ground is very near freefall speed.

Wherever your "15 seconds" comes from, that's still waaaay too short for the alleged pancake collapse due to gravity and some papers says the structure would act like a shock absorber and slow any real collapse to a stop quite quickly so there couldn't even BE a 'pancake collapse.'

To me continuing to claim free fall = 50% slower than free fall is inaccurate or dishonest.

I understand your distinction and appreciate your scrutinizing this detail, the reason I put up the thread.

[Joe Hillshoist]

I have watched several videos of both towers collapsing, probably every one available, and its my own conclusion, tho its seems consistant with other people's assessments, including some pro CD people.

Its not an accurate figure to within tenths of a second, but I'd say it is accurate within + or - 1 second.

I don't understand how NIST can claim fall times of 9 or 11 seconds when clearly that isn't the case. But then NIST hasn't exactly been a shininh example of credibility.

IMO one of the things worth examining is why NIST chose the collapse times it chose. That methodology is either flawed or deliberately wrong.

I also think that some of the anomalies you claim with the collapse can be explained away...

The beams being ejected such huge distances are tiny in comparison to all the energy/momentum in the collapsing structure, and that energy is being directed in all directions, it doesn't take much of the total energy of the system to propell one or several steel beams 150 metres. This concept is illustrated really well in a video game called Armadillo Run.

The pyrochlastic dust clouds are billowing out cos of the mass of the building falling through them and displacing their mass. This seems obvious from watching footage of the collapse. At least to me.

Your previous post (1.58 on 16/5) had a photo in it, the first one just below the 911 architects and engineers link.

In that photo you can clearly see an intact section of wall 4 or 5 stories high, roughly square in shape falling at free fall speed. It is significantly ahead of the main collapse through the actual building, which appears intact for 5, 10 or more stories above. Thats a humungous chunk of concrete falling at free fall speed isn't it?

If the builfing was falling at the same speed as free fall the building should have collapsed to the same point as that chunk of wall, if it was nearly free fall it should be alot closer. It clearly isn't.

Wherever your "15 seconds" comes from, that's still waaaay too short for the alleged pancake collapse due to gravity and some papers says the structure would act like a shock absorber and slow any real collapse to a stop quite quickly so there couldn't even BE a 'pancake collapse.'

I don't know about that, for all I know its plenty of time, and I don't think "pancake collapse" is even a helpful term. It assumes or implies that whats falling will be planes of mass, like a pancake, instead of chaoticly distributed elements of what were planes of mass before the collapse started. By plane of mass I mean each individual floor and the the stuff on those floors, partitionsm, desks, computers, filing cabinets etc etc.

Keep in mind that when I say 15 seconds thats what I see watching the video of the collapse, so thats from the first movement till the outside wall hits the ground. (If you want me to explain, slowly my own process on how I jusge the timing I'll do it on another post after this.)

Thats the outside of the building, the inner parts of it could be collapsing at a slower speed and we wouldn't be able to tell cos the whole thing is obscured by dust.

If the NIST ncollapse times given are based on seismic readings then perhaps they could refer to the rest of the material hitting the ground, ie the time NIST gave was in fact time from the first significant debris hitting the ground till the last. That would add another 10 seconds to the actual collapse time. (I have no issue with people claiming the NIST report was reverse engineered, nor with the claim that is was done incompetenbtly and with no real clue about what actually happened.)

Do you see where I am going here?

Also I have seen photos of immense piles of concrete and other debris with some of the biggest excavators I have ever seen on them and those piles dwarf the excavators. Close ups show chunks of concrete, not a big pile of dust. I have also seen a photo of the site with the remains of the central column of one building standing on its own tens of stories high.

To me that isn't obliterated or pulverised.

Cheers.

[stefano]

I'm with barracuda - this is a complete waste of energy. It was a conspiracy, anyone who's spent a half an hour thinking about it agrees. But arguing about CD or no CD is playing into the hands of the people who did it. Hence the disinfo. Keeping this argument going is a way to keep intelligent, ethical people shackled to computer keyboards where they can be monitored and their impact be kept to a minimum.

It's also pretty offensive that 9/11 has this reputations as 'the crime of the century' when a country has been invaded and destroyed in the meantime. Why is the murder of 4 000 Americans of so much more consequence than the murder of a million Iraqis and the forced migration of two million more? That also irritated me on that other thread, when people were going on about black magic, talking about the event like it was some momentous thing that the forces of evil had been conspiring to make happen for fucking eons. Never mind Hiroshima, forget Falluja, buddy, when Americans die it's huge. Not just any Americans, mind you, ones wearing suits. Oh, the horror! We must never forget!

[Hugh Manatee Wins]

I'm with barracuda - this is a complete waste of energy. It was a conspiracy, anyone who's spent a half an hour thinking about it agrees.

There's still lots of people duped and many sitting on a fence wondering whether they can face the shame of being a "conspiracy theorist."

Making the case solid bolsters the choir and brings in converts.

But arguing about CD or no CD is playing into the hands of the people who did it. Hence the disinfo. Keeping this argument going is a way to keep intelligent, ethical people shackled to computer keyboards where they can be monitored and their impact be kept to a minimum.

Most of us wouldn't know shit if we hadn't spent time "shackled to our keyboards" and then spending some time passing on what we've learned is CRUCIAL to institutionalizing having figured out these spook bastards control games.

It's also pretty offensive that 9/11 has this reputations as 'the crime of the century' when a country has been invaded and destroyed in the meantime. Why is the murder of 4 000 Americans of so much more consequence than the murder of a million Iraqis and the forced migration of two million more?

Absolutely. I agree with you. But the media psy-ops plays up American exceptionalism as USG = God's Hand and tries to make all history start at 9/11.

And that's another reason to expose this mind fuck system designed to trick people into war and torture against the world's poor to steal their stuff.

That also irritated me on that other thread, when people were going on about black magic, talking about the event like it was some momentous thing that the forces of evil had been conspiring to make happen for fucking eons.

I agree with you again. Portraying ugly mundane murder and lying into an overly-theatrical entertainment is doing the same thing that the mass murderers did, make people's lives into a psy-ops commodity.

Never mind Hiroshima, forget Falluja, buddy, when Americans die it's huge. Not just any Americans, mind you, ones wearing suits. Oh, the horror! We must never forget!

I agree with you.
And putting some damn reality back into the mix is critical to getting more Americans out of the mindset that life is a fucking Indiana Jones movie with the innocent exploring white man set upon by darker evil savages.

[orz]

As seen in this revealing photo the Twin Towers' destruction exhibited all the characteristics of destruction by explosions:

Most of the things subsequently listed are not seen in that photo.