911 WTC nuclear demolition Dimitri Khalezov

"Dimitri Khalezov, a former officer of the Soviet nuclear intelligence, explains true mechanics of pulverisations of the Twin Towers & the WTC-7, as well as existence of a secret nuclear demolition scheme of the World Trade Center in New York & of the Sears Tower in Chicago."

This thread is not intended to be about US foreign policy, not about Iraq, Afghanistan or about terrorism in general, it is about answering the question that many thousands of professionals in the USA have raised... most obviously: How can 3 towers disintegrate into dust in less than 10 seconds?

His theory is one of the few that contends that the events of 9/11 were NOT an inside job. That alone is remarkable.

His story is fantastic...

fantastic definition:

1a: based on fantasy : not real b : conceived or seemingly conceived by unrestrained fancy c : so extreme as to challenge belief : unbelievable; broadly : exceedingly large or great

2: marked by extravagant fantasy or extreme individuality : eccentric

3 fantastic: excellent, superlative <a fantastic meal>

Here is part 01 of 26 || & part 10 of 26

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZzwyPRgY9o

Hopefully your thread will remain on course..

As a General Building Contractor I have said the same before.

I do not care to discuss whether saying so is Anti...what ever or not.

What I have said many times is there are too many unanswered questions.

I have not seen your videos yet so cannot say I agree or disagree with its content.

Just as I said over the years seeing many reports from the architects & engineers has left many questions unanswered.

But even now if they did re-open the investigation it could not 100% be investigated for obvious reasons.

There were/are anomolies and unanswered questions, however I think this Russian's theory is flawed in that the buildings collapsed from top to bottom.

There were/are anomolies and unanswered questions, however I think this Russian's theory is flawed in that the buildings collapsed from top to bottom.

The whole documentary is very long, he covers so much information...

According to his theory, the 'compression'? pulverises solid material at a microscopic level (if thats the right word). He contends that within nano seconds (immediately - his words) the lower sections of the buildings ceased to remain solid, and were in fact

........already dust!

But, if the towers were already dust.. then it would do a 'blamange' at the base, within the time it took to fall... unless it had a veneer of building left for some reason..

Such a neat theory, covers all the wierd questions... the rumblings under the towers, the fine dust, the lack of sufficient debris...

hmm...

I thought he was contending that the pulverisation occurred below the ground, hence no radiation, but destabilising the foundations.

In another thread you referred to a chap, the videographer, that fled persecution to Argentina....he seemed to corroborate with talk about cavities under the buildings.

There does seem to be ALOT of atomised dust thhough.

Here he talks about it

The technique for creating cavities underground with nukes is proven, he says that some kind of force (i cant remember!)- a compressing force.. shot upwards within 12 seconds of detonation and in its direct ? path up to a height turned all before it to dust...like a huge sandcastle!

kurt sonnenfeld is the FEMA investigator that fled to S.America, he has hours of video from ground zero, and has said he is giving them to some scholars... but of course this coud be another hoax... not a peep from him for a year or so..

whiterussian Today, 2010-04-06 01:30:57

His story is fantastic...

fantastic definition:

1a: based on fantasy : not real b : conceived or seemingly conceived by unrestrained fancy c : so extreme as to challenge belief : unbelievable

Here he talks about it

The technique for creating cavities underground with nukes is proven, he says that some kind of force (i cant remember!)- a compressing force.. shot upwards within 12 seconds of detonation and in its direct ? path up to a height turned all before it to dust...like a huge sandcastle!

kurt sonnenfeld is the FEMA investigator that fled to S.America, he has hours of video from ground zero, and has said he is giving them to some scholars... but of course this coud be another hoax... not a peep from him for a year or so..

Perhaps the CIA have done their usual "sanction". ....or Mossad.

...or maybe the seven dwarfs.

Hi ho, hi ho, it's off to war we go....

Got a reply to my question: "Why didnt the structure disintegrate immediately from the ground up...until the falling top section came donw on top.." (or a question rather like that):.. (who knows maybe he is aposter on Thai visa!)

---------------------------

Re: dust Re: dust Hi. It is difficult to answer your question, though, I guess, I understand what you mean - why the Tower didn't start to crush down immediately once only the very first lower part of it was pulverized? That is what you mean? Why the Tower top 'waited' for the entire Tower was pulverized first and then only strated to crush down? Is that what you meant? To be honest, I don't know. I know only for sure about the existense of a demolition scheme, and about general physical properties of an underground nuclear explosions. The rest - are merely conclusions of mine. However, I think it might happen because of this. Perhaps it does not take 12 seconds for crashing wave to slowly pass along the entire Tower's body. Perhaps it takes about 11 seconds or so for the X-ray underground to be absorbed by the rock, then for the overheated rock to be evaporated and to begin trying to expand the primary size of the cavity to its secondary size by the pressure, while the actual process of 'crushing' the rock around and, consecutively, of the Tower's body on top, might take merely a second or even less than a second. Perhaps the crushing wave travelled along the entire Tower's body in only a split of a second, since the steel might have different properties in conducting such a wave compare to granite. I am almost certain that that is the case, but I can't be sure about it. You have to understand first of all, that this was the very first attempt to actually demolish a skyscraper by such a thing as a nuclear explosion under it. So, there is no prior expreience accumulated, no studies at all undertakena and now we could only guess. I am certain that even Mr. Loizeaux from 'Controlled Demolition Inc.' would not be able to answer this question - simply because he has never studied it and has no any experience. That is probably the best I could master in answering your question.

Sincerely yours,

Dimitri

Great thread, very interesting.

It's incredible that we're still having this debate. (Clearly, the shadowy figure behind the grassy knoll masterminded the whole thing).

It's incredible that we're still having this debate.

Could be because the majority of the victims families have never gotten straight answers from the Commission.

So their voices are still there.. Of course there are many others who also have questions but as I said in my earlier post

any investigation done now would be so far from complete it probably would have little merit.

It's incredible that we're still having this debate.

Especially in a forum called 'Thaivisa.com'

It's incredible that we're still having this debate.

Especially in a forum called 'Thaivisa.com'

Ohhh endure, this is thai related, just about all these crisis born in the USA relate to the rest of the world......mainly because of the massive implications they've had world wide.

I wonder about the people that are happy to accept the 'official' version of this incident, perhaps they are the ones that didn't suffer any personal loss or perhaps the thought that there is something more sinister behind the whole thing scares them.

Maybe OJ was innocent too!

Well, who you gonna believe. Some so called Russian spy living in BKK or your lying eyes.

I saw two planes fly into two very tall buildings, loaded with jet fuel and innocent victims. I then watched as the buildings burned and then collapsed due to the heat and the stress of that heat on the top of the building.

I never did see a mushroom shaped cloud over Manhattan that day.

Now, JFK on the other hand......

A very good thread, however.

Well, who you gonna believe. Some so called Russian spy living in BKK or your lying eyes.

I saw two planes fly into two very tall buildings, loaded with jet fuel and innocent victims. I then watched as the buildings burned and then collapsed due to the heat and the stress of that heat on the top of the building.

You probably thought that dude was really walking on the moon too!

Well, who you gonna believe. Some so called Russian spy living in BKK or your lying eyes.

I saw two planes fly into two very tall buildings, loaded with jet fuel and innocent victims. I then watched as the buildings burned and then collapsed due to the heat and the stress of that heat on the top of the building.

I never did see a mushroom shaped cloud over Manhattan that day.

Now, JFK on the other hand......

A very good thread, however.

You obviously didnt read the material or watch the videos.....nobody is denying that the planes flew into the buildings. Following that of course the buildings had fire in them and then everyone watched as they collapsed & of course we were fed the story about them collapsing due to the heat and stress at the top of the building......but doesnt it just seem a bit odd to you, exactly how the buildings did collapse and after their collapse there they were reduced to a fine dust particle. Im not talking about concrete dust, keeping in mind the building consisted mainly of a metal structure. What about the lack of debris after it all? What about those images of molten steel being unearthed under the world trade centre a couple of months after the attack?

You seem quick to lable the Russian as a 'spy' when in actual fact he never claimed to be a spy at all.

Get with the program.

Well, who you gonna believe. Some so called Russian spy living in BKK or your lying eyes.

I saw two planes fly into two very tall buildings, loaded with jet fuel and innocent victims. I then watched as the buildings burned and then collapsed due to the heat and the stress of that heat on the top of the building.

You probably thought that dude was really walking on the moon too!

Of course man landed on the moon , whats that got to do with the American Government murdering thousands of innocent people (and thats just their own citizens for a change )......lets not even start talking about the evil antics of this group in other parts of the world.

Come on UG........Switch on

Well, who you gonna believe. Some so called Russian spy living in BKK or your lying eyes.

I saw two planes fly into two very tall buildings, loaded with jet fuel and innocent victims. I then watched as the buildings burned and then collapsed due to the heat and the stress of that heat on the top of the building.

I never did see a mushroom shaped cloud over Manhattan that day.

Now, JFK on the other hand......

A very good thread, however.

You obviously didnt read the material or watch the videos.....nobody is denying that the planes flew into the buildings. Following that of course the buildings had fire in them and then everyone watched as they collapsed & of course we were fed the story about them collapsing due to the heat and stress at the top of the building......but doesnt it just seem a bit odd to you, exactly how the buildings did collapse and after their collapse there they were reduced to a fine dust particle. Im not talking about concrete dust, keeping in mind the building consisted mainly of a metal structure. What about the lack of debris after it all? What about those images of molten steel being unearthed under the world trade centre a couple of months after the attack?

You seem quick to lable the Russian as a 'spy' when in actual fact he never claimed to be a spy at all.

Get with the program.

Fine dust particles, yet the passport of one of the hijackers was found in the area!!!!

So, not only did a passport conveniently survive when the tough black boxes didn't, this hijacker took his passport on a domestic flight!!!!

Curious.

^Thats right Harcourt and theres so many other things that don't add up.

When you watch the towers collapse in slow motion, you can see that it actually collapses from the bottom up, not like what the 'official' version tries to tell us by suggesting that immense heat cause it to fail floor by floor from top to bottom.

Something is seriously wrong here and people seems to have just sat back and taken the official line as gospel.

.but doesnt it just seem a bit odd to you, exactly how the buildings did collapse and after their collapse there they were reduced to a fine dust particle. Im not talking about concrete dust, keeping in mind the building consisted mainly of a metal structure. What about the lack of debris after it all?

You should watch the original videos of those buildings being built.

Very interesting too. I will see if I can find them.

So, not only did a passport conveniently survive when the tough black boxes didn't, this hijacker took his passport on a domestic flight!!!!

Curious.

Ah haa!

Why is it curious that a Saudi national would take his passport on a domestic flight? It was probably his only ID and he had no plans on coming back. This is the kind of thing that passes for "evidence" amongst the conspiracy crowd and is why so many people are more than happy to accept the "offical" version that two airplanes loaded with jet fuel - that were on TV all over the world - brought the WTC down.

Well, who you gonna believe. Some so called Russian spy living in BKK or your lying eyes.

I saw two planes fly into two very tall buildings, loaded with jet fuel and innocent victims. I then watched as the buildings burned and then collapsed due to the heat and the stress of that heat on the top of the building.

I never did see a mushroom shaped cloud over Manhattan that day.

Now, JFK on the other hand......

A very good thread, however.

You obviously didnt read the material or watch the videos.....nobody is denying that the planes flew into the buildings. Following that of course the buildings had fire in them and then everyone watched as they collapsed & of course we were fed the story about them collapsing due to the heat and stress at the top of the building......but doesnt it just seem a bit odd to you, exactly how the buildings did collapse and after their collapse there they were reduced to a fine dust particle. Im not talking about concrete dust, keeping in mind the building consisted mainly of a metal structure. What about the lack of debris after it all? What about those images of molten steel being unearthed under the world trade centre a couple of months after the attack?

You seem quick to lable the Russian as a 'spy' when in actual fact he never claimed to be a spy at all.

Get with the program.

Why is it such a surprise that there is some fine dust around a demolished building. I have been around a couple of buildings in Saudi destroyed by truck bombs. There is plenty of fine dust. I would surmise it is concrete dust, but maybe it is the other kind. I am sure our Russian "spy" could clear up the issue.

By the way, the USS New York was built with nearly eight tons of steel from the WTC attacks.

http://www.ussny.org/

I watched about 8 minutes of the first link and that was enough to convince me the theory is full of hot air.

I am with the program. It's just a different channel.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

A passport survived!!! Proof positive there is a conspiracy involved.

Why is it such a surprise that there is some fine dust around a demolished building. I have been around a couple of buildings in Saudi destroyed by truck bombs. There is plenty of fine dust. I would surmise it is concrete dust, but maybe it is the other kind. I am sure our Russian "spy" could clear up the issue.

By the way, the USS New York was built with nearly eight tons of steel from the WTC attacks.

http://www.ussny.org/

I watched about 8 minutes of the first link and that was enough to convince me the theory is full of hot air.

I am with the program. It's just a different channel.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

A passport survived!!! Proof positive there is a conspiracy involved.

A passport survived. No argument about that?

Maybe proof positive of a conspiracy, but if not, certainly an eyebrow raiser, to put it mildly.

Why do you not find it incredible that a paper passport survived while black boxes and bodies and all manner of otherwise durable items were pulverised or burnt to dust?

The aircraft black boxes were demolished, vanished without a trace, yet a passport on board that provided "proof positive" of the identity of one of the hijackers survived.

I prefer to think that the tragedy was simply as the official line states, but there are too many inconsistancies.

(Does anyone else dislike the new font on TV that has less gap between letters so that, for example, c + l looks like d (cl), ?)

Why is it such a surprise that there is some fine dust around a demolished building. I have been around a couple of buildings in Saudi destroyed by truck bombs. There is plenty of fine dust. I would surmise it is concrete dust, but maybe it is the other kind. I am sure our Russian "spy" could clear up the issue.

By the way, the USS New York was built with nearly eight tons of steel from the WTC attacks.

http://www.ussny.org/

I watched about 8 minutes of the first link and that was enough to convince me the theory is full of hot air.

I am with the program. It's just a different channel.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

A passport survived!!! Proof positive there is a conspiracy involved.

brother, i have seen a few demolished buildings too & yes it is amazing how much dust there can be, but two things I have to say to you:-

1. These buildings were made of something like 80% steel, even after you put everything else in the buildings, furniture, carpet, desks, people etc, there still a considerably high proportion of steel, overall. You could stack steel (thick &lt;deleted&gt; like this was built of) all the way to the moon and when the sukker toppled over, it wouldnt turn to dust. Argree or disagree?

2. When buildings are demolished by way of explosive, a portion of the building becomes dust......but not the major portion. Clearly in this, there was only the top 15% of the building left as recognisable debris.....where on fekkks name did the rest of it go, you couldnt seriously think that a building falling down like this (made from steel) would turn to dust in the process.

(Does anyone else dislike the new font on TV that has less gap between letters so that, for example, c + l looks like d (cl), ?)

Its not a good font for old bastards such as ourselves yourself Harcourt, thats for sure.

good video from Dr Judy wood, if just for the 'Doorsy' music!

500 miles of steel girders?? I will have to check that..

Dr. Wood received her

B.S. (Civil Engineering, 1981) (Structural Engineering),

M.S. (Engineering Mechanics (Applied Physics), 1983), and

Ph.D. (Materials Engineering Science, 1992) from the Department of Engineering Science and Mechanics at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University in Blacksburg, Virginia.