Share this page!

Enter URL or ID to Unroll

You can paste full URL like: https://x.com/threadreaderapp/status/1644127596119195649
or just the ID like: 1644127596119195649

How to get URL link on X (Twitter) App

  1. On the Twitter thread, click on or icon on the bottom
  2. Click again on or Share Via icon
  3. Click on Copy Link to Tweet
  4. Paste it above and click "Unroll Thread"!
  5. More info at Twitter Help
Bruce Baird Profile picture
@drbairdonline
Sep 11, 2020 • 62 tweets • 46 min read • Read on X
Scrolly
WHERE could the immense ENERGY needed to destroy the WTC on 9/11 AND maintain hot spots in the ground for 99 days have come from? Many observers have judged NO WAY could gravity & ANY chemical source (e.g., nanothermite) have provided sufficient ENERGY. So WHERE?
Thread
1/ ImageImage
On day of 9/11, #MSM - as if reading from some "official" script - propagandized the idea that it was practically INEVITABLE that fuel-filled jetliners flying into the Twin Towers combined w/force of gravity would cause the utter destruction of the WTC
2/
Despite the shock & awe of 9/11, some doubters like Peter Meyer, started questioning the "official" story of the inevitable "collapse" of the Twin Towers almost immediately, suggesting it had to be some form of "controlled demolition."
3/
 serendipity.li/wtc_0913.html ImageImage
Feb 2002 AFP reporter Christopher Bollyn first to seriously investigate where ENERGY came from to produce immense clouds of dust; disintegrate 425,000 cu yds concrete; burning rubble for more than 3 mos despite being constantly sprayed w/water & "vaporize" so many of the dead
4/ ImageImage
Bollyn reported former E German physicist told him "a directed-energy weapon using "deep infrared" radiation" could have destroyed WTC. First developed in USSR but since 1995 US & Israel have jointly developed a mobile Tactical High-Energy Laser (THEL)
5/
 serendipity.li/wot/bollyn1.htm ImageImageImageImage
Aug 2002 AFP reporter Christopher Bollyn further explored where the ENERGY came from reporting that two seismic "spikes" on 9/11 "indicate huge bursts of energy shook the ground beneath the WTC's twin towers — just as the buildings began to collapse"
6/
 serendipity.li/wot/bollyn2.htm ImageImage
Bollyn also suggests that these underground explosions could be the so-far unexplained "energy source" for the "pools of "molten steel" found at the base of the collapsed twin towers weeks after the collapse"
7/ ImageImage
Mar 2003 Jim Hoffman put out flyers claiming evidence of max seismic mvmt & rpts of explosions at beginning of collapse, cellphone outages, deep fires lasting mos & melted core columns all "consistent with the detonation of small THERMONUCLEAR devices"
8/
 911research.wtc7.net/materials/earl… ImageImageImage
Jun 2003 Jim Hoffman using "basic physics" calculated ENERGY required simply to produce expansion of the dust clouds following destruction of Twin Towers over 100x greater than gravitational energy available
9/
 web.archive.org/web/2003112016… ImageImage
Oct 2003 Jim Hoffman still supported idea of "thermonuclear devices in the basements" citing earlier evidence, also afterglow at end of collapse. Absence of radiation rpts at GZ did not rule out but he didn't know if fissionless fusion bombs existed.
10/
 web.archive.org/web/2003100517… Image
Oct 2003 Jim Hoffman also did NOT believe basement bombs taking out the core structures could explain "observed methodical destruction starting from the crash zones and proceeding down the towers" which he said only required high explosives
11/
 web.archive.org/web/2003100518… ImageImageImage
Oct 2003 Hoffman also considered "directed energy weapons" & "radiant energy projectiles" but "impossible to work out their details" for such "secret weapons technologies" although not implausible b/c US had
"large highly secret black-budget projects"
12/
 web.archive.org/web/2004021311… ImageImage
Jan 2004 Jim Hoffman on Guns & Butter calls DEWs his "working theory", "physically possible" & better explains "number of more subtle features" e.g. lack of overpressures in the first 2 sec, fineness of pulverization, persistence of North Tower spire
13/
 911research.wtc7.net/interviews/rad… ImageImage
Hoffman acknowledges not really certain "where the energy came from" but imagines some kind of maser device trucked into the deep sub-basement of the towers "pumped by some source of energy" ~1.5 gigawatt-hours delivered in ~15 sec would take a foot-thick copper cable
14/ Image
In the first 4+ years of the #911Truth movement, as most truthers settled into arguing over some form of "controlled demolition," there wasn't much concern with trying to work out an ENERGY BALANCE (inputs = outputs) for WTC on 9/11
15/ ImageImage
The person who would do more to shake up this #911Truth complacency was the anonymous Finnish Military Expert whose work became available in English (as well as Finnish) saunalahti.fi by at least Dec 2005
16/
 web.archive.org/web/2005122915… Image
The "Finnish Military Expert" (FME) believed WTC was destroyed by ~10,000 cutting charges in both WTC1 & WTC2 & 4,000 in WTC7 to cut outer steel pillars with at least one small thermonuclear bomb [“mini hydrogen bomb”] in all three bldgs
17/
 web.archive.org/web/2011021808… Image
FME: “The thermonuclear bomb used [developed in 1980s] was a 'pure' hydrogen bomb, so no uranium or plutonium at all. The basic nuclear reaction is Deuterium + Tritium > Alpha + n." With no fission device, the H bomb can be "smaller than a pineapple" w/wide range of yields
18/ ImageImage
FME: "The amt of fusion-able materials control the yield (effect) & the shape of the charge as well as the initiation arrangements [powerful beam array or antimatter] impress the direction of the explosion wave" "in order not to level the adjacent blocks of high-rise bldngs"
19/ Image
FME's "Observations Suggesting the Use of Small H Bombs":
1) Concrete pulverized into fine dust
2) Very energetic – hot – dust after explosions
3) Brown shades in air
4) Superheated steel objects disintegrating into vapor, molten steel in elevator shafts, fires until Dec 19
20/ ImageImageImageImage
5) High levels of tritium at WTC but not elsewhere in NYC
6) EMP-type phenomenon blacked out cel phones when WTC2 started to "collapse" & "strange afterglow" in late phase of "collapse"
7) Wave of pressure at base of towers
8) Melted core columns
9) Ejected steel columns
21/ ImageImageImageImage
FME: Photo shows explosion of small H bomb placed in basement & directed to tower core reaching roof of tower, over 10 million degrees temp sublimizing all water in concrete exploding extremely quickly 1000-fold volume totally pulverizing concrete, vaporizing humans & objects
22/ ImageImage
FME says 104-kT Storax Sedan explosion (left) was "in theory 100x stronger" than each mini H bomb that destroyed Twin Towers (thus nominally 1 kT nuke) "but in practice the difference is only 4x due to the capability of direction of the small H bomb" (thus effectively 25 kT)
23/ ImageImage
FME added a lot of details to his mini H bomb theory in an online "debate" w/Antti Partanen in spring 2006 where claims this directed "1-kiloton H-device" was "cutting edge around 1990, NOT 2001" citing work of Gsponer on 4th-generation nuclear weapons
24/
 web.archive.org/web/2013030101… ImageImageImage
FME describes the mechanisms behind this picture some 6 secs after neutron volley & 4+ secs after full heat wave & blast wave caused by the fireball effect has hit the outer walls of the tower and broke through it
25/ ImageImage
FME explains lack of rpts of radioactivity b/c mini-H bomb 1/100 radiation of plutonium bomb & different type (alpha & tritium particles) requires very expensive instruments & water spraying helps evaporate, biggest problem neutron absorption why steel shipped off so quickly
26/ ImageImageImage
Finnish Military Expert's analysis received a generally positive reception as it became known in US & elsewhere. At PhysOrgForum, Advanced Member "MMC" quite ably defended FME's analysis agst all challengers in Jan-Feb 2006 discussion w/2040 posts!
27/
 web.archive.org/web/2008040910… Image
May 2006 Peter Meyer, in "Reply to a 9/11 Skeptic" who doubted that so many people who knew the score could have kept silent, uses FME's mini-H bomb argument that only 30 men were needed to install cutting charges & all these could have been eliminated
28/
 serendipity.li/wot/reply911a.… Image
FME's most significant impact was on Rick Siegel & David Schaufele (aka Dave Shaw) who in Sep 2005 had released documentary "911 Eyewitness" featuring Siegel's unique footage of events of WTC on 9/11 from across Hudson River on Hoboken Pier
29/
Nov 2005 Siegel & Shaw (S&S) launched online 911 Eyewitness News site to serve in part as discussion forum for “the latest developments in solid evidence” on 9/11. Apr 2006 new member "freedomfighter" starts posting on Finnish Military Expert.
30/
 web.archive.org/web/2006102921… ImageImageImage
"freedomfighter" also brought up "MMC" discussion at PhysOrgForum and Rick Siegel was so intrigued that S&S decided to make a totally new doc "911 Eyewitness Hoboken" incorporating FME's theory released May 2006
31/ ImageImageImageImage
Juxtaposing images of Storax Sedan (erroneously called H-bomb) & WTC, narrator says "Clearly, a very powerful energy source was required. Our darkest suspicions have been confirmed by a military expert in Finland.”
32/
 ImageImage
Curiously in Apr 2006 "freedomfighter" also posted online article that had just come out on work of BYU physicist Steven Jones who now believed "an incendiary substance called thermite, bolstered by sulfur" caused WTC structural steel to fail & bldgs to collapse on 9/11
33/ Image
At first Siegel was ecstatic to learn of Jones' work - even going so far as to proclaim "100% Proof WMD and Thermite took down the Towers" - undoubtedly thinking that here was solid proof of the "cutting charges" that the Finnish Military Expert had theorized
34/ ImageImage
July 2006 David Shaw wrote "open letter" to Prof Jones
seeking "expert comments" on "the hypothesis that directed energy fusion devices" were used at WTC b/c thermate couldn't begin to explain expanded 23-point list of fusion evidence that FME had provided Shaw
35/ ImageImageImageImage
Jones promptly responded "I have studied nuclear fusion my entire career in Physics...There was NO radioactivity above background in solidified molten metal nor in WTC dust...Thus, with a VERY high degree of confidence, we can rule out the use of fusion weaponry in the WTC."
36/ Image
Jones attached to his email a link to a copy of his results "Answer to Objections and Questions" (July 18, 2006), originally posted on BYU Physics website but since removed & reposted at Journal of 9/11 Studies website
37/
 journalof911studies.com/articles/Jones… ImageImageImageImage
Shaw, after consulting FME, responded to Jones asking whether metal/dust samples given him 4 years after 9/11 could be trusted & considered conclusive proof fusion didn't occur + addtl 11 questions as well as to comment on why EACH of 23 points invalid. Jones never responded.
38/ ImageImageImage
Prof Jones, despite his frequent claims to follow "the scientific method," had no intention of engaging Finnish Military Expert to refine "fusion hypothesis" or come up w/"alternative hypothesis" to explain FME's 23 pieces of evidence & answer FME's follow-up questions
39/ ImageImageImageImage
After having analyzed the way Prof Jones propagandized "explosive nanothermite," I actually think this UNSCIENTIFIC approach very typical of him & thus would suspect a priori ANY Jones claim abt WTC samples, radioactivity, cold fusion or ANYTHING!
40/
Despite his professed belief in “Law of Conservation of Energy,” Prof Jones is much more interested in dismissing any nuclear 9/11 hypothesis (that at least has chance of explaining huge 9/11 energy input) than coming up w/alt hypothesis that actually DID conserve energy.
41/ Image
I would furthermore be very suspicious whether Prof Jones was brought into #911Truth community back in Sep 2005 as an avuncular #ColdFusionGatekeeper (who got a LOT of MSM attention!) to be in a position to dismiss out of hand any nuclear 9/11 hypothesis, most esp that of FME
42/ ImageImageImageImage
It is unclear exactly when FME’s writings went public but we know his writings were first posted on a Finnish-language site 11syyskuu.org & an English translation was written in spring 2005 so it seems at very least Finnish version online sometime before spring 2005
43/ ImageImage
There seems to have been a coordinated effort among staunch Jones followers like Jim Hoffman (left) & Christopher Bollyn (right) to distance themselves from their earlier alternative hypotheses that actually had addressed in some way the 9/11 ENERGY balance problem
44/ ImageImageImageImage
Bollyn wrote Nov 2009 he had been duped by Mossad agent Frau Marek pretending to be former E German physicist when he wrote in Feb 2002 about DEW & THEL, ideas some people still promote in spite of "published scientific evidence of super-thermite found by Dr. Steven E. Jones"
45/ ImageImageImageImage
Aug 2002 Bollyn wrote abt "huge bursts of energy" under WTC as bldgs began to collapse & demanded steel be tested for radioactivity but, although blames Israel for 9/11, perversely NEVER suggests Israel might have used nukes, only #DimonaSuperThermite!
46/
 bollyn.com/israels-secret… ImageImageImageImage
Jan 2004 Jim Hoffman called DEWs his "working theory", "physically possible" & better explains "subtle features" but by Nov 2005 Hoffman wrote "I no longer consider this theory credible" linking to web page detailing "Problems with EM Weapons Theories"
47/
 web.archive.org/web/2005110914… ImageImageImage
Oct 2003 Hoffman said much evidence supporting "thermonuclear devices in the basements" & but by July 2006 calling “Basement Bombs” & “Nuclear Weapons” theories UNTENABLE while his rejected DEW theory is merely called EXOTIC!
48/
 web.archive.org/web/2006100523… ImageImage
EXACT SAME evidence that Hoffman cited Oct 2003 in support of "Nuclear Devices" theory in Jul 2006 he calls "A Litany of Flimsy Claims"! "None of these claims appear to be supported by credible evidence"!
49/
 web.archive.org/web/2006082406… ImageImage
Oct 2003 Hoffman said absence of radiation rpts at GZ didn't rule out nukes if fissionless fusion bombs existed (wch FME says have since 1990) but Jul 2006 Hoffman says ANY nuclear device "vast amounts" of fallout & Prof Jones "found no radioactivity above background levels"
50/ ImageImage
While Jones, Bollyn, Hoffman et al w/their "explosive nanothermite" controlled demolition hypothesis & NO concern for "Law of Conservation of ENERGY" would dominate #911Truth movement after 2005, some researchers who WERE concerned w/ENERGY continued to explore 9/11 nukes
51/ Image
William Tahil published online "Ground Zero: The Nuclear Demolition of the World Trade Centre" (2006) w/evidence that Twin Towers destroyed by explosion & core meltdown ("China Syndrome") of at least two small clandestine nuclear reactors 80m below WTC
52/
 wikispooks.com/w/images/6/60/… ImageImageImageImage
Tahil's "smoking gun" is high levels of chemical elements in WTC dust that could ONLY come from nuclear fission, lays the framework to explain intense underground heat that lasted months, seismic spikes, free fall & eruptive ejection of dust & rubble, Cherenkov radiation, etc
53/ ImageImageImageImage
Sep 2006 Ed Ward, MD argued by process of elimination based on known facts (lots of links!) "only one viable option" for WTC destruction -"a relatively pure hydrogen bomb" (like FME), evidence indicates US has used 3rd or maybe 4th generation H-bombs
54/
 serendipity.li/wot/ed_ward/us… Image
Aug 2006 Morgan Reynolds & Judy Wood, "disturbed" by Steven Jones' 9/11 work, asserted thermite is "non-starter" to acct for 23 pts Dave Shaw (courtesy of FME) asked Jones to respond to. R&W also doubted Jones' "scientific method" disproving mini-nukes
55/
 web.archive.org/web/2007010321… ImageImageImageImage
Oct 2006 Morgan Reynolds & Judy Wood (R&W) paper "The Star Wars Beam Weapon" based on 23 principal data that must be explained, rejects conventional & thermite demolition on several points.
56/
 drjudywood.com/articles/DEW/S… ImageImageImage
R&W concluded fission or fusion nukes (and clean bombs) theory "fails b/c an explosion powerful enough to turn most of each tower to dust would have seriously damaged the bathtub"; "spiked a high Richter reading" & can't explain top-down disintegration nor toasted cars
57/ Image
R&W concluded all data consistent w/DEW theory (e.g., round holes in WTC5 & WTC6, toasted cars), emphasize they make no claim about whether DEW operated from a space-, air-, or ground-based platform, what source of energy was, etc
58/
 drjudywood.com/articles/DEW/S… Image
Jan 2007 "Physics Professor" at "911 University" posted "only exotic, unconventional weaponry" w/"humongous energy release" (of unknown form/source) can explain "widespread molecular dissociation" at GZ that Steven Jones is "falsely trying to rule out"
59/
 web.archive.org/web/2007011706… ImageImageImage
Jan 2007 Steven Jones formally published his application of "scientific method" to Finnish Military Expert et al's "hypothesis" that "a small nuclear bomb was...used to demolish the bldgs on 9/11" at Journal of 9/11 Studies
60/
 journalof911studies.com/letters/a/Hard… Image
Jones concluded "The hard physical evidence presented is strongly agst the hypothesis that mini-nukes destroyed WTC Towers" & "our technology is not yet sufficient to have a “pure” fusion device of any significant size." Even tho invited to respond, I don't think FME ever did
61/ ImageImage
Mar 2007 Moderator "Spooked" at wtcdemolition.blogspot.com reprinted FME's 24-point "Evidence of advanced fusion devices at the WTC" - adding "The evidence is quite compelling, as abhorrent as the idea may be"
62/
 web.archive.org/web/2007042602… Image

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
　

Keep Current with Bruce Baird

Bruce Baird Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @drbairdonline

Bruce Baird Profile picture
Nov 30, 2023
In previous threads I have laid out the long history of Netanyahu's "Hamas is ISIS" & "battle of civilization agst barbarism" rhetoric that dominated Zionist hasbara in aftermath of 10/7. What still needs to be told is the story of those who chose to fight this hasbara.
Thread
1/


Image
Image
Image
Image
Late on 10/7, Israeli PM Netanyahu tweeted (in Hebrew) to the citizens of Israel "Hamas started a cruel and evil war...Hamas wants to murder us all. It is an enemy who murders children and mothers in their homes, in their beds..."
2/
On 10/9 Netanyahu addressed the citizens of Israel in Hebrew & English. In English he said "Hamas is ISIS. And just as the forces of civilization united to defeat ISIS, the forces of civilization must support Israel in defeating Hamas."
3/
Read 39 tweets
Bruce Baird Profile picture
Nov 18, 2023
Up until 10/7 Netanyahu's rhetoric dating back to the 1980s that "the battle agst terrorism was part of a MUCH LARGER STRUGGLE, one btwn the forces of civilization & the forces of barbarism" had been treated as hyperbole. Is it still hyperbole?
Thread
1/
To understand whether Netanyahu's post-10/7 rhetoric threatens WWIII or just revival of Global Coalition to Defeat ISIS, a good start is to compare/contrast how identical rhetorical elements played out in 2014 "Gaza War" & are currently playing out in 2023 "Israel-Hamas War"
2/
Image
Image
A key rhetorical device employed in both Gaza wars was the meme "Hamas is ISIS, ISIS is Hamas", personally introduced & propagandized by Netanyahu in the last week of the six-week long 2014 Gaza War (8 July – 26 August 2014)
3/
 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Gaza…

Image
Image
Read 104 tweets
Bruce Baird Profile picture
Nov 13, 2023
No doubt if Netanyahu gave this "battle of civilization against barbarism" speech before joint session of Congress, he would break the record of 29 standing ovations he got in 2011! But what is it w/this WWII rhetoric? What happened to the "War on Terror"?
As Christopher Bollyn outlined in 2018, "the War on Terror is essentially an Israeli war strategy," first promoted on world stage by Netanyahu & Menachem Begin at Jerusalem Conference hosted by Netanyahu Institute in July 1979
web.archive.org/web/2018111208…
Image
Netanyahu continued as the leading proponent of "the global War on Terror" through the 1980s & 1990s with books like "Terrorism" How The West Can Win" (1986) & "Fighting Terrorism" (1995) Image
Read 36 tweets
Bruce Baird Profile picture
Oct 30, 2023
Richard Medhurst & Paul Lookman have recently raised doubts 2020 #BeirutBlast was an ACCIDENT, observing how destruction of port of Beirut fit into a pattern along w/other recent events that can ALL be seen as part of a #USrael plan for Netanyahu’s “New Middle East”
Thread
1/ Image
Both @richimedhurst & @PaulLookman suggest war in Ukraine, sanctions on Russia, blowing up Nord Stream pipelines, US occupation of & Israeli bombing of Syria, killing of Iranian nuclear deal all part of plan to give Israel oil & gas monopoly in Europe
2/
@richimedhurst @PaulLookman Both also see geopolitical motives behind the recent Gaza genocide/Nakba 2.0 as Israel needs to "extinguish the Palestinian issue once and for all" in order to provide the regional "stability" necessary for #USRAEL to carry out "New Middle East" agenda
3/
 geopolitiekincontext.wordpress.com/2023/10/28/de-…
Read 106 tweets
Bruce Baird Profile picture
Oct 23, 2023
On 22 Jan 2004, "Joe Vialls" posted an article "Fortress Americas, Part 2" on his website in which he made the startling claim "the Zionists" were responsible for blowing up the US & French Marine barracks in Beirut on 23 Oct 1983. So WHO was this mysterious Joe Vialls?
Thread/
1 Image
Joe Vialls more startlingly claimed "the Zionists" had NUKED the US & French Marines by detonating "two Dimona micro nukes" outside their barracks! But was he REALLY the impoverished, seriously ill Aussie working out of his home he portrayed himself as?
2/
 web.archive.org/web/2005011510…
Image
Vialls stated "The Zionists were furious when the multinational peace keeping force invaded their new training ground." So was "Joe Vialls" really the "extreme right wing" "anti-semitic" conspiracy theorist B'nai B'rith tried to paint him as?
3/ Image
Read 36 tweets
Bruce Baird Profile picture
Oct 4, 2023
What could have caused this "cloud" at "surface zero" above the Nord Stream 1 explosion site in this photo taken at 19:12 (UTC+2) on 26 Sep 2022? Was it a "plume" from a 1-4 kiloton underwater nuke? A "fountain" from escaping methane? Could it have possibly been both?
Thread
1/ Image
In the past year, two "citizen investigators" - Hans-Benjamin Braun @Ben68638515 (l) & Erik Andersson @Erkperk (r) - w/very different ideas on what caused the 2022 Nord Stream explosions, have done more than anyone to analyze the physical effects of these explosions
2/
Image
Image
@Ben68638515 @Erkperk Swiss physicist Hans-Benjamin Braun laid out his basic ideas in a 31 Dec 2022 paper "Nordstream - Anatomy of Dante's Explosion" that he immediately started circulating to other academics, journalists, politicians, governments, etc.
3/
 drive.proton.me/urls/HYVJAJ3P5…

Image
Image
Read 26 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

Send Email!

:(