The title says it all. I wonder if AJ would be surprised to know that NORAD controlled the planes that hit the Twin Towers? Just asking. ROTFLOL!
The answer is AJ knows that the planes were remote controlled. Judy Woods says there were no planes. It was just a figment of our imaginations, a product of lasers.
The answer is AJ knows that the planes were remote controlled. Judy Woods says there were no planes. It was just a figment of our imaginations, a product of lasers.
I am not sure what AJ knows or doesn't know, but Judy Woods is not a reliable source of info for really anything, yet certain people keep pushing her 9/11 stories. The 9/11 truth movement is trying to be made into a laughing stock by these jokers to make sure the general population does not investigate the events of 9/11 and realize they have been lied to by the media and government for years.
If widespread knowledge of the truth of 9/11 came out then Israel would be history just like Alan Saborsky said they would be. It is the state of Israel, Mossad and CIA agents, as well as those in the government and military that cooperated with this false flag event that are using every means available to discredit the 9/11 truth movement with wackos like Judy Wood.
Low opinions of Judy Wood are irrelevant to the facts that planes don't explain the devastation at the WTC, nor does thermitics. The same devastation can be seen in newsclips. The question of exotic weaponry didn't originate with her anyway. That's traceable to Christopher Bollyn, all the way back to February 2002 -- long before she arrived in the 9/11 research community whether you like it or not. What you think of her or the WMD aspect of 9/11 investigations changes nothing of the issues that can't be chalked up to conventional controlled demolitions.
What you think of her or the WMD aspect of 9/11 investigations changes nothing of the issues that can't be chalked up to conventional controlled demolitions.
There is not ONE thing which can't be "chaulked up" to conventional EXPLOSIVES, let alone that which could be "chaulked up" to explosives based on nano-thermite.
Nano-thermite would be the way to go if they didn't want evidence of conventional explosives found in the debris. Now they can have people post on forums saying that no traces of explosives have been found.
There is not ONE thing which can't be "chaulked up" to conventional EXPLOSIVES, let alone that which could be "chaulked up" to explosives based on nano-thermite.
Nano-thermite would be the way to go if they didn't want evidence of conventional explosives found in the debris.
I disagree with both of those statements. For someone who claimed in this post not to have looked into nano-thermite in any depth until less than two weeks ago, you seem to have like a religious fervor for the stuff. The magnitude of powers you've attributed to it are way over-estimated.
Now they can have people post on forums saying that no traces of explosives have been found.
Jones' alleged samples are rubbish. He and his crew didn't even try to find traces of conventional explosives. Those are plain facts and have nothing to do with your misdirected imagineerings about people like me. It's ok to realize that he's been misleading people -- kind of like "Mr. Thermite Sandman". Just shake it off and leave his deceptive snare.
I worked 2 decades + front end....fabricating oil/nat gas process systems. CNC underwater cut/Cryogenic nitrogen - plasma gantry, move plate and finished vessels with 50 ton remote control cranes. I have many years of metallurgy,ultrasound insp ticket,...nuclear weld xray senior burner....machine operator. We used 2" boxed column as supports under pressure vessels which went into ovens with 24 fired gas burners and heat treated/equalized the vessels welds for over 12 hours sometimes.....above the pissy useless value of burning avfuel.....neither the 2" boxed supports...nor the pressure vessel ....nor even the railcar which loaded all into a huge oven...melted,failed,...saged. Its BS that the 64 2" core columns failed in the carbon based fire after the jet fuel was consumed. so it requires assisted intervention....where you see fountains of molten steel and alloy flow out of the towers like a waterfall.....thats the Nano - thermate/thermite...doing its thing. yet still...you can see the top portion of the tower pivot over centre and lean...some 30 plus floors...and become powder in milliseconds! Thats a directed energy weapon!
This ends the BS that Moo si lums did 9-11. Only dept's and here....its like Area 51 stuff.....have access to Directed Energy weapons. The people who want to take down Iraq,A stan,Libya and Syria are the ones who did 9- 11 Zbigniew B and Grand chessboard/Fake war on Terror.....9-11 was the kick off for the next phase.
you can see the top portion of the tower pivot over centre and lean...some 30 plus floors...and become powder in milliseconds! Thats a directed energy weapon!
There is not one directed energy weapon that I am aware of which can turn concrete to dust.
There ARE explosives however which can, and DO, accomplish that. Ever see a controlled demolition?
Conventional explosives don't cause molecular dissociation which was seen at the wtc.
LOL!!!!!!!!!!
Do you even know what molecular dissociation IS, or are you just using a word you found at one of your psuedoscience sites?
Name me ONE, just ONE, REAL "directed energy" weapon which could cause such a thing.
Again, I don't mean something you find on science fiction shows, like Star Trek. I mean something REAL.
BTW, did you personally analyze the WTC debris and find that there were any "unassociated molecules"? If so, please describe to me the analysis, ie. what procedures and what instruments were used to make such a determination.
If you can not click a link that has been given to you repeated times for a question you have asked over and over then your a fucking idiot not worthy of the attention people waste on you.
BTW agent titorite, are you saying BOTH nuclear weapons AND beam weapons brought down the towers now? Do you even know what a nuclear blast looks like?
Do you understand that an investigation of WMDs per 9/11 -- or any other investigation for that matter -- doesn't generally begin with all the answers just because you think it should and think you have all of them?
Do you understand that you don't jump into wild insane speculation that has no basis in probability nor logic, especially when there are valid, plausible, and scientific explanations based on observed phenonema and forensic evidence?
Do you understand that you don't jump into wild insane speculation that has no basis in probability nor logic, especially when there are valid, plausible, and scientific explanations based on observed phenonema and forensic evidence?
You are welcome to leave the 9/11 discussions of WMD probabilities any time you like, if it troubles you so much. Undoubtedly there is no shortage presently of people who will go along with your arguments that conventional controlled demolitions are commonplace; Ergo, the very different, top-down unraveling at the WTC can likewise be compared and explained away so, too, but I'm not one of them. You're seemingly on a mission to dumb-down 9/11 for mass-market appeal and I am currently not interested in fencing back and forth about it, so I'll find something else to do for the time-being and leave this study-guide here for you to contend with. There are, of course, better samplings but they'd likely get kicked to the curb or down a memory hole by you anyway, so I reckoned against extra-expenditures of energy to provide a variety. Thought you might at least give this one more than a quick scan or dismissal out-of-hand without even reading it if you saw the word mossad in the title:
It's hard for me...or anyone with a modicum of common sense to take this report seriously when the items they based this report on were given to them by residents of Lower Manhattan almost SIX YEARS after the Towers fell. These samples were not kept in sterile environments by any stretch of the imagination and were handled by ordinary, non-scientist New Yorkers. The paper also never actually says that material in question is nanothermite or even regular thermite......rather that...
These observations reminded us of nano-thermite [sic]
The material they found, that had been contaminated over six years, reminded them of nanothermite or regular thermite but probably nanothermite no really it's almost definitely the nano kind. Or it might be just regular paint. Except that it also has rust and aluminum in it. Which may be a result of the contamination or it may just be because those two substances are present in just about every structure
You are welcome to leave the 9/11 discussions of WMD probabilities any time you like
You're welcome to use your intelligence anytime you want. I see you're not keen on it too often.
I keep asking you to specify an energy beam weapon which could destroy a structure such as the WTC, yet you can't come up with one which actually COULD.
But that doesn't stop you from attacking those who ask you for evidence of what you say.