9/11:Muddy waters

quote:

Op zondag 27 september 2015 13:56 schreef ems. het volgende:

[..]

Dat kan hij roepen maar dat maakt het nog niet waar.

En als dat waar is, hoe bijzonder is dat?

quote:

Op zondag 27 september 2015 21:30 schreef ATuin-hek het volgende:

[..]

En als dat waar is, hoe bijzonder is dat?

oeps... verkeerd gepost sorry

quote:

Op vrijdag 25 september 2015 09:17 schreef theguyver het volgende:

[..]

Ik ken m wel, maar 5 uur trok ik niet.

zal jogy even vragen of die m in de OP kan zetten

dan probeer je 5x 1 uur?

quote:

Op maandag 28 september 2015 01:45 schreef THEFXR het volgende:

[..]

dan probeer je 5x 1 uur?

Er staat nu een heel topic voor open

quote:

Op maandag 28 september 2015 09:18 schreef Molurus het volgende:
[ afbeelding ]

In 2006, Rex Tomb of the FBI's public affairs unit said, "The reason why 9/11 is not mentioned on Osama bin Laden's Most Wanted page is because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting bin Laden to 9/11". So far, the U.S. Justice Department has not sought formal criminal charges against bin Laden (or anyone but Zacarias Moussaoui) for the 9/11 attacks. This has provided what some call "fodder for conspiracy theorists who think the U.S. government or another power was behind the Sept. 11 hijackings." Two separate indictments were made against bin Laden by two separate grand juries in 1998 for two separate terrorist acts, though no indictments have been filed against him for the events of 9/11.

So, the answer, from the horse's mouth, is: no hard evidence connecting Osama Bin Laden to the 9/11 attacks.

https://www.quora.com/Is-(...)-in-the-9-11-attacks

Grap is dat zodra je linkt naar een interview van Bin Laden met een Arabisch nieuwsstation over de aanslagen, waarin hij zijn betrokkenheid toegeeft, dit onmiddellijk wordt weggewuifd.
Zelfde met de videos van de kapers: meteen weggewuifd...

Anyway, het citaat van je bron is enkele jaren geleden uit wikipedia verwijderd...

[ Bericht 15% gewijzigd door Wantie op 28-09-2015 21:26:13 ]

quote:

waarin hij zijn betrokkenheid toegeeft,

bron ?

verderop in de vorige reeks van deze thread.
Ik heb een reeks videos gepost in een discussie met japie, hij heeft er geeneen bekeken.

quote:

Op maandag 28 september 2015 21:40 schreef DeMolay het volgende:

[..]

bron ?

BNW / 9/11 : It goes on and on and on and on and on....

heb het even voor je terug gezocht is al weer een paar weken geleden

Military Reloads with Nanotech


Smaller. Cheaper. Nastier. Those are the guiding principles behind the military’s latest bombs. The secret ingredient: nanotechnology that makes for a bigger boom.

Nanotechnology is grabbing headlines for its potential in advancing the life sciences and computing research, but the Department of Defense (DoD) found another use: a new class of weaponry that uses energy-packed nanometals to create powerful, compact bombs.

With funding from the U.S. government, Sandia National Laboratories, the Los Alamos National Laboratory, and the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory are researching how to manipulate the flow of energy within and between molecules, a field known as nanoenergentics, which enables building more lethal weapons such as “cave-buster bombs” that have several times the detonation force of conventional bombs such as the “daisy cutter” or MOAB (mother of all bombs).

Researchers can greatly increase the power of weapons by adding materials known as superthermites that combine nanometals such as nanoaluminum with metal oxides such as iron oxide, according to Steven Son, a project leader in the Explosives Science and Technology group at Los Alamos.

“The advantage (of using nanometals) is in how fast you can get their energy out,” Son says.

Son says that the chemical reactions of superthermites are faster and therefore release greater amounts of energy more rapidly.

“Superthermites can increase the (chemical) reaction time by a thousand times,” Son says, resulting in a very rapid reactive wave.

Son, who has been working on nanoenergetics for more than three years, says that scientists can engineer nanoaluminum powders with different particle sizes to vary the energy release rates. This enables the material to be used in many applications, including underwater explosive devices, primers for igniting firearms, and as fuel propellants for rockets.

However, researchers aren’t permitted to discuss what practical military applications may come from this research.

Nanoaluminum is more chemically reactive because there are more atoms on the surface area than standard aluminum, according to Douglas Carpenter, the chief scientific officer at nanometals company Quantumsphere.

“Standard aluminum covers just one-tenth of one percent of the surface area (with atoms), versus fifty percent for nanoaluminum,” Carpenter says.

Carpenter says the U.S. military has developed “cave-buster” bombs using nanoaluminum, and it is also working on missiles and torpedoes that move so quickly that they strike their targets before evasive actions can be taken.

“Nanoaluminum provides ultra high burn rates for propellants that are ten times higher than existing propellants,” says Carpenter.

The military is also trying to make sure that its bullets kill quickly.

The U.S. Army Environmental Center began a program in 1997 to develop alternatives to the toxic lead that is used in the hundreds of millions of rounds that are annually fired during conflicts and at its training ranges. Carpenter says that although bullets using nanoaluminum are ready to be field tested, the government has been slow implement the technology.

“Getting the government to change the way they kill people is difficult,” Carpenter says.

Because nanometal provides a higher concentration of energy while requiring fewer raw materials, the overall cost of these weapons would drop, according to Kevin Walter, vice president of technical business development at nanometals manufacturer Nanoscale Technologies.

“You get a little better bang for your buck,” Walter says.

The nanometals can be produced in particles as small as eight nanometers, Walter says, and then combined with other chemicals to create the explosive materials, which can also be used for non-military applications including pyrotechnics and explosives for mining.

Nanotechnology “could completely change the face of weaponry,” according to Andy Oppenheimer, a weapons expert with analyst firm and publisher Jane’s Information Group. Oppenheimer says nations including the United States, Germany, and Russia are developing “mini-nuke” devices that use nanotechnology to create much smaller nuclear detonators.

Oppenheimer says the devices could fit inside a briefcase and would be powerful enough to destroy a building. Although the devices require nuclear materials, because of their small size “they blur the line with conventional weapons,” Oppenheimer says.

The mini-nuke weapons are still in the research phase and may be surreptitiously funded since any form of nuclear proliferation is “politically contentious” because of the possibility that they could fall into the hands of terrorists, Oppenheimer says.

The creation of much smaller nuclear bombs adds new challenges to the effort to limit weapons of mass destruction, according to Oppenheimer.

“(The bombs) could blow open everything that is in place for arms control,” Oppenheimer says. “Everything gets more dangerous.”

http://www.technologyrevi(...)ith-nanotech/page/2/

quote:

Op woensdag 7 oktober 2015 09:15 schreef THEFXR het volgende:
Military Reloads with Nanotech

Smaller. Cheaper. Nastier. Those are the guiding principles behind the military’s latest bombs. The secret ingredient: nanotechnology that makes for a bigger boom.

Nanotechnology is grabbing headlines for its potential in advancing the life sciences and computing research, but the Department of Defense (DoD) found another use: a new class of weaponry that uses energy-packed nanometals to create powerful, compact bombs.

With funding from the U.S. government, Sandia National Laboratories, the Los Alamos National Laboratory, and the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory are researching how to manipulate the flow of energy within and between molecules, a field known as nanoenergentics, which enables building more lethal weapons such as “cave-buster bombs” that have several times the detonation force of conventional bombs such as the “daisy cutter” or MOAB (mother of all bombs).

Researchers can greatly increase the power of weapons by adding materials known as superthermites that combine nanometals such as nanoaluminum with metal oxides such as iron oxide, according to Steven Son, a project leader in the Explosives Science and Technology group at Los Alamos.

“The advantage (of using nanometals) is in how fast you can get their energy out,” Son says.

Son says that the chemical reactions of superthermites are faster and therefore release greater amounts of energy more rapidly.

“Superthermites can increase the (chemical) reaction time by a thousand times,” Son says, resulting in a very rapid reactive wave.

Son, who has been working on nanoenergetics for more than three years, says that scientists can engineer nanoaluminum powders with different particle sizes to vary the energy release rates. This enables the material to be used in many applications, including underwater explosive devices, primers for igniting firearms, and as fuel propellants for rockets.

However, researchers aren’t permitted to discuss what practical military applications may come from this research.

Nanoaluminum is more chemically reactive because there are more atoms on the surface area than standard aluminum, according to Douglas Carpenter, the chief scientific officer at nanometals company Quantumsphere.

“Standard aluminum covers just one-tenth of one percent of the surface area (with atoms), versus fifty percent for nanoaluminum,” Carpenter says.

Carpenter says the U.S. military has developed “cave-buster” bombs using nanoaluminum, and it is also working on missiles and torpedoes that move so quickly that they strike their targets before evasive actions can be taken.

“Nanoaluminum provides ultra high burn rates for propellants that are ten times higher than existing propellants,” says Carpenter.

The military is also trying to make sure that its bullets kill quickly.

The U.S. Army Environmental Center began a program in 1997 to develop alternatives to the toxic lead that is used in the hundreds of millions of rounds that are annually fired during conflicts and at its training ranges. Carpenter says that although bullets using nanoaluminum are ready to be field tested, the government has been slow implement the technology.

“Getting the government to change the way they kill people is difficult,” Carpenter says.

Because nanometal provides a higher concentration of energy while requiring fewer raw materials, the overall cost of these weapons would drop, according to Kevin Walter, vice president of technical business development at nanometals manufacturer Nanoscale Technologies.

“You get a little better bang for your buck,” Walter says.

The nanometals can be produced in particles as small as eight nanometers, Walter says, and then combined with other chemicals to create the explosive materials, which can also be used for non-military applications including pyrotechnics and explosives for mining.

Nanotechnology “could completely change the face of weaponry,” according to Andy Oppenheimer, a weapons expert with analyst firm and publisher Jane’s Information Group. Oppenheimer says nations including the United States, Germany, and Russia are developing “mini-nuke” devices that use nanotechnology to create much smaller nuclear detonators.

Oppenheimer says the devices could fit inside a briefcase and would be powerful enough to destroy a building. Although the devices require nuclear materials, because of their small size “they blur the line with conventional weapons,” Oppenheimer says.

The mini-nuke weapons are still in the research phase and may be surreptitiously funded since any form of nuclear proliferation is “politically contentious” because of the possibility that they could fall into the hands of terrorists, Oppenheimer says.

The creation of much smaller nuclear bombs adds new challenges to the effort to limit weapons of mass destruction, according to Oppenheimer.

“(The bombs) could blow open everything that is in place for arms control,” Oppenheimer says. “Everything gets more dangerous.”

http://www.technologyrevi(...)ith-nanotech/page/2/

Ja the Black Ops Project liggen echt lightyears voor op de rest van de maatschappij op het gebied van technologie. Daar gaan ook al die missende biljarden heen.

quote:

Op maandag 28 september 2015 09:18 schreef Molurus het volgende:
[ afbeelding ]

quote:

Op woensdag 7 oktober 2015 09:31 schreef Japie77 het volgende:

[..]

Ja the Black Ops Project liggen echt lightyears voor op de rest van de maatschappij op het gebied van technologie. Daar gaan ook al die missende biljarden heen.

Ik dacht dat al die missende miljarden gingen naar het opzetten van false flags.
Btw, ze zijn bezig met robotic suits, maar die werken nog niet optimaal

quote:

Op woensdag 7 oktober 2015 10:37 schreef theguyver het volgende:

[..]

Ik dacht dat al die missende miljarden gingen naar het opzetten van false flags.

Het is maar net hoe de wind waait
Maar series als 'A Town Called Eureka' zijn natuurlijk op ware gebeurtenissen gebaseerd...

quote:

Op woensdag 7 oktober 2015 10:37 schreef theguyver het volgende:

[..]

Ik dacht dat al die missende miljarden gingen naar het opzetten van false flags.
Btw, ze zijn bezig met robotic suits, maar die werken nog niet optimaal

[ afbeelding ]

Waar denk jij dan dat al dat geld blijft? Of hoe denk jij dan dat al die Black Ops betaald worden?

quote:

Op woensdag 7 oktober 2015 11:31 schreef Japie77 het volgende:

[..]

Waar denk jij dan dat al dat geld blijft?

Dat kan alle kanten op, van de zakken van politica tot aan onzinnige uitgaven.
Ik denk niet dat er ooit een duidelijk beeld geschetst kan worden waar bepaalde bedragen naar toe gaan, zeker niet in een grote economie van de VS.

The first rule of Black Ops is you do not ask about Black Ops.

quote:

Op woensdag 7 oktober 2015 11:35 schreef theguyver het volgende:

[..]

Dat kan alle kanten op, van de zakken van politica tot aan onzinnige uitgaven.
Ik denk niet dat er ooit een duidelijk beeld geschetst kan worden waar bepaalde bedragen naar toe gaan, zeker niet in een grote economie van de VS.

Jaja. Voor 9/11 miste er al 2,3 triljoen. (heb je enig idee hoeveel geld dat is?) en dat is nu opgelopen tot 8,5 triljoen......

http://crooksandliars.com(...)-85-trillion-missing

quote:

Op woensdag 7 oktober 2015 11:35 schreef theguyver het volgende:

[..]

Dat kan alle kanten op, van de zakken van politica tot aan onzinnige uitgaven.
Ik denk niet dat er ooit een duidelijk beeld geschetst kan worden waar bepaalde bedragen naar toe gaan, zeker niet in een grote economie van de VS.

Vroeger waren dat projecten als de SR-71 Blackbird. Daar is vast wel een hedendaags equivalent van.

quote:

Op woensdag 7 oktober 2015 11:39 schreef Japie77 het volgende:

[..]

Jaja. Voor 9/11 miste er al 2,3 triljoen. (heb je enig idee hoeveel geld dat is?) en dat is nu opgelopen tot 8,5 triljoen......

http://crooksandliars.com(...)-85-trillion-missing

nou mist mist, dit word gewoon doorgesluist naar een bepaalde afdeling van de overheid.
Voor speciale projecten zoals bijvoorbeeld Hekje hier boven al verteld.

Wat ik me af vraag is het volgende hoe komen ze bij het bedrag?
hoe word dat berekend, is dat bedrag ergens van afgeschreven.
En hoe voegen ze vermist geld er aan toe?

Hobbled by old, incompatible computer systems, the Defense Department’s payroll bureaucracy inflicts punishing errors on America’s warriors

Tja, dat probleem was dus al duidelijk in 2001: verouderde incompatible computersystemen in het pentagon die voor een financiele janboel zorgen.

En toch blijven mensen denken dat de overheid helemaal state of the art is, mijlenver vooruit loopt op de rest van de wereld, etc...

quote:

Op woensdag 7 oktober 2015 11:55 schreef Wantie het volgende:
Hobbled by old, incompatible computer systems, the Defense Department’s payroll bureaucracy inflicts punishing errors on America’s warriors

Tja, dat probleem was dus al duidelijk in 2001: verouderde incompatible computersystemen in het pentagon die voor een financiele janboel zorgen.

En toch blijven mensen denken dat de overheid helemaal state of the art is, mijlenver vooruit loopt op de rest van de wereld, etc...

Ik had het niet over de overheid pipo, ik had het over de black projects. De geheime overheid if u will. Waar een heleboel van dat geld naartoe is verdwenen. En die lopen inderdaad mijlenver voor mbt technologie op de rest van de maatschappij. Hoe denk je anders dat hologram technologie opeens vanuit het niets in het publieke domein kwam? Zelfde geld voor de technologie om het weer te beinvloeden.