IPB




POSTS MADE TO THIS FORUM ARE THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE AUTHOR AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF PILOTS FOR 911 TRUTH
FOR OFFICIAL PILOTS FOR 9/11 TRUTH STATEMENTS AND ANALYSIS, PLEASE VISIT PILOTSFOR911TRUTH.ORG

WELCOME - PLEASE REGISTER OR LOG IN FOR FULL FORUM ACCESS ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Alex Jones Nukes V. Ventura's Spacebeam Judywoodoo, a 9/11 truth movement pro-wrestling or hijack?

tumetuestumefais...
post May 17 2011, 07:50 AM
Post #1





Group: Respected Member
Posts: 1,099
Joined: 7-November 07
From: Prague or France
Member No.: 2,452






It's not my video. I checked the primary source and it is here - the third video 2:55-6:10
bs_flag.gif
I almost can't believe my ears, but I have a bridge in Brooklyn and a tank of fine sneak oil for reasonable prices -for everybody who does still believe this guys.

Btw was Jesse Ventura a NAVY SEAL? No? At least it is still maintained he was a military demolition expert, so he somehow should a bit understand demolitions...

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
amazed!
post May 17 2011, 09:04 AM
Post #2





Group: Extreme Forum Pilot
Posts: 3,911
Joined: 14-December 06
From: Fort Pierce, FL
Member No.: 331



I tend to agree with Jesse & Woods that it appears some sort of special weapon was used, but I think most of what Alex said was right.

What Alex said about radioactivity being high agrees with what I remember reading some years back.

It's entirely possible, indeed likely, that technology in nuclear weapons has advanced very much in the last 50 years. I think it is entirely possible that some sort of tactical nuclear weapons were used.

After all, we're dealing with the fooking Pentagon....
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DoYouEverWonder
post May 17 2011, 09:14 AM
Post #3





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 770
Joined: 1-February 09
Member No.: 4,096



QUOTE (amazed! @ May 17 2011, 08:04 AM) *
I tend to agree with Jesse & Woods that it appears some sort of special weapon was used, but I think most of what Alex said was right.

What Alex said about radioactivity being high agrees with what I remember reading some years back.

It's entirely possible, indeed likely, that technology in nuclear weapons has advanced very much in the last 50 years. I think it is entirely possible that some sort of tactical nuclear weapons were used.

After all, we're dealing with the fooking Pentagon....

Neither one has bothered to study the structure of the buildings, nor have they studied the video and still images in sequence before they made their conclusions. In other words, their theories are not based on the evidence.

The evidence clearly shows classic controlled demolitions, probably assisted by fuel/air explosives, of which there was tons of fuel available around the site and WTC 7 was loaded with fuel.


Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
tumetuestumefais...
post May 17 2011, 11:34 AM
Post #4





Group: Respected Member
Posts: 1,099
Joined: 7-November 07
From: Prague or France
Member No.: 2,452



QUOTE (amazed! @ May 17 2011, 02:04 AM) *
It's entirely possible, indeed likely, that technology in nuclear weapons has advanced very much in the last 50 years. I think it is entirely possible that some sort of tactical nuclear weapons were used.

As I've already written elsewhere I think any fission, fusion or even the "Pure Hydrogen Bomb" nuclear explosion would absolutely inevitably emit huge amounts of neutrons and so activate the materials around (transmutate stable isotopes in suroundings into the radioactive isotopes) and make the radioactivity in vast surroundings quite easily detectable by simplest conventional geigers for very long period of time, because the radioisotopes would inevitably shine gamma rays of relatively high energies as a christmass tree there.
Wouldn't you think somebody would find out throughout the almost ten years?
That's most important reason why I think the "WTC nuclear demolition" terrories - either by "mininukes", "3x150kt hydrogen bombs" (Khalezov) or by "Pure Hydrogen Bomb" - usually disseminated by people who barely understand the issue or are paid disinfo - look to me being such a pathetiacal nonsense. rolleyes.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Obwon
post May 17 2011, 02:52 PM
Post #5





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 560
Joined: 29-November 09
From: NYC
Member No.: 4,712



QUOTE (tumetuestumefaisdubien @ May 17 2011, 10:34 AM) *
<snips>
Wouldn't you think somebody would find out throughout the almost ten years?
That's most important reason why I think the "WTC nuclear demolition" terrories - either by "mininukes", "3x150kt hydrogen bombs" (Khalezov) or by "Pure Hydrogen Bomb" - usually disseminated by people who barely understand the issue or are paid disinfo - look to me being such a pathetiacal nonsense. rolleyes.gif


I would think so too. But, with the pulverization of the concrete and the absence
the furniture in the pile, a look for some mechanism for accomplishing
this feat is in order. Since I don't have the knowledge needed to evaluate
the parts of 9-11 that I don't understand yet, I have to leave that on the
table until I get more information one way or another.

I'd certainly think that use of a nuke of some type would cause
highly detectable levels of radiation, but then I don't think we're
all aware of what the state of the art is in the subatomic area.
I remember when I first read that 9-11 was an "inside" job, it
seemed pretty pathetic to me. Until the anomalies began to pile
up to the level of intrigue that got me to looking more closely
then the dam burst.

In any event, the fact that 9-11 is an inside job, doesn't rest on
how it was done, but on what is missing, and how that impacts
the story we've been told. So, we really don't need to go reaching
into some nuclear toy box, at least until we have no other choice.

Obwon
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 




RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 1st September 2014 - 07:18 AM