[ccmay]

There was something else going on, perhaps an FBI sting that went haywire—but there were probably some serious demolition charges on support beams as well as the blast from the front.

Rubbish. This is just as inane as the claims that the World Trade Center was brought down by explosives.

Half-educated conspiracy theorists on both the Left and the Right will sometimes make this kind of baseless accusation, and compare it to Nazi Germany and the Reichstag fire. Of course, the Reichstag fire required nothing more than one guy with a gallon of gas and a book of matches.

To bring down a modern multi-storey building requires tons of explosives, miles of det cord, much drilling and cutting, weeks of preparation, and a large number of co-conspirators. Beyond doubt, this did not take place either in Oklahoma City or at the WTC.

-ccm

[AmericaUnited]

To bring down a modern multi-storey building requires tons of explosives, miles of det cord, much drilling and cutting, weeks of preparation, and a large number of co-conspirators. Beyond doubt, this did not take place either in Oklahoma City or at the WTC.

You've just explained why it COULD NOT have been just a simple fertilizer bomb parked out in front. DUH?!

General Ben Parton, in charge of the research for "blowing things up" for the Airforce for 25 years did an extensive writeup on how it was ridiculous to think that it was just the fertilizer truck bomb.

[Verax]

To bring down a modern multi-storey building requires tons of explosives, miles of det cord, much drilling and cutting, weeks of preparation, and a large number of co-conspirators

So you admit that jet fuel fire could not have demolished WTC? Interesting.