You have the below correct. Otherwise you have everything else almost exactly wrong, backwards. Congratulations!
"Nor was there any time whatsoever to plant sufficient explosives to create the 9-11 effect."
"But we've been through all that before."
It is being put to use right now for the American people whom you have no reason to give a squat for ever.
Wrong.
You said 'less than a couple of minutes' was near free fall. Nope. That's just normal collapse time.
You said that large chunks of debris constitutes 'total pulverisation'. Nope. Pulverisation means reducing to dust and fine debris. Given the size of many of the remaining fragments, 'total pulverisation' just didn't happen.
The longest shelf life of any military explosive, in its original sealed packaging, is 20 years. C4 has considerably less.
Covering it in concrete, or worse, mixing it with acetone, would REDUCE that shelf life considerably. Ergo, C4 planted in the late 1960s would be inert by 2001.
No plastic explosive can be 'cut' with solvents. Try it some time. Go ahead. It's been tried. So no slurry of C4 and acetone would have exploded - especially not sufficiently to cut steel and 'pulverise' concrete.
There is not now, nor was there in the 1960s, 3" rebar. 3" rebar would have been almost impossible to work with, and far too large for the job anyway.
For you to prove that this is wrong, you need to provide the following:
1) A clear definition of 'near free fall' which is also not 'nearly normal collapse time'.
2) Clear evidence that all matter in the towers was completely pulverised into fine dust and gravel - gravel being, of course, particulate matter, not fist-sized and often larger chunks of debris.
3) Clear evidence of the existence of any explosive capable of demolishing buildings of this scale that could remain viable for 40+ years, exposed to air and mixed with other chemicals.
4) Your chemical calculations for the results of softening/liquifying C4 or other plastic explosives with acetone or other solvents, proving that the explosive would still react to electrical stimulation or other means of detonation.
5) Clear evidence of the existence of 3" rebar - by which I mean, a catalogue entry, technical journal entry, invoice, anything, which shows 3" rebar existed.
As for your snide comment at the end, I'll let it slide. After all, I welcome our new NWO masters! My personal standard of living has never been higher. Besides, who's the real callous and uncaring American - the one who simply disbelieves fairy tale theories about magical explosives, missing documentaries, and 40-year plans involving destroying national icons, or the one who 'knows the truth', yet does absolutely nothing useful or practical with that knowledge?
Hint: A crappy website full of crackpot theories and a thread on a limited-viewership skeptics' board does NOT constitute 'informing the public', any more than a fuzzy picture of 'something' inside a dust cloud constitutes 'raw evidence'.
Fact: You could post another couple of hundred pages here, and a year from now,
nothing will have changed. In fact, you could do what you're doing now, for the rest of your life, and on your deathbed, you'll have accomplished nothing.
That's why I keep asking you what you're going to do about it. If it were really that important, you'd be doing something other than wasting time posting on internet forums.
In a way, this reminds me of that antichrist guy who thinks it was a sign because he posted some nonsense about terrorism as post 666 on an internet forum. SO he goes around posting his 'revelation' on internet forums. And this does what, exactly?
So, Antichrist Guy, got any better plans for overthrowing the NWO than wasting time posting to the only internet forum that hasn't banned you for fatal stupidity?
