but now you say there were explosions. If it's 'nano-thermite' (a novel material demonstrated in laboratory quantities) that would be an explosion, with a bang. It's not ordinary thermite with a (pretty impressive) splutter. Whats the point of using an untested explosive that makes a bang when something like C4 or semtex is incredibly effective on steel, has a massive test history, has proven technology for simultaneous detonations and could easily be passed off as something in possession of the islamists if the CIA got rumbled? Where did the alleged pools of molten metal come from if it was high explosive or explosive 'nano-thermite'? None of this clandestine, controlled demolition using thermite stuff stands up to scrutiny. Comment number 96. So if the aim of the sinister shadowy figures was to bring down the towers, and then blame it on Osama Bin Laden/Al Qaeda/Generic Arab Terrorists, why didn't they repeat the MO of the 1993 World Trade Centre bombing, in which a truck full of explosives was detonated in the underground car park and which almost caused the collapse of one of the towers, which would have then crashed into the second. This wouldn't have required any crazy thermite/demolition charges/planes, and would require about 99% less planning and preparation. Instead, the truth movement would have you believe that three whole towers were rigged with demolition charges while not a single one of the 6000 or so people that worked in them noticed a thing. And to put things in perspective,