Humint Events Online: Basement Nukes and Top-Down Demolition

Sunday, December 30, 2007

Basement Nukes and Top-Down Demolition

Various people have suggested that the basement of the WTC was blown with high explosives (even nuked) prior to, and/or concomitant with, the top-down demolition that was performed to obliterate the towers.

I have always been somewhat unsure of this idea for the simple reason that it wasn't clear to me how exactly basement bombs/nukes fit in with the top-down demolition-- plus there was the fact that during the demolitions, part of the inner cores for each tower remained standing after the initial demolition phase.

However, this post from 911blogger provides more evidence for explosions at the base of the tower concomitant with demolition.

Thinking about this some more, I have an idea for how basement bombs would have been used.

Here we see the remnants of tower one-- and clearly there is a section of the core remaining in the center of the blasted out debris:

(click to enlarge; you can see the people better to give scale)

The key here is that IN FACT, only PART of the core is remaining-- what looks like only the very center of the core-- perhaps a dozen columns at most.

The core was made of 47 absolutely MASSIVE columns-- just think that the core columns that would make up the core at the base of the tower carried much of the weight of those huge towers above. Clearly, most of these massive columns have been blown away from their original location. Note, it's not like there is debris is covering these columns-- the columns have either been knocked/blown away or they have been blown to pieces. Given that the very center core columns survived the "onslaught" (see the picture), it is not clear why the just as strong outer core columns wouldn't survive-- unless they were literally blown away at the base.

What seems plausible-- even likely-- is that several basement nukes took out the core columns at the sides or corners of the core section. A partial dismemberment of the core could conceivably facilitate a top-down collapse by taking away some of the supports between the floors and the core. This would give explosive devices on the upper floors an easier time in peeling the outer walls from the core remnant. Which is really what happened-- the outer walls peeled away from the tower from top to bottom, in an explosive sequence-- leaving an inner core remnant that then must have been blown from below from the lower floors to leave the small column remnants seen in the picture above.

But the key here is that basement bombs-- almost certainly nukes-- would be used to take out PART OF THE CORE specifically to facilitate the top-down collapse.

15 Comments:

Blogger Chad said...

First off, please show your work.

Secondly. Why would nukes need to be used to take out a few core columns in the first place? Conventional explosives could have done the job just the same.

It's a serious question. If you were planning this Spooked, would you go through all the trouble of faking plane videos and using nukes? Or would you maybe look for the easiest, most logical way?

11:35 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

C
H
A
D

Cia
Has been &
Agent
Dumbass

Spends every second of his existence here now. When he said there is nothing here he agrees with. But the pay is good, agent dumbass. And his filth/handlers are worried at a source of truth on the net at last.

He hasn't said, an honest or intelligent thing here. Go back to Langley & JREF.

1:43 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The trouble of faking plane videos is negligible compared to the trouble of an aluminum 767 with a plastic nosecone and fragile wings trying to penetrate the massive steel columns of the wtc.

6:12 AM  
Blogger Chad said...

Yep Anon. We're shakin' in our boots at this site. We have no idea how to combat the truth you're spewing. We nuked the towers, faked the planes, murdered 3,000 Americans, but...

We just don't know how to track down and handle you people.

Fucking idiot.

8:15 AM  
Blogger spooked said...

Show my work? What are you talking about, man? I gave my reasoning, you can give your counter-reasoning -- assuming you have some. Demolition has been proven many times over-- here and elsewhere.

As far as fake videos-- fake video planes are guaranteed to hit and penetrate the towers which was needed to sell the jet fuel story-- whereas with real planes, many things could go wrong.

Nukes are required because they give much more bang for their size than conventional explosives and thus can be planted more easily.

Having modestly paid goons come to this site and monitor what goes on and write silly comments is much more cost effective and less hassle than sending out someone to take me out or take the site out. Less chance of something going wrong too. They don't want to raise too much suspicion, particularly given, as you constantly point out, my low traffic.

That help, my little shill/monitor?

9:39 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

So tell me Chad, was that an admission, or just sarcasm?

11:10 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

A sarcastic admission?

12:07 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Chad,

Your first mistake is to assume that spooky is a rational person who you can have a rational conversation with. Given the things that he has said in the past(moonbases, nukes, rayguns in space, etc) he is hardly a coherent fellow.

He is able to ignore the evidence that 99% of us cannot. Why? He's a freakin' KOOK! Yer wasting you time engaging him in debate...he would never see the errors of his ways...

3:42 PM  
Blogger Chad said...

Having modestly paid goons come to this site and monitor what goes on and write silly comments is much more cost effective and less hassle than sending out someone to take me out or take the site out. Less chance of something going wrong too. They don't want to raise too much suspicion, particularly given, as you constantly point out, my low traffic.

I love it. Now all of a sudden, when the issue of silencing Spooked is brought up, the government is concerned with cost-effectiveness and minimizing the chance of something going wrong.

Whereas when it came to 9/11, they took the most complicated and illogical route possible. Rather than flying actual planes into buildings, they faked the images, planted the debris, and brain-washed thousands of New Yorkers who witnessed the events first hand.

And you honestly think sending would-be shills here is cheaper? Why pay me X bucks a day to comment here for X number of days when they can shut the site down or "disappear" you and be done with the issue for good?

You really need to start using your common sense more pal.

And Anon. It's sarcasm. I play up the shill thing because I get a kick out of you guys actually believing it.

4:59 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Peally Chad, no one cares if you are a real shill or just appear to be one. Anyway, both Spooked and Anon Physicist have many times explained their reasoning behind the nuked WTC theory. Accept it or disagree with it, it doesn't matter how many times you mock it.

6:09 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

6:09,

I've asked, many multiple times, for a *reason* to believe Sphincter or the Anony Asshole. They refuse to give *any* rationale or legitimate scientific evidence or technical taxonomy of their hypotheses. They are, as has been said before, just making shit up.

People who just make shit up do not merit, in any way, shape or form, even the most basic attention of support.

There is *absolutely* no evidence of *anything* blowing up in the basement of the WTC,. Nothing. Lo0ok at the videos of the entire evolution. Any detonation of *anything* large enough to take out the core would have some sort of evidence. ESPECIALLY a nuke. What is there? *NOTHING*.

9:31 PM  
Blogger spooked said...

I've asked, many multiple times, for a *reason* to believe Sphincter or the Anony Asshole. They refuse to give *any* rationale or legitimate scientific evidence or technical taxonomy of their hypotheses. They are, as has been said before, just making shit up.

People who just make shit up do not merit, in any way, shape or form, even the most basic attention of support.

There is *absolutely* no evidence of *anything* blowing up in the basement of the WTC,. Nothing. Lo0ok at the videos of the entire evolution. Any detonation of *anything* large enough to take out the core would have some sort of evidence. ESPECIALLY a nuke. What is there? *NOTHING*.


Lies and more lies-- the evidence we have presented is there and you know it.

Please read this post carefully and the 911blogger link, if nothing else.

Is there something there that you don't believe in or disagree with? If so, say so.

Otherwise, you are blowing smoke.

9:50 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

There is substantial evidence that explosions occurred well BELOW the areas impacted by the planes hitting the Twin Towers on 9/11. Indeed, according to some witnesses, some of these explosions occurred before the plane even hit the building:

Below The Belt

of course these witnesses can be discounted as one was the Assistant Chief Engineer at the World Trade Center., right?

i wonder what this Assistant Chief Engineer at the World Trade Center's qualifications are?

11:29 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Look at that image. Look at it full size.

Tell me where the damage from a nuclear detonation is.

8:49 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You look at that image. Look at it full size.

You tell me where the debris from 256 massive perimeter columns and 47 extra massive core columns, each 1/4 mile long is.

12:43 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Powered by Blogger