9/11 lie day

[Novusod]

And of course, Dr. Judy Wood's forensic investigation book entitled "Where Did the Towers Go"? added detail. She even filed a suit in federal court over it, not to determine who did it, but what actually happened. I think ultimately it was determined that the explosion(s?) were caused by a material laid between the floors that caused the explosion. It was definitely determined that burning jet fuel could not create that much heat nor explosive power. It was dubbed a "controlled demolition". Also to further complicate things (on purpose probably) was the story about "NESARA" and it's release of global funds. A science friend of mine told me some time ago that before the explosions there had been many trash trucks coming out of the basements filled with gold bars. Apparently one truck didn't make it out and is still underneath the new construction.

The Judy Wood theory is pretty interesting and I agree about the NESARA distraction. ET or Atlantian super weapons were used to melt the buildings from the ground up and then vaporize them to dust.

Rare photo of cooled magma:


Lava at ground zero. The fire was coming from below.

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qgfvn4X-h00

[Aragorn]

The Judy Wood theory is pretty interesting and I agree about the NESARA distraction. ET or Atlantian super weapons were used to melt the buildings from the ground up and then vaporize them to dust.

Rare photo of cooled magma:


Lava at ground zero. The fire was coming from below.

According to Dimitry Khalezov, the Twin Towers both had a carefully tuned thermonuclear device buried underneath them for in the event that they needed to be brought down in a controlled demolition. I've read his incredibly long book, in which he goes into all of the minute details on everything — including his credentials — and he is not a native English speaker, so he does often beat around the bush for a while before getting to the point, simply because he doesn't have the right words to explain it.

Now, I do not necessarily agree with everything he writes — some of it really is conjecture — but I find his claim that a tuned thermonuclear device would have been used and that this is what vaporized the steel columns quite plausible, and certainly a hell of a lot more credible than the claim that the fire at the base of the Twin Towers would have been caused by jet fuel. Jet fuel doesn't keep on burning at 2000°C for weeks on end. Thermite can develop enough heat to melt steel, but that too wouldn't keep burning for weeks on end. Furthermore, the place where the towers had stood was immediately referred to by members of the Bush administration as "ground zero", which is a military term for the site of a nuclear detonation.

Khalezov also states that all skyscrapers have a thermonuclear device buried underneath them. Now, I'm not so sure about that, but what I do know is that most strategically important bridges are constructed with provisions for putting in explosives at some later point, for in the event of an invasion by a foreign power — this is called the scorched earth strategy, and it's where the expression "burning your bridges" comes from. Of course, that doesn't mean that there actually are any explosives in them just yet, but just that the provisions are there for putting in explosives at some later point in time so that they can be safely and thoroughly be destroyed in order to not let them fall into the hands of an enemy.

The biggest problem with "9/11" is that there are so many different theories, many of which are plausible, but just as many of them are mutually exclusive. And then there's all the misinformation and deliberate disinformation to add to the confusion. I guess we'll never find out what really happened that day, other than that the official 9-11 Commission Report is a preposterous pack of lies.

[Novusod]

According to Dimitry Khalezov, the Twin Towers both had a carefully tuned thermonuclear device buried underneath them for in the event that they needed to be brought down in a controlled demolition. I've read his incredibly long book, in which he goes into all of the minute details on everything — including his credentials — and he is not a native English speaker, so he does often beat around the bush for a while before getting to the point, simply because he doesn't have the right words to explain it.

Now, I do not necessarily agree with everything he writes — some of it really is conjecture — but I find his claim that a tuned thermonuclear device would have been used and that this is what vaporized the steel columns quite plausible, and certainly a hell of a lot more credible than the claim that the fire at the base of the Twin Towers would have been caused by jet fuel. Jet fuel doesn't keep on burning at 2000°C for weeks on end. Thermite can develop enough heat to melt steel, but that too wouldn't keep burning for weeks on end. Furthermore, the place where the towers had stood was immediately referred to by members of the Bush administration as "ground zero", which is a military term for the site of a nuclear detonation.

Khalezov also states that all skyscrapers have a thermonuclear device buried underneath them. Now, I'm not so sure about that, but what I do know is that most strategically important bridges are constructed with provisions for putting in explosives at some later point, for in the event of an invasion by a foreign power — this is called the scorched earth strategy, and it's where the expression "burning your bridges" comes from. Of course, that doesn't mean that there actually are any explosives in them just yet, but just that the provisions are there for putting in explosives at some later point in time so that they can be safely and thoroughly be destroyed in order to not let them fall into the hands of an enemy.

The biggest problem with "9/11" is that there are so many different theories, many of which are plausible, but just as many of them are mutually exclusive. And then there's all the misinformation and deliberate disinformation to add to the confusion. I guess we'll never find out what really happened that day, other than that the official 9-11 Commission Report is a preposterous pack of lies.

Some in the military industrial complex may have been told it was a nuke to keep them quiet. The real secrets have to be kept secret because they were opening doors to other dimensions on 9/11. There are somethings that defy even nuclear physics. If it was a nuke the people standing around would have been turned to dust along with the buildings. Only the metal caught fire. The paper and wood didn't burn. There is a reason for this.

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D2nyaHaBtyQ




**

[Aianawa]

Very interesting indeed.
I remember my then partner taking me to her American friends to watch the first two vids on 9/11 that came out, from a german university exsposing the truth, this was a couple of years after 9/11 lies, still took me six months to drop the cogkniefe dissodance and take the truth in, nice to see the sciency germans piercing the noosphere still > http://www.veteranstoday.com/2016/09...ed-demolition/