Jim Hoffman's "Explosives Found in World Trade Center Dust"

[Edx]

Just found browsing and found this quote:

Perhaps the plane crashes did trigger some of the charges. If so, their blasts were lost in the jet-crash fireballs, and their damage was insufficient to budge the Towers' tops. Thermite incendiaries in the core ignited by the crash would not be visible over the fires, unless dislodged to the building's exterior, as apparently happened in the South Tower. However, this probably wasn't an issue because, in contrast to conventional explosives, thermite has a very high ignition temperature -- above 2200ºC. Thus, thermitic incendiaries used around the crash zones could have been designed to survive the fires. As for thermitic explosives, they could have been designed to detonate only on exposure to the very extreme conditions of temperature and pressure provided by specialized detonators, and to deflagrate (merely burn) in response to the kinds of pressures and temperatures produced by the plane crashes and fires. As a fail-safe, the demolition sequence could have been programmed to be triggered by premature ignitions of pyrotechnics.

Note the bolded part above.

Is he saying that thermite can only be ignited at temperatres above 2200ºC?

In that case how do so many people that make homemade thermite manage to ignite it with little more than a lighter?

[TruthersLie]

Edx.

The bolded part is pretty close. In order to get the reaction going it has to be under HIGH heat. You need something added to the mix to create the thermitic reaction. Usually a magnesium triggering device. So you light the fuse, it then lights the magnesium and it lights the thermite.

While that part is true the VERY next two sentences are lies. There are NO thermitic explosives. Even thermite grenades for the military are NOT explosive.

Too often twoofs don't understand that thermite (all grades) are incendiaries not explosives... but what do you expect of folks who think that high school chemistry is too tough.

[Muadib]

That's odd...

I tought Harrit & al proved that their super-nano-thermite/ate ignite around 450°C? :D

[~enigma~]

Edx.

The bolded part is pretty close. In order to get the reaction going it has to be under HIGH heat. You need something added to the mix to create the thermitic reaction. Usually a magnesium triggering device. So you light the fuse, it then lights the magnesium and it lights the thermite.
Nope. You can light a proper stoichiometric mix with a match plus grinding of ferric metals is a fairly common cause of mini thermite fireballs.

[beachnut]

...
Is he saying that thermite can only be ignited at temperatres above 2200ºC?

In that case how do so many people that make homemade thermite manage to ignite it with little more than a lighter?
You use things that burn very hot. Check the real information with further study. You can use potassium perchlorate, or magnesium to light thermite. ( http://www.pyroguide.com/index.php?title=Thermite ) But this fact is why it is hilarious idiots like Hoffman choose thermite as their moronic delusion. They have no clue as their conspiracy controlled minds make up lies.

That's odd...

I tought Harrit & al proved that their super-nano-thermite/ate ignite around 450°C? :D
Harrit has dust not thermite.

[TruthersLie]

Nope. You can light a proper stoichiometric mix with a match plus grinding of ferric metals is a fairly common cause of mini thermite fireballs.

WrCWLpRc1yM

the fuse starts the thermite reaction

Ignition of a thermite reaction normally requires only a simple child's sparkler or easily obtainable magnesium ribbon, but may require persistent efforts, as ignition can be unreliable and unpredictable. Thermite reactions require very high temperatures for initiation. These temperatures cannot be reached with conventional black powder fuses, nitrocellulose rods, detonators, pyrotechnic initiators, or other common igniting substances. Even when the thermite is hot enough to glow bright red, it will not ignite as it must be at or near white-hot to initiate the reaction. It is possible to start the reaction using a propane torch if done correctly. The torch can preheat the entire pile of thermite which will make it explode instead of burning slowly when it finally reaches ignition temperature.

Often, strips of magnesium metal are used as fuses. Because metals burn without releasing cooling gases, they can potentially burn at extremely high temperatures. Reactive metals such as magnesium can easily reach temperatures sufficiently high for thermite ignition. Magnesium ignition remains popular among amateur thermite users, mainly because it can be easily obtained.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermite

[~enigma~]

WrCWLpRc1yM

the fuse starts the thermite reaction


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermite

You are being told by a chemist. You are not an encyclopedia but you can go on and believe whatever nonsense you want. No skin off my back.


Breach of Rule 12 removed. Apparently you didn't read the page you cited. Under ignition it says A stoichiometric (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stoichiometric) mixture of finely powdered iron(III) oxide and aluminium may be ignited using ordinary red-tipped book matches by partially embedding one match head in the mixture, and igniting that match head with another match, preferably held with tongs in gloves to prevent flash burns (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flash_burn).

[TruthersLie]

You are being told by a chemist. You are not an encyclopedia but you can go on and believe whatever nonsense you want. No skin off my back.


Breach of Rule 12 removed. Apparently you didn't read the page you cited. Under ignition it says A stoichiometric (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stoichiometric) mixture of finely powdered iron(III) oxide and aluminium may be ignited using ordinary red-tipped book matches by partially embedding one match head in the mixture, and igniting that match head with another match, preferably held with tongs in gloves to prevent flash burns (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flash_burn).

Now isn't that nice.

Does the part I CITED state that they use a magnesium fuse? yes or no? Yes it does.

Do some types of thermite use magnesium fuses? Yes they do.

So was I correct? Completely? NO. Because I have NEVER used the stiochiometric thermite. I on the other hand have hand mixed my own thermite, and it ALWAYS uses a magnesium fuse.

Boy oh boy, it would have been reallllllllly freaking hard for you to say, "in some types of thermite you are correct."

Instead you come in all buff and badass... Thank you very much for the CONDESENTION. Have a GREAT night.
tsk tsk tsk. Thank you very much.

[bill smith]

I read somewhere at the fireproofing had been beefed up shortly prior to 9/11 amazingly only on the floors that had fires from the plane impacts . I read that 0.75'' was he rated thickness but that the builders had actually used 1.5'' as standard. For the upgraded fireproofing this was increased to 4''. More than enough to prevent the thermite that had been sprayed/pumped into the inside of the core columns from igniting spontaneously.

[bill smith]

Just found browsing and found this quote:



Note the bolded part above.

Is he saying that thermite can only be ignited at temperatres above 2200ºC?

In that case how do so many people that make homemade thermite manage to ignite it with little more than a lighter?

As I understand it nanothermite ignites at around 430 degrees C.

[Edx]

I read somewhere at the fireproofing had been beefed up shortly prior to 9/11 amazingly only on the floors that had fires from the plane impacts .

Whats your source?

More than enough to prevent the thermite that had been sprayed/pumped into the inside of the core columns from igniting spontaneously.

But I thought there was explosives in the towers that ejected steel beams hundreds of feet and caused "blast waves" and "vaporised" the towers into "fine dust" and created "pyroclastic" dust clouds?

1. What kind of explosives do all that?

2. Why wouldnt they explode with the plane hitting i?

[Edx]

As I understand it nanothermite ignites at around 430 degrees C.

So you're saying Hoffman's argument is wrong, correct?

[bill smith]

Whats your source?



But I thought there was explosives in the towers that ejected steel beams hundreds of feet and caused "blast waves" and "vaporised" the towers into "fine dust" and created "pyroclastic" dust clouds?

1. What kind of explosives do all that?

2. Why wouldnt they explode with the plane hitting i?

Well apparently all the dust found with the microspheres is comprised of 6% iron in total. A ridiculously enormous proportion for a gravity driven collapse you will agree. I can only imagine hat this is the result of vapourised steel condensing into the dust. No other conceivable mechanic comes close to working.

I believe the Core columns were mostly melted with around 10,000- 15,000 tons of molten iron ending up in the basements and taking several months to cool down despite the perps pumping lakes of water in on top of it. I think the energetic explosions had more to do with demolishing the top block of WTC1 for instance. Probably the same in WTC2.

The floors may have had a layer of nanothermite sprayed on or possibly even impregnated into the concrete. Nano materials are even small enough to enter the human cell let alone porous concrete. Ignite that and the floors will turn into instant dust, the floorpans and rebar will vapourise and disappear (as they largely did) only to ahow up again in the dust as iron microspheres..

[Josarhus]

As I understand it nanothermite ignites at around 430 degrees C.

No thats paint on rust.

[Edx]

Well apparently all the dust found with the microspheres is comprised of 6% iron in total. A ridiculously enormous proportion for a gravity driven collapse you will agree. I can only imagine hat this is the result of vapourised steel condensing into the dust. No other conceivable mechanic comes close to working.

I believe the Core columns were mostly melted with around 10,000- 15,000 tons of molten iron ending up in the basements and taking several months to cool down despite the perps pumping lakes of water in on top of it. I think the energetic explosions had more to do with demolishing the top block of WTC1 for instance. Probably the same in WTC2.

The floors may have had a layer of nanothermite sprayed on or possibly even impregnated into the concrete. Nano materials are even small enough to enter the human cell let alone porous concrete. Ignite that and the floors will turn into instant dust, the floorpans and rebar will vapourise and disappear (as they largely did) only to ahow up again in the dust.

You didnt actually answer the question.

Here it is again:

1. What kind of explosives do all that?

[bill smith]

You didnt actually answer the question.

Here it is again:

1. What kind of explosives do all that?

Well you see the core columns were hollow box-columns up to about the 88th floor where hey switched to I-beams.. So I'd say a good rule of thumb might be that many of the hollow box columns were melted from their internal thermite and many of the I-beams were blasted away using RDX or any one of a few hundred conventional explosives. Lots of people heard the explosions even though they were far up in the air. I can put up a video that is wall-tp-wall explosion witnesss for more than an hour if you like ?

[Dave Rogers]

I read somewhere at the fireproofing had been beefed up shortly prior to 9/11 amazingly only on the floors that had fires from the plane impacts .

And I seem to remember pointing out to you, with quotes from your own source, that this wasn't true. Funny how quickly you forget that stuff.

Dave

[9/11 Chewy Defense]

Explosives found in dust? :hypnotize

Wasn't there some paint chips in there as well with red and grey particules? :boggled:

[9/11 Chewy Defense]

Lots of people heard the explosions even though they were far up in the air.

A cruise missile explodes above it's target in mid-air. (Don't get any ideas Bill)

http://chandrakantha.com/articles/indian_music/filmi_sangeet/media/1998_cruise_missile.jpg

[bill smith]

So you're saying Hoffman's argument is wrong, correct?

No, I am saying what I read.

[9/11 Chewy Defense]

For Bill:

If there were any RDX explosives inside the WTCs'. Can you explain why on earth the bomb sniffing dogs didn't detect a trace of it before 9/11?

Canines: ATF's explosives-detecting canine training program was established in 1992. Although not high tech, canines can detect minute quantities for a variety of explosives.

[BigAl]

Originally Posted by bill smith

I believe the Core columns were mostly melted with around 10,000- 15,000 tons of molten iron ending up in the basements.

So you are back to the claim of 20-30,000 tons of thermite in the Towers?

Thermite is completely ineffective unless the burning thermite is in direct contact with steel. Just storing the 300 semi truckloads of thermite in the basement wouldn't accomplish anything.

[bill smith]

So you are back to the claim of 20-30,000 tons of thermite in the Towers?

Thermite is completely ineffective unless the burning thermite is in direct contact with steel. Just storing the 300 semi truckloads of thermite in the basement wouldn't accomplish anything.
Nanothermite Al....not your 1893-vintage thermite. A completely different beast altogether.

[BigAl]

Nanothermite Al....not your 1893-vintage thermite. A completely different beast altogether.


Ok. 20-30,000 tons of nano-thermite. The chemistry is essentially the same.

[bill smith]

Ok. 20-30,000 tons of nano-thermite. The chemistry is essentially the same.

I can post you a pdf if you like with all the details?

[9/11 Chewy Defense]

Nano-thermite:

There are many possible thermodynamically stable fuel-oxidizer combinations. Some of them are:

Aluminium-molybdenum(VI) oxide
Aluminium-copper(II) oxide
Aluminium-iron(II,III) oxide
Antimony-potassium permanganate
Aluminium-potassium permanganate
Aluminium-bismuth(III) oxide
Aluminium-tungsten(VI) oxide hydrate
Aluminium-fluoropolymer (typically Viton)
Titanium-boron (burns to titanium diboride)

Notice what's the most constant? ALUMINUM!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nano-thermite

TruthersLie used the same website too.

[triforcharity]

I read somewhere at the fireproofing had been beefed up shortly prior to 9/11 amazingly only on the floors that had fires from the plane impacts . I read that 0.75'' was he rated thickness but that the builders had actually used 1.5'' as standard. For the upgraded fireproofing this was increased to 4''. More than enough to prevent the thermite that had been sprayed/pumped into the inside of the core columns from igniting spontaneously.


Well, except for the fact that you could scrape it off with a butter knife.

[BigAl]

Well, except for the fact that you could scrape it off with a butter knife.

Or with the debris of a 140 tons of aircraft going by at hundreds of MPH.

[BigAl]

Originally Posted by BigAl
Ok. 20-30,000 tons of nano-thermite. The chemistry is essentially the same.

I can post you a pdf if you like with all the details?

Go ahead, it's still roughly 2 pounds if anything-ite for each pound of steel melted.

That would be 20-30,000 tons according to your fantasy. And each ounce of it has to be in direct contact with steel or it goes to waste as it burns.

[A W Smith]

so if all this 'nanu nanu thermite" or whatever the next incarnation of an imaginary reactive chemical the twoofers come up with after its been debunked heavily. was poured into hollow core columns billi Gurl. why did it not simply fall to the sub basement? seeing as those columns didn't have base caps. And why was none of it detected during recovery by all the cadaver dogs that were cross trained for explosives?

[HeyLeroy]

I read somewhere at the fireproofing had been beefed up shortly prior to 9/11 amazingly only on the floors that had fires from the plane impacts . I read that 0.75'' was he rated thickness but that the builders had actually used 1.5'' as standard. For the upgraded fireproofing this was increased to 4''. More than enough to prevent the thermite that had been sprayed/pumped into the inside of the core columns from igniting spontaneously.

Edx has asked you for your source on that. Did you miss that, or ignore it?

Can you provide a link?

[Luntoc]

Is he saying that thermite can only be ignited at temperatres above 2200ºC?


If it takes 2,200 degrees celsius to ignite thermite how was ignited if they claim that tempertatures never got up that high. Talk about contradictions.

[bill smith]

Edx has asked you for your source on that. Did you miss that, or ignore it?

Can you provide a link?

I can't find the right link right now. Do you dispute what I say about the fireproofing upgrade ?

[HeyLeroy]

I can't find the right link right now. Do you dispute what I say about the fireproofing upgrade ?

I find it very hard to believe. Very, very hard to believe. Very, very, VERY hard to believe. A credible source would go a long way in swaying opinion.

What would be the point in upgrading fireproofing on "only" the floors that experienced fires?

Who could've known which floors, EXACTLY, would experience fires?

Sorry, I'm not the type of credulous person who believes every little factoid presented as fact on the internet, based on "something" "someone" "read somewhere".

[dropzone]

Without proof? Yeah, ya got nothin'.

[triforcharity]

It wouldn't have mattered if they iincreased the thickness to 10 feet. It still would have come off, as the base fireproofing was improperly applied.

It would have made no difference.

[njslim]

There are many possible thermodynamically stable fuel-oxidizer combinations. Some of them are:

Aluminium-molybdenum(VI) oxide
Aluminium-copper(II) oxide
Aluminium-iron(II,III) oxide
Antimony-potassium permanganate
Aluminium-potassium permanganate
Aluminium-bismuth(III) oxide
Aluminium-tungsten(VI) oxide hydrate
Aluminium-fluoropolymer (typically Viton)
Titanium-boron (burns to titanium diboride)

Notice what's the most constant? ALUMINUM!


How about TANNERITE ? Binary explosive which is legal to possess.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tannerite

Tannerite consists of two components, a sensitizer and a bulk material. The bulk material is a mixture of 85% ammonium nitrate and 15% ammonium perchlorate, while the sensitizer is a mixture of 90% dark flake aluminium powder, 5% Titanium and 5% zirconium hydroxide. [2] Simpler mixtures of ammonium nitrate and aluminium powder are also known to work, but are less sensitive and harder to reliably detonate.[citation needed

Of course some yahoo packed an old truck with it and set off near a nuclear power plant

Got visit from authorities....

[9/11 Chewy Defense]

For Bill:

If there were any RDX explosives inside the WTCs'. Can you explain why on earth the bomb sniffing dogs didn't detect a trace of it before 9/11?

Bill, rather than ignore the question I pose to you earlier, why don't you answer for a change?

[bill smith]

I find it very hard to believe. Very, very hard to believe. Very, very, VERY hard to believe. A credible source would go a long way in swaying opinion.

What would be the point in upgrading fireproofing on "only" the floors that experienced fires?

Who could've known which floors, EXACTLY, would experience fires?

Sorry, I'm not the type of credulous person who believes every little factoid presented as fact on the internet, based on "something" "someone" "read somewhere".

This is not the link I am looking for but it does contain some of the information.

http://www.911blogger.com/node/13272

[9/11 Chewy Defense]

Bill, please answer my question.

[willhaven]

Even if they did only upgrade the floors that would appear to catch fire, what were the chances that the plane could hit a specific floor perfectly? How would the plane not disrupt this setup? How come we can see in videos exactly where the building folds and that we notice no signs of foul play there?

A CD scenario is so unlikely. It would need rock solid evidence to support it and there simply isn't any. Only speculation.

[Dave Rogers]

I can't find the right link right now. Do you dispute what I say about the fireproofing upgrade ?

http://www.fema.gov/pdf/library/fema403_ch2.pdf

Page 12, section 2.1.3.1


By September 11, 2001, a total of 31 stories had been upgraded, including the entire impact zone in WTC1 (floors 94-98) but only the 78th floor in the impact zone in WTC2 (floors 78-84).


As I think I pointed out to you once before.

Dave

[bill smith]

Even if they did only upgrade the floors that would appear to catch fire, what were the chances that the plane could hit a specific floor perfectly? How would the plane not disrupt this setup? How come we can see in videos exactly where the building folds and that we notice no signs of foul play there?

A CD scenario is so unlikely. It would need rock solid evidence to support it and there simply isn't any. Only speculation.

We will do the best we can. We have already proven it beyond any reasonable doubt. You have to decide when enough is enough .( if that is possible).

[stateofgrace]

We will do the best we can. We have already proven it beyond any reasonable doubt. You have to decide when enough is enough .( if that is possible).

Really ?

I read somewhere at the fireproofing had been beefed up shortly prior to 9/11 amazingly only on the floors that had fires from the plane impacts .

Well apparently all the dust found with the microspheres is comprised of 6% iron in total. A ridiculously enormous proportion for a gravity driven collapse you will agree. I can only imagine hat this is the result of vapourised steel condensing into the dust. No other conceivable mechanic comes close to working.

I believe the Core columns were mostly melted with around 10,000- 15,000 tons of molten iron ending up in the basements and taking several months to cool down despite the perps pumping lakes of water in on top of it. I think the energetic explosions had more to do with demolishing the top block of WTC1 for instance. Probably the same in WTC2.


No, I am saying what I read.

I can't find the right link right now.

This is not the link I am looking for but it does contain some of the information.



Yes, Bill, you have proved something beyond reasonable doubt, but it really isn't what you imagine.

[9/11 Chewy Defense]

Bill's ignoring my question, yet again. Why isn't that a surprise? :rolleyes:

If there were any RDX explosives inside the WTCs'. Can you explain why on earth the bomb sniffing dogs didn't detect a trace of it before 9/11?

[BobHaulk]

i heard they found Marmite and it melts on toast

[9/11 Chewy Defense]

i heard they found Marmite and it melts on toast

I heard Mermaid Man & Barnicle Boy was present when Spongebob Squarepants pulled the trigger to CD the WTCs' with thermite & with Patrick Stars help. Is it a Bikini Bottom Conspiracy?

According to un-Official sources.....yeah, I'd go with that!

I like jelly & toast!

[willhaven]

We will do the best we can. We have already proven it beyond any reasonable doubt. You have to decide when enough is enough .( if that is possible).hahaha

Then why aren't people in jail? Why haven't there been trials?

There is no solid evidence of controlled demolition being more likely than fire-driven collapse. None.

[twinstead]

There is no solid evidence of controlled demolition being more likely than fire-driven collapse. None.

Bill likes to ignore this. According to him, the truth movement has proven their case lock, stock, and barrel. It's funny actually.

[Cl1mh4224rd]

Ok. 20-30,000 tons of nano-thermite. The chemistry is essentially the same.


Heh. Which is heavier: 20,000 tons of thermite, or 20,000 tons of nano-thermite?

Bill likes to ignore this. According to him, the truth movement has proven their case lock, stock, and barrel. It's funny actually.


And, even if true, just goes to show how utterly ineffectual the 9/11 Truth Movement is, as a whole. They've "proven it beyond a reasonable doubt" and yet can't seem to do a damn thing about it.

[9/11 Chewy Defense]

An explaination about the alledged "nano-thermite" can be found at my new thread I just created:

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=157058

What find you might shock you!

[9/11 Chewy Defense]

http://minerals.usgs.gov/minerals/pubs/commodity/iron_&_steel_slag/790494.pdf

Explains about Iron Slag & Microspheres found only in Steel Mills & Blasts Furnaces.

Truthers get that wrong!

[Galileo]

Edx.

The bolded part is pretty close. In order to get the reaction going it has to be under HIGH heat. You need something added to the mix to create the thermitic reaction. Usually a magnesium triggering device. So you light the fuse, it then lights the magnesium and it lights the thermite.

While that part is true the VERY next two sentences are lies. There are NO thermitic explosives. Even thermite grenades for the military are NOT explosive.

Too often twoofs don't understand that thermite (all grades) are incendiaries not explosives... but what do you expect of folks who think that high school chemistry is too tough.

so how does that prove WTC 7 fell down from an office fire?

[9/11 Chewy Defense]

so how does that prove WTC 7 fell down from an office fire?

They don't call the FDNY FIREFIGHTERS for nothing you know.

With me being a volunteer firefighter, I would know that WTC7 fell because of fire. Not a CD like most Truthers think.

[9/11 Chewy Defense]

Does this look like a "controlled demolition" to you Galileo? How about the other Truthers?

The picture shows some columns that were inside WTC7.

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/photos/wtc7grid.html

[TruthersLie]

so how does that prove WTC 7 fell down from an office fire?

Wow... you run and hide for months to come out for this? Really?

The issue with thermite has NOTHING to do with wtc7...

but there is some engineering paper out there... like 10,000 pages which describe what happened to wtc7 and there are NO peer reviewed engineering refutations of it ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD...

[TruthersLie]

9/11 chewie.

Actually that isn't the best proof that wtc7 wasn't CD.
This is
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/11/Fiterman_hall_damage.jpg/414px-Fiterman_hall_damage.jpg

How does a building that is CD (traditional or non traditional) manage to collapse and hit a building on the FREAKING ROOF that is ACROSS THE STREET? Yet there are still intact windows in the building. If there were explosives which threw debris across the street to the ROOF of Fittermann hall, why are the windows still intact? Of course that also means it was stealth explosives...

[9/11 Chewy Defense]

9/11 chewie.

Actually that isn't the best proof that wtc7 wasn't CD.
This is
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/11/Fiterman_hall_damage.jpg/414px-Fiterman_hall_damage.jpg

How does a building that is CD (traditional or non traditional) manage to collapse and hit a building on the FREAKING ROOF that is ACROSS THE STREET? Yet there are still intact windows in the building. If there were explosives which threw debris across the street to the ROOF of Fittermann hall, why are the windows still intact? Of course that also means it was stealth explosives...

Or stealth ninjas that "planted" the "explosives" inside the WTCs'.

Why are the windows still intact? Beats me! I just call that pure luck! But some panes are broke, that's clear!

Of course the Truthers are still wondering why on Earth the windows in the Pentagon are still intact.

[TruthersLie]

Or stealth ninjas that "planted" the "explosives" inside the WTCs'.

Why are the windows still intact? Beats me! I just call that pure luck! But some panes are broke, that's clear!

Of course the Truthers are still wondering why on Earth the windows in the Pentagon are still intact.

9/11 Chewie.

If there were explosives to throw debris (as has been claimed by many) ALL of the windows should be shattered.

Notice the lack of glass in any building or automobile
http://jp.senescence.info/thoughts/oklahoma.jpg

[9/11 Chewy Defense]

9/11 Chewie.

If there were explosives to throw debris (as has been claimed by many) ALL of the windows should be shattered.

Notice the lack of glass in any building or automobile
http://jp.senescence.info/thoughts/oklahoma.jpg

Yup! Too bad the Truthers don't pick up on that TruthersLie.

[TruthersLie]

Yup! Too bad the Truthers don't pick up on that TruthersLie.

It is called reading for comprehension, and the vast majority of truthers don't have any skill in it.

[9/11 Chewy Defense]

It is called reading for comprehension, and the vast majority of truthers don't have any skill in it.

And they don't know comprehension, exactly right!

TruthersLie,

I know you from YouTube.

I'm WhyAskQuestions!