Win / Conspiracies
Conspiracies
Communities Topics Log In Sign Up
Sign In
Hot
All Posts
Settings
All
Profile
Saved
Upvoted
Hidden
Messages

Your Communities

General
AskWin
Funny
Technology
Animals
Sports
Gaming
DIY
Health
Positive
Privacy
News
Changelogs

More Communities

frenworld
OhTwitter
MillionDollarExtreme
NoNewNormal
Ladies
Conspiracies
GreatAwakening
IP2Always
GameDev
ParallelSociety
Privacy Policy
Terms of Service
Content Policy
DEFAULT COMMUNITIES • All General AskWin Funny Technology Animals Sports Gaming DIY Health Positive Privacy
Conspiracies Conspiracy Theories & Facts
hot new rising top

Sign In or Create an Account

45
The debate is over: The Twin Towers were mostly turned into dust in midair - steel and all! (www.youtube.com)
posted 4 years ago by PuzzleheadedWhile9 4 years ago by PuzzleheadedWhile9 +48 / -3
47 comments share
47 comments share save hide report block hide replies
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (47)
sorted by:
▲ 2 ▼
– DZP1 2 points 4 years ago +5 / -3

I've had inside information for decades that the buildings were brought down by "dial a nuke"s placed in the subbasements. These are military weapons designed to be able to leave little radioactivity afterwards. Info was via a leaked security clearanced source inside the New York Port Authority.

The nukes blew straight up elevator shafts and also - important - inadvertently blew pressure through the sewer system under these and neighboring buildings. That was detected but not talked about.

Another thing is the nukes emitted radiation some of which left the buildings and radiated out. Much of it was absorbed by nearby buildings but some went through gaps between buildings and was absorbed by the metal in parked cars blocks away. There the heated metal burned its paint off and yet nearby newspapers which were nonmetallic and so did not absorb the energy, did not burn. Absolute proof radiation was emitted, as this was not thermal energy from any collapse, and no way that could have happened by any other mechanism.

Also tritium levels in air were elevated, and the steel that Bush immediately sent to China (to be melted and of course destroyed as evidence) was also radioactive.

I came into this when I worked on a project to furnish screening of trucks entering the new replacement towers. There is an underground facility for supply trucks that enter under the buildings. All vehicles coming in get scanned for radiation; this is to prevent nukes from being used in the future again. But locking the barn door after horses get out.

As for disparaging remarks related to credibility, I was part of a team that worked with the Port Authority to protect the new towers. To do that, we were opened to their information sources. I relate what I know, and there is some nasty stuff I may not disclose, but what I say is true, not made up or grandstanding.

permalink save report block reply
▲ 5 ▼
– PuzzleheadedWhile9 [S] 5 points 4 years ago +6 / -1

This suggestion ignores survivors inside WTC1 (Miracle of Stairwell B), ignores the lack of flash and blast (sound), and ignores the unburned people in the dust clouds.

Your "inside information" means nothing if it is incommensurate with the documentable evidence.

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 1 ▼
– 17-45Pepe45_17 1 point 4 years ago +1 / -0

You both need to listen to manny Rodriguez first, then come and debate this.

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 1 ▼
– DZP1 1 point 4 years ago +1 / -0

Your debugging attempt is accepted but I will address each point.

  1. A blast up elevator shafts has no connection to stairwells.
  2. Lack of flash and blast. A nuke in the basement does not flash out of upper stories. As for blast, there are very specific seismo recordings documenting a high energy pulse PRE COLLAPSE. And no, not the plane hits. Which show up too. Also, witness in basement saw 20 ton steel doors get blasted open and crushed. Evidence indicates truck with bomb in underground garage and mostly likely positioned precisely under shafts for maximum effect.
  3. Unburned people in dust clouds. Open to debate; blast energy converted to breaking material apart and forming dust clouds has nothing to do with unburned people. The cloud may not have been thermally very hot as such. However, I note that many people, over time and continuing to now, have cancer very likely from short-lived radioactives in the dust clouds.

As for disparaging 'inside information' I accept scoffing but I am honest, and have much more not disclosed info. This material is real, and we know who pulled off the takedown. Not just one party. Foreign and domestic.

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 2 ▼
– PuzzleheadedWhile9 [S] 2 points 4 years ago +3 / -1
  1. The elevators and stairs are both in the central core. How did they not hear such an event? They say the noise came from above.
  2. This is a claim. I would love to see the seismographic data from the source regarding your claim of an energy pulse pre collapse. Thank you!
  3. If this is ionizing radiation creating dust clouds, how does it not relate to people being burned? If it is thermal, how does it not relate to people being burned? How were there no radiation burns, especially considering "the nukes emitted radiation" that "heated [the] metal burned its paint off"?
permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 1 ▼
– DZP1 1 point 4 years ago +1 / -0
  1. How did they not hear? It happened BEFORE the people began panic fleeing.

http://www.911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/seismic.html https://serendipity.li/wot/bollyn2.htm 3. You are confusing ionizing radiation with thermal radiation. 4. As I mentioned, dial-a-nukes are configurable for what radiation is given off. And on the car burning, it is obvious that intervening buildings screened some radiation beaming but some got through in a narrow pattern to the cars. No radiation burns: again, you do not have a full model or understanding. As I said, energy was emitted in bands that do not affect newspapers (carbon and human tissues) but which is absorbable by metals.

permalink parent save report block reply
... continue reading thread?
▲ 4 ▼
– KiloRomeo 4 points 4 years ago +4 / -0

What do you make of evidence from other truthers who have discovered evidence of thermite within the wreckage? The buildings fall at free fall speeds and appears to be demoed

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 2 ▼
– DZP1 2 points 4 years ago +2 / -0

You have a good point. Prior to the collapse event, the building were closed off and teams installed thermite on supports to weaken them. The collapse was engineered with multiple points for takedown. I note that the official building photographer was barred from the building during the thermite installation period. He commented on it to reporters in the years right after the event.

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 1 ▼
– deleted 1 point 4 years ago +1 / -0
▲ 2 ▼
– DZP1 2 points 4 years ago +2 / -0

Okay. On the US government side, Dick Cheney, who was the real president behind George Bush who was just a figurehead but the son of Bush senior. Dick and Sr Bush were Neocons, allies of the elite.

The Israelis were big operatives, Mossad teams handling much of the needed work. Silverstein of course working with Mossad. The Israelis worked with Saudi royalty, and the Saudis set up the lower end of the chain (pilots/willing dupes). Mossad monitored the dupes in Florida preflight.

On the big day, Mossad teams like the moving company guys got in place and recorded the event, but were caught when people reported the dancing Israelis. An Israeli moving van was stopped by police and it tested out having carried explosives. There was a foiled plot to bomb a bridge leading out of NYC.

The nukes were handled by a combined US team of subversives in the military, a fifth column, and Mossad. The US traitors supplied stolen nukes, the Israeli did the planting under the towers with full cooperation of Silverstein. Cheney and the traitors also handled the Pennsylvania crash.

The Pentagon hit was not the passenger jet as claimed but a drone painted to resemble the jet. I know a TV producer who was there and he identified that it would be impossible for a passenger jet to have come up over the rim of land around the Pentagon and then dip at that speed close to the ground. The surveillance tapes confiscated by the FBI - which also was infiltrated with Neocon operatives - tell the truth and they will never be released. However, I saw photos of the crash parts outside the Pentagon - I still have the FEMA photos - and identified that the turbine wreckage was not from a passenger jet. I have worked in aerospace with a turbine manufacturer and knew right away when I saw the photos that it was too small to be a Boeing passenger jet unit.

There is a lot more but I will not write an encyclopedia here.

permalink parent save report block reply
... continue reading thread?
▲ 1 ▼
– SuicideTruthbomber 1 point 4 years ago +1 / -0

They did not need some exotic atomic bomb to demolish the buildings.

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 1 ▼
– DZP1 1 point 4 years ago +1 / -0

Brainwashed by the media I see. The fuel from two jets did everything?

permalink parent save report block reply
... continue reading thread?
▲ 1 ▼
– deleted 1 point 4 years ago +1 / -0
▲ 1 ▼
– deleted 1 point 4 years ago +1 / -0
▲ -1 ▼
– RichardNIxon2point0 -1 points 4 years ago +1 / -2

The buildings start their collapse at the EXACT spots that the planes hit. How do you explain that with basement nukes?

The whole top collapsed above the impact area before anything below the impact area even moves.

There was plenty fucked up on 9-11, but no one can ever explain me that fact other than some magical technology, or they rigged the entire building and only set off those bombs (incredibly stupid to think any wiring for bombs or even radio tranceivers would work after sitting in fires for hours.).

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 1 ▼
– SuicideTruthbomber 1 point 4 years ago +1 / -0

I think the fire crews that went in did so to manually set the demolitions in motion. It was a secret safety protocol to prevent a domino effect in Manhattan.

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 0 ▼
– RichardNIxon2point0 0 points 4 years ago +1 / -1

But the demolitions would have had to be at the point of impact. There is no one on the planet that will convince me that whatever setup was there survived the planes and hours of fires.

Do you know the melting point of small wires and circuitry that's required for explosives?

No one would be able to go in and wire it for demolition at that point.

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 1 ▼
– SuicideTruthbomber 1 point 4 years ago +1 / -0

You are assuming a few things.

I do not agree that the point of impact from the airplanes is necessarily a factor in the takedown. In fact, I think it is unlikely.

I do not believe that explosives were necessarily used, although I do think it is probable.

I do not believe a controlled demolition requires fragile components.

I do not believe that the takedown needed to occur in an exact spot that was ravaged by fire.

It is unclear to me how much time it would take to execute an emergency demolition if the protocol were pre-planned and practiced.

permalink parent save report block reply
... continue reading thread?
▲ 1 ▼
– DZP1 1 point 4 years ago +1 / -0

Start of damage does not preclude or eliminate other co-existing causes of damage.

<incredibly stupid to think any wiring for bombs or even radio tranceivers would work after sitting in fires for hours>

Timers can and are made to be rugged. Further, local explosions of thermite within the infrastructure could easily have been timed to go off, or have been centrally wired to a detonator box preceding collapse.

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 1 ▼
– SuicideTruthbomber 1 point 4 years ago +1 / -0

I think that someone had to go in and manually do something to make it happen.

Oh, I should also explain that one theory of mine is that buildings libel to cause epic catastrophes if they collapse sideways can be outfitted with the means by which to demolish them even as early as their initial construction. However, allowing this to be done by remote control is a risk they would never take, so it takes a crew to go in and enable the emergency takedown.

permalink parent save report block reply
▲ 1 ▼
– deleted 1 point 4 years ago +1 / -0
▲ 0 ▼
– RichardNIxon2point0 0 points 4 years ago +1 / -1

Not even close. Look here at 3 minutes. You can see the top collapsing above the impact while everything below is 100% stationary. Tehre are also close up shots that make this even more apparent.

https://youtu.be/ft2uIYucsXo?t=183

permalink parent save report block reply

GIFs

Conspiracies Wiki & Links

Conspiracies Book List

External Digital Book Libraries

Mod Logs

Honor Roll

Conspiracies.win: This is a forum for free thinking and for discussing issues which have captured your imagination. Please respect other views and opinions, and keep an open mind. Our goal is to create a fairer and more transparent world for a better future.

Community Rules: <click this link for a detailed explanation of the rules

Rule 1: Be respectful. Attack the argument, not the person.

Rule 2: Don't abuse the report function.

Rule 3: No excessive, unnecessary and/or bullying "meta" posts.

To prevent SPAM, posts from accounts younger than 4 days old, and/or with <50 points, wont appear in the feed until approved by a mod.

Disclaimer: Submissions/comments of exceptionally low quality, trolling, stalking, spam, and those submissions/comments determined to be intentionally misleading, calls to violence and/or abuse of other users here, may all be removed at moderator's discretion.

Moderators

  • Doggos
  • axolotl_peyotl
  • trinadin
  • PutinLovesCats
  • clemaneuverers
  • C
Message the Moderators

Terms of Service | Privacy Policy

2025.03.01 - lf7fw (status)

Copyright © 2024.

Terms of Service | Privacy Policy