This will answer 99% of your questions about 9/11.

originally posted by: soulwaxer

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: soulwaxer

The reason they feared A LOT more casualties can be found in what was found at the end of that hole in the Pentagon.

What was at the end of that hole in the Pentagon?

An unexploded 150 kilo-ton thermo-nuclear warhead.

(It was meant to not explode.)

souwaxer

In the Pentagon? Not in the plane?

originally posted by: dragonridr

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

There was radiation measured. And cancer rates skyrocketed. It's just never reported.

Prove it, show me actual data that proves radiation levels in New York consistent with that of a nuclear detonation.

Show me actual accounts of people coming down with radiation sickness in the aftermath of the attacks, actually prove it.

If you are making a claim as if it is a fact then provide evidence for it otherwise your "fact" is much like my "fact" about how the sky is actually a giant glass dome.

Its top secret radiation it only shows up on conspiracy blogs and websites. Sadly people believe this when someone lies to them. Thr illnesses related to 9/11 were from dust inhalation mostly. There was never radiation involved unless your trying to sell a book to the gullible.

There are different types of radiation, as you probably know. The video explains this very well. You can also just google it. And again, the effects of an UNDERGROUND nuclear detonation are quite different from what happened in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

soulwaxer

originally posted by: soulwaxer

originally posted by: dragonridr

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

There was radiation measured. And cancer rates skyrocketed. It's just never reported.

Prove it, show me actual data that proves radiation levels in New York consistent with that of a nuclear detonation.

Show me actual accounts of people coming down with radiation sickness in the aftermath of the attacks, actually prove it.

If you are making a claim as if it is a fact then provide evidence for it otherwise your "fact" is much like my "fact" about how the sky is actually a giant glass dome.

Its top secret radiation it only shows up on conspiracy blogs and websites. Sadly people believe this when someone lies to them. Thr illnesses related to 9/11 were from dust inhalation mostly. There was never radiation involved unless your trying to sell a book to the gullible.

There are different types of radiation and radiation poisoning, as you probably know. The video explains this very well. You can also just google it. And again, the effects of an UNDERGROUND nuclear detonation are quite different from what happened in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

soulwaxer

originally posted by: JinMI

originally posted by: soulwaxer

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: soulwaxer

The reason they feared A LOT more casualties can be found in what was found at the end of that hole in the Pentagon.

What was at the end of that hole in the Pentagon?

An unexploded 150 kilo-ton thermo-nuclear warhead.

(It was meant to not explode.)

souwaxer

In the Pentagon? Not in the plane?

No its was obviously a unexploded nuclear bomb that both exploded and didn't explode at the same time and also left no radiation.

pft.

originally posted by: JinMI

originally posted by: soulwaxer

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: soulwaxer

The reason they feared A LOT more casualties can be found in what was found at the end of that hole in the Pentagon.

What was at the end of that hole in the Pentagon?

An unexploded 150 kilo-ton thermo-nuclear warhead.

(It was meant to not explode.)

souwaxer

In the Pentagon? Not in the plane?

Yes, in the Pentagon. That's why the US military THOUGHT that they were also in the top of WTC 1 and WTC 2.

In order to fully understand this, you need to understand how a nuclear bomb is triggered to explode, and for that, I refer to the video, the pdf, and google.

soulwaxer

originally posted by: soulwaxer

originally posted by: stosh64

originally posted by: soulwaxer

originally posted by: one4all
a reply to: soulwaxer


@ 24:44 of the video I realised something....could the Aluminum from the planes have been used as a component of thermite...if the rest of the ingredients and needed catalysts were already inside the building....makes me wonder if they painted the inside of the building with the other ingredients besides aluminum needed to produce or enhance thermite or its reaction and accomodated the process.

No.

The only thing that has enough energy to produce what we saw on 9/11 (turning all that steel into fine dust) is a nuclear explosion. A BIG one, in this case 77 meters underground. 150 kilo-tons. That's what caused the huge 100 meter diameter cavity with the molten rock surrounding it. (see the photos in the pdf)

soulwaxer

WOW,

Slowly backs out of thread........

Wow, giving up so soon? Great! bye

soulwaxer

Well, with your claim of a 150kt weapon bringing down the towers, there is little point in trying to be rational.

The "Dog" test, during operation Greenhouse was an 81kt device.

Test: Dog
Time: 18:34 7 April 1951 (GMT) 06:34 8 April 1951
(local) Location: Island Runit ("Yvonne"), Enewetak Atoll
Test Height and Type: 300 foot Tower
Shot Yield: 81 kt

The explosion lifted 250,000 tons of soil to an altitude of approximately 35,000 feet.

Source


You expect me to take someone serious, who believes a device nearly twice the size of the Dog device was detonated beneath the WTC, and yet it was "covered up"??

LoL, did they use 2 150kt bombs, one for each tower?

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

It was stated the it was an undetonated warhead that was not meant to have been detonated.

I'd like to know why they (the OP or author) thinks this was also part of the plan.

a reply to: soulwaxer

In order to fully understand this, you need to understand how a nuclear bomb is triggered to explode, and for that, I refer to the video, the pdf, and google.

Now we are at the point where things start falling apart. Not just this CT, but many.

Instead of having a discussion about what you know, as the OP and presenter of evidence, it is now incumbent on me (the reader) to 'educate myself' on things that you think I'm clearly ignorant of.

The point being that you/they know everything and is unshakeable, yet the reader is clueless and ignorant and there is no bridge meant to be had in this discussion.

How can you know all and anyone not convinced by any margin be completely in the wrong? Do you not see the hubris in this?

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

It was stated the it was an undetonated warhead that was not meant to have been detonated.

I'd like to know why they (the OP or author) thinks this was also part of the plan.

Because.... reasons.... now stop asking for logic and facts its making the OPs head hurt.

I ain't play in till someone plugs in to power up

NUETRONFLUSH.....NEUTRONFLUX....sorry

Plug him in....he's artificially smart...knot unlike HAL9000

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: soulwaxer



People will simply not accept the truth because they can't live in World where their delusions are so unraveled. It becomes a personal attack on their well-being which is why cognitive dissonance is so strong around 9/11.

I don't know about any of this. But this thought here I have saved from your post is what is really going on to many. If you are WILLING to buy what we are told to believe in the face of Newton's Laws of Gravity, then I can't suspend them still to this day and I would ask you who think you know how to do that to please share them. There either was help exploding the floors with preset charges or Newton's Laws are void for this event.

a reply to: soulwaxer

And here we have another winner! Not only cancer rates, but the types of cancer typical for radiation poisoning.

Please do go into detail.


This must be some sort of smoking gun.

What types of cancers?

What is the correlation to even start suggesting its radiation that was released during the collapse or attack that caused this increase and not something else toxic that is found in building materials?

By the way folks, there is a huge difference between the amount of radiation released from an underground nuclear detonation, compared to an atmospheric one. And Dimitry Khalezov is very well placed to understand this.

and i guess you are not, hence why you need others to speak their minds and you just nod along to whatever you believe to be correct based on your biased views that have been manipulated by youtube videos that get posted over and over in threads like this to speak for the OP.

Seriously the only reason there are so many that think there is a conspiracy is because of what conspiracy theorist call every one else

Sheeple.

The only thing that has enough energy to produce what we saw on 9/11 (turning all that steel into fine dust) is a nuclear explosion.

and there it is


nothing more to say since there is no evidence whatsoever for steel turning to dust.

Just a low quality youtube video where the narrator points you to the last part of building that seems to turn to dust.

That is evidenec right there that so many 9/11 truthers are exactly what they call others

Sheeple

being herd by .... at least the normal sheeple not awake and that watch the MSM are lead by some sort intelligence not some idiot in his basement with a webcam.

A BIG one, in this case 77 meters underground. 150 kilo-tons. That's what caused the huge 100 meter diameter cavity with the molten rock surrounding it. (see the photos in the pdf)

I guess you have never seen an underground detonation.

If there was an underground detonation under the trade centers the area above the detonation ( i assume would be directly under) would have be obvious.

It wouldn't bring 1 building , then another a bit later and then another hours later.

The building would be seen to go up in all the footage as the grounds is forced up and then back down and then collapse into the cavity.

However just having 1 building collapse at a time just shows ignorant of critical though such a claim is.

Sorry but on the day there was nothing like this.

a reply to: JinMI
Just want to clarify something for the less initiated.

If you swallow the official conspiracy theory hook, line, and sinker, you will never be able to grasp what really happened because your mind will not allow it.

If you do not believe the official conspiracy theory, then it should be obvious to you that there has been a huge cover-up going on for the last 17 years, in which the US government is definitely involved. You then have to figure out why this cover-up is taking place, and also why no other governments (who are obviously not stupid, like for example Putin's government or the British government, etc), including governments who are not exactly friendly with the US, are allowing this cover-up to continue.

What is being covered up for the public, is a different animal than what is being covered up for the non-US governments. Remember, high-up government officials have access to much more information than citizens and lower level government officials. The high-up government officials were fed a completely different BS story ("truth number 2" than the lower officials and plain citizens "truth number 1". "Truth number 2" has to do with mini-nukes and was made to be perfectly believable, and in fact is partly true, but not in the 9/11 event. The reason that those who were fed "truth number 2" are not talking about it, is because it would cause world-wide chaos.

Truth number 3 (without quotation marks) is what really happened, and this truth is only known by the US government and the perpetrators of 9/11 behind the curtain. This is the truth explained by Dimitri Khalezov in the video and the pdf. He doesn't know 100% of it, but he knows very close to that, hence 99%.

soulwaxer

a reply to: soulwaxer

If you swallow the official conspiracy theory hook, line, and sinker, you will never be able to grasp what really happened because your mind will not allow it.

True but that goes both ways if you believe that nukes caused those buildings to collapse you are likewise never going to really quite understand this...

originally posted by: stosh64

originally posted by: soulwaxer

originally posted by: stosh64

originally posted by: soulwaxer

originally posted by: one4all
a reply to: soulwaxer


@ 24:44 of the video I realised something....could the Aluminum from the planes have been used as a component of thermite...if the rest of the ingredients and needed catalysts were already inside the building....makes me wonder if they painted the inside of the building with the other ingredients besides aluminum needed to produce or enhance thermite or its reaction and accomodated the process.

No.

The only thing that has enough energy to produce what we saw on 9/11 (turning all that steel into fine dust) is a nuclear explosion. A BIG one, in this case 77 meters underground. 150 kilo-tons. That's what caused the huge 100 meter diameter cavity with the molten rock surrounding it. (see the photos in the pdf)

soulwaxer

WOW,

Slowly backs out of thread........

Wow, giving up so soon? Great! bye

soulwaxer

Well, with your claim of a 150kt weapon bringing down the towers, there is little point in trying to be rational.

The "Dog" test, during operation Greenhouse was an 81kt device.

Test: Dog
Time: 18:34 7 April 1951 (GMT) 06:34 8 April 1951
(local) Location: Island Runit ("Yvonne"), Enewetak Atoll
Test Height and Type: 300 foot Tower
Shot Yield: 81 kt

The explosion lifted 250,000 tons of soil to an altitude of approximately 35,000 feet.

Source

You expect me to take someone serious, who believes a device nearly twice the size of the Dog device was detonated beneath the WTC, and yet it was "covered up"??

LoL, did they use 2 150kt bombs, one for each tower?

Your example was an atmospheric detonation. The ones under the WTC were 77 meters below the surface, in VERY HARD granite rock. Do I really need to school you on the difference in resistance between air and granite?

soulwaxer

a reply to: soulwaxer

If you swallow the official conspiracy theory hook, line, and sinker, you will never be able to grasp what really happened because your mind will not allow it.

What is the official CT? If you mean the official narrative of what happened pre and post, then I believe you would be hard pressed to find anyone who believes it entirely.

Truth number 3 (without quotation marks) is what really happened, and this truth is only known by the US government and the perpetrators of 9/11 behind the curtain.

Corruption is beyond corruption? What I mean by this is that everything is so well orchestrated from the top all the way down and that the information that could enlighten or incriminate is kept to such a minimum that the people could never know the truth?

The issue with that is that you have to have humans behave in a certain manner and do in a certain manner. Many of them by my estimation. Also, it's been my experience that humans are horrible at this behavior!

originally posted by: notsure1
Ive said it before . I want to believe the OS but the whole no cameras at the pentagon thing make my BS sensors max out.

It was the 21st century and this was the Pentagon for christs sake.

In 03 or 04 there was local girl who got kidnapped from Target . They had video of her car pulling in the pot then video of his car pulling in the lot.

They had video of her walking across the parking lot and into the store then video of him walking through the lot and into the store.

They had video of her walking around the store and video of him stalking her.

video of both of them leaving. then video of him grabbing her in the lot, then video of him driving out of the lot with her.

This was at Target for christs sake, but the PENTAGON had no camera.

Yeah thats some bull caca right there.

Does one really need to explain how retail stores operate and what keeps them operating and what may hurt their business and why they install surveillance?


Why would the Pentagon need HD cameras filming the buildings surroundings?

What logical purpose?

The cameras that were there were there and had a purpose.

It seems that Americans or fanatical conspiracy theorists are upset because they cannot get the simple reason why what they think should be happening wasn't and isn't.

originally posted by: Justoneman

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: soulwaxer



People will simply not accept the truth because they can't live in World where their delusions are so unraveled. It becomes a personal attack on their well-being which is why cognitive dissonance is so strong around 9/11.

I don't know about any of this. But this thought here I have saved from your post is what is really going on to many. If you are WILLING to buy what we are told to believe in the face of Newton's Laws of Gravity, then I can't suspend them still to this day and I would ask you who think you know how to do that to please share them. There either was help exploding the floors with preset charges or Newton's Laws are void for this event.

The lie for the twin towers is they fell through the path of greatest resistance. Video of the towers show the floor systems collapsed, and long lengths of vertical columns standing in the wake of the collapse of the floor systems.

The floor systems fell around 66 percent the rate of free fall. The vertical columns that held up the floor systems fell afterwards from lose of lateral support, and toppled at 40 percent the rate of free fall.

a reply to: soulwaxer

prove the bomb was there

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

There was radiation measured. And cancer rates skyrocketed. It's just never reported.

Prove it, show me actual data that proves radiation levels in New York consistent with that of a nuclear detonation.

Show me actual accounts of people coming down with radiation sickness in the aftermath of the attacks, actually prove it.

If you are making a claim as if it is a fact then provide evidence for it otherwise your "fact" is much like my "fact" about how the sky is actually a giant glass dome.

You are too biased to accept any evidence as being evidence. So, I will just pass on your request.

1 it wasn't a request directed at you.

and 2.

They posted exactly what the evidence you need to supply in which if you do they cannot deny because they highlighted what the evidence should be.

So supply it or stop making up BS you parrot from YOUTUBE videos.