9/11: Explosive Evidence - Experts Speak Out, Full-length

[ktlight]

Join 23-year architect Richard Gage, AIA, in this feature length documentary with cutting-edge 9/11 evidence from more than 50 top experts in their fields -- high-rise architects, structural engineers, physicists, chemical engineers, firefighters, metallurgists, explosives experts, controlled demolition technicians, and more. Each is highly qualified in his/her respective fields. Several have Ph.D's -- including National Medal of Science awardee Lynn Margulis. She, along with the other experts, exposes the fraud of NIST and discusses how the scientific method should have been applied and acknowledges the "overwhelming" evidence of high temperature incendiaries in all dust samples of the WTC. High-rise architects and structural engineers layout the evidence in the features of the destruction of these three high-rises that point inevitably to explosive controlled demolition.

lw-jzCfa4eQ

[Cidersomerset]

Thanks Ktlight I've been waiting to watch this ............Cheers Steve

[Kimberley]

I posted this a week ago on some similar threads... I feel posting it again here is appropriate!!

10 years ago I knew immediately that 2 planes could not have caused the total destruction to those buildings (and the various surrounding building too)...however for a while I only spoke to the information being given to us that it was done by Muslim terrorists. I spoke out saying ok even if that is the case fighting fire with fire does not work. Love your enemies I proclaimed!! Oh did I get flack for that!! So I chose to be silent. Then as the months progressed I started to realize/know that what had taken place was so very much darker than what we were being told. I did not dare speak that to anyone. So as the years have progressed and the conspiracy facts and theories have been bouncing around on the internet I was glad to see so many asking the good questions etc... But it was not until in the past month that I started to re-visit and share this information in public to both those that are awake and asleep.. (no judgment to any of us :-) ) And it was not until last week that I was finally able to give the time to learning about Dr. Judy Wood's 10 year investigation. WOW!!! The best of the truth that I have seen..It resonates so strongly with me on so many levels. She and I and many of you are not looking for revenge, we just want the truth to be told!

How did the WTC buildings turn into DUST? What free energy technology was used to do that? Who has hold of that technology? Most importantly how can we use that technology for the benefit of the world? I do not want revenge...I do not need justice.. . I am not in judgement of others so I have no one to forgive...I just want to know the truth!!! How about you!

I am so energized by the opportunity we have at this point of our evolution. I know that the majority of the people of the world are loving and caring and kind! I also know that there are dark and light forces at play on this planet and off this planet. I also know that the light forces are stronger than the dark forces.

Anyway writing like this is one of my least favorite things to do, however I am so compelled right now...thanks to Dennis hehehe...

Here is the plan that came to me while writing this...

We need to repeal the dismissal of this Dr. Judy Wood case in the Supreme Court.

http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/N..._Tam_Wood.html

We need to get this group http://l911t.com/ and this group http://ae911truth.org/ and whatever other 911 truth groups are big to work together and demand an end to the 9/11 cover-up, a new, full and unbiased investigation, and accountability, and disclosure of the technology used, from all parties involved.

We are not looking for retaliation we are demanding the truth! And as you all know the truth will set you free!! And free energy will set us free too....

Ok for starters please listen to these two interviews with Dr. Judy Wood....

Interview conducted a few days ago by Mel Fabregas with Dr. Judy Wood http://www.veritasshow.com/guests/20...0909-jwood.php
Interview conducted on Sunday by Henrik Palmgren with Dr. Judy Wood http://www.redicecreations.com/radio...RIR-110911.php

......and then get back to me ok???

Much love to us all always in all ways!!

¤=[Post Update]=¤

and this:

Here is some video evidence:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lGXDmNZCeKo


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lGXDmNZCeKo



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoAa_B2kRuo


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoAa_B2kRuo




http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iL9ZAJINU1c&NR=1


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iL9ZAJINU1c&NR=1

[Cidersomerset]

Thanks KTlight...I was not dissapointed an excellent, expertly filmed and presented , presentation from proffesionals in all the main fields of investigation into the reasons why the NIST report was a 'whitewash' and a new investigation is essential. Now of course we all know this already !! so what is new and what will this film change ? The main thing is the mainstream cannot just dismiss these experts as cranks .

More people are picking up on the fact 9/11 does not add up , but most of the evidence put out over the last decade has been fragmented,or information overload from films like 'Loose Change' which are great for us because we have been exposed to the bigger picture....I know there are other more exotic theories by John Lear , Judy Wood which could all be part of the bigger conspiricy along with Neo Cons etc.

But if there is going to be a chance of a reinvestigation ( Short of a major whistleblower ) they have to go with the conventional thermetic controlled demolition theory. What needs to happen now is for even more proffesionals to come forward in a avalanche of truth seeking !!!! We can only hope this film will spark the conscious of as many experts as possible, which would convince even more of the public to demand a new investigation possibly leading to war crime tribunerals........No one was even dissaplined over security failures for the massive home land massacre of inocent people on 9/11 as far as I'aware.........Cheers Steve

[EYES WIDE OPEN]

We need to repeal the dismissal of this Dr. Judy Wood case in the Supreme Court.



Of course, we would not need to do it in the first place had she gone to court with some actual hard evidence instead of just opinions. What else could the court do but dismiss it? Her heart is in the right place but her science and approach is all wrong IMO.

[ponda]

EYES WIDE OPEN said:

Of course, we would not need to do it in the first place had she gone to court with some actual hard evidence instead of just opinions. What else could the court do but dismiss it? Her heart is in the right place but her science and approach is all wrong IMO.


I take it that you are assuming that the 'supreme court' is beyond reproach,not corrupted and can't make flawed decisions.

[onawah]

I have not listened yet to the interview from Sunday (I will get back to you when I have), but I did listen to the other recent ones.
One of the biggest problems seems to be that there are powerful people in the 911 Truth movement who are not willing to give Judy Wood's theories the credit they deserve because it makes them look foolish, the same kind of academic competitive jealousy that is behind so many coverups.
And there is also the very real possibility that some of those individuals are disinfo agents whose theories, though plausible from a certain perspective, are designed to distract us from the truth. Free energy technology is one of the biggest secrets they don't want us to know about, and they will go to great lengths to keep it secret.

[EYES WIDE OPEN]

EYES WIDE OPEN said:

Of course, we would not need to do it in the first place had she gone to court with some actual hard evidence instead of just opinions. What else could the court do but dismiss it? Her heart is in the right place but her science and approach is all wrong IMO.


I take it that you are assuming that the 'supreme court' is beyond reproach,not corrupted and can't make flawed decisions.

Of course I dont. Of course they are corrupt. I am just a realaist.
She went to court with no evidence. What did she expect? Even the fairest court in the land would have to do the same.
If you go to court you need hard physical evidence. We have that in nanothermite. We have the witnesses to testify regarding explosions. We have thousands of architects to back up the hard evidence of nanothermite in the dust and repsonders lungs. This is the way to go.
Besides which, everythign that judy claims is evidence of space weapons can be explianed usinf nanothermite. :)

¤=[Post Update]=¤


I have not listened yet to the interview from Sunday (I will get back to you when I have), but I did listen to the other recent ones.
One of the biggest problems seems to be that there are powerful people in the 911 Truth movement who are not willing to give Judy Wood's theories the credit they deserve because it makes them look foolish, the same kind of academic competitive jealousy that is behind so many coverups.
.

Niles harrit who wrote the thermite paper has publicly asked Judy Wood to talk to him and show him some hard evidence. He is still waiting.

[gooty64]

to Kimberly, you said:
We need to get this group http://l911t.com/ and this group http://ae911truth.org/ and whatever other 911 truth groups are big to work together and demand an end to the 9/11 cover-up, a new, full and unbiased investigation, and accountability, and disclosure of the technology used, from all parties involved.

We are not looking for retaliation we are demanding the truth! And as you all know the truth will set you free!! And free energy will set us free too....

First, let me say that I love your energy and attitude in your approach to wanting the truth to be exposed for all the right reasons and not at all for revenge.
What alarms me in your writing is when you say we need to demand, and demand this and that. But Kimberly, who are you demanding to? What I am saying is that there is no one in existence to demand to anymore! It is just us now! We are the ones we have been waiting for.
There is no "place" or "authority" to go to with your (ours) demands anymore-if there ever was in the first place, I doubt that.
I am probably just nit-picking here and you likely already know what I am saying but, I was afraid afraid you were going to take your "demands" and go protesting or "marching of D.C.".
Correct me if I am off-base and let me know how I can help,
THanks, Gooty (Alan).

[Bo Atkinson]

EYES WIDE OPEN said:

Of course, we would not need to do it in the first place had she gone to court with some actual hard evidence instead of just opinions. What else could the court do but dismiss it? Her heart is in the right place but her science and approach is all wrong IMO.


I take it that you are assuming that the 'supreme court' is beyond reproach,not corrupted and can't make flawed decisions.

Of course I dont. Of course they are corrupt. I am just a realaist.
She went to court with no evidence. What did she expect? Even the fairest court in the land would have to do the same.
If you go to court you need hard physical evidence. We have that in nanothermite. We have the witnesses to testify regarding explosions. We have thousands of architects to back up the hard evidence of nanothermite in the dust and repsonders lungs. This is the way to go.
Besides which, everythign that judy claims is evidence of space weapons can be explianed usinf nanothermite. :)

¤=[Post Update]=¤


I have not listened yet to the interview from Sunday (I will get back to you when I have), but I did listen to the other recent ones.
One of the biggest problems seems to be that there are powerful people in the 911 Truth movement who are not willing to give Judy Wood's theories the credit they deserve because it makes them look foolish, the same kind of academic competitive jealousy that is behind so many coverups.
.

Niles harrit who wrote the thermite paper has publicly asked Judy Wood to talk to him and show him some hard evidence. He is still waiting.

Hello there,

Granted, there is protocol. The issues here are broader than current protocol and that is the cog in this cycle of justice: Authoritarian protocol recognizes only currently funded protocol.

Dr Wood's work is a rare sort of engineering bravery which dares probe protocol itself. This is the problem with engineering truth. Authoritarian protocols are naturally blind to advanced technology or more advanced engineering.

Let Niles Herrit show that thermite tech is the only way to produce thermite like particles, (or whatever he terms the evident particles). Chances are that more advanced science will show that such particles can be produced by means other than thermite. For example some sort of energy manifestation as yet to be freely shared by a more responsible civilization of people. Our current protocols hold us rigidly in a court stale mate. Clever, those instigators, eh? They have a lot of decoys and stuck-protocols to stall the courts. Except maybe not the following one...

Web Quote: "Susan Lindauer is a former U.S. Intelligence Asset who covered anti-terrorism at the Iraqi Embassy in New York from 1996 up to the invasion. Independent sources have confirmed that she gave advance warning about the 9/11 attack. She also started talks for the Lockerbie Trial with Libyan diplomats. Shortly after requesting to testify before Congress about successful elements of Pre-War Intelligence, Susan became one of the first non-Arab Americans arrested on the Patriot Act as an “Iraqi Agent.” She was accused of warning her second cousin, White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card and Secretary of State Colin Powell that War with Iraq would have catastrophic consequences. Gratis of the Patriot Act, her indictment was loaded with “secret charges” and “secret evidence.” She was subjected to one year in prison on Carswell Air Force Base in Fort Worth, Texas without a trial or hearing, and threatened with indefinite detention and forcible drugging to shut her up. After five years of indictment without a conviction or guilty plea, the Justice Department dismissed all charges five days before President Obama’s inauguration." Google galore

Let us not dig deeply into protocols of courts of law. This area is more arcane than engineering protocol of today.

[Corncrake]

It may be useful albeit annoying (!) to remind ourselves of the official line - I took this from the 'evolution of 9/11 conspiracy theories' on the BBC webpage http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-14665953:


2. Collapse of the Twin Towers

The question: Why did the Twin Towers collapse so quickly, within their own footprint, after fires on a few floors that lasted only for an hour or two?

Conspiracy theorists say: The Twin Towers were destroyed by controlled demolitions. Theories relate to the rapid collapse (about 10 seconds), the relatively short-lived fires (56 minutes in World Trade Center 2 or 102 minutes in World Trade Center 1), reports of the sounds of explosions shortly before the collapse, and the violent ejections that could be seen at some windows many floors below the collapse.


Five new skyscrapers are being built on the World Trade Center site
Official reports say: An extensive inquiry by the National Institute of Standards and Technology concluded that the planes severed and damaged support columns and dislodged fire-proofing.

Around 10,000 gallons of jet fuel were spewed over many floors starting widespread fires. Temperatures of up to 1,000C caused the floors to sag and the perimeter columns to bend, causing the sounds of "explosions".

The massive weight of the floors dropped, creating a dynamic load far in excess of what the columns were designed for. Debris was forced out of the windows as the floors above collapsed.

Controlled demolition is nearly always carried out from the bottom floors up, yet this collapse started at the top.

No evidence has ever been found of explosive charges despite the extensive hand searches and there is no evidence of any pre-cutting of columns or walls, which is routinely carried out in a controlled demolition.

*****

I find this sort of summary exasperating because it is over simplified and so much information is left out - easy for those who are reluctant to have their world view changed to just sit back and accept.

Now the Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has weighed in again saying that he believes that the World Trade Center could not have been collapsed by planes.http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-15028776 As he is reviled by most of the West it will probably not help the the truth movement at all - more than 30 diplomats walked out in protest.

[EYES WIDE OPEN]

EYES WIDE OPEN said:

Of course, we would not need to do it in the first place had she gone to court with some actual hard evidence instead of just opinions. What else could the court do but dismiss it? Her heart is in the right place but her science and approach is all wrong IMO.


I take it that you are assuming that the 'supreme court' is beyond reproach,not corrupted and can't make flawed decisions.

Of course I dont. Of course they are corrupt. I am just a realaist.
She went to court with no evidence. What did she expect? Even the fairest court in the land would have to do the same.
If you go to court you need hard physical evidence. We have that in nanothermite. We have the witnesses to testify regarding explosions. We have thousands of architects to back up the hard evidence of nanothermite in the dust and repsonders lungs. This is the way to go.
Besides which, everythign that judy claims is evidence of space weapons can be explianed usinf nanothermite. :)

¤=[Post Update]=¤


I have not listened yet to the interview from Sunday (I will get back to you when I have), but I did listen to the other recent ones.
One of the biggest problems seems to be that there are powerful people in the 911 Truth movement who are not willing to give Judy Wood's theories the credit they deserve because it makes them look foolish, the same kind of academic competitive jealousy that is behind so many coverups.
.

Niles harrit who wrote the thermite paper has publicly asked Judy Wood to talk to him and show him some hard evidence. He is still waiting.

For example some sort of energy manifestation

What SORT? This is the problem.
Judy wood says its an energy weapon. Fine. But its all so vague. She needs to come up with something more concrete.

Great post by the way. :)

¤=[Post Update]=¤





EYES WIDE OPEN said:

Of course, we would not need to do it in the first place had she gone to court with some actual hard evidence instead of just opinions. What else could the court do but dismiss it? Her heart is in the right place but her science and approach is all wrong IMO.


I take it that you are assuming that the 'supreme court' is beyond reproach,not corrupted and can't make flawed decisions.

Of course I dont. Of course they are corrupt. I am just a realaist.
She went to court with no evidence. What did she expect? Even the fairest court in the land would have to do the same.
If you go to court you need hard physical evidence. We have that in nanothermite. We have the witnesses to testify regarding explosions. We have thousands of architects to back up the hard evidence of nanothermite in the dust and repsonders lungs. This is the way to go.
Besides which, everythign that judy claims is evidence of space weapons can be explianed usinf nanothermite. :)

¤=[Post Update]=¤


I have not listened yet to the interview from Sunday (I will get back to you when I have), but I did listen to the other recent ones.
One of the biggest problems seems to be that there are powerful people in the 911 Truth movement who are not willing to give Judy Wood's theories the credit they deserve because it makes them look foolish, the same kind of academic competitive jealousy that is behind so many coverups.
.

Niles harrit who wrote the thermite paper has publicly asked Judy Wood to talk to him and show him some hard evidence. He is still waiting.

Hello there,

Granted, there is protocol. The issues here are broader than current protocol and that is the cog in this cycle of justice: Authoritarian protocol recognizes only currently funded protocol.

Dr Wood's work is a rare sort of engineering bravery which dares probe protocol itself. This is the problem with engineering truth. Authoritarian protocols are naturally blind to advanced technology or more advanced engineering.

Let Niles Herrit show that thermite tech is the only way to produce thermite like particles, (or whatever he terms the evident particles). Chances are that more advanced science will show that such particles can be produced by means other than thermite. For example some sort of energy manifestation as yet to be freely shared by a more responsible civilization of people. Our current protocols hold us rigidly in a court stale mate. Clever, those instigators, eh? They have a lot of decoys and stuck-protocols to stall the courts. Except maybe not the following one...

Web Quote: "Susan Lindauer is a former U.S. Intelligence Asset who covered anti-terrorism at the Iraqi Embassy in New York from 1996 up to the invasion. Independent sources have confirmed that she gave advance warning about the 9/11 attack. She also started talks for the Lockerbie Trial with Libyan diplomats. Shortly after requesting to testify before Congress about successful elements of Pre-War Intelligence, Susan became one of the first non-Arab Americans arrested on the Patriot Act as an “Iraqi Agent.” She was accused of warning her second cousin, White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card and Secretary of State Colin Powell that War with Iraq would have catastrophic consequences. Gratis of the Patriot Act, her indictment was loaded with “secret charges” and “secret evidence.” She was subjected to one year in prison on Carswell Air Force Base in Fort Worth, Texas without a trial or hearing, and threatened with indefinite detention and forcible drugging to shut her up. After five years of indictment without a conviction or guilty plea, the Justice Department dismissed all charges five days before President Obama’s inauguration." Google galore

Let us not dig deeply into protocols of courts of law. This area is more arcane than engineering protocol of today.

good post.

[jorr lundstrom]

Sorry friends

http://i600.photobucket.com/albums/tt81/sakasvattaja/tomte.jpg

[Maia Gabrial]

I wonder if Bush and his co-conspirators are feeling the noose yet? People are not giving up on finding the truth....
Dumb question, did some of the bodies disintegrate they way the buildings did? I mean being in the proximity and all, maybe they cremated??

[sygh]

I wonder if Bush and his co-conspirators are feeling the noose yet? People are not giving up on finding the truth....
Dumb question, did some of the bodies disintegrate they way the buildings did? I mean being in the proximity and all, maybe they cremated??

Bush Senior.

[ThePythonicCow]

Judy wood says its an energy weapon. Fine. But its all so vague. She needs to come up with something more concrete.

http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSoJXzOK99VVqFwo-wcZzOEVxxcvI1HxIULviKYM1Jwd8LXQYpAWA

No - one does not dismiss the evidence because the theory explaining it is not sufficiently "concrete" for your approval.

Rather one dismisses theories that don't fit the evidence as wonderfully compiled in Judy Woods' "Where Did The Towers Go?" (http://wheredidthetowersgo.com/). Pancake collapses, controlled demolition using conventional or even "nano-thermite" explosives and nuclear explosions do not fit the evidence. The general class of affects obtained from directed energy does fit the evidence.

[onawah]

Is it a problem of insufficient scientific evidence, or a problem of scientists and judges being unable to recognize and acknowledge simple common sense?

[EYES WIDE OPEN]

Judy wood says its an energy weapon. Fine. But its all so vague. She needs to come up with something more concrete.

http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSoJXzOK99VVqFwo-wcZzOEVxxcvI1HxIULviKYM1Jwd8LXQYpAWA

No - one does not dismiss the evidence because the theory explaining it is not sufficiently "concrete" for your approval.

Rather one dismisses theories that don't fit the evidence as wonderfully compiled in Judy Woods' "Where Did The Towers Go?" (http://wheredidthetowersgo.com/). Pancake collapses, controlled demolition using conventional or even "nano-thermite" explosives and nuclear explosions do not fit the evidence. The general class of affects obtained from directed energy does fit the evidence.

but it also fits the evidence for nano-thermite for which the fit is MUCH better than space weapons. also, we have actual unreacted nano-thermite from the dust. There is no such direct evidence for the space beam theory. All the OBSERVABAL behaviour of the towers is explained by nanothermte. We dont have to resort to unprovable theories. Occoms Razors.
Being that she has been thrown out of court already, I know which of the 2 scenarios has the most chance of getting justice for the families. ;)

[Cidersomerset]

when John Lear said several years ago he believed that the towers were brought down by the orbiting weapons platforms using energy weapons , I thought nice one John. But if you believe we have had a secret space fleet for the past 50 years then energy weapons could be feasable. Also by the same token the evidence that Richard Gage and his team have presented concerning nano thermite is also credible.The one theory that is not, is that buildings built to withstand multiple plane hits, collapsed to dust before our vary eyes !! Its frustrating but without major whistleblower testomony to the existence of exotic weaponry with proof, its unlikely to go anywhere. The richard Gage teams info maybe the best route to try and reopen the NIST enquiry.....

[ThePythonicCow]

but it also fits the evidence for nano-thermite for which the fit is MUCH better than space weapons. also, we have actual unreacted nano-thermite from the dust. There is no such direct evidence for the space beam theory. All the OBSERVABAL behaviour of the towers is explained by nanothermte. We dont have to resort to unprovable theories. Occoms Razors.
Being that she has been thrown out of court already, I know which of the 2 scenarios has the most chance of getting justice for the families. ;)
You win!

I am unable to respond in detail without showing more disrespect for another member than it is appropriate for me to show.

And, besides, as we both know from long experience (we've both engaged in detailed, blow by blow, dissections of 9/11 evidence, theories and whistleblowers in our past), such detailed arguments, back and forth, serve to perpetuate the cloud of disinformation in a barrage of conflicting claims and counter claims, thus continuing to keep the truth of 9/11 from public awareness.

I'm sure neither of us want that.

May I recommend that you read Judy Wood's book "Where did the towers go?" -- with an open mind.

The evidence for the use of directed energy in the destruction of the WTC buildings is substantial, voluminous and varied. No other explanation that I've seen comes close to explaining all the evidence; all other explanations that I've seen suggested so far are excluded by substantial portions of the evidence.

(By the way, her qui tam case was not dismissed on the evidence; it was dismissed over various legal questions, and last I knew, is being appealed.)

[Hervé]

Hmmm...

You know, if someone had ventured the idea that a volcano à la Eyjafjallajökull had erupted right smack in the middle of New York on 9-11; I would have believed him/her on account of those pyroclastic flows following the streets...

On another hand, I may be totally off with that one and would need confirmation from architects and engineers but: there is that thing about modern highrises that don't get building permits unless they are built with an in-built demolition scheme... if that were the case for the twin towers, then that would explain the presence of nanothermite all over the place -- used and not used... also, that Silverstein guy forked out a down payment (never had to pay full price) for these towers despite the fact they were slated (legally per city law) for imminent demolition.

Oh well... my few $0.02...