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.
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.
Your debugging attempt is accepted but I will address each point.
A blast up elevator shafts has no connection to stairwells.
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.
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.
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.
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!
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"?
How did they not hear? It happened BEFORE the people began panic fleeing.
http://www.911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/seismic.htmlhttps://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.
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.
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.
Your debugging attempt is accepted but I will address each point.
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.
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.