A new theory on 9/11?

[Blasphemous]

As opposed to wasting it posting comments on a DIY forum about nothing to do with DIY

This is the 'General Discussion' area. A fact that one assumes you are aware saying as you started this thread that has 'nothing to do with DIY'.

 

[enyam]

150kt and no radiation?
Hmmmmmmmmmm

I was at ground zero recently and no one mentioned radiation.After walking around there you think why the hell would the Americans collapse the building's just so they could rebuild it?

 

[RedHerring2]

It's not the "bin Laden mini-nukes" red herring either,

Hey, don't associate me with him.

 

[wobs]

Well, it is to me- ex Soviet Military Nuclear Specialist Dimitri Khalezov has compelling knowledge as to exactly how the towers were brought down, and knows EXACTLY what missile hit the Pentagon...

So now you don't believe Dr Judy Woods but some other nut? No evidence any nuclear blast, no radiation sickness or burns, only background levels of radioactivity in the area.

Basically, you like any nutty idea.

Re the missile theory at the Pentagon:
A missile that no one saw, but over 100 people saw a plane hitting the Pentagon:
104 directly saw the plane hit the Pentagon.
6 were nearly hit by the plane in front of the Pentagon. Several others were within 100-200 feet of the impact.
26 mentioned that it was an American Airlines jet.
39 others mentioned that it was a large jet/commercial airliner.
2 described a smaller corporate jet. 1 described a "commuter plane" but didn't mention the size.
7 said it was a Boeing 757.
8 witnesses were pilots. One witness was an Air Traffic Controller and Pentagon tower Chief.
2 witnesses were firefighters working on their truck at the Pentagon heliport.
4 made radio calls to inform emergency services that a plane had hit the Pentagon.
10 said the plane's flaps and landing gear were not deployed (1 thought landing gear struck a light pole).
16 mentioned seeing the plane hit light poles/trees, or were next to to the poles when it happened. Another 8 mentioned the light poles being knocked down: it's unknown if they saw them hit.
42 mentioned seeing aircraft debris. 4 mentioned seeing airline seats. 3 mentioned engine parts.
2 mentioned bodies still strapped into seats.
15 mentioned smelling or contacting aviation/jet fuel.
3 had vehicles damaged by light poles or aircraft debris. Several saw other occupied vehicles damaged.
3 took photographs of the aftermath.
Many mentioned false alarm warnings of other incoming planes after the crash. One said "3-4 warnings."
0 saw a military aircraft or missile strike the Pentagon.

http://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/PentWitnesses.xls

 

[wobs]

Would do Alarm but it's a bit distracting tbh, thing is with this one is there's very little that's been covered before under the usual controlled demolition stuff. It's not the "bin Laden mini-nukes" red herring either, it's a full on (3x) 150kt nuke well below the buildings...

Funny how WTC1&2 collapses started around the impact zones and not at the bottom, and a lack of radiation would point to there being no nukes anywhere near GZ:
http://www.osha.gov/nyc-disaster/summary.html
And the EPA have plenty of info here:
http://www.epa.gov/wtc/

No evidence, but plenty of pseudo-science, as before from the twoof movement. And they can't even agree on which idea they want to spout.

 

[sooey]

Not even worth a meaningful response. So does anyone remember the mole man from marvel comics? He got his subterranean minions to dig big holes below new york and fit huge hydraulic lifts. So when he pressed the button all the biggest buildings descended into the depths of the earth. Luckily the fantastic four were around to sort him out.....maybe he's back.

 

[joinerjohn]

Big , big flaw in the nuclear device theory. The Electro Magnetic Pulse, would have knocked out everything containing electrical circuits for quite a large radius around the site. Cameras and videos recording the collapse would have stopped working when their circuits were fried. Can ABC explain the absence of an EMP ???
Back to the drawing board methinks.

 

[ABCwarrior]

I don't recall saying I believed the whole of what he was saying, naturally after reading Judy Woods stuff I'm keen to find out why these buildings did turn to dust(please don't regurgitate the- "oooh, it was unprecedented blah blah", physics changed that day nonsense...), and still think anyone who believes the official story needs their head examined.
I did however want maybe a few of you to watch it, so there could be rational debate possibly over the ideas, as I have quite a few things to pick fault at with his theories
For the record Wobs:

Funny how WTC1&2 collapses started around the impact zones and not at the bottom

This was one of the points bothering me- if, as he claimed the towers were turned to dust internally from an upwards nuclear explosion then surely we would have seen windows blowing from the bottom up and the building would surely have collapsed instantly in one go if it happened as quick as he thinks it did? If all the walls of your house were turned to dust they couldn't possibly support the roof. This wasn't given any credible explanation IMO

Likewise Joinerjohn, that's an excellent point which may be true.

Like I say I'd have preferred to have some rational debate, if I wanted a regurgitation of the "official" 9/11 Commission story I could have got that in my library from the fiction section, next to Harry Potter and the Bible

 

[ABCwarrior]

Good, stuff Wobs.
I saw a small hole in a massively reinforced fortress- caused by a flying aluminium tube, whose engines, wings and tail, after somehow not breaking off outside the building but folding in and following each other neatly into the hole for convenience, then vapourised in the swirling vortex of this "new physics"....

Amazing....

 

[wobs]

I watched part1 for about 2mins. What do I win?

 

[namsag]

Wobs on a different tangent do you believe that no western government or associated agencies would allow thousands of their population to die for monetary or power reasons.
Not on about twin towers or soldiers during an official war

 

[ABCwarrior]

I watched part1 for about 2mins. What do I win?

hmmmm....a SHILLing perhaps?

 

[Mw Roofline]

People who believe this shit fall into the same category of people that believe...

Pay as you go is cheaper than contract
Daddy longlegs are the most venomous creatures on the planet
Paranormal stuff
Smoking when pregnant is not a problem

 

[joinerjohn]

I believe any government would allow xxx thousands of their citizens to die for monetary or power reasons. I can't believe that any government (in the West) would initiate such an action though. ( not to the extent the conspiracy theorists would have us believe) Next thing they'll have us believe is that they weren't planes at all but a couple of blokes using hang gliders made to look like civilian aircraft or aliens in space were controlling the minds of thousands of New Yorkers and Americans that day. ( I mean they've tried every other crackpot theory, such as Military missiles not planes, controlled demolition of the twin towers, Thermite explosives, heat rays, and now nuclear explosions underground)

Perhaps , one way to shut them up might be to build a full scale mock up of one side of the Pentagon , using the exact same materials and construction methods, then remotely fly an aircraft of the same type, into it at 550mph, then compare results.

 

[namsag]

What do you class as initiate ??? and to what extent ,You dont believe they would allow how many to die 10, 100, 1000 or 3000 ?

Is not having prior knowledge of times dates and how its going to happen and not stopping it when you can not the same as initiating it then