Deep Politics Forum

Full Version: 9/11 Weekend - New hypothesis to Explain 9/11 - Part I
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Marvelous insights from chief electrical engineer Richard Humenn and controlled demolition technician Tom Sullivan.

Mr. Humenn:

If the floors pancake, columns still standing.

Interior columns compromised, black hole sucking everything in.

Accessibility of elevator companies 24/7; elevator companies worked at night, access to interior of core columns

Sub stations 107/75/41/7: 4 transformers each side: (4 + 4) X 4 = 32 X 30,000 lb = 960,000 lb = 480 tons

Aircooled dry type; where are the transformers

Antenna fell first: at top, not at impact

Mr. Sullivan:

Our procedure: cut at intervals, cut stairways, elevators, remove cars

A complex and precise process

NIST said fire caused one column to fail causing global collapse: nonsense

Access for team of loading experts, right kind of explosives

Sometimes load only lower third; don't have to load all floors, only bottom third

Wireless remote detonators, too expensive for civilian use, used by military

Thermite since invention in 1984; vs. RDX copper jacketed

Successive, progressive, smaller waves of sound

Thermite > melting > cutting > far less noise (nothing left but melted steel)

[Phil's note: The fire down below; so hot, for so long.]

Lean? It happens, even in controlled demolition

I knew from Day One it was a controlled demolition

Classic kink, center core failed first, classic implosion: penthouse first

Phil's footnote:

On the basis of the testament of these two highly qualified observers, the next step would be to catalog the most recent elevator work

And, again, I say, the presence of the E-4B: why

Why do you need an Air Force command center over New York--it's a platform designed for a post-nuclear exchange environment
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17