Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Dimitri Khalezov - WTC Nuclear Demolition

Options
  • 10-08-2012 3:42am
    #1
    Registered Users Posts: 54 ✭✭


    Dimitri Khalezov - WTC Nuclear Demolition



    lenght of the interview: 4hrs:16min:20sec - after this interview there will be no more questions unanswered!

    Dimitri Khalezov - WTC Nuclear Demolition
    a groundbreaking interview of an ex officer of the Soviet nuclear intelligence
    exposing the truth of the 9/11 events
    This Video series has been censored all through the web.

    "Why I believe nuclear demolition fits all the evidence we know about.

    They didn't call it "ground zero" for nothing! Before 911, ground zero only meant the area below or above a nuclear detonation, after 911, they changed some of the dictionaries to say it was also the place where terrorists attacked the trade centers. It's all mind control.

    Dimitri Khalezov has been an expert in nuclear demolition for many years and has an incredible amount of proof that the buildings were taken down by underground micro nuclear demolition charges! I've posted some links to other material such as the melted cars that could have only been done by EMP type effects caused by a nuclear bomb since there was no jet fuel burning at ground level AND some of these cars were missing engine blocks! They were totally melted! How do you melt an engine block when no fire was burning at ground level - many of these cars were 7 blocks away! They were never explained in any way. Also it was never explained why Tritium levels were 55 times more than normal at ground zero. And of course we have ALL the strange cancers from first responders and many of them have died. They were forced to wear "air quality" badges which Dimitri says were really just radiation detectors in disguise so they could monitor everybody's exposure and pull people out of the hot zones for a while when their badges reported higher radiation. Easy to lie to everybody and tell them the badge is to monitor air quality. That is pure garbage if you think about it. There is not going to be that much difference in "air quality around such a relatively small area anyway.

    Dimitri even said that in the 70's he was told that the Americans had authorized the twin towers to be taken down at the end of their lifetimes with small nuclear demolition charges! I did some research and it was true! It was determined that only a nuclear demolition charge could safely bring down both Towers and Building 7 because of their construction. Here's some good information on nuclear demolition"

    From the youtube uploader


«13

Comments

  • Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    Hi Teddy,

    They didn't call it "ground zero" for nothing! Before 911, ground zero only meant the area below or above a nuclear detonation, after 911, they changed some of the dictionaries to say it was also the place where terrorists attacked the trade centers. It's all mind control.

    Here is the thing - If I was involved in this vastly elaborate and dastardly crime and also the coverup where exposure of my involvement would lead to certain death for treason, that is if angry mobs didn't drag me through the street first, the last thing I would want to do is leave any kind of indicator of the crime that points in my direction i.e. "Ground Zero".

    I don't think anyone else would think different.


  • Registered Users Posts: 54 ✭✭teddy_irish


    Hi Teddy,


    Here is the thing - If I was involved in this vastly elaborate and dastardly crime and also the coverup where exposure of my involvement would lead to certain death for treason, that is if angry mobs didn't drag me through the street first, the last thing I would want to do is leave any kind of indicator of the crime that points in my direction i.e. "Ground Zero".

    I don't think anyone else would think different.

    If you think so... Just check the time frame between 1:41:22 to 1:46:10
    It's only 5 mins from the clip above. There is the proof.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,451 ✭✭✭weisses


    If you think so... Just check the time frame between 1:41:22 to 1:46:10
    It's only 5 mins from the clip above. There is the proof.


    Neehh that is to far fetched ... Dictionary's always get re-written ... That last comparison was from a American dictionary so i can understand that they rephrased it for future reading

    They are more adapting the meaning of the word to what is generally used for the word "ground zero" after 9/11


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 921 ✭✭✭Border-Rat


    Nuclear detonation. Laughable disinfo. The buildings were rigged with conventional military-grade explosives. The wireless detonators were added in the 3 weekends leading up to 9/11 by Israeli military demolition teams. They had access because the security contract had already been won by an Israeli-linked firm.


  • Registered Users Posts: 33,446 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    Border-Rat wrote: »
    Nuclear detonation. Laughable disinfo. The buildings were rigged with conventional military-grade explosives. The wireless detonators were added in the 3 weekends leading up to 9/11 by Israeli military demolition teams. They had access because the security contract had already been won by an Israeli-linked firm.

    Three weekends is not long enough to wire up a building and plant explosives for demolition purposes, and that's without taking into account that the explosives would have to be hidden. I remember watching a doc years ago where it took a month to set explosives in a building half that size, and that was without having to conceal them, and there were wires all over the place. I also worked in a quarry for a short while and one day had to help set explosives for a rock blast, which took a day and wasn't nearly as complex as doing it in a building.

    Then add to that the fact that once the planes hit and the fire started, the explosives would have been set off instantly.

    As for wireless detonators, I'm not sure that would have been advisable to use with the amount of cellular devices in New York City, and even in those buildings. They could have accidentally set off the explosives early which would have been disastrous. I'm pretty sure the time I helped with explosives we had to turn all phones off, even though it was a wired detonation, though it was a few years ago now and I can't really remember.


  • Advertisement
  • Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    Penn wrote: »
    Three weekends is not long enough to wire up a building and plant explosives for demolition purposes,

    ...

    Sheikh A. Alakl Residential & Commercial Center
    Over the last 52 years, Controlled Demolition Incorporated has designed and used explosives to cause the controlled, progressive failure of thousands of brick, concrete and steel structures. It comes as no surprise that Controlled Demolition Incorporated’s database is highly useful in analyzing the condition of, and designing the implosion sequence for the demolition of structural systems damaged by construction failure, earthquakes, fires or explosions.

    Half of the 17-story Sheikh A. Alakl Apartment Building in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia collapsed when portions of the new reinforced concrete facility were overloaded during final stages of construction. At the request of Bechtel, Controlled Demolition Incorporated’s team mobilized to the site in less than 24 hours, prepared the central-core, flat slab, reinforced concrete structure in another 27 hours and put the balance of the building on the ground with absolute safety just 96 hours after the start of demolition preparations.




    http://www.controlled-demolition.com/sheikh-alakl-residential-commercial-center


  • Registered Users Posts: 33,446 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    ...

    Sheikh A. Alakl Residential & Commercial Center
    Over the last 52 years, Controlled Demolition Incorporated has designed and used explosives to cause the controlled, progressive failure of thousands of brick, concrete and steel structures. It comes as no surprise that Controlled Demolition Incorporated’s database is highly useful in analyzing the condition of, and designing the implosion sequence for the demolition of structural systems damaged by construction failure, earthquakes, fires or explosions.

    Half of the 17-story Sheikh A. Alakl Apartment Building in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia collapsed when portions of the new reinforced concrete facility were overloaded during final stages of construction. At the request of Bechtel, Controlled Demolition Incorporated’s team mobilized to the site in less than 24 hours, prepared the central-core, flat slab, reinforced concrete structure in another 27 hours and put the balance of the building on the ground with absolute safety just 96 hours after the start of demolition preparations.




    http://www.controlled-demolition.com/sheikh-alakl-residential-commercial-center

    I'd actually highlight different parts of that paragraph:
    Half of the 17-story Sheikh A. Alakl Apartment Building in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia collapsed when portions of the new reinforced concrete facility were overloaded during final stages of construction. At the request of Bechtel, Controlled Demolition Incorporated’s team mobilized to the site in less than 24 hours, prepared the central-core, flat slab, reinforced concrete structure in another 27 hours and put the balance of the building on the ground with absolute safety just 96 hours after the start of demolition preparations.

    That was a 17 storey building, half of which had already collapsed, and from the start of their demolition preparations took 96 hours or 4 days.

    The Twin Towers were two 110 storey buildings, occupied and structurally intact, and three weekends would only be 6 days.

    Now fair enough, perhaps I should have said "Three weekends is not long enough to wire up a building of this size and plant explosives for demolition purposes", but in fairness, I think the point still stands when taken in context of the whole paragraph.


  • Registered Users Posts: 25,232 ✭✭✭✭King Mob



    Half of the 17-story Sheikh A. Alakl Apartment Building in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia collapsed when portions of the new reinforced concrete facility were overloaded during final stages of construction. At the request of Bechtel, Controlled Demolition Incorporated’s team mobilized to the site in less than 24 hours, prepared the central-core, flat slab, reinforced concrete structure in another 27 hours and put the balance of the building on the ground with absolute safety just 96 hours after the start of demolition preparations.

    So 9 ish stories of a deserted, partially collapsed building. In 4 days.
    You are agreeing with Penn right?


  • Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    King Mob wrote: »
    So 9 ish stories of a deserted, partially collapsed building. In 4 days.
    You are agreeing with Penn right?

    4 days? Nice exaggeration. You do realise that the travel time to get there is irrelevant?

    This is the important part:
    "prepared the central-core, flat slab, reinforced concrete structure in another 27 hours"

    And "9ish stories"? Is that a scientific term?

    Another point is that obviously "putt(ing) the balance of the building on the ground with absolute safety" is not a consideration in the scenario of the twin towers as controlled demolition therefore this would speed up the process.


  • Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    Penn wrote: »

    Now fair enough, perhaps I should have said "Three weekends is not long enough to wire up a building of this size and plant explosives for demolition purposes", but in fairness, I think the point still stands when taken in context of the whole paragraph.

    Can you prove this?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 33,446 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    King Mob wrote: »
    So 9 ish stories of a deserted, partially collapsed building. In 4 days.
    You are agreeing with Penn right?

    I think Brown Bomber, and he's free to correct me on this, was pointing out that I had said three weekends was not long enough to plant explosives and demolish a building in, whereas he could point to that example which was done in four days. After all, I only said "a building" and did not specify size or height.

    Though I would argue that even regardless of size, if half of the building had already collapsed while it was being constructed then demolition would likely be easier as it would seem that the building was not structurally sound in the first place. Nor was the building occupied which would mean it was quicker and easier to plant the explosives.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,988 ✭✭✭enno99


    Penn wrote: »
    I think Brown Bomber, and he's free to correct me on this, was pointing out that I had said three weekends was not long enough to plant explosives and demolish a building in, whereas he could point to that example which was done in four days. After all, I only said "a building" and did not specify size or height.

    Though I would argue that even regardless of size, if half of the building had already collapsed while it was being constructed then demolition would likely be easier as it would seem that the building was not structurally sound in the first place. Nor was the building occupied which would mean it was quicker and easier to plant the explosives.


    Could it also be argued that process might have been a lot slower than normal given the precarious nature of the building and a lot more tought to the safety of the team rigging the building would be required


  • Registered Users Posts: 25,232 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    4 days? Nice exaggeration. You do realise that the travel time to get there is irrelevant?
    The article said it took 94 hours from the start of demolition preparation.
    This is the important part:
    "prepared the central-core, flat slab, reinforced concrete structure in another 27 hours"
    Which could mean a lot of things in demolition terms. For all we know it could just mean that the demolition charges were set, but were not wired up.
    Hell it could even mean all the prep work that was needed to be done such as clearing the building of rubble etc before they could even set the charges.

    The article stated it took 96 hours start to finish.
    And "9ish stories"? Is that a scientific term?
    Yes, it's halfish of 17.
    The point is the building in question was a 10th the size of one of the Twin Towers and it took 4 days to demolish. And that was working without needing to be stealthy.
    Another point is that obviously "putt(ing) the balance of the building on the ground with absolute safety" is not a consideration in the scenario of the twin towers as controlled demolition therefore this would speed up the process.
    No, but the supposed covert demolition team would have their own challenges.
    Such as avoiding being seen or detected. Quietly shipping in their equipment. Hiding their work. Making multiple redundant systems so the charges would fire after a plane hit and the resulting fires. Possibly working with exotic materials such as thermite, nano thermite or nuclear weapons.
    So what time they might have saved in safety they surely lost in other stuff.


  • Registered Users Posts: 25,232 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    enno99 wrote: »
    Could it also be argued that process might have been a lot slower than normal given the precarious nature of the building and a lot more tought to the safety of the team rigging the building would be required
    So then perhaps would should use an example of a larger, stable building to determine a fair comparison?
    Like for instance: http://www.controlled-demolition.com/jl-hudson-department-store
    A 33 story building which took 24 days to rig to explode, which does not count the prosecuting and pre weakening that was needed.

    And that's still only a third the size of one of the WTC buildings and of a totally different structure.


  • Registered Users Posts: 33,446 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    Can you prove this?

    http://sydney.edu.au/engineering/civil/wtc.shtml
    One demolition expert on the day of the collapse said it looked like implosion but this is not very strong evidence. Implosion firstly requires a lot of explosives placed in strategic areas all around the building. When and how was this explosive placed in the building without anyone knowing about it. Second, implosion required more than just explosives. Demolition experts spend weeks inside a derelict building planning an event. Many of the beams are cut through by about 90% so that the explosion only has to break a small bit of steel. In this state the building is highly dangerous, and there is no way such a prepared building could still be running day to day like WTC was.

    http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/kaboom/loizeaux.html
    We've had chimneys prepared in half a day and we've had buildings that take three months. Generally we don't do the preparation work. We are usually an implosion subcontractor, meaning that there is a main demolition contractor on site, who's been contracted by the property owner or the developer, and they then subcontract the implosion to us. We will then ask them to perform preparatory operations, including non-load bearing partition removal—meaning, the dry wall that separates the rooms. It's not carrying the weight of the building. It's just there as a divider. But what happens—you know, if you have a case of beer—all the little cardboard reinforcements inside? If you have all those little cardboard reinforcements, then you can jump up and down on the case. But if you take them out, the case will crush under your weight. Those little partitions actually add up and act as stiffeners. So that's one of the first things we strip out. The second thing we do is drilling. Depending on the height of the structure, we'll work on a couple of different floors—usually anywhere from two to six. The taller the building, the higher up we work. We only really need to work on the first two floors, because—you can make the building come down that way. But we work on several upper floors to help fragment debris for the contractor, so all the debris ends up in small, manageable pieces. Other preparatory operations are covering—wrapping the columns with chain link fence and then in geotextile fabric, which is very puncture resistant and has a very high tensile strength. It allows the concrete to move, but it keeps the concrete from flying. The chain link catches the bigger material and the fabric catches the smaller material from flying up and out. We also sometimes put up a curtain around the entire floor, to catch the stuff that gets through these first two layers. That's really where your liability is.

    Obviously though, I'm no expert. But with the amount of work that I saw both first hand and in the documentary, coupled with my experience in structural design, I really fail to see how two buildings of that size could be wired with explosives for controlled demolition in 6 days, incognito, and covering up the explosives so they are unnoticeable.


  • Registered Users Posts: 33,446 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    enno99 wrote: »
    Could it also be argued that process might have been a lot slower than normal given the precarious nature of the building and a lot more tought to the safety of the team rigging the building would be required

    I'd say more time would have been needed both to put everything back as it was so no-one would notice all the work which had taken place.

    One of the main factors however would be the fact that, if they knew a plane was going to hit the building, the explosives should have gone off instantly. Now, I'm not an expert so maybe there is some way of shielding the explosives for a certain amount of time, but that could only possibly add even more time to the demolition works, further stretching the credibility of the three weekend limit.


  • Registered Users Posts: 33,446 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    King Mob wrote: »
    Yes, it's halfish of 17.
    The point is the building in question was a 10th the size of one of the Twin Towers and it took 4 days to demolish. And that was working without needing to be stealthy.

    I'd slightly disagree with the 9-ish floor claim. It said half of the 17-storey building had collapsed. It's unlikely that the top 9-ish floors collapsed leaving the bottom 9-ish floors, more likely half of the footprint of the building collapsed, meaning there was still 17 storeys, just with half the floor area.

    However, as it doesn't give a floor area of the building, it's unknown whether one floor of the building is equal to one floor of one of the Towers, whether before or after half of that building collapsed.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,988 ✭✭✭enno99


    Penn wrote: »
    I'd say more time would have been needed both to put everything back as it was so no-one would notice all the work which had taken place.

    One of the main factors however would be the fact that, if they knew a plane was going to hit the building, the explosives should have gone off instantly. Now, I'm not an expert so maybe there is some way of shielding the explosives for a certain amount of time, but that could only possibly add even more time to the demolition works, further stretching the credibility of the three weekend limit.

    Perhaps we have our wires crossed
    I was talking about the partially collapsed building in BB's post


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,988 ✭✭✭enno99


    King Mob wrote: »
    So then perhaps would should use an example of a larger, stable building to determine a fair comparison?
    Like for instance: http://www.controlled-demolition.com/jl-hudson-department-store
    A 33 story building which took 24 days to rig to explode, which does not count the prosecuting and pre weakening that was needed.

    And that's still only a third the size of one of the WTC buildings and of a totally different structure.

    How would that be a fair comparison between a structurally sound building and a partially collapsed one

    If you read further in to the link you gave it explains why it took the length of time to complete the task


  • Registered Users Posts: 25,232 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    enno99 wrote: »
    How would that be a fair comparison between a structurally sound building and a partially collapsed one
    It's a more fair comparison to the twin towers than a partially collapsed one.
    enno99 wrote: »
    If you read further in to the link you gave it explains why it took the length of time to complete the task
    No, the link specifically states that it took 24 days just to place and wire up the charges, nothing else.
    This is not counting the safety things or the precutting etc, and it doesn't count any covert operation stuff either.
    And that's a building a third the size of the WTC.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,988 ✭✭✭enno99


    King Mob wrote: »
    It's a more fair comparison to the twin towers than a partially collapsed one.


    No, the link specifically states that it took 24 days just to place and wire up the charges, nothing else.
    This is not counting the safety things or the precutting etc, and it doesn't count any covert operation stuff either.
    And that's a building a third the size of the WTC.

    So how much explosives and time do you think it would have took to bring down 1 of the towers


  • Registered Users Posts: 25,232 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    enno99 wrote: »
    So how much explosives and time do you think it would have took to bring down 1 of the towers
    More than it would have taken to bring down a building 1/3 it's size.


  • Registered Users Posts: 33,446 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    enno99 wrote: »
    Perhaps we have our wires crossed
    I was talking about the partially collapsed building in BB's post

    Ah, I see. That makes more sense alright. Apologies.

    It's too hard to say without any information on why the rest collapsed or the design, but I would suspect that works to make the remaining structure safe would have already taken place before calling in demolition crews. Every effort to retain the structure would have been made. After all, the building was still being constructed. The costs of demolishing and rebuilding would be huge. If they could have added new structural members (columns, beams etc) to the remaining in order to make it safe, then rebuild the demolished part also with additional structural elements, they probably would have. In order to decide, engineers would have needed to investigate the part of the building which didn't collapse, so the building would have needed to have been made safe.

    Again, I have pretty much zero information on the case so this is all just speculation and what I would expect to happen.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,988 ✭✭✭enno99


    King Mob wrote: »
    More than it would have taken to bring down a building 1/3 it's size.

    I can see where that would apply

    If both buildings were identical in every way except height


    No structural drawings of the facility were available, making structural analysis and implosion design a considerable task for CDI. The interdependency of the 12 different construction stages, with differing construction and variable column flange directions and bay widths created what CDI calls differential natural failure modes in each section of the structure which CDI’s demolition program had to cope with. These factors created an implosion design, preparation and dynamic control challenge for the 2nd and 3rd generation of a family recognized as the international founders of the commercial implosion industry

    Perhaps this design needed more than a normal 33 story building


  • Registered Users Posts: 29 sparxz


    Dimitri Khalezov - WTC Nuclear Demolition



    lenght of the interview: 4hrs:16min:20sec - after this interview there will be no more questions unanswered!

    Dimitri Khalezov - WTC Nuclear Demolition
    a groundbreaking interview of an ex officer of the Soviet nuclear intelligence
    exposing the truth of the 9/11 events
    This Video series has been censored all through the web.

    "Why I believe nuclear demolition fits all the evidence we know about.

    They didn't call it "ground zero" for nothing! Before 911, ground zero only meant the area below or above a nuclear detonation, after 911, they changed some of the dictionaries to say it was also the place where terrorists attacked the trade centers. It's all mind control.

    Dimitri Khalezov has been an expert in nuclear demolition for many years and has an incredible amount of proof that the buildings were taken down by underground micro nuclear demolition charges! I've posted some links to other material such as the melted cars that could have only been done by EMP type effects caused by a nuclear bomb since there was no jet fuel burning at ground level AND some of these cars were missing engine blocks! They were totally melted! How do you melt an engine block when no fire was burning at ground level - many of these cars were 7 blocks away! They were never explained in any way. Also it was never explained why Tritium levels were 55 times more than normal at ground zero. And of course we have ALL the strange cancers from first responders and many of them have died. They were forced to wear "air quality" badges which Dimitri says were really just radiation detectors in disguise so they could monitor everybody's exposure and pull people out of the hot zones for a while when their badges reported higher radiation. Easy to lie to everybody and tell them the badge is to monitor air quality. That is pure garbage if you think about it. There is not going to be that much difference in "air quality around such a relatively small area anyway.

    Dimitri even said that in the 70's he was told that the Americans had authorized the twin towers to be taken down at the end of their lifetimes with small nuclear demolition charges! I did some research and it was true! It was determined that only a nuclear demolition charge could safely bring down both Towers and Building 7 because of their construction. Here's some good information on nuclear demolition"

    From the youtube uploader

    SO MANY WARNINGS - SO FEW LISTEN, EVEN LESS UNDERSTAND, AND NO ONE ACTS. ALL OF THE ELEMENTS A CRIMINAL CABAL NEED TO ACT WITH IMPUNITY. - Quote, from this poster.
    "In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens, you can bet it was planned that way." - Franklin D. Roosevelt
    “Since I entered politics, I have chiefly had men's views confided to me privately. Some of the biggest men in the United States —in the fields of commerce and manufacturing—are afraid of somebody. They know that there is a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they had better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it.” - Woodrow Wilson


    Justice is incidental to law and order.
    J. Edgar Hoover



    We[FBI] are a fact-gathering organization only. We don't clear anybody. We don't condemn anybody.
    J. Edgar Hoover



    We must now face the harsh truth that the objectives of [International]communism
    [Created by the city of London/TempleBar] are being steadily advanced because many of us do not recognize the means used to advance them. ... The individual is handicapped by coming face to face with a Conspiracy so monstrous he cannot believe it exists. The American mind simply has not come to a realization of the evil which has been introduced into our midst.

    ― -- J. Edgar Hoover


    Above all, I would teach him to tell the truth Truth-telling, I have found, is the key to responsible citizenship. The thousands of criminals I have seen in 40 years of law enforcement have had one thing in common: Every single one was a liar.



    “Today, America would be outraged if UN troops entered Los Angeles to restore order. Tomorrow they will be grateful! This is especially true if they were told that there was an outside threat from beyond, whether real or promulgated, that threatened our very existence. It is then that all people of the world will plead to deliver them from this evil. The one thing every man fears is the unknown. When presented with this scenario, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well-being granted to them by the world government.”
    - Henry Kissinger (Bilderburg Conference 1991 Evians, France)

    [Visited Dublin, and greeted by Brian Cowan and Mary McAlease in Four seasons Hotel. Michael Martin(FF TD) sent written invites to Trilateral members, from Dept Foreign affairs headed paper, to dine in Dublin Castle].

    “Naturally the common people don't want war…but after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship…all you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country.” Herman Goering ( One of Hitler's top men, during the Nuremberg Trials)

    The easiest way to gain control of the population is to carry out acts of terror. The public will clamor for such laws if the personal security is threatened. - Joseph Stalin

    The real rulers of Washington are Invisible and exercise power from behind the scenes. - Justice Felix Frankfurter - US Supreme Court Justice

    "We shall have World Government. Whether or not we like it. The only Question is whether World Government will be achieved by conquest or consent." - James Paul Warburg , Foreign agent for the Rothschild dynasty - Major Player in the Federal Reserve act scam / Feb. 17, 1950 speaking before the U.S. Senate.

    "The Technetronic era involves the gradual appearance of a more CONTROLLED society. Such a society would be dominated by ELITE, unrestrained by traditional values." - Zbigniew Brezhinsky , Advisor to 5 U.S. Presidents - Executive Director Trilateral Commission. "Between two Ages"
    “The interests behind the Bush Administration, such as the CFR, the Trilateral Commission – founded by Brzezinski for David Rockefeller – and the Bilderberg Group have prepared for and are now moving to implement open world dictatorship within the next five years.” - Dr. Johannes Koeppl – former official of the German Ministry for Defense and adviser to NATO.
    “We are on the verge of a Global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis and the nations will accept the New World Order.” - David Rockefeller



    "Democracy tends to ignore, even deny, threats to its existence because it loathes doing what is needed to counter them," explained Revel. "It awakens only when the danger becomes deadly, imminent, and evident. By then, either there is too little time left for it to save itself, or the price of survival has become crushingly high." - Jean Francois Revel



    “Every time we do something, you tell me America will do this and will do that . . . I want to tell you something very clear: Don't worry about American pressure on Israel . We, the Jewish people, control America , and the Americans know it.” - Ariel Sharon , October 3, 2001



    "We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated Governments in the world - no longer a Government of free opinion, no longer a Government by conviction and vote of the majority, but a Government by the opinion and duress of small groups of dominant men." - Woodrow Wilson [U.S. President during World War I]


  • Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    enno99 wrote: »
    I can see where that would apply

    If both buildings were identical in every way except height
    Height can be used to the demolitions crew's advantage. It's the downward pressure that does most of the destruction.


  • Registered Users Posts: 25,232 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    enno99 wrote: »
    I can see where that would apply

    If both buildings were identical in every way except height


    No structural drawings of the facility were available, making structural analysis and implosion design a considerable task for CDI. The interdependency of the 12 different construction stages, with differing construction and variable column flange directions and bay widths created what CDI calls differential natural failure modes in each section of the structure which CDI’s demolition program had to cope with. These factors created an implosion design, preparation and dynamic control challenge for the 2nd and 3rd generation of a family recognized as the international founders of the commercial implosion industry

    Perhaps this design needed more than a normal 33 story building
    And perhaps the WTC design needed more.

    You're welcome to show examples of buildings like the WTC that were demolished in under 6 days.

    But all the examples so far seem to indicate such a feat is not likely even if the building was evacuated.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,988 ✭✭✭enno99


    King Mob wrote: »
    And perhaps the WTC design needed more.

    You're welcome to show examples of buildings like the WTC that were demolished in under 6 days.

    But all the examples so far seem to indicate such a feat is not likely even if the building was evacuated.

    So like I said in the start your comparison is invalid


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,827 ✭✭✭christmas2012


    i dont believe in any conspriacy theories to this , it is just crazy,i seen one guy use a road runner as an argument on youtube it is just too much to take in as serious you have to laugh at some of these nutjobs going around trying to convince us 911 was an inside job,i cant imagine how infuriating it must be for the relatives of this attack to have to see this online..


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 25,232 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    enno99 wrote: »
    So like I said in the start your comparison is invalid
    But BB's isn't?

    Can you show an example of a comparable building of similar size or construction that was rigged in less than 6 days?
    Cause so far even the largest example you can find and the nearest analogue to the Twin Towers took 24 days.


Advertisement