I'm saying "what if" here, though the above is all factual.
Are you seeing the potential here?
I see numerous potential ways that you can connect the Vice President to nanothermite so I don't find the above very curious or indicative of anything on it's own. The Secret Service had an office in WTC7, the military I'm sure already has plenty of nanothermite available, why bother with a civilian company? One of the tenants I believe is the Zim-Israeli Trading Corp, clearly Zionists, no? The only real question is, what is the evidence that this former WH staff person and co. install nanothermite in WTC?
"For example, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed described the design of planned attacks of buildings inside the U.S. and how operatives were directed to carry them out. That is valuable information for those of us who have the responsibility to protect the American people. He told us the operatives had been instructed to ensure that the explosives went off at a high -- a point that was high enough to prevent people trapped above from escaping."
~President Bush, Oct. 31, 2006
Let's get this straight - in the same year the truth movement go mainstream, immediately follows this pre-emptive counterpunch that the alleged Al Qaeda masterminds had "planned attacks" whereby "explosives" were placed at "high" points in buildings. Now, had any evidence of demolition been introduced which the official narrative could not provide some semblance of explanation for… it’s ok, terrorists planted the bombs that brought down the WTC buildings.
How have you measured what 'year the truth movement' went mainstream in order to designate this 'same year' connection? Several Loose Change videos were released, from 2005 through 2009, the Truth movement has been around since I believe 2004.
And you know the masses would have swallowed it whole.
We know no such thing, after all, there are no shortage of people on the net that haven't swallowed it whole. I think I saw a reference to a poll that said around 20% of Americans think the buildings were demolished; that's a big chunk out of our 'masses'.
I have yet to see any risk to those responsible.
You've involved 20-70 people in this conspiracy, and I think we can both agree that those numbers are pretty much the minimum required. These 20-70 people trust each other implicitly, none of them feel like the head conspirators might off them just to ensure their silence? Maybe some of these conspirators squirreled away some good evidence as an insurance policy? I'm sure no Democrats would be interested in pinning 9/11 on the Republicans...
Anyway, we seem to be pretty much shooting the breeze with our opinions on alternate histories. I'm not sure if W Tell is coming back, and I've read a little on WTC7, so maybe that would be a good thing to focus on if you are willing. I read your link and most of what you are talking about there is your disagreement with the NIST report. I'm glad that you pointed me to that as it was informative. I'm entirely willing to say that the NIST report is in error and reached wrong conclusions, which is entirely understandable as they didn't have much to go on. What then is the evidence for demolition? There seem to be a few firefighters who were actually there, unlike anyone who compiled the NIST report, and they sure seemed to indicate that they thought the building would collapse, and do talk about some pretty significant damage done and the prevalence of fires. They also said that they saw structural deformation before the collapse, such as a bulge between a couple of the floors. What is your theory then on WTC7 and why do you believe it? One question I'd have is if they were going to demolish it, why let it stand so long and thereby increase the chance that evidence of the demolition might become apparent? On the link, you said that it is blatant that WTC7 was demolished, so again, they seem to have botched up their master plan. Why wouldn't they just demolish WTC7 after one of the towers fell? You could hardly see the building because of all the dust, that would have been the opportune time.