nuclear (fission type) explosions v. some kind of classified DEW technology

[Jeannon Kralj]

If there is to be a discussion of nuclear (fission) versus some kind of directed energy weapon used to destroy the Twin Towers, it will have to happen here, because I can assure you that any "mainstream 9-11 truth movement" discussions that will take place in the next few months, leading up to 9-11-11, will probably be to force us into discussing Building 7 and a call for a new independent 9-11 investigation.  That is where we are being herded now.

 

(I recall someone giving an estimate of how much regular high explosives would be needed in a Tower if it were the exclusive agent.  It was a huge amount.  I will search around in my records for that information.)

 

One thing that I have always wondered is why they had to do pre-explosions in the sub-basements of the towers if directed energy weapons were so effective that they are said to have been capable of taking out the whole building, as Dr. Wood maintains.  I do take it as fact that these pre-explosions happened,

 

* http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/Article911SeismicProof.html

 

The Columbia University seismic labs, not far from the World Trade Center did record two seismic events that happened like 14 and 17 seconds BEFORE the alleged plane crashes.

 

I think Dr. Wood prefers to claim that Directed Energy Weapons could have and would have done the ENTIRE destruction job, and implies that pre-explosions using traditional high explosives would not have been needed.

 

I also tend to think that if fission type mini-nukes were used, they probably could have been placed in such a way so as not to need to first loosen the bedrock and foundational areas of the core beams with explosives.  But even if that step were necessary, it seems that they would have used mini-nukes there too and not regular explosives.  But if mini-nukes were used to do those pre-explosions, there are quite a few people who were in those sub-basements when those pre-explosions happened and they would probably not be alive today from having received too large a dose of radiation, but they are alive.

 

In my way of thinking, those pre-explosions in the sub-basement argue for standard high explosives and standard controlled demotion for the entire building such as the WillyLoman Wordpress site hypothesizes, not mystery nano-thermite type, not nukes, and not DEWs.

 

[Dr. J. P. Hubert]

As we discuss this issue further, here is food for thought.

 

Some Questions of Fact Still in Need of Clarification:

 

1)  How many tons of conventional (HMX, RDX, PETN) explosives would be required to implode each Twin Tower?

2)  Do pure fission nuclear bombs ever produce Tritium even in low concentrations?

3)  What percentage of each Twin Tower fell into its respective footprint?

4)  What percentage of each Twin Tower fell outside its respective footprint into the WTC grounds?

5)  Is there any evidence that radioactive waste was disposed of outside of New York City? If so where is it? Can it be tested now?

6)  Is there any evidence that WTC clean-up workers were dressed appropriately to be dealing with radiation contamination?

7)  Has thermite/nanothermite ever been used to implode a “high rise” building??

8)  Has the controlled demolition of a high rise building ever produced copious quantities of nano-sized dust?

[Thoth II]

on 5 and 6 I'd say that most of fallout was in the WTC complex and the dirt was used to absorb the gamma radiation coming out of the fallout.  Now they've poured concrete to absorb it permanently.

[Jeannon Kralj]

5)  Is there any evidence that radioactive waste was disposed of outside of New York City? If so where is it? Can it be tested now?

 

The dust from the WTC was taken to someplace called Fresh Kills landfill on Staten Island, named after the Fresh Kills estuary.  Kind of ironic and disgusting that the remains of approximately 1,100 human beings were placed in a dump named Fresh Kills.

 

Keep in mind that the official story of 9-11 refers to "toxic debris", not "radioactive waste." 

 

"The thousands of tons of toxic debris resulting from the collapse of the Twin Towers consisted of more than 2,500 contaminants,^[3] more specifically: 50% non-fibrous material and construction debris; 40% glass and other fibers; 9.2% cellulose; and 0.8% of the extremely toxic carcinogen asbestos, as well as detectable amounts of ^[4] lead, and mercury. "

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_effects_arising_from_the_Septem...

 

So, you see another disinformation mainstream ifnormation site, Wikipedia, constructs this whole write-up to conform to the official story.  There is no mention of radioactivity at all and the word "collapse" appears 17 times.

 

So it will be extremely difficult to find professional sources that give information about "radioactive" waste.  That would be telling the truth and that would be strongly suppressed in any professional literature.

 

 

 

 

6)  Is there any evidence that WTC clean-up workers were dressed appropriately to be dealing with radiation contamination?

 

Dr. Judy Wood has on her website, and possibly in her book, clean-up personnel walking around in the "fuming" debris or dust with rubber boots on and not a full "haz  mat " suit.  She used those photos to support her position that the "fuming" was not hot, but was cool or ambient temerature.

 

The governor of New Jersey, I think Christy Todd Whitman at the time, put out a statement that the air was safe to breathe and no special equipment was needed for workers or citizens.

 

I gave estimates of "thermite" needed in a previous post in this thread, that Dr. Fetzer deduced from Dr. Jones' statements  The Twilight Pines link I gave may no longer be working but the transcript (which I did_  is posted on 911Sholars at

 

http://twilightpines.com/images/themanipulationofthe911community.pdf

 

There may be some estimates at the WillyLoman Wordpress site since there is where conventional controlled demolition is strongly hypothesized.  Controlled Demolition Inc. is supposedly the company that did the demolition of the WTC buildings.

 

All information about radiation is going to probably be limited to Dr. Ward and a very few other people.  The cancers that people contracted were said to be from asbestos and highly toxic debris.

 

 

[Jeannon Kralj]

"

1)  How many tons of conventional (HMX, RDX, PETN) explosives would be required to implode each Twin Tower?"

 

I am not sure how this fits in to the subject of this thread, but I did find some interesting material here...

 

http://the911forum.freeforums.org/nanothermite-t175.html

 

Here is a small excerrpt from that discussion...

 

"So how much explosive would be needed to topple the Twin Towers? Well, it is significant that real-world controlled demolitions rarely use more than 400 kg of high explosives to bring down high-rise buildings up to 40 stories tall. For example, the 31-story Four Seasons Hotel in Mozambique was demolished by CDI in 2007 with only 250 kg of high explosives; similarly, the 21-story Sands Hotel in Las Vegas, Nevada, required 180 kg of explosives for its CD.

Now it is to be expected that the amount of explosive used to topple a high-rise building is not directly proportional to the height of the building. This is true due to factors such as widely different floor areas, and concrete/steel ratios, etc, in the buildings being demolished. However, it is also true that very tall buildings such as the Landmark Tower require less explosives than their height would suggest because explosive charges are usually placed on less than 10 floors of the building to be demolished, regardless of its height, and gravity and momentum buildup are utilized to complete the collapse of the remaining floors. On the other hand, very tall high-rise structures generally do require extra explosives because the columns to be cut are thicker and stronger than those used in the construction of low-rise buildings. Thus, overall, there is a very approximate trend in the amount of explosives used in CD’s of high-rise buildings vs. the building’s height showing that, if the total amount of explosive used in a particular CD was uniformly spread over every floor, 9 +/- 4 kg of high explosive per floor would be required to demolish the building. Thus, extrapolating to WTC 1 & 2, each of these buildings would require about 1 tonne (or 1 ton!) of explosive to bring about its total destruction. (Incidently, Jones himself has estimated that about 600 kg of explosive would suffice to demolish one WTC Tower.)

Unfortunately, this relatively small amount of explosive is not in line with Harrit/Jones’ proposal that WTC 1, 2 & 7 were razed to the ground by the detonation of multi-ton quantities of pre-planted nanothermite. I use the phrase “multi-ton-quantities” because of Harrit and Jones’ public statements with regard to the amount of nanothermite they allege was planted in buildings 1, 2 & 7 at the WTC Complex prior to 9/11. Thus Jones argued in his recent UC Davis presentation that there must have been about 9 tons of red/gray chips in the total mass of dispersed WTC dust. Harrit, on the other hand, goes even further by suggesting that because of the high concentration of red/gray chips in the WTC dust, there must have been an initial charge approaching 100 tons of nanothermite in the WTC complex prior to 9/11 – presumably because, upon detonation, 90 % was decomposed and 10 % remained un-reacted.
  "

 

 

[Danny White]

Jeannon:  In response to your questions about cancers due to asbestos and  "other"  toxic materials occurring in first responders

and cleanup workers :  I'm no doctor, but I've studied a lot of Hematology over the years as kind of a hobby.   While there were

many asbestosis and other lung diseases suffered by first responders and cleanup crews;  the giveaway for radiation exposure is blood and bone diseases of all kinds. The very best book on Hematology is  "BLOOD  Textbook of Hematology"  by James H.

Jandl.  If you look in the index under radiation, you'll find all kinds of nastiness related to radiation exposure.  Many of the blood

cancers and side effects of the radiation may not show up for years.  I think the NYC Health Dept  is keeping track of the many

cases of 9/11 related diseases.  They should have the proof positive of radiation exposure.

[Jeannon Kralj]

Thanks for info.  I think Dr. Hubert could help us in getting info about diseases first responsders are being treated for now.  I know that radiation exposure can take 10 or 20 years to manifest but I have heard that it is not if you will get cancer from it. but only a matter of when you will get cancer from it.

 

I just get so dismayed sometimes in looking in to 9-11 evidence because it seems to have been such a splendily universally covered up operation.  As an example, recently I found about 5 different sources that gave their analysis of the dust from Ground Zero and each of them gave a different list of the "ingredients" in the dust and none of them mentioned any radioisotopes present and none of them mentioned the presence of "red / grey chips" and "iron spherules" that Dr. Jones mentions. 

 

Where can we go to get solid objective information.  I find it so amazing that "they" seemed to have so perfectly covered all the bases in covering up and preventing objective verified data.

[Danny White]

In support of Dr Fetzer's water sprinkler drainage idea:  ....  http://forum.davidicke.com/showthread.php?t=167548

[Danny White]

Another possible reason for flooding the sub levels was to sever all communication between the wtc complex and the outside world  ...  by flooding a major telecommunications vault which was used for

 securities trading and was one of the busiest telecomunications hubs in the world:  ....  http://www.nae.edu/Publications/Bridge/EngineeringfortheThreatofNat...