9-11 in scene gezet #2

quote:

Op vrijdag 4 juli 2008 19:51 schreef Terecht het volgende:

[..]

Oneensch. De totale kosten waren 600 miljoen, waarvan de kosten voor het WTC meer dan 200 miljoen van dat bedrag uitmaakten. Nu kun je je afvragen tot hoever de significantie gaat van die bedragen.
Stel de kosten voor het WTC zouden eigenlijk 201 miljoen zijn, zou dat significant genoeg zijn om te vermelden? Denk het niet. 300 miljoen? Dat lijkt me toch wel een significant verschil. 250 miljoen ook nog wel. Ik denk dat je bij 'meer dan 200 miljoen' aan 200-225 miljoen moet denken, zeker geen getal richting de miljard.

Dat lijkt op het eerste gezicht een enorm bedrag, maar voordat je daar allerlei conclusies aan gaat verbinden zou je eerst moeten kijken wat het WTC Silverstein jaarlijks opleverde. Dan pas kun je iets zeggen of het een onoverkomelijke kostenpost voor hem was. Btw, dit gegeven was al bekend voordat Silverstein het leasecontract voor het WTC afsloot, dus het zou logisch zijn wanneer hij dit in zijn bod zou hebben meegenomen.

Er is echt niets dat er op wijst dat Silverstein een slaatje wilde slaan uit de aanslagen, er teveel zaken die totaal niet met dat idee rijmen.

quote:

Op vrijdag 4 juli 2008 20:14 schreef Erasmo het volgende:

[..]

Wat is er dan win aan dat 300 bedrijven praktisch alles kwijt zijn?

quote:

Did Two Nuclear Reactors, not Nuclear Bombs, Destroy the WTC on 9/11?
Review of William Tahil’s Book, “Ground Zero: The Nuclear Demolition of the WTC”, and of his Reactor Hypothesis

Tahil’s book is now downloadable for free here: http://www.nucleardemolition.com. I welcome Tahil’s comments and corrections, if any, to this review and analysis of his work, via email to Spooked, who will forward to me. Tahil was one of the very first to write and publish on the nuclear demolition of the WTC on 9/11. Also, other than myself, he is the only other scientist, or person, to write about the China Syndrome aftermath. As my illness prevented me from writing on 9/11 until 2007, his 2006 book was the first to correctly attribute the great heat and molten metal that existed at the WTC for months afterwards, to the China Syndrome of still-fissioning material. While I discovered that independently, he was the first to demonstrate this in public writing. He deserves much credit for this. The Finnish military expert, Tahil, and myself, are the three people who have written proposed nuclear demolition schemes. My articles on the nuclear destruction of the WTC are here http://wtcdemolition.blogspot.com and my articles on the China Syndrome are here http://wtc-chinasyndrome.blogspot.com. The Finn believes a single nuclear bomb was used on each tower, via a focused, nuclear shape charge in the basement. I have stated that numerous mini- or micro-nukes were employed in the towers, and in all the other WTC buildings. I have further highlighted that great redundancy was employed, and that numerous nukes either were sabotaged, fizzled on their own, or were impacted (without being triggered themselves), by other exploding nukes. And so many nukes did not go off as planned, and their unused fissile material later gave rise to the China Syndrome. My article on the early attempted nuking of WTC7, which failed, is good evidence of fizzled, or sabotaged nukes. Thus there were many nukes available, whose fissile material was not employed in the destruction, and which gave rise to the China Syndrome, in my hypothesis.
[..]
One of the nuclear 9/11 proponents, William Deagle, M.D., further lends support to my redundant nuclear bomb hypothesis with his direct knowledge of a Fort Collins U.S. Army Forensics Team member who was immediately sent in to the OKC bombing site in 1995. This man told Deagle (his physician) directly, that he and the team brought out two unexploded micro-nuclear bombs, and one unexploded C4 pineapple bomb, from the 10-story Murrah building, after its destruction. This Army man said that the nukes were emplaced by ATF and FBI personnel. He further stated that his Army team was under armed supervision by Wackenhut guards, who tested that they did not remove any radioactive evidence. We can see from this, that great redundancy (extra nuclear bomb emplacement) was employed at OKC. Remember that Murrah was only 10 stories tall, and nowhere near as wide as the towers or WTC7. Consider the total volume of the WTC towers, the 47 story WTC7, and all the other buildings, and you can see how dozens of redundant nukes may have been employed in the nuclear destruction of the entire WTC. If the matter is linear, given the relative volumes, we might even conclude that 50-100 micro-nukes were emplaced, and they gave rise to the China Syndrome, in my hypothesis.

quote:

[..]

Then Tahil’s analysis of this photo also appears to be very astute, as far as demonstrating the PTB’s desire to hide the China Syndrome. The photo is of the so-called Light Memorial. This was the extremely bright, double-blue lights, that were turned on for weeks, a few months after 9/11, from dusk to 11 P.M. Tahil surmises that this began when they finally reached the reactor remnant areas, or large areas of fissioning Uranium. And while they were doing something to it, or carting it away, its blue light of the Cherenkov radiation (from nuclear fission) would have been visible.

quote:

Op vrijdag 4 juli 2008 20:34 schreef Terecht het volgende:

[..]

Net wanneer je dacht dat het niet veel gekker kon...

quote:

Op vrijdag 4 juli 2008 20:52 schreef Resonancer het volgende:

[..]

Het zou wel die enorme hitte en kraters verkaren en makkelijker uit te voeren dan 100den conventionele explosieven.

quote:

Op vrijdag 4 juli 2008 23:12 schreef ToT het volgende:
Vliegende vinkentering zeg, straks zeggen ze nog dat God zelf in het complot zit en met Zijn goddelijke vinger de Twin Towers platgedrukt heeft.
Dat zou me dan een logische verklaring lijken voor de sneller-dan-vrije-val-snelheid waarmee de torens ingestort zijn.