Directed-energy weapons and the WTC

[BaaBaa]

Y'all are worse than deluded if you think this was anything else but an example of the Wave Motion Gun in action.

Where was Space Cruiser Yamato, on 9/11?

Obviously, this was a put-up job by Iskandar, in order for the US to be dragged into the Global War on Gamelan!!!

 

[Scott Sommers]

Aliens? Or psychedelic mushrooms? You make the call...

You mean you didn't find the pictures of hubcaps to be convincing? what more proof could you ask for?

 

[alienentity]

Why the either/or? Could be aliens on mushrooms!

 

[A W Smith]

The dustification of dirt

testing, testing, is this DEW thing on? OOPS sorry Guatemala. My bad

http://www.csmonitor.com/CSM-Photo-Galleries/In-Pictures/Guatemala-sinkhole

 

[aggle-rithm]

testing, testing, is this DEW thing on? OOPS sorry Guatemala. My bad

http://www.csmonitor.com/CSM-Photo-Galleries/In-Pictures/Guatemala-sinkhole

De nada.

 

[aggle-rithm]

De nada.

That's why the CIA established all these third-world countries, to have a place to test their weapons-O-doom.

 

[jammonius]

I was in NY about 2 weeks after 9/11- The whole city smelled of an electric fire- i'll never forget that smell..

Greetings Titanic Explorer,

Your sense impression has epistemological value. Thank you for posting.

While sight and hearing are our primary sense organs that allow us to make claims about what we think we know, the sense of smell (weak though it may be in comparison, say, with our canine companions) can impart important information.

Your sense of "an electric fire" is consistent with destruction by exotic weaponry in the nature of DEW. I notice you did not say there was a smell of kerosene.

Thanks again for your direct observation post. It is much appreciated for its contribution to our knowledge base.

 

[Oystein]

...
Your sense of "an electric fire" is consistent with destruction by exotic weaponry in the nature of DEW....

How do you know that? Sources? Own experience?

If you can't providy neither sources nor own experience, we can safely depose that claim of yours to nirvana, as it carries no weight and value. I am sure you agree with this 100%.

ETA: Because obviously you must have pulled that thing from your backside as you saw fit.

 

[Oystein]

I was in NY about 2 weeks after 9/11- The whole city smelled of an electric fire- i'll never forget that smell..

I notice you did not say there was a smell of pyrotechnical displays. I notice you did not say there was a smell of burned rubber. I notice you did not say there was a smell of petroleum of any kind.

...I notice you did not say there was a smell of kerosene.

Eh, jammo, do you want to suggest that means anything? Why don't you spell it out? You want to suggest that TE's not smelling kerosene is an indication of the fires not having been started with kerosene, right?
Why don't you say so?

Will you accept in the same vein that TE's statement is equally indicative of there not having been any vehicles with rubber tires burning, or diesel-powered vehicles and generators, such as the one in WTC7? Or, lo and behold - no indication of pyrotechnics involved that fateful day?

Of course you know all that is bull.

Ever done a barbeque? When I do it, I usually start the fire with a fluid or solid matter that probably contains some type of petroleum and sure does smell like petroleum.
However, when someone comes by my place 2 weeks (or 2 hours) later, they never smell the petroleum that started the fire. They usually smell the pork fat that makes the BBQ such a yummie affair.

 

[fess]

Greetings Titanic Explorer,

Your sense impression has epistemological value. Thank you for posting.

While sight and hearing are our primary sense organs that allow us to make claims about what we think we know, the sense of smell (weak though it may be in comparison, say, with our canine companions) can impart important information.

Your sense of "an electric fire" is consistent with destruction by exotic weaponry in the nature of DEW. I notice you did not say there was a smell of kerosene.

Now we are getting to the heart of the matter. Would you mind explaining to us that are unknowledgeable about your supposed DEW weapon just how it would leave a strong smell of an electrical fire throughout NY for weeks? Or better yet, explain to us what this DEW “thingy” really is.

And, reading your comments, I see that you are also implying that the individuals that got out of the towers after they were hit, you know, the ones that reported a strong smell of kerosene in the buildings, are also liars.

 

[phunk]

Greetings Titanic Explorer,

Your sense impression has epistemological value. Thank you for posting.

While sight and hearing are our primary sense organs that allow us to make claims about what we think we know, the sense of smell (weak though it may be in comparison, say, with our canine companions) can impart important information.

Your sense of "an electric fire" is consistent with destruction by exotic weaponry in the nature of DEW. I notice you did not say there was a smell of kerosene.

Thanks again for your direct observation post. It is much appreciated for its contribution to our knowledge base.

Unsupported nonsense. How do you know what a DEW smells like, when you don't even know what a DEW is or does?

 

[carlitos]

Unsupported nonsense. How do you know what a DEW smells like, when you don't even know what a DEW is or does?

He won't answer that. Here was his "explanation," over in the thread devoted to this topic.

What form of energy will "dustify" steel?

Greetings Alferd Packer

Your 7 word question remains unanswered by any authorized investigation as it relates to the destruction of the WTC complex. Dr. Wood has answered it -- DEW -- and has vetted that answer via NIST, via the US Directed Energy Directorate and tried to put SAIC and ARA on the spot, via legal process, to get them to answer it.

No one here seems much interested in following those leads;

SAIC
ARA
DEPS
DED

But, just as your question was concise, so to is the answer. It is set forth within the above acrynyms.

As the board now has its answer to the quintessential question, I will sign off here. It has been a useful endeavor. Your question obviously entails understanding that a presumed smack from a jetliner, a bit of kerosene (about enough to fill an average size backyard swimming pool) and office content did not amount to sufficient energy to do this:

[qimg]http://drjudywood.com/articles/DEW/dewpics/Image190.jpg[/qimg]
There are no steel beams where one would assume hundreds or thousands should be; but there is dust.



Show the above picture and ask your question at

SAIC
ARA
DEPS
DED

bye for now

 

[CompusMentus]

How do you know what a DEW smells like

I know what I smell. <hint> Cows produce a lot of it but I wouldn't put it in my tea.

Compus

 

[TSR]

Your sense of "an electric fire" is consistent with destruction by exotic weaponry in the nature of DEW.

.
It is? You can supply citation to support this assertion, right?





No?






Then why make unsupportable assertions as if they were fact?
.

 

[Tinfoil Hater]

Greetings Titanic Explorer,

Your sense impression has epistemological value. Thank you for posting.

While sight and hearing are our primary sense organs that allow us to make claims about what we think we know, the sense of smell (weak though it may be in comparison, say, with our canine companions) can impart important information.

Your sense of "an electric fire" is consistent with destruction by exotic weaponry in the nature of DEW. I notice you did not say there was a smell of kerosene.

Thanks again for your direct observation post. It is much appreciated for its contribution to our knowledge base.

What does the smel in the air proove? The smell of the calamity filled the NY/Jersey air for the rest of the month..the moment I approached NY city around Sept 25 (2001) , it was a charred smell, and smelled of an electric fire. What does that prove? many different things burned that day- 2 airplanes, the contents of the WTC complex, and the bodies of countless victims.

Planes still hit the towers, as opposed to your holograms.


I'm still waiting for you to provide PROOF that the airplane wreckage was planted, and that the people who saw the planes hit the towers were lying, and that all the film footage is fake.

You can't.

You have no proof.

 

[jammonius]

Hey Lurkers, point blank, DO ANY OF YOU WORK FOR SAIC or ARA? PM me if you do.

Now we are getting to the heart of the matter. Would you mind explaining to us that are unknowledgeable about your supposed DEW weapon just how it would leave a strong smell of an electrical fire throughout NY for weeks? Or better yet, explain to us what this DEW “thingy” really is.

I have done that, as noted by Carlitos in post # 2101

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6108858&postcount=2101

Fess, because you engage in rhetoric, rather than dialogue, it is entirely unclear what information you have about DEW and whether or to what extent you have researched the subject.

I suspect that most posters here, who, after all, self-identify as "debunkers" by an overwhelming margin, are those who, for the most part, are very comfortable in acknowledging the legitimacy of ex-president Dwight D. Eisenhower, who was also one of a very few 5-star army generals. As you know, he held the lofty title of Supreme Allied Commander in WW II.

I assume you're familiar with Eisenhower's admonition to beware of the "military industrial complex" (MIC) right?

I here assert that Americans have not taken President Eisenhower's warning against the MIC very seriously, with debunkers being on the opposite end of the spectrum; namely, embracing and trusting of the MIC.

Indeed, posters and lurkers, hear this:

Debunker websites advance the interests of the MIC.

The MIC is implicated in what happened on 9/11, could more of you but realize it.

As noted in post # 2101, I have already given the answer as to what happened on 9/11 and have given the sources of where more information can be found.

I think debunkers are afraid of SAIC and ARA. They sure as heck don't ever comment on those companies, let alone their capacities and areas of expertise.

Side Note to Lurkers: These intials are key to understanding 9/11:

saic, ara, deps, usded, afrl

Take it from there, folks and post if you can.

And, reading your comments, I see that you are also implying that the individuals that got out of the towers after they were hit, you know, the ones that reported a strong smell of kerosene in the buildings, are also liars.

The above is inane and insipid. All posters and lurkers know that you, Fess, are much more patriotic, loyal, curteous, friendly, brave and reverent you are than I am. You don't need to proclaim your moral superiority post in and post out; unless, that is, you have your own doubts...

 

[jammonius]

I notice you did not say there was a smell of pyrotechnical displays. I notice you did not say there was a smell of burned rubber. I notice you did not say there was a smell of petroleum of any kind.




Eh, jammo, do you want to suggest that means anything? Why don't you spell it out? You want to suggest that TE's not smelling kerosene is an indication of the fires not having been started with kerosene, right?
Why don't you say so?

Will you accept in the same vein that TE's statement is equally indicative of there not having been any vehicles with rubber tires burning, or diesel-powered vehicles and generators, such as the one in WTC7? Or, lo and behold - no indication of pyrotechnics involved that fateful day?

Of course you know all that is bull.

Ever done a barbeque? When I do it, I usually start the fire with a fluid or solid matter that probably contains some type of petroleum and sure does smell like petroleum.
However, when someone comes by my place 2 weeks (or 2 hours) later, they never smell the petroleum that started the fire. They usually smell the pork fat that makes the BBQ such a yummie affair.

Well, Oystein, you've ranged far and wide in the above quote, all the while missing the point rather badly.

One interesting snipet and aspect of your post does stand out, however. Intermingled in the above is the following rhetorical flourish:

"Will you accept in the same vein that TE's statement is equally indicative of there not having been any vehicles with rubber tires burning, or diesel-powered vehicles and generators, such as the one in WTC7?"

What some lurkers might not realize is that on the one hand, not one single part or piece of a supposed jetliner was identified by part or serial number; but, just about every automobile, truck or other vehicle having a serial number that was damaged on 9/11 near the WTC was identified by that method, on the other.

See: http://www.nysm.nysed.gov/wtc/recovery/sortingprocess.html

Your snide reference to such vehicles did call to mind some information that is actually of some use. So, for that, I'd like to express gratitude.

 

[dafydd]

I have done that, as noted by Carlitos in post # 2101

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6108858&postcount=2101

Fess, because you engage in rhetoric, rather than dialogue, it is entirely unclear what information you have about DEW and whether or to what extent you have researched the subject.

I suspect that most posters here, who, after all, self-identify as "debunkers" by an overwhelming margin, are those who, for the most part, are very comfortable in acknowledging the legitimacy of ex-president Dwight D. Eisenhower, who was also one of a very few 5-star army generals. As you know, he held the lofty title of Supreme Allied Commander in WW II.

I assume you're familiar with Eisenhower's admonition to beware of the "military industrial complex" (MIC) right?

I here assert that Americans have not taken President Eisenhower's warning against the MIC very seriously, with debunkers being on the opposite end of the spectrum; namely, embracing and trusting of the MIC.

Indeed, posters and lurkers, hear this:

Debunker websites advance the interests of the MIC.

The MIC is implicated in what happened on 9/11, could more of you but realize it.

As noted in post # 2101, I have already given the answer as to what happened on 9/11 and have given the sources of where more information can be found.

I think debunkers are afraid of SAIC and ARA. They sure as heck don't ever comment on those companies, let alone their capacities and areas of expertise.

Side Note to Lurkers: These intials are key to understanding 9/11:

saic, ara, deps, usded, afrl

Take it from there, folks and post if you can.



The above is inane and insipid. All posters and lurkers know that you, Fess, are much more patriotic, loyal, curteous, friendly, brave and reverent you are than I am. You don't need to proclaim your moral superiority post in and post out; unless, that is, you have your own doubts...

Every time that I think you have plumbed the depths of insanity,you dive deeper.

 

[dafydd]

Well, Oystein, you've ranged far and wide in the above quote, all the while missing the point rather badly.

One interesting snipet and aspect of your post does stand out, however. Intermingled in the above is the following rhetorical flourish:

"Will you accept in the same vein that TE's statement is equally indicative of there not having been any vehicles with rubber tires burning, or diesel-powered vehicles and generators, such as the one in WTC7?"

What some lurkers might not realize is that on the one hand, not one single part or piece of a supposed jetliner was identified by part or serial number; but, just about every automobile, truck or other vehicle having a serial number that was damaged on 9/11 near the WTC was identified by that method, on the other.

See: http://www.nysm.nysed.gov/wtc/recovery/sortingprocess.html

Your snide reference to such vehicles did call to mind some information that is actually of some use. So, for that, I'd like to express gratitude.

Stop talking to the the lurkers,none of them agree with you.

 

[Thunder]

theories like "DEW" and "No-Planes" are the best evidence of a govt. conspiracy to make
9-11 Truthers look insane and psychotic.

MKULTRA maybe?

maybe just plain old disinfo.