Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * - - - 6 votes

America Nuked 9/11


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
2269 replies to this topic

#31    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 32,469 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006

Posted 21 March 2013 - 10:47 PM

View Postpoppet, on 21 March 2013 - 07:20 PM, said:

Dr. Christopher Busby is one of the preeminent experts on nuclear fallout and radiation.

Dr. Chris Busby  is director of the independent environmental consultancy, Green Audit. He has a first-class Honours degree in Chemistry from London University and a PhD in chemical physics from the University of Kent. He is Scientific Secretary of the European Committee on Radiation Risk and a member of the UK Department of Health Committee Examining Radiation Risk for Internal Emitters (CERRIE).
Chris also sits on the UK Ministry of Defence Depleted Uranium Oversight Board and is National Speaker on Science and Technology for the Green Party of England and Wales. Chris is a fellow of the University of Liverpool in the Faculty of Medicine. He is also scientific advisor of the Low Level Radiation Campaign which he helped to set up in 1995.

Here is a snip from a translated radio interview with host Jim Fetzer and Leuren Moret who is an independent geoscientist and Dr Busby, the whole interview can be read at the link below the interview is titled, New Bombs and War Crimes in Fallujah and what is being discussed is a new weapon.

American soldiers ride around in the M-1 Abrams tank. During an airshow, an Abrams tank was placed on display for the public to view and touch and what is the armor of that tank constructed of? Depleted uranium.

As I have said, radiation is not considered a hazard in regards to depleted uranium. In fact, when control surfaces are balanced, the depleted uranium counter-balance weights are left in the open.

Quote

Dr. Busby: Well, that is an interesting question there and it has to do with this story of tritium in the water in the basement of the Twin Towers. Now if you look at tritium in the Twin Towers, there is a proper, peer reviewed scientific paper by a number of quite eminent chemical analysts who measured the concentration of the element tritium, which is a form of radioactive hydrogen [used in nuclear weapons and produced in some nuclear reactions] in the basement waters of the Twin Towers, and they concluded that the amount of tritium there was absolutely impossible – it could not have got there except as a consequence of some “unusual happening”.

Tritium had nothing to do with a nuclear device at ground zero. Here is something that you were unaware of.

Quote


Radioactive tritium leaks found at 48 US nuke sites

'You got pipes that have been buried underground for 30 or 40 years, and they've never been inspected,' whistleblower says

Tritium has leaked from 48 of 65 nuclear sites in the US. In one case it was detected in groundwater at levels exceeding the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) drinking water
standards by up to 375 times

At three sites — two in Illinois and one in Minnesota — leaks have contaminated drinking wells of nearby homes, the records show, but not at levels violating the drinking water standard. At a fourth site, in New Jersey, tritium has leaked into an aquifer and a discharge canal feeding picturesque Barnegat Bay off the Atlantic Ocean.



Edited by skyeagle409, 21 March 2013 - 10:53 PM.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#32    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Closed
  • 8,732 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011

Posted 22 March 2013 - 06:21 PM

Sky

Are you claiming that WTC was the site of a former nuclear site, or are you just doing your usual thing and making nonsensical suggestions?

Your link references 48 of 65 former nuclear sites.  Anymore I seldom read your posts, but took a look at this one.  Are you saying WTC was a former nuclear site, or just talking trash?  On the surface your post is absurd.


#33    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 32,469 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006

Posted 22 March 2013 - 06:25 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 22 March 2013 - 06:21 PM, said:

Are you claiming that WTC was the site of a former nuclear site, or are you just doing your usual thing and making nonsensical suggestions?

Nope, but I think you overlooked something else, which said:

Quote

At three sites — two in Illinois and one in Minnesota — leaks have contaminated drinking wells of nearby homes, the records show, but not at levels violating the drinking water standard. At a fourth site, in New Jersey, tritium has leaked into an aquifer and a discharge canal feeding picturesque Barnegat Bay off the Atlantic Ocean.


KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#34    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Closed
  • 8,732 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011

Posted 22 March 2013 - 06:34 PM

OK, then are you claiming WTC was located on that aquifer or that discharge canal?

If you're not, then I don't know what relevance you are attempting to assign?  Garbage in, garbage out, it what it looks like.  Typical denial of evidence for an OCT apologist.


#35    pallidin

pallidin

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 7,757 posts
  • Joined:09 Dec 2004

Posted 22 March 2013 - 07:08 PM

Hahahahhaaaa... New York was nuked on 9/11. What a total bunch of stupid crap.

Wow !!!!!! Is there no end to bizzare CT propaganda?

I guess not.

What's next: "Extraterrestrial aliens took down the towers"

Blah, blah, blah... jesus people, GET A LIFE ALREADY, and leave the rest of us sane people alone.


#36    Iron_Lotus

Iron_Lotus

    Happy

  • Member
  • 3,933 posts
  • Joined:02 Jul 2012

Posted 22 March 2013 - 07:14 PM

View Postpallidin, on 22 March 2013 - 07:08 PM, said:

Hahahahhaaaa... New York was nuked on 9/11. What a total bunch of stupid crap.

Wow !!!!!! Is there no end to bizzare CT propaganda?

I guess not.

What's next: "Extraterrestrial aliens took down the towers"

Blah, blah, blah... jesus people, GET A LIFE ALREADY, and leave the rest of us sane people alone.

i've heard just about every completely ridiculous made up story about 9/11 there is from laser based sky weapons (lmao) to nukes (ugh) they are all crap built off the imagination of idiots. nothing more nothing less.

Edited by Iron_Lotus, 22 March 2013 - 07:14 PM.

"Good lord, what is happening in there?!" ................."Aurora Borealis?"

"A...Aurora Borealis?! At this time of year?!? At this time of day!?!  In this part of the country!? Localized entirely within your kitchen!?!"   ...."Yes!"

#37    Corp

Corp

    Telekinetic

  • Member
  • 6,951 posts
  • Joined:19 Jun 2008

Posted 22 March 2013 - 08:05 PM

Maybe aliens planted the nukes. ;)


I don't agree with most 9/11 theories but this is just really out there. Sounds like someone is just trying to cash in on the Truther movement and is putting out a wild theory to stand out.

War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things: the decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth a war, is much worse...A man who has nothing which he is willing to fight for, nothing which he cares more about than he does about his personal safety, is a miserable creature who has no chance of being free, unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.

#38    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 32,469 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006

Posted 22 March 2013 - 08:22 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 22 March 2013 - 06:34 PM, said:

OK, then are you claiming WTC was located on that aquifer or that discharge canal?

As noted in the report, Tritium reached the Atlantic Ocean. Can you sail from New York City to the Atlantic Ocean?

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#39    Obviousman

Obviousman

    Spaced out and plane crazy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,763 posts
  • Joined:27 Dec 2006

Posted 22 March 2013 - 08:56 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 20 March 2013 - 08:56 PM, said:

The OP presents evidence for some sort of nuclear event.  Whether his evidence is true and accurate I don't know, but if it is, THERE is the evidence

OMFG!!!! That is the quote of the year!

"OK, what they say may not be accurate, may not be true, may not even be possible, but it is EVIDENCE people!"

That's a Stundie if ever I saw one....


#40    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Closed
  • 8,732 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011

Posted 23 March 2013 - 02:46 PM

Obviousman

What you cannot understand, it seems, is the ability that some of us have to remain NEUTRAL on any given question.  That is, not commit to either side.

I do not know and cannot say with certainty that a nuclear device was used there, but it is obvious that SOMETHING special happened, and the simple factual evidence for that is that structural steel was in a molten state for more than a month.  Jetfuel and gravity, and phone books and office furniture CANNOT do that.

It seems a likely candidate for such an energy requirement would be a nuclear device or two.

Open-minded critical analysis OBVIOUSMAN, that's all.  The consideration of all possibilities.  You should try it sometime. :tu:


#41    poppet

poppet

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 197 posts
  • Joined:09 Feb 2013

Posted 23 March 2013 - 04:13 PM

for those who have downloaded the FREE book the author makes a compelling case that for the last forty years the military have produced a small enough nuclear/neutron device that would do just the job of taking a 110 story skyscraper down, one man could place a device the size of a apple on every 10th floor in each building and it could be done in a afternoon.

The Seismic data tells us that the plane impact caused a reading of 2.3 on the Richter scale but only 2.1 when a half a million ton building hit the ground , how can this be ?

Posted Image

B2level CAD and Oct 18 2001 3D - Below ground view of Ground Zero showing crater depths at the Twin Towers and Building 7 at more than 60 feet deep but not even a dent where the towers stood.

Posted Image

Stairwell B in the back ground were I believe 14 survivors were rescued ,how could any survive 500,000 tons of construction material coming down on top of them ,they couldn’t unless the mass of the building had already disappeared , take a look at the ground does anyone honestly see a pancaked 110 story skyscraper laying there because I sure cant.

The 1000 plus cases of rare cancer is now being investigated, The “New York Post” reports the WTC Medical Monitoring and Treatment Program has started contacting 911 responders who have been diagnosed with thyroid cancer.
Doctors are already looking into the high incidence of certain blood cancers in patients who worked at the former World Trade Center site, but it’s believed this is the first such probe to focus on a tumour cancer. Court papers filed in February 2009 as part of a case brought against New York City by ten thousand rescue and recovery workers cited 51 cases of thyroid cancer, making it the seventh most common type of cancer claimed by 911 responders.
This needs to be investigated.

Again for those who have downloaded Jeff’s book will  quite plainly see that no large plane penetrated the Pentagon ,there are images of the Pentagon that were taken before the collapse and every front column is still intact , go and see for yourself page 16 the image will fill your screen and is quite revealing.


#42    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 32,469 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006

Posted 23 March 2013 - 06:33 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 23 March 2013 - 02:46 PM, said:

I do not know and cannot say with certainty that a nuclear device was used there, but it is obvious that SOMETHING special happened,...

But, nothing to do with nukes.


Quote

...and the simple factual evidence for that is that structural steel was in a molten state for more than a month.

No it wasn't. No one saw molten steel at ground zero.

Quote

...Jetfuel and gravity, and phone books and office furniture CANNOT do that.

On the contrary, the fuel got the ball rolling and phone books and officer furniture took over and they can produce temperatures high enough to weaken steel. For you to claim otherwise would require the rewriting of the laws of physics.

Quote

It seems a likely candidate for such an energy requirement would be a nuclear device or two.

It is very clear that  you have no understanding of nukes at all. There was no nuke involved and it shows that conspiracist are in the habit of dreaming up fantasies thinking they can rewrite the laws of physics and expect them to stick.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#43    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 32,469 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006

Posted 23 March 2013 - 06:35 PM

View Postpoppet, on 23 March 2013 - 04:13 PM, said:

for those who have downloaded the FREE book the author makes a compelling case that for the last forty years the military have produced a small enough nuclear/neutron device that would do just the job of taking a 110 story skyscraper down, one man could place a device the size of a apple on every 10th floor in each building and it could be done in a afternoon.

There is no evidence whatsoever that a nuclear device was used. It is very clear that you are unaware that you have been duped.

Edited by skyeagle409, 23 March 2013 - 06:38 PM.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#44    poppet

poppet

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 197 posts
  • Joined:09 Feb 2013

Posted 23 March 2013 - 06:49 PM

View Postskyeagle409, on 23 March 2013 - 06:35 PM, said:

There is no evidence whatsoever that a nuclear device was used. It is very clear that you are unaware that you have been duped.

tell that to the first responders who now have cancer .


#45    Iron_Lotus

Iron_Lotus

    Happy

  • Member
  • 3,933 posts
  • Joined:02 Jul 2012

Posted 23 March 2013 - 06:57 PM

View Postpoppet, on 23 March 2013 - 06:49 PM, said:

tell that to the first responders who now have cancer .

?? and that has what to do with nukes? the dust from the pulverized buildings that covered the first responders had nothing to do with it eh? had to be nukes... you do realize that asbestos is cancer causing as is crystalline silica, lead, cadmium, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon which was all released in the massive cloud of dust... but nope had to be nukes. oh the truthers are an "interesting" bunch.

"Good lord, what is happening in there?!" ................."Aurora Borealis?"

"A...Aurora Borealis?! At this time of year?!? At this time of day!?!  In this part of the country!? Localized entirely within your kitchen!?!"   ...."Yes!"