What brought the towers down???

[azxcvbnm321]

Runcible, it won't matter what evidence you present, some people just won't believe. That's why there are still some who think we've never landed on the moon, that the Earth is still flat.

Why is it so hard for people to believe that there are terrorists out there who want us dead? History shows that religion has caused wars and that religious wars are often brutual and senseless.

I'm no fan of the government. As a Conservative Libertarian, I believe that government power should be reduced and the people free to do what they want as long as it doesn't directly hurt others. That includes legalizing drugs, eliminating social security taxes, eliminating gas taxes, reducing income taxes to no more than 15%, and severly reducing the government's ability to use eminent domain to seize the property of citizens.

Yet we have to recognize a threat when there is one. Hey, I think the actions at Ruby Ridge were deplorable; that those FBI agents should be given the death penalty for murder; that Waco was an outrage, but the 9-11 attacks weren't caused by our government. History has shown that we have many enemies jealous of what we've accomplished, let's not forget Libya's Pan Am bombing and other acts of violence towards Americans. We have to be vigilant against the government, but also be on guard against the many enemies who hate our freedoms and would impose their views on us. Libertarians have always been pro self-defense, I don't understand why this should be any different.

[Penny Lane]

Why is it so hard for people to believe that there are terrorists out there who want us dead? History shows that religion has caused wars and that religious wars are often brutual and senseless.
History also shows that false flag psy-ops are the rule rather than the exception, inside and outside the US, and that the best way to unify a people is to force an enemy to attack you, or if you can't do that, false flag yourself.

It's very rare to find a war that doesn't have economics as an underlying cause - your enemy has something you want, and you take it. Muslim wars in Spain and against the Franks were all about plunder. Religion may have unified, but there is rarely a time when economics don't play the major part. The crusades are a possible exception, not the rule.

[Halophyte]

Halo,

I could care less where you worked, its your ignorance and stubbornness that is so frigging annoying.

notice I did not call you stupid, I think in other areas you are quite adept, with 9/11 you seem pretty ignorant.

if you did used to work at NORAD, call some old co-workers and ask them why Cheney had them "Stand Down" on 9/11?


Let me relieve you of your stubborn ignorance about N.O.R.A.D.

NORAD does not "stand down", hasn't since its inception. There are different levels of awareness for its staff but its specific mission does not deviate or "stand down", 24 hrs a day, 365 days a year.

TAC can be told to "stand down", Space Command can be ordered to lower alert levels, but not NORAD.

Here's another clue for ya' NORAD takes no orders from the vice president unless a state of emergency dictates passing war powers (and the "football") to the vice president. That did not happen prior to 9/11 or after 9/11.


You must be a grunt or a leather neck "Sarge", clueless about the flyboys. Don't believe everything you read in the CT papers.



.

[Veritas]

Does above average IQ equal ad hoc jerk-off ?

At best, yes.

Sheep mentality.

[Veritas]

All the conspiracies depend on "doubts" but have no evidence themselves. There are no pictures of the so-called explosives, no other evidence that explosives were set. In a court, which side would win? The side with evidence of planes flying into the buildings, or the side with no evidence at all of explosives?

Ok. Show me the evidence of planes flying into WTC 7.

Now I'm no demolition expert, but I'm sure someone else can answer this question here. How could it be possible for explosives to be set in a planned demolition without thousands of people who work in the building not to notice?

Easy. They shut down every floor above the 50th floor on September 8th and September 9th. September 8th and 9th were Saturday and Sunday. How many people do you suppose went to work that day?

Read this email:

From: "Scott Forbes" <scottforbes2002@hotmail.com>
To: skylax@comcast.net
Subject: Official Verison of 9/11 - new info
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2004 12:35:12 +0000

To John Kaminski,

I was pleased to read your article "The Official Version of 9/11 is a Hoax"
... Please note some other facts. My name is Scott Forbes and I still work
for Fiduciary Trust. In 2001 we occupied floors 90 and 94-97 of the South
Tower and lost 87 employees plus many contractors.

On the weekend of 9/8,9/9 there was a 'power down' condition in WTC tower 2,
the south tower. This power down condition meant there was no electrical
supply for approx 36hrs from floor 50 up. I am aware of this situation since
I work in IT and had to work with many others that weekend to ensure that
all systems were cleanly shutdown beforehand ... and then brough back up
afterwards. The reason given by the WTC for the power down was that cabling
in the tower was being upgraded ... Of course without power there were no
security cameras, no security locks on doors and many, many 'engineers'
coming in and out of the tower. I was at home on the morning of 9/11 on the
shore of Jersey City, right opposite the Towers, and watching events unfold
I was convinced immediately that something was happening related to the
weekend work ...

I have mailed this information to many people and bodies, including the 9/11
Commission but no-one seems to be taking and registering these facts. Whats
to hide? Can you help publicise them?

Please feel free to mail me.

Scott Forbes


SO AZwhatever321 - THINK before you SPEAK. Try doing a little research before making such ASSumptions....or have they not taught you in school how to research information yet?

[Veritas]

I'm quite confused why a conspiracy would wire up WTC #1 & #2 for demolition, then skip WTC 3 (nearest to both towers), WTC 6 (next nearest to WTC 1), WTC 4 (nearest to WTC 2), and WTC 5 (same block as WTC 1 - 6, next nearest to WTC 1 & WTC 2), and decide that, just for the hell of it, they'd blow WTC 7 (across the street from the twin towers and the above mentioned towers!)

It has to do with what was in those buildings.

Runcible, do you have any idea what was housed in WTC 7? Care to find out?

[Veritas]

So you believe that the 20th floor can't support the 90 floors above it. Your logic or lack of it.

Each floor truss supports its own weight plus its static load which is it's share of the weight of the floor pan and office equipment. The 47 core columns are a unit that are constructed first and the floor trusses hang from the core. The core is an integral part of the floor system.

You space alien types want to say the trusses failed and brought down the whole building, but that dog don't hunt. A few floor trusses falling to the floor below on one side of the building wouldn't make a dent in the core structure. The only thing that does that is

EXPLOSIVES

I hope you are locomotive engineer.

Well said bigjon! :clap2:

[Veritas]

Let me relieve you of your stubborn ignorance about N.O.R.A.D.

NORAD does not "stand down", hasn't since its inception. There are different levels of awareness for its staff but its specific mission does not deviate or "stand down", 24 hrs a day, 365 days a year.

TAC can be told to "stand down", Space Command can be ordered to lower alert levels, but not NORAD.

Here's another clue for ya' NORAD takes no orders from the vice president unless a state of emergency dictates passing war powers (and the "football") to the vice president. That did not happen prior to 9/11 or after 9/11.


You must be a grunt or a leather neck "Sarge", clueless about the flyboys. Don't believe everything you read in the CT papers.



.

Large Sarge and Halo -

You are both wrong.

Cheney never had the authority over NORAD to give stand down orders. If anyone in the Bush administration can be singled out to take responsibility for NORAD's failure to act, it is Secretary of Derense, Donal Rumsfeld.

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Instruction CJCSI 3610.01A (dated 1 June 2001) was issued for the purpose of providing "guidance to the Deputy Director for Operations (DDO), National Military Command Center (NMCC), and operational commanders in the event of an aircraft piracy (hijacking) or request for destruction of derelict airborne objects." This new instruction superseded CJCSI 3610.01 of 31 July 1997.

This CJCSI states that "In the event of a hijacking, the NMCC will be notified by the most expeditious means by the FAA. The NMCC will, with the exception of immediate responses as authorized by reference d, forward requests for DOD assistance to the Secretary of Defense for approval."

Reference D refers to Department of Defense Directive 3025.15 (Feb. 18, 1997) which allows for commanders in the field to provide assistance to save lives in an emergency situation -- BUT any requests involving "potentially lethal support" (including "combat and tactical vehicles, vessels or aircraft; or ammunition") must still be approved by the
Secretary of Defense. So again, the ability to respond to a hijacking in any meaningful fashion, is stripped from the commanders in the field.

So, Commanders in the field are stripped of all authority to act. This amazing order came from S.A. Fry (Vice Admiral, US Navy and Director, Joint Staff) so it appears to me that responsibility for the US armed forces "Failure to Respond" rests directly with Fry for issuing this instruction, as well as with Donald Rumsfeld for failing to execute his responsibility to issue orders in a timely fashion.

It would be interesting if Fry could testify as to the reasoning behind making it bureaucratically impossible for the DOD to respond to hijackings in a timely fashion.

http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/d302515_021897/d302515p.pdf

[Halophyte]

(damn IE is screwing up ... )


NORAD's job is to ID all aircraft within the boarders or the North America's "Global Shield" this primary mission does not change. This was the point I made to Sarge's "stand down" theory. Once a flying object is identified their primary job is done. Flight plans of already identified domestic aircraft is not their concern unless the FAA request action. ""In the event of a hijacking, the NMCC will be notified by the most expeditious means by the FAA."

What was the FAA's official word on 'contacting' the military ?

[Halophyte]

Great research Veritas !

Looks like the morons in DC thought domestic aircraft (hijacked as cruise missiles) could never happen, and/or they had all the time in the world to react !


Excelllent post.

[Large Sarge]

NORAD does not "stand down", hasn't since its inception. There are different levels of awareness for its staff but its specific mission does not deviate or "stand down", 24 hrs a day, 365 days a year.

TAC can be told to "stand down", Space Command can be ordered to lower alert levels, but not NORAD.

Here's another clue for ya' NORAD takes no orders from the vice president unless a state of emergency dictates passing war powers (and the "football") to the vice president. That did not happen prior to 9/11 or after 9/11.
.

http://911review.com/means/standdown.html

The 'Stand-Down Order'

The shocking failure (http://911review.com/means/noshow.html) of the air defense system to protect New York City and the capital would seem to require either an incredible series of failures or an order to stop intercepts -- a stand-down order. Yet apparently there have been no cases of military officials disciplined for gross negligence surrounding 9/11/01, nor have there been publicized reports of commanders admitting to having received stand-down orders.
If the stand-down order were disguised as a procedural change, and enacted well in advance, it might be hidden in plain sight.
CJCSI 3610.01A, dated June 1, 2001, required that all requests for asistance in hijackings be approved by the Secretary of Defense. It had an exception for emergencies that would seem to give commanders in the field autonomy in ordering intercepts. However, that exception did not cover requests for "potentially lethal assistance", the kind required to respond to the attack. Hence, this order may have been the long-sought stand-down order (http://911review.com/articles/russell/standdown.html).
That this order could, by itself, have frozen the military response to the attack is highly doubtful. It was likely one of a number of "fixes" that included multiple war games (http://911review.com/means/wargames.html) planned on the day of the attack. Thus, even if commanders violated standing orders and ordered intercepts of the commandeered jetliners, they would face depleted interceptor resources and corrupted flight data.
The June 1st order apparently gave Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld the legal authority (if not the de facto authority) to prevent intercepts of Flights 11, 175, and 77 by just doing nothing. The following post starts with the June 1st order and goes on about Rumsfeld. It fails to note Reference D, explained in Jerry Russell's stand-down post (http://911review.com/articles/russell/standdown.html).

[RealityCheck]

Do you happen to have a source for that picture, as well as a date? A better shot of the cut beam would be interesting as well.




I don't have a source or date but if I find it I will post it. I cant remeber where I found that picture, I just stumbled across it one day so I saved it.

[Large Sarge]

(damn IE is screwing up ... )


NORAD's job is to ID all aircraft within the boarders or the North America's "Global Shield" this primary mission does not change. This was the point I made to Sarge's "stand down" theory. Once a flying object is identified their primary job is done. Flight plans of already identified domestic aircraft is not their concern unless the FAA request action. ""In the event of a hijacking, the NMCC will be notified by the most expeditious means by the FAA."

What was the FAA's official word on 'contacting' the military ?

it was procedural change, combined with phoney "War Games" drill.

so your own theory was wrong.

Veritas was the closest, it was Rumsfeld not Cheney, as I wrongly stated.

[Halophyte]

it was procedural change, combined with phoney "War Games" drill.

so your own theory was wrong.

Veritas was the closest, it was Rumsfeld not Cheney, as I wrongly stated.


Those "phoney" war games is called alert training, it never stops. You imply it was scheduled on 9/11 to interfer with operations , that's a line BS.

I proposed no "theory", just stated mission purpose.

Veritas was not "close",he was simply right with the facts, that's a hellova lot more than I can say about your CT slant.


.

[RealityCheck]

Just in case any of the naysayers need their memory refreshed, take a look: (and while your watching, just keep remembering that steel from the WTC tested positive for the bi products of thermite.)

http://youtube.com/watch?v=ExrVgioIXvk

:bath:

[Large Sarge]

Those "phoney" war games is called alert training, it never stops. You imply it was scheduled on 9/11 to interfer with operations , that's a line BS.

I proposed no "theory", just stated mission purpose.

Veritas was not "close",he was simply right with the facts, that's a hellova lot more than I can say about your CT slant.
.

Halo,

You need to start using your brain for more than just holding up the top of your head.

Massive simulated hijacking drill is started on morniing of 9/11
Mayor willie brown called and told not to fly,
All the generals at the pentagon suddenly cancel all flights for 9/11
operation northwoods

etc etc

you think these are all just random and coincidental?

please....

[RealityCheck]

Those "phoney" war games is called alert training, it never stops. You imply it was scheduled on 9/11 to interfer with operations , that's a line BS.

.

Wrong. Are you aware how many overlaping drills there were? Over 15. That was the most ever done on one day. If you think that was an accident or normal your insane.

[slvrbugjim]

Originally Posted by Halophyte http://goldismoney.info/forums/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://goldismoney.info/forums/showthread.php?p=273769#post273769)
Those "phoney" war games is called alert training, it never stops. You imply it was scheduled on 9/11 to interfer with operations , that's a line BS.


There were over 19 different drills that day, including drills of hijacked planes hitting the twin towers, hitting the pentagon and first responders going to a crashed plane site in Shanksville PA!!! Yep thats right.

Then we have the terror drills happening at the same time of the London Bombings, Peter Power admitting on the day of the attacks on 7/7 that the drills just happened to be at the very same moment and the exact same train stations and bus stops as where the bombs went off!!! Wow now that is just lucky huh.

Halo is here to defend the government story, as he works or worked for the governmet. Protecting the evil doers is what many love to do. He is in this site as he knows what is going on with the FED as most of us do. I for one do not believe that he could be so stupid, but I could be wrong.

[slvrbugjim]

Exactly. Couple that with all the other anomalies like 3 buildings falling in on themselves for the first time in history on the same day within hours of each other. The absense of plane debris at both the Pentagon and Flight 93. The massive coverup of evidence including (to date) no recognizable plane hitting the Pentagon, only 5 frames of obscured footage. A cruise missile sized hole neatly punching 3 concentric circles of the Pentagon. Reports of Flight 93 landing at Cleveland-Hopkins Airport by the Mayor and the press. None of the alleged terrorists names on the passenger manifest. NORAD sitting on their thumbs. Unbelievable pilot maneuvering by cave-dwelling fanatics. Reports of bombs in the building by EMS. Reports of explosions by New York Firefighters. Seismograph activity prior to the collapses. WTC7 falling perfectly because of an internal fire.

ALL IN ONE DAY. To deny these obvious truths is to deny logic. The pancake theory is a joke with no punch line...

No No you are talking CT stuff here, (that is the Government Shill line, you can spot it a mile away BTW< CT er, Ct, foil hat etc)

They repeat the same ignorant rant over and over again thinking that it makes any sense, while at the same time saying that our logic is somehow flawed because " well they just would not do something as bad as that"

They being the cabal in this government and in others that Halo and some others are protecting here, that pulled off this stunt on 911.

[runcible]

It has to do with what was in those buildings.

Runcible, do you have any idea what was housed in WTC 7? Care to find out?

Other than up to 43,000 gallons of diesel fuel?

Here's a list (http://worldtradeaftermath.com/wta/wtc_info/tenants_by_floor_wtc7.asp). Compare and contrast to WTC 4-6.

GIYF.

I'll expect you'll blame it as a targetted attack against the records of some office. SEC, or the SS, perhaps.

It seems logical that any hypothetical controlled demolition targetted records, not people. I'd assume that most of the employees not seriously injured or killed by falling debris managed to evacuate before the collapse. So what records were only stored at WTC7 and not backed up offsite?

I expect my conspiracy theorists to do their homework. :D

[runcible]

Little bit of trivia: Up until 2 months before the 9/11 attack, a rare 1933 Double Eagle was stored at WTC7, which is now the only legal tender 1933 DE in existence. What Really Happened™ was a vast conspiracy by the treasury department to destroy the 1933 DE (like the Canadian Mounties, they always get their man, er, coin). Unfortunately, once the plan was in place, there were unforeseen problems that delayed the implementation until after the coin was moved to Fort Knox. Due to the extreme secrecy and cell structure of the conspiracy, the treasury department was unable to call off the plan without exposing themselves. That was the true cause of 9/11. WTC #1, WTC #2, and the Pentagon were red herrings to throw the CT off the scent. Flight 93 had its own nefarious plan. It was supposed to "crash", but not in Pennsylvania. Instead, the crash was supposed to be in Washington, DC, but it would have "accidentally" landed on the Smithsonian, destroying a 1804 Silver Dollar and a 1913 Liberty Nickel, two other coins which were never supposed to exist. The treasury department had previously tried to destroy another 1913 Liberty Nickel by staging a "car crash" of the holder of a 1913 LN, but that was unsuccessful. As you can see, the treasury department has a long history of covert undercover ops to destroy illegitimate coins.

Don't piss off the treasury department!

[Veritas]

What was the FAA's official word on 'contacting' the military ?

I would like to know just as much as you would. Unfortunately, they are claim priveledge to withholding such information under Exemption 2 of the FOIA, 5 U.S.C. ,, 552(b)(2), which protects from disclosure records which relate to internal practices of the agency, release of which would risk the circumvention of the law.

In other words, they are reserving their legal right to withhold any records that may be self-incriminating.

Another intersting point to note is that NORAD has deleted their press release on 9/11 from there website. It used to be here:
http://www.norad.mil/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.news_rel_09_18_01 (http://www.norad.mil/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.news_rel_09_18_01)

The press release, which can still be found on "alternative" websites states in summary that something lead to the emasculation of our air defenses on 9/11, causing NORAD to fail to follow S.O.P.

[Veritas]

Great research Veritas !

Looks like the morons in DC thought domestic aircraft (hijacked as cruise missiles) could never happen, and/or they had all the time in the world to react !


Excelllent post.

Thanks Halo.

Still the question that comes to my mind is do we really accept the spin that they were incompetent and failed to prevent this act from happening, or were their actions/inactions more deliberate than they are leading us to believe?

Obviously, there were thousands of hands in play on 9/11 and I am sure a majority of them were doing exactly what they believed they were supposed to be doing. I am sure that a large majority of them saw the attacks just as the rest of us did on that day. However, is it possible that a small few at the top of the chain could have purposely (with foresight) set certain pawns in place (such as inept procedures as the one I referred to a few posts back) that made the mismanagement of the events that took place that day, deliberate?

If that possiblity even exists, then there needs to be a thorough and truely independent investigation of every detail of the events leading up, including, and following, the 9/11 attacks.

[Veritas]

Just in case any of the naysayers need their memory refreshed, take a look: (and while your watching, just keep remembering that steel from the WTC tested positive for the bi products of thermite.)

http://youtube.com/watch?v=ExrVgioIXvk

:bath:

Bi products?

Do you mean byproducts?

[Veritas]

Massive simulated hijacking drill is started on morniing of 9/11..

I believe this was a National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) operated computer simulation of a plane flying into one of its buildings. The NRO primarily outsources military and CIA personnel to run it's operations.

CIA described the tests as a "bizarre coincidence".

It is quite bizarre indeed and officials at NORAD claimed after the fact to have been confused. They claim to have been aware of the testing that was planned and some said they mistakenly took actual hijacked aircraft on radar, for what they belived was just a test.

Personally, I find such statements hard to believe. First of all, the tests were not to be conducted on commercial airliners hitting the WTC buildings. They were to be conducted on small commuter jets hitting one of the NRO buildings. Secondly, I find it hard to belive that most of America knew of the attacks long before NORAD did. The first transponder was shut off at 8:23 and hijack alerts and calls were made to the FAA shortly thereafter. Third of all, the Pentagon was struck more than an hour after the second tower was hit at the WTC. They had ample time to prevent the Pentagon from being attacked (perhaps they did as many argue that no plane hit the Pentagon? - another questionable event).

Bottom line is that the "official" corpor-govo-crat version of events has more holes than a screen door and is a flat-out lie.

The truth is still out there...

[Veritas]

Exactly. Couple that with all the other anomalies like 3 buildings falling in on themselves for the first time in history on the same day within hours of each other. The absense of plane debris at both the Pentagon and Flight 93. The massive coverup of evidence including (to date) no recognizable plane hitting the Pentagon, only 5 frames of obscured footage. A cruise missile sized hole neatly punching 3 concentric circles of the Pentagon. Reports of Flight 93 landing at Cleveland-Hopkins Airport by the Mayor and the press. None of the alleged terrorists names on the passenger manifest. NORAD sitting on their thumbs. Unbelievable pilot maneuvering by cave-dwelling fanatics. Reports of bombs in the building by EMS. Reports of explosions by New York Firefighters. Seismograph activity prior to the collapses. WTC7 falling perfectly because of an internal fire. All fallen WTC buildings leased by Silverstein, while none of the intact buildings were. WTC7 containing records of Wall Street insider trading investigations. Massive put options on the airliners before the event. FEMA in town the day before the event.

ALL IN ONE DAY. To deny these obvious truths is to deny logic. The pancake theory is a joke with no punch line...

Thanks Fifty.

You make some great points and I haven't seen anyone really come up with an explanation yet.

Time to seperate fact from fiction and speculation - and come up with a conclusion and a course of action.

[Veritas]

Other than up to 43,000 gallons of diesel fuel?

Here's a list (http://worldtradeaftermath.com/wta/wtc_info/tenants_by_floor_wtc7.asp). Compare and contrast to WTC 4-6.

GIYF.

I'll expect you'll blame it as a targetted attack against the records of some office. SEC, or the SS, perhaps.

It seems logical that any hypothetical controlled demolition targetted records, not people. I'd assume that most of the employees not seriously injured or killed by falling debris managed to evacuate before the collapse. So what records were only stored at WTC7 and not backed up offsite?

I expect my conspiracy theorists to do their homework. :D

I always do my homework runcible....

1. The SEC has not quantified the number of active cases in which substantial files were destroyed [by the collapse of WTC 7]. Reuters news service and the Los Angeles Times published reports estimating them at 3,000 to 4,000. They include the agency's major inquiry into the manner in which investment banks divvied up hot shares of initial public offerings during the high-tech boom. ..."Ongoing investigations at the New York SEC will be dramatically affected because so much of their work is paper-intensive," said Max Berger of New York's Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann. "This is a disaster for these cases."

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/wtc7_sec.jpg

2. Citigroup says some information that the committee is seeking [about WorldCom] was destroyed in the Sept. 11 terror attack on the World Trade Center. Salomon had offices in 7 World Trade Center, one of the buildings that collapsed in the aftermath of the attack. The bank says that back-up tapes of corporate emails from September 1998 through December 2000 were stored at the building and destroyed in the attack.
http://www.thestreet.com/markets/matthewgoldstein/10036925.html

3. Inside [WTC 7 was] the US Secret Service's largest field office with more than 200 employees. ..."All the evidence that we stored at 7 World Trade, in all our cases, went down with the building," according to US Secret Service Special Agent David Curran.

[runcible]

Bi products?

Do you mean byproducts?

Just because those products don't fit into your narrow Victorian view of sexuality does not mean that you can pigeon-hole them in another category!

:tongue:

*ponders what the by-products of thermite would be*

Thermite is finely ground aluminum + oxydizer (usually finely ground iron oxide, commonly called rust).

So the by-products of a thermite reaction would be leftover aluminum and rust?

Thus, when aluminum and rust was found at the WTC, this was proof of thermite, right?

Did the conspiracy theorists figure this out themselves, or was a group of highly-trained monkeys involved?

[runcible]

I'm almost tempted to make thermite and use it to cut through a few old scrap beams laying around.

Almost.

4500°F temperature, destroying most common materials it is laying on, and the inability to extinguish (stop) a thermite reaction leaves me with a lot of respect for it.

[Didga]

Just because those products don't fit into your narrow Victorian view of sexuality does not mean that you can pigeon-hole them in another category!

:tongue:

*ponders what the by-products of thermite would be*

Thermite is finely ground aluminum + oxydizer (usually finely ground iron oxide, commonly called rust).

So the by-products of a thermite reaction would be leftover aluminum and rust?

Thus, when aluminum and rust was found at the WTC, this was proof of thermite, right?

Did the conspiracy theorists figure this out themselves, or was a group of highly-trained monkeys involved?

Fe2O3(s) + 2Al(s) → Al2O3(s) + 2Fe(s)

The by-product of a thermite reaction is molten iron, which was found at the WTC.