CDI - DREXS Technology Sounds Perfect

Pootie,

Wow those are some amazing quotes. way above

So the Loizeaux family gets off on making buildings dance...the danse macabre is more like it.

And Griff is right, the son is all but admitting the collapse of the towers is impossible as described. And who should know better? Both going down like that and we zoom off into probabilities of "one in a" followed by a handful of zeroes.


[edit on 14-4-2007 by gottago]

Pootie,

I hope you don't mind, but I'm going to start a thread just about that quote so we don't derail this thread. Thanks for the quote and I will give you full credit of course.

Originally posted by Griff

Originally posted by Pootie
Mark Loizeaux (Son, CEO):

“to bring [a building] down as we want, so . . . no other structure is harmed,” the demolition must be “completely planned,” using “the right explosive [and] the right pattern of laying the charges” (Else, 2004).[20] . Accordingly, the official theory, by implying that fire produced collapses that perfectly mimicked the collapses that have otherwise been produced only by precisely placed explosives, requires a miracle.

Are those Mark's actual words? Can you give a source? If so, then that is a CD specialist (and one that was hired to do the clean up at that) saying that it was a miracle for the towers to fall like they did without it being a CD?

it looks to me like the quote ends at "laying of charges", and the 'miracle' part is commentary by the author?

Originally posted by billybob
it looks to me like the quote ends at "laying of charges", and the 'miracle' part is commentary by the author?

Can someone verify this? I'd hate to have jumped the gun on this.

thing is, there was a video of some european CD expert that claimed his opinion was that its a CD, just like this guy is sure it wasnt.

That same guy is also sure WTC 7 was a controlled demolition.

www.youtube.com...

Originally posted by Griff

Originally posted by billybob
it looks to me like the quote ends at "laying of charges", and the 'miracle' part is commentary by the author?

Can someone verify this? I'd hate to have jumped the gun on this.

oops. here's the original article in full...

911review.com...

there is this footnote in relation to the mark loizeaux quote..

Incredibly, after explaining how precisely explosives must be set to ensure that a building comes straight down, Loizeaux said that upon seeing the fires in the Twin Towers, he knew that the towers were “going to pancake down, almost vertically. It was the only way they could fail. It was inevitable.” Given the fact that fire had never before caused steel-frame buildings to collapse, let alone in a way that perfectly mimicked controlled demolition, Loizeaux’s statement is a cause for wonder. His company, incidentally, was hired to remove the steel from the WTC site after 9/11.

it's almost as good, in my opinion. liars almost always end up contradicting themselves.

[edit on 14-4-2007 by billybob]

Thanks BillyBob. When someone's story changes, it usually means they are fibbin a little.

That's what gets me with people who believe the official story. They know that for a building to come down in the way WTC 7 did, it had to be a CD. But, they believe uneven fire and asymmetrical damage can cause the building to behave in this manner. It just doesn't seem logical to me.

Originally posted by gottago
And Griff is right, the son is all but admitting the collapse of the towers is impossible as described. And who should know better? Both going down like that and we zoom off into probabilities of "one in a" followed by a handful of zeroes.

I think on the company's website they list all their records. I remember looking into some controlled demo stuff for another thread and thinking to myself, "I bet they are PO'd that they can't put the WTC on their list as a new world record for height in the CD business."

Maybe this is their way of wink, wink, nudge, nudge getting the advertising that they think they are entitled to.

Incidentally, I can't believe that I am posting in a thread that stalled a couple of years ago. I have to thank Griff for that. I realised that I hadn't seen any posts by him in a while, so I looked him up in the members list and found out that he had been banned.

What a guy! I think he had a Phd. in civil engineering. (Correct me if I'm wrong.) He was one of those engineering brains that B.S. couldn't baffle. Very handy guy to have around when the government's hired guns showed up. It would be nice if he reincarnated under a new byline as some others have done.

Anyway, all the best, Griff, if you are reading this. I feel like that dude in Platoon, standing on the ground watching as Charley Sheen is flown off in a helicopter at the end of the movie. Smash Fascism!!

Originally posted by Pootie

Mark Loizeaux (Son, CEO):

“... Accordingly, the official theory, by implying that fire produced collapses that perfectly mimicked the collapses that have otherwise been produced only by precisely placed explosives, requires a miracle.

One of the blasters:

"With the use of delays, we can control pretty much where the debris lands; we can control vibration; we can control noise levels. Timing a delays are the keys to just about everything in our business."

Well I'm glad this thread was brought back. I've never read it but there are some great quotes above, and figured I'd post in hopes more folks come in hear to read it.

Let me see if I get this right: This company that these Loizeaux guys are from..they are the founders? Also, they are the best CD company in the business? Just by browsing through this thread that's what I gathered.

Strange that the son, the CEO of this company even feels that it would take a miracle for the buildings to have collapsed as per the Official Conspiracy Theory.

The biggest bit however, is the statement about being able to CONTROL THE NOISE LEVELS. What???

So for all our "Debunkers" out there, for all those who have this argument that "there is no audio evidence of explosives", or, even better, when they watch a video which contains explosions, they waive it off as "wind" or "people at ground zero were under too much stress and didnt know what they were hearing" (which, btw, is a disgusting display of disrespect to those people), what do you all have to say about this?

I think this is a very good point for discussion

reply to post by P1DrummerBoy


Great point regarding the noise or lack of. Prior to both collapses there were 2 huge tremors registering 2.1 and 2.3 respectfully on the Richter scale.

One of the seismologists, Won-Young Kim, told AFP that the Palisades seismographs register daily underground explosions from a quarry 20 miles away. These blasts are caused by 80,000 lbs. of ammonium nitrate and cause local earthquakes between Magnitude 1 and 2.

Just another note to show you what kind of a guy Griff was (and undoubtedly still is), he tried to get a job with Controlled Demolitions to learn more about how those operations are carried out and found that they don't just hire people on the basis of their qualifications and in fact qualifications as the straight world knows them, aren't really what is looked for.

Their company is a family business and very much an insider thing. They hire people that they know who have the sort of experience they are looking for, blowing things up. What do you want to bet that they are wired to the military with a lot of two way cooperation going on?

They are a tight outfit. Looking for a whistleblower at CDI would be a waste of time, I'm guessing. But vanity is another thing. I wonder how insiders would react to Mr. Loiseaux's statements. With a chuckle maybe?

One of my own little pet theories might find an answer with them though. I'm sure there must be a thermal imaging video of the collapses of the towers somewhere and if it exists anywhere, the archives of Controlled Demolitions Incorporated would be one of the first places I would look for it.


[edit on 13-8-2009 by ipsedixit]

reply to post by ipsedixit


I think IF such a video exists, that it would instantly raise a red flag. I can't really see any reason why someone would by chance be using some sort of thermal imaging equipment to record the towers collapsing (exploding) - unless it was for the company records, or something to that effect, know what I mean?

Seventh, I've read small sections of arguments to the tone of the seismographs on 9/11. That whole thing seems like it would 'cancel' each other out...what I mean is those on the "Truther" side couldn't really argue that there are explosions in the videos, then also claim that these guys can engineer a bomb to be 'quiet'.

However, my thoughts on that would be that the small 'squibs' we see in the videos, the ones that are lined up and down the entire structure, those would be smaller than the ones in the basements/lower levels..is that accurate? Meaning, we don't hear all the "boom boom boom boom" in the videos of the smaller ones, but we do hear the enormous ones in the lower levels (I've seen a video of a firefighter on the phone, and an enormous explosion goes off)...maybe they are much larger and can't be engineered so quietly? Does all that make sense? Just putting some thoughts together.

reply to post by P1DrummerBoy

Yes, I'm thinking more of something the perps would have shot themselves for their own purposes. If a company like CDI did do the job, a thermal image record of the event might tell them a lot from the technical point of view.

Personally, I think there was a lot going on inside those tall clouds of billowing smoke that wrapped themselves around the core columns of the buildings. I think some kind of incendiary was actually burning a lot of those core columns to dust in some as yet not understood way.

There is no way that the initial fires in the towers would have produced that much smoke all along the standing core at the end of the collapse.

I think there were things going on that would have been of interest to the technicians looking at the event with a view to future such demolitions.

Eventually it may be necessary to take down buildings like that in the straight, non black ops world.






[edit on 14-8-2009 by ipsedixit]

Originally posted by ipsedixit
I think there were things going on that would have been of interest to the technicians looking at the event with a view to future such demolitions.

Eventually it may be necessary to take down buildings like that in the straight, non black ops world.

My thoughts exactly. Make a record of the logistics or what have you, of the entire event. What's plausible about that theory, is that it would seem that whatever was used (assuming), it would be safe to say its something thats not commercially known. I've stated in another thread that I absolutely belive there is technology out there that we can't fathom.

Whatever was used to bring those building down could very well have been something state-of-the-art, something completely unknown to everyone, so that no one would have suspicions. Recording this event would do wonders for a company looking to profit off of a product like that in the future.