| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Wokeman
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Joined: 27 Jul 2005
Posts: 881
Location: Woking, Surrey, UK
|
 Posted: Sun Sep 24, 2006 4:57 pm Post subject: Staten Island Findings May Prove WTC was Mini-Nuked |
 |
|
Subject: Radioactive Readings, Staten Island
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2006 14:47:49 -0400
Friday - September 22, 2006 On Thursday exposure of a top-secret anti-terrorism program was made public. Federal officials flew helicopters over the entire city of New York making a complete radiological map of the entire city. Covering all boroughs from Staten Island to the outer reaches of the Bronx. This was all in the guise to help the NYPD prepare for a "dirty bomb” attack or other radiological disaster. The Federal Department of Energy made this survey last year and found over 80 unexpected hot spots throughout the city and provided in a Report from the Government Accountability Office. The biggest problem so far is a huge hot spot in the Great Kills Park, a Federal Park on the South Shore of Staten Island and the spot where the 3 Trade Center Towers debris is thought to be. New York city is the only one in the nation to get this complete survey. It is reported that the NYPD had requested this for a map of pre-existing "radiological signatures" that could be later used to detect dirty bombs or other movements of radiological materials. "I am concerned by the findings of this report and the potential health impacts on nearby residents," said Rep Vito Fossella (R-Staten Island). "We have only minimal information at this time ... based on a brief description in the GAO report. It is important for the public to remain calm while we work quickly to learn more details. It is essential for the government to act immediately to fully understand the extent of the contamination." We would like to see release of the whole survey and know what the radioactives are. In particular the survey of the WTC 1, 2 and 7 as well as the finds at Fresh Kills, where the debris was taken for "examination". |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Wokeman
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Joined: 27 Jul 2005
Posts: 881
Location: Woking, Surrey, UK
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 24, 2006 7:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The fact that radioactive, contaminated "hotspots" have been found in, was it 80 centres in New York city, is of massive concern to everyone. I believe this report was issued some days ago. I haven't seen any concern yet expressed in the UK media, but on matters like this, that's par for the course, unfortunately! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
iro
Moderate Poster
Joined: 23 Apr 2006
Posts: 376
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 24, 2006 7:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
whats the source/link please 8  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chek
Mega Poster
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Blou
Wrecker
Joined: 01 Sep 2006
Posts: 4
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chek
Mega Poster
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 24, 2006 8:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Blou wrote: | http://www.wnbc.com/news/9904214/detail.html
i think this is it? |
The article says: "The radiation apparently comes from "some piece of industrial equipment, pieces of old rusty metal. Whatever this equipment used to do, it picked up radioactivity," he (National Park Service spokesman Brian Feeney )said.
As is astutely pointed out on the linked thread "what that 'old rusty metal' used to do was hold up the WTCs", being the collection point for NIST's few sample pieces. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Wokeman
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Joined: 27 Jul 2005
Posts: 881
Location: Woking, Surrey, UK
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ignatz
Moderate Poster
Joined: 14 Sep 2006
Posts: 918
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 24, 2006 11:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Where do you think these mini-nukes might have been planted at 9/11 ?
However "mini" they might be, don't you think they would have, er, shown up a little? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chek
Mega Poster
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2006 12:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ignatz wrote: | Where do you think these mini-nukes might have been planted at 9/11 ?
However "mini" they might be, don't you think they would have, er, shown up a little? |
The strongest aspect of the theory is that their destructive force can be directionally focused, upwards in this case, to cause near instant super-heating and failure of the buildings' steel cores.
Instant expansion (as much as 25 times original volume) of the sublimated water content of materials such as cement, wood, gysum, plastics and organic cells etc. would also account for the extremely fine particle sizes (sub 100 micron) of most non-metallic objects. Lateral effects would allegedly be negligable.
It's a way of accounting for the mysterious powderising core 'spire' and the also the excess heat that kept steel molten for weeks afterwards in the basements. The vacuum effect (as noticed by ground collapse in underground test footage) may also have drawn the foundation's river walls ( the WTC bathtub) inwards by 3 feet.
The weakness of the hypothesis has always been the fission trigger that should have left radioactive traces.
And then 5 years later, along come those traces.
Although it's also probable that there were x-ray machines throughout the buildings, and everyone coincidentally had super-luminous watches on that day. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ignatz
Moderate Poster
Joined: 14 Sep 2006
Posts: 918
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2006 9:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
| chek wrote: | | Ignatz wrote: | Where do you think these mini-nukes might have been planted at 9/11 ?
However "mini" they might be, don't you think they would have, er, shown up a little? |
The strongest aspect of the theory is that their destructive force can be directionally focused, upwards in this case, to cause near instant super-heating and failure of the buildings' steel cores.
|
I didn't realise there were directional nukes. Do you have any links for further research?
But what really bothers me is that, with the bottoms of the buildings blown out, wouldn't they have collapsed bottom-up as opposed to the top-down we see in the films? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chek
Mega Poster
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2006 10:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ignatz wrote: | | chek wrote: | | Ignatz wrote: | Where do you think these mini-nukes might have been planted at 9/11 ?
However "mini" they might be, don't you think they would have, er, shown up a little? |
The strongest aspect of the theory is that their destructive force can be directionally focused, upwards in this case, to cause near instant super-heating and failure of the buildings' steel cores.
|
I didn't realise there were directional nukes. Do you have any links for further research?
But what really bothers me is that, with the bottoms of the buildings blown out, wouldn't they have collapsed bottom-up as opposed to the top-down we see in the films? |
I'll have to get back to you with links, but the principle is essentially the same as the lensing effect imparted by shaped charges.
Although the central core columns would instantly fail, normal explosives and the visible thermite emissions would still be required to take down the outer columns. But the main thing would be that there would be no central core resisting the downward demolition wave.
Another factor is EMP damage. It's conceivable that it could be reduced by the shielding effect of the foundation's rock base and the upward directing of the EMP wave, but I recently found out - I think in that 'What We Saw' video among others that the landline and mobile phones went down, and while I'm not certain, I'm fairly sure I saw a network news film where the camera shakes and whites out briefly.
It's an aspect that I've been trawling the NYC blogger sites to find out more about, but with no luck so far.
So maybe it wasn't a mini nuke at all. Maybe it was so many truckloads of C4 parked in the centre of the core that it just seemed like one.
We'll probably have to wait for the inquiry and trial to find out what the hell happened that day in detail. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sonic
Moderate Poster
Joined: 06 Dec 2005
Posts: 196
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2006 10:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
There is a link to a Swedish Scientist who already made claims of a mini-nuke being used on this forum but I can't track it down.
Also I believe that the DVD "9/11 Eyewitness - Hoboken" (the later edition) makes that claim too, showing the upward explosion as well as the controlled demolition action.
I think this is very important and a crucial part of understanding what actually happened with regards to the reducing of the towers to dust.
Peace,
Sonic.
P.S. Just received Victor Thorn and Lisa Gulain's book "9/11 Evil" in the post today, should be interesting reading www.wingtv.net |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chek
Mega Poster
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ignatz
Moderate Poster
Joined: 14 Sep 2006
Posts: 918
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2006 8:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| So, you folks believe that a nuke powerful enough to vaporise massive steel box-section girders could be sufficiently 'focused' that it wouldn't blow out some gypsum partition walling and expose it's nuclear horror light show to hundreds of interested cameras? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ConspiracyTheorySceptic
Moderate Poster
Joined: 24 Apr 2006
Posts: 144
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2006 8:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Ignatz writes:
| Quote: | I didn't realise there were directional nukes. Do you have any links for further research?
But what really bothers me is that, with the bottoms of the buildings blown out, wouldn't they have collapsed bottom-up as opposed to the top-down we see in the films? |
Ignatz, hasn't it occurred to you that the nukes might have been placed near the tops of the Twin Towers and pointing downwards so that the towers collapsed top-down? In fact, there might have been a succession of mini-nukes at different levels giving rise to all the explosions that people claim to have heard.
On the other hand, runaway trains seem a more plausible explanation, don't you think? (Ref: Amazing new theory for the collapse of the Twin Towers).
Cheers
CTS |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chek
Mega Poster
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2006 8:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ignatz wrote: | | So, you folks believe that a nuke powerful enough to vaporise massive steel box-section girders could be sufficiently 'focused' that it wouldn't blow out some gypsum partition walling and expose it's nuclear horror light show to hundreds of interested cameras? |
Have your superiors not given you some plausible sounding better explanations for :-
Evaporation eroded steel girders ?
Molten (not 'melted') steel present on three sites for weeks afterwards?
Crumbling steel cores?
All caused by jet fuel and gravity?
Gypsum partition walling?? In the core foundation bedrock??? What the hell are you talking about??
If you have to mis-associate, please show some style at least.
I don't 'believe' anything. However I do know that several extraordinary things occurred at the WTC that day that defy any easy conventional analysis, hence the interest shown in some of the more outre possibilities.
So you can load your questions and shill as much as you like, but you'll find that hundreds of thousands if not millions no longer 'believe' the facile explanations that were deemed fit for public consumption.
gah - 3 spelling edits |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ignatz
Moderate Poster
Joined: 14 Sep 2006
Posts: 918
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2006 9:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ConspiracyTheorySceptic wrote: | Ignatz writes:
| Quote: | I didn't realise there were directional nukes. Do you have any links for further research?
But what really bothers me is that, with the bottoms of the buildings blown out, wouldn't they have collapsed bottom-up as opposed to the top-down we see in the films? |
Ignatz, hasn't it occurred to you that the nukes might have been placed near the tops of the Twin Towers and pointing downwards so that the towers collapsed top-down? In fact, there might have been a succession of mini-nukes at different levels giving rise to all the explosions that people claim to have heard.
On the other hand, runaway trains seem a more plausible explanation, don't you think? (Ref: Amazing new theory for the collapse of the Twin Towers).
Cheers
CTS |
You got me. Trains it was. Silverstein has a huge loft with a vast electric train set too, which is plenty proof for anyone. Dubya was hoping nobody would find out, but Wolfowitz blew Silversteins cover in an article for "Model Railway World". |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
prole art threat
Validated Poster
Joined: 13 Apr 2006
Posts: 804
Location: London Town
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2006 11:41 pm Post subject: Re: Staten Island Findings May Prove WTC was Mini-Nuked |
|
|
| Wokeman wrote: | Subject: Radioactive Readings, Staten Island
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2006 14:47:49 -0400
Friday - September 22, 2006 On Thursday exposure of a top-secret anti-terrorism program was made public. Federal officials flew helicopters over the entire city of New York making a complete radiological map of the entire city. Covering all boroughs from Staten Island to the outer reaches of the Bronx. This was all in the guise to help the NYPD prepare for a "dirty bomb” attack or other radiological disaster. The Federal Department of Energy made this survey last year and found over 80 unexpected hot spots throughout the city and provided in a Report from the Government Accountability Office. The biggest problem so far is a huge hot spot in the Great Kills Park, a Federal Park on the South Shore of Staten Island and the spot where the 3 Trade Center Towers debris is thought to be. New York city is the only one in the nation to get this complete survey. It is reported that the NYPD had requested this for a map of pre-existing "radiological signatures" that could be later used to detect dirty bombs or other movements of radiological materials. "I am concerned by the findings of this report and the potential health impacts on nearby residents," said Rep Vito Fossella (R-Staten Island). "We have only minimal information at this time ... based on a brief description in the GAO report. It is important for the public to remain calm while we work quickly to learn more details. It is essential for the government to act immediately to fully understand the extent of the contamination." We would like to see release of the whole survey and know what the radioactives are. In particular the survey of the WTC 1, 2 and 7 as well as the finds at Fresh Kills, where the debris was taken for "examination". |
Maybe this could prove to be another important smoking gun?
This could very well provoke New York based media people into actually doing their job properly, particularly when these pockets of radiation could very well be effecting the health of the city's populace now and for years to come. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chek
Mega Poster
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2006 11:49 pm Post subject: Re: Staten Island Findings May Prove WTC was Mini-Nuked |
|
|
| prole art threat wrote: | | Wokeman wrote: | Subject: Radioactive Readings, Staten Island
Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2006 14:47:49 -0400
Friday - September 22, 2006 On Thursday exposure of a top-secret anti-terrorism program was made public. Federal officials flew helicopters over the entire city of New York making a complete radiological map of the entire city. Covering all boroughs from Staten Island to the outer reaches of the Bronx. This was all in the guise to help the NYPD prepare for a "dirty bomb” attack or other radiological disaster. The Federal Department of Energy made this survey last year and found over 80 unexpected hot spots throughout the city and provided in a Report from the Government Accountability Office. The biggest problem so far is a huge hot spot in the Great Kills Park, a Federal Park on the South Shore of Staten Island and the spot where the 3 Trade Center Towers debris is thought to be. New York city is the only one in the nation to get this complete survey. It is reported that the NYPD had requested this for a map of pre-existing "radiological signatures" that could be later used to detect dirty bombs or other movements of radiological materials. "I am concerned by the findings of this report and the potential health impacts on nearby residents," said Rep Vito Fossella (R-Staten Island). "We have only minimal information at this time ... based on a brief description in the GAO report. It is important for the public to remain calm while we work quickly to learn more details. It is essential for the government to act immediately to fully understand the extent of the contamination." We would like to see release of the whole survey and know what the radioactives are. In particular the survey of the WTC 1, 2 and 7 as well as the finds at Fresh Kills, where the debris was taken for "examination". |
Maybe this could prove to be another important smoking gun?
This could very well provoke New York based media people into actually doing their job properly, particularly when these pockets of radiation could very well be effecting the health of the city's populace now and for years to come. |
Some will, the rest - apart from propaganda central, we can but hope have sensed the change in the wind and will choose to help stop this madness going any further. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
alwun
Moderate Poster
Joined: 09 Apr 2006
Posts: 282
Location: london
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 25, 2006 11:55 pm Post subject: new clear evidence? |
|
|
chek - that's an interesting link to the libertyforum. If these hot spots in NY turn out to be truly dangerously high, then this could perhaps signal a new phase of cover up, such as is being discussed at that forum. In other words - to camoflauge nuclear toxins, what better than a fresh sprinkling of toxic dust. May be 'shaped' this time as a 'dirty terrorist bomb', perpetrated once again by those who hate our freedoms. I have thought for a long time that the massive eruptions of dust at the top of both towers resembled the image of the shallow subterranean nuke shown here on the right.
http://www.saunalahti.fi/wtc2001/military.htm
Sobering thought. And to think that in both the '911 Mysteries' and '911 Witness' vids the subject is more skirted around than broached. What could keep steel molten for six weeks? This possibility of NY as an actual 'Ground Zero' in the original sense is difficult for me to assimilate, although I suppose so was the 'Inside Job' meme when it first surfaced.
Al. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chek
Mega Poster
Joined: 12 Sep 2006
Posts: 3889
Location: North Down, N. Ireland
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 26, 2006 12:10 am Post subject: Re: new clear evidence? |
|
|
| alwun wrote: | chek - that's an interesting link to the libertyforum. If these hot spots in NY turn out to be truly dangerously high, then this could perhaps signal a new phase of cover up, such as is being discussed at that forum. In other words - to camoflauge nuclear toxins, what better than a fresh sprinkling of toxic dust. May be 'shaped' this time as a 'dirty terrorist bomb', perpetrated once again by those who hate our freedoms. I have thought for a long time that the massive eruptions of dust at the top of both towers resembled the image of the shallow subterranean nuke shown here on the right.
http://www.saunalahti.fi/wtc2001/military.htm
Sobering thought. And to think that in both the '911 Mysteries' and '911 Witness' vids the subject is more skirted around than broached. What could keep steel molten for six weeks? This possibility of NY as an actual 'Ground Zero' in the original sense is difficult for me to assimilate, although I suppose so was the 'Inside Job' meme when it first surfaced.
Al. |
It's a kind of pet subject of mine, in that the FEMA and the EPA's homicidal negligence under White House direction that discouraged the wearing of respirators and even dustmasks in case it 'alarmed' people has led to the further premature deaths of nearly 300 people so far, with anything up to hundreds of thousands more affected.
That was a government, not a terrorist act and wholly avoidable but for callous, cheapskate incompetence and dereliction.
Of course, there were plenty of other cancer causing toxins in that dust, but if the presence of radiation from a nuclear detonation is proved to be a significant source, that could well have as powerful an effect on the popular psyche as 911 itself.
And the years of cover-up will make belated claims 'the terrsts did it' self-evidently false.
I didn't quite get the hang of some claims at that forum's about the concept of private unlicensed nuclear reactors either?
How does that work? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
alwun
Moderate Poster
Joined: 09 Apr 2006
Posts: 282
Location: london
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 26, 2006 1:01 am Post subject: beyond me |
|
|
chek
I had never considered the possibility until now. Sounds unlikely to me. I have assumed that the deployment of nuclear energy was the exclusive preserve of military and governments – but what do I really know?
May be the seeding of a fable here – “We believe it was the micro-generators what done it. Move along.”
The implications of this are troubling. I’m going back to check for updates to the original report.
Cheers Al |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ignatz
Moderate Poster
Joined: 14 Sep 2006
Posts: 918
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 26, 2006 6:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
| chek wrote: | | Gypsum partition walling?? In the core foundation bedrock??? What the hell are you talking about?? |
AH ! It all becomes clear now. The nuke was in the foundation bedrock.
So not only is your nuke focused directly upwards but it has the capacity to limit its explosion to the basement floors where nobody will see it.
Thanks for clearing that up. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
