Published on Jul 23, 2013
ncredible see inside of building 6 http://youtu.be/a4FkO5ry1uo Links are under the video for inside pictures of World Trade Center 6 , the interior is missing ,its not crushed or explosives go to the link and see for yourself . There is no parts of the towers inside , the basement is intact , the walls are intact . Its like something sucked all the office furniture , computers, walls ,doors ,floors , desks filing cabinets , beams , structure , everything is missing . This means some kind of very exotic secret technology was used . Go See !
This is a plead to 911 Truth Community https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six_Wor…
Rather than getting blogged down in a debate on how the buildings were brought down, which will lead to ‘my expert knows more than your expert’ arguments, I prefer to concentrate on the following question: How can the most heavily protected area in the world be successfully attacked’? The answer to that question leads to traitors on the inside and a foreign intelligence operation.
Wow! Never heard of bldg #6. This is insane!
1- Newton’s law s of motion
First law: In an inertial frame of reference, an object either remains at rest or continues to move at a constant velocity, unless acted upon by a force.[2][3]
Second law: In an inertial reference frame, the vector sum of the forces F on an object is equal to the mass m of that object multiplied by the acceleration a of the object: F = ma. (It is assumed here that the mass m is constant – see below.)
Third law: When one body exerts a force on a second body, the second body simultaneously exerts a force equal in magnitude and opposite in direction on the first body
The planes would have at least partially broke and bounced off the buildings. They would also have slowed before existing on the other side.
2- Wingtip vortices
Wingtip vortices are circular patterns of rotating air left behind a wing as it generates lift. One wingtip vortex trails from the tip of each wing.
None are present in any video of the planes hitting building.
3- Aircraft Performance in Relation to Atmospheric Pressure, Density and Temperature.
Atmospheric characteristics such as pressure, density, temperature, and humidity play a crucial role in altering the efficacy of the airplane engine and/or the aerodynamic capability of the aircraft to fly, thus affecting the aircraft performance.
Aircraft experience more drag at lower altitudes which reduces its available airspeed. The engines will stall due to an increase in pressure ahead of the intake port. This will also lead to cavitations resulting in the wing getting vibrated off.
4- concrete does not vaporize due to isolated carbon fires while passports survive.
5- planes destroyed by vaporizing into buildings.dont get sighted later at airports.
6- nobody spends.millions to research how to make cell phone s work on planes years after they worked just fine on a flight that needed audio evidence since their was no parts left when it hit the ground in Pennsylvania.
7- when all video is seized from around the pentagon and then no real evidence is shown from those videos of an aircraft.
…etc
Fiction is fiction. This debate is like arguing about how fake star trek is.
You mean Star Trek ISN’T real??!
Color ME gullible.
🙂
COMPLETE AND UTTER B.S.
First of all, WTC 6 is NOT what was shown in the video (you’re looking at the ruins of one of the twin towers) and if there is a problem with the lack of debris from building 6, it’s because it was a commodities trading pit, rather than an office building. (kind of like a huge, open arena)
Typical disinformation that wants to make as ass out of you in every debate rather than win it.
The nonsense never stops. Please don’t repeat ANYTHING concerning 9-11 unless you did the research yourself. This is a video-load of crap, and nothing else, and there a hundred more of them out there just like it.
Thanks for setting my record straight Jolly. Like I said, I’d NEVER heard of building 6. I did not share this nor will I after your educated comment.
My brother worked in building 6, trading cocoa, sugar and cotton.
http://drjudywood.com/articles/JJ/pics/wtc-lidar092701-site.jpg
Surreal Pictures Inside WTC 6 Destroys 9/11 Cover Story For Ever!
I really do give up. If people are still falling for the same nonsense after 17 years, they want to be fooled, and there’s no hope for them.
Here’s 9-11 truth in once sentence: The American people are too goddamn stupid to figure out what happened to us on 9-11, and they’ll continually swallow any pile of crap that’s thrown in their face regarding the issue, so there’s no sense in trying to educate them.
They’re going to find out about tyranny the hard way, and we’ll have a lot of brainless bodies to bury after the dust settles.
Here’s the whole argument:
http://drjudywood.com/articles/DEW/StarWarsBeam4.html
Forget it. “Dr.” Judy Wood has been shoveling BS for at least a decade. I don’t need to hear any of her arguments.
Chris Bollyn has been consistently telling the truth about 9-11 since 9-11. He’s probably still a good source, (unless he’s been turned…haven’t listened to him in years)
If you look at the PBS documentary “America Rebuilds” you’ll see building 6, and the clean up crew demolishing the remains. You’ll also hear Larry Silverstein’s accidental confession that WTC 7 was “pulled”.
Naturally, BS 9-11 “activists” like Uncle Fetzer want you to ignore obvious evidence like a F*&$in’ CONFESSION in favor of counting rivets and useless nonsense of that nature, to make sure you never do anything effective at spreading the truth.
The one piece of evidence that will win any debate, with any person, is the molten steel found in the basements of all three buildings that collapsed. That particular phenomenon (steel flowing like a liquid — not softened, or weakened, but MELTED), requires temperatures above 2800 degrees (F). ANY hydro-carbon (like jet fuel) has a maximum burning temperature of 1750 degrees.
There are numerous photos and videos of the molten steel (even pouring from the 82nd floor window of the south tower just before collapse), and countless credible witnesses.
Chris Bollyn is pushing Dr. Steven Jones who was the center of killing cold fusion and destroying the careers of Ponds and Fleshman. At the time, I believe Jones was being funded by the DOE. Not only did Jones play the part to close them down in the media, but he is the one who attempted to preempt their patent on cold fusion by rushing through an inferior one of his own.
You are not alone, I know many good and aware people who consider Bollyn the go-to guy for 911. Because he is pushing Jones, an agent that I identified long ago, I just don’t trust him.
I’d say that I had done around 200 hours or so of 911 research and video watching around 2009 when I happened across Judy Wood’s site. I found a staggering amount of images of the twin tower’s site that I had never seen (hundreds) and was compelled to buy her book and dissect her research to the best of my ability. Her information is worth a look and it appears to be gaining traction as we go on.
Even though she is jewish, she has the best argument and most data out there in my opinion. She is also the most suppressed 911 researcher from what I can tell. The best video I have from her is not even available on the web anymore, and it is fairly recent.
Anyway, I’ve been watching the creator of those videos for years now (Dana Durnford) and he appears to be on the level, but really – who the hell knows? 🙂
http://www1.ae911truth.org/faqs/646-faq-8-what-is-nanothermite-could-it-have-been-used-to-demolish-the-wtc-skyscrapers.html
Thermite produces a blinding white light. The towers did not light up like sparklers on the Fourth of July! If they found chocolate chip cookie crumbs in the dust would that be the cause of destruction?
Let me introduce you to Dr. J. Douglas Beason
https://web.archive.org/web/20180823222442/https://www.af.mil/DesktopModules/ArticleCS/Print.aspx?PortalId=1&ModuleId=858&Article=108539
https://web.archive.org/web/20070317075918/http://img385.imageshack.us/img385/1011/spire1li0.jpg
New weapons and how they may change war subject of talk Thursday at Museum
Light-wave energy in the same spectrum of energy found in home appliances may soon be used in a new generation of weapons. On Thursday, the Laboratory’s Associate Director for Threat Reduction, Douglas Beason, will talk about America’s new directed energy weapons in a talk at the Laboratory’s Bradbury Science Museum.
The talk is scheduled to begin at 6:30 p.m., and is free and open to the public. After the talk, Beason is scheduled to sign copies of his new book, “The E-Bomb: How America’s New Directed Energy Weapons will Change the Way Future Wars will be Fought,” at the Otowi Station Bookstore next to the museum.
Beason, who was named Los Alamos’ Threat Reduction Directorate (ADTR) leader in January, is a leading expert in directed energy research. At the talk, he will describe the development of a new generation of weapons that discharge light-wave energy. The technology that supplies the same spectrum of energy found in microwave ovens or television remote control devices is a revolution in weaponry, perhaps more profound than the atomic bomb. Beason will discuss these new weapons and answer the questions that everyone is asking: What is directed energy? How do these new weapons work? How lethal are they?
According to Beason, the first directed energy weapons are being tested now and their deployment is being planned for today’s battlefields.
https://web.archive.org/web/20081006044013/http://www.lanl.gov/news/index.php/fuseaction/home.story/story_id/7356
The E-Bomb: How America’s New Directed-Energy Weapons Will Change the Way Future Wars Will be Fought
In science fiction, futuristic soldiers are often shown wielding light emitting weapons – Flash Gordon’s ray gun, Captain Kirk’s phaser, and Darth Vader’s light saber. Today, this imagined future of science fiction is on the road to reality. After more than two decades of research, the United States is on the verge of deploying a new generation of weapons that discharge light-wave energy, the same spectrum of energy found in your microwave or in your TV remote control. They’re called “directed-energy weapons” – lasers, high-powered microwaves, and particle beams – and they signal a revolution in weaponry, perhaps, more profound than the atomic bomb.
https://web.archive.org/web/20051119112050/http://www.heritage.org/Press/Events/ev112905a.cfm
Those who control the energy control the people. But those who control their perception control everything.
The oil industry (leaded gas), tobacco industry (lung cancer), and more recently the NFL (chronic traumatic encephalopathy), have all spent millions and millions of dollars marginalizing scientific findings and the scientists that find them by way of “public relations” which is another word for propaganda. Lead in the food chain, carcinogens in the air, and brain damaged football players are all good for you, right?
What Sound?
The mass of each WTC tower was around 500,000 tons or 1,102,311,310.9 pounds.
https://hypertextbook.com/facts/2004/EricChen.shtml
Garbage trucks weigh around 33,000 pounds empty.
https://www.absoluterescue.com/vehicle/heavy-rescue/garbage-truck-weight-wet-dry/
The destruction of each tower would equal the sound of 33,403 empty garbage trucks raining down. (a little over one quarter of all U.S. garbage trucks in service) That didn’t happen. The towers were turned into dust in mid air never hitting the ground. Figures don’t lie, but liars figure.
Both the super-duper thermite gang and the super-duper nuclear gang are covering up the lack of high heat when a careful observation of ALL the evidence concludes that the destruction was cold molecular dissociation produced by a type of directed energy. There is also the CGI/Remote controlled plane coverup gangs – when it was actually image projection of some kind. There are also gangs that coverup both lack of high heat and image projection technology.
https://vgy.me/NiTnPC.jpg
What high heat?
High heat is part of the government’s official conspiracy theory and is as relevant as “19 bad guys with box cutters”. Using water and dirt to quench cold molecular dissociation is not evidence of high heat.
High heat? Why hasn’t the steam cooked these workmen alive? Why are the pressurized hydraulic hoses on the heavy equipment still working and not bursting under high heat?
http://img.timeinc.net/time/photoessays/groundzero/zero04.jpg
Why is wet dirt fuming?
https://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs/2001/10/wtc/pdrm1941.jpg
Steam? If this were steam, these workers would have been cooked. If this were as hot as a grill, these people would become something that looked more like a grilled-cheese sandwich. The hoses to their torches would melt and ignite the fuel.
https://web.archive.org/web/20060613070347if_/http://hereisnewyork.org:80/jpegs/photos/5103.jpg
On September 27, 2001, the four yellow dump trucks are heading south on West Street, toward the WTC complex. Each of the dump trucks carries a uniform load of what appears to be dirt.
https://www.fema.gov/media-library-data/a4104155-dee4-430e-b170-d4ed563d337c/5644_medium.jpg
WHY WOULD THE DIRECTED ENERGY COVER-UP TEAM WANT 9/11 JUSTICE FOR ALL?
https://salsa3.salsalabs.com/o/50694/images/Richard-DavidG-StevenJ.jpg
https://vgy.me/xixegK.jpg
A fallacy is an error in reasoning. This differs from a factual error, which is simply being wrong about the facts. To be more specific, a fallacy is an “argument” in which the premises given for the conclusion do not provide the needed degree of support. Decredentializing a highly qualified expert like Dr. Wood by appealing to spite, ridicule, or willful ignorance does nothing to support a valid argument. Also, an opinion and an Internet connection does not qualify someone as an expert in forensic engineering and science, nor nuclear physics, nor structural engineering, nor materials engineering science, nor engineering mechanics (applied physics). The empirical research Dr. Wood performed is a way of gaining knowledge by means of direct and indirect observation or experience, not by performing experiments. Steven Jones [Journal Of Nine Eleven Studies or J.O.N.E.S.] and Greg Jenkins used to ridicule Dr. Wood by claiming that it would take more than five times the world’s energy to destroy the WTC towers. Does that mean their thermite came from off planet or “outer space”? LOL What experiments would Dr. Wood perform? What are the experiments for, to prove the buildings are still there or if the buildings are gone? Why not just look? No assumptions needed with empirical evidence! A forensic scientific investigation involves the collection and analysis of ALL of the evidence. Even though A&E911truth appeals to authority and popularity, a controlled group is not synonymous with evidence.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoAa_B2kRuo
Those who want to cover up the evidence of what happen often falsely claim that Dr. Wood is talking about a specific weapon and a specific location of it (e.g. laser beam from outer space, or “spacebeams”). This disinformation campaign was initiated by Steven Jones on 11/11/2006 in a presentation he gave at the University of California, Berkeley [available here at timestamp 1:53:47
https://archive.org/details/liftingthefog_2006_11_11_session2 ],
telling his audience that “Judy Woods (Dr. Wood) says it’s a laser or maser from space” while showing how difficult it is to hold his hand like a beam from space. Not only does Dr. Wood NOT SAY THAT, she actually RULES THAT OUT. The mechanism of destruction of a laser beam would be from heat and produce a bright and blinding light. But we know the buildings were not cooked to death. The term Directed Energy is used because energy is directed to do something different then it normally does and it is directed to do this within a certain geographic zone. [As a mental example, think of directing the binding energy of matter to repel instead of attract. A solid object would turn to atomic-sized dust. Direct this to happen within the WTC complex and not across the street.]
At the end of Chapter 20 in Dr. Wood’s book, she explains why playing “name the weapon” game is counterproductive. Name dropping trendy terms is not synonymous with understanding. The easiest example is HAARP. The full capabilities are classified. But people often name-drop the trendy term to APPEAR to know something. A tongue-in-cheek definition of HAARP stands for High Amplitude Advancement of Real Propaganda. They are just substituting “HAARP” for “Bin Laden.”
In Dr. Wood’s book, the closest she comes to “naming a weapon” is merely describing what it creates: magnetic-electrogravitic-nuclear reactions (page 365). But as soon as someone starts talking about a name, people will stop looking at the evidence which is another form of a cover up.