The best analysis of how the WTC buildings came down you’ll ever hear

Above this level, the buildings just disappeared.  What happened to 1 million tons of debris?  And why were adjacent buildings almost entirely unscathed?

There are many good videos and documentaries about other events that occurred on 9/11.  This is the best one I’ve seen about the buildings and what happened to them.

The Tap Blog is a collective of like-minded researchers and writers who’ve joined forces to distribute information and voice opinions avoided by the world’s media.
Print Friendly, PDF & Email
Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmail

38 Responses to “The best analysis of how the WTC buildings came down you’ll ever hear”

  1. Anonymous says:

    Hi Tap, anybody that looses a laser pointer, is suspect, in my book.
    Tesla told us about vibration and energy 100 years ago.
    What we really wish to know,is, WHO DID IT ??

  2. Anonymous says:

    When these buildings were erected.special places were included for demolition explosives.
    This meant such explosives could easily and unobtrusively be installed.It meant that calling in a demolition firm to spend weeks wiring them up was not necessary.
    Also radio detonation methods meant no visible wiring would be needed.

  3. Dan says:

    Wonderful….more truther bullshit. Those buildings were brought down exactly as Osama bin Laden had hoped for when the plan was laid out….he WAS an engineer and built many a high rise before going jihad. He knew the possibilities and was absolutely delighted that what he hoped would happen DID happen….and said so publicly on videotape after 9/11. The truther bullshit should be an IQ test. Anyone who spouts the insanity that the US government managed to plant explosives in the twin towers, fly a missile that looked EXACTLY like a jet into the Pentagon and make 4 jets and all their passengers mysteriously disappear and do ALL OF THAT IN SECRET is a special kind of stupid. So stupid they need to be locked up and sterilized.

  4. Tapestry says:

    11.34 she deals with that idea very well in her presentation. radio detonation can be inadvertently triggered by mobile phone signals. For that reason building detonation sites have to kept mobile phone free.

  5. Anonymous says:

    Anon 12:27, put yourself on that list.

  6. Dan…I don’t remember seeing a plane hit building 7. I wonder why they never mention building 7 ?
    A 47 storey skyscraper brought down by an office fire ? Aye in your dreams.
    I suspect the plane that hit the ground in Pennsylvania was supposed to hit bldg 7 but the best laid plans of mice and men sometimes often go awry.

  7. Anonymous says:

    Wake Up People!
    Conspiracy theory No.5 (the most infamous proponents – Dr. Judy Wood and Prof. Morgan Reynolds):
    a laser-beams theory or so-called “directed energy weapons” theory, often abbreviated to “DEW”.
    Read this book:
    911tholgy Third Truth 911 (Dimitri Kahlezov)

  8. Anonymous says:

    The 5 dancing israelis gave the game away, the police dept
    statements showed they knew the israelis did it with USA connivance

  9. Tapestry says:

    They might have been a part of the story, but you can’t pull off an event like this without everyone involved in world government being a part of it. Samantha Cameron and many others were there at 911 to witness the event, just as many people on the ‘inside’ gathered at Deeley Plaza to see Kennedy assassinated 38 years earlier.

    There was a lot of leakage with cancelled meetings reported, people not arriving for work and schools nearby told not to come to school that day. Many people knew what was coming.

  10. yes2truth says:

    Dan is obviously a spook. LOL

    NOTHING winds ’em up more than Dr Judy Wood’s brillant work and her cleverly not pointing any fingers but, rather, leaving us to use OUR own brains to work out who did it.

    Answer on the back of a postage stamp.

  11. Anonymous says:

    Dan,

    “he WAS an engineer and built many a high rise before going jihad. He knew the possibilities and was absolutely delighted that what he hoped would happen DID happen….and said so publicly on videotape after 9/11.”

    Seriously?

    Firstly you’ll find that the world trade centre buildings were designed to withstand 40+ jumbo jet hits EACH!
    Secondly you’ll also find that bin Laden denied all responsibility of 9/11.

    I don’t know what’s worse, the official story or those who actually believe it?

    Harbinger

  12. Law Firm says:

    This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

  13. Anonymous says:

    @dan 12.27

    The story was simple, two American congressional representatives were allowed to read the Congressional 9/11 Investigation Report, this time including the areas President Bush had ordered removed. Both congressmen clearly state that the redacted pages of the report place full responsibility for the planning and execution of 9/11 on one or more foreign intelligence agencies, not “terrorists.”

    http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/12/21/saudi911/

    http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/12/28/mossad-bush-planned-executed-911/

    And sorry to put the boot in on your tin foil hat comment!

    The Twin Towers and Building #7 at the World Trade Center collapsed on 9/11 not on account of aircraft collision and office fires but expertly engineered controlled demolitions which could not have occurred without active planning and activity of enemies of the State of New York and the United States –http://www2.ae911truth.org/docs/AE911Truth-Vance-2013-02-04.pdf

    Don’t hit your head on the way out

  14. Anonymous says:

    Hi Tap, Dr Judy Wood is correct in what she says, but what she describes is just part of it.
    Why did the lifts blow up after they had just been serviced that day ?
    As far as I can remember nano thermite is Military grade.
    The Military use nano thermite to cut through steel, just like the steel beams that were cut at an angle.
    The energy weapon, entered the top of the towers at a downward angle, the heat trail could be clearly seen.
    Who supplied the cameras that failed to record the event, and for weeks previous ??
    Much of this is in the Tap archive.

  15. yes2truth says:

    @ Anon 7.07 pm

    Only building 7 was destroyed by controlled demolition.

    Feltzer is a disso of dissos – a US Government plant. You know that by the people he has writing for him.

  16. Anonymous says:

    @yes2truth
    As i understand it, the twin towers was brought down by thermite!? and a lot of it to boot.

    As for Feltzer- The second time i have read that today….
    i read VT a lot.. are you saying VT is something that its is not?(please say it aint so)
    or just Feltzer?

  17. Anonymous says:

    The ludicrous DEW nonsense has long been exposed as a disinfo project. So thanks, now I can add The Tap to the long list of fake truth sites.

  18. Tapestry says:

    fake truth? fake or truth but not both….!!!

  19. Anonymous says:

    This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

  20. Jason H. Smith says:

    You know when you’re over the target, cos the flak really starts to fly! And no one gets closer than
    Dr Judy Wood. Alex Jones goes ballistic at the very mention of her name…. And that’s about as good as it gets when it comes to an endorsement from the fake opposition! Even Gordon Duff finds her a ‘very difficult character.’ Which means, he’s been told to: ‘stay off the subject.’

  21. Anonymous says:

    Jason, you do realise that ‘directed energy weapon’ covers everything from a spear to a nuke, right? It’s one of the most vague and meaningless terms ever dreamed up by these goons. Watch what happens when a drugged up CIA prop get confronted by a real scientist…
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rJZrj0leylc

  22. Jason H. Smith says:

    Using aircraft to bring down the twin towers would have been no more effective than throwing a couple of spears at them!

  23. Anonymous says:

    It was a controlled demolition. The evidence is irrefutable. There is no reason to reject the wealth of physical evidence for CD in favour of some wild supposition about space lasers that run off hurricanes. Not unless you are trying to sow confusion and discredit the truth movement….
    I’m actually grateful for the Judy Wood disinfo op, it’s made it incredibly easy to identify the Mossad scum masquerading as truthers.

  24. Jason H. Smith says:

    You have quite obviously not bothered to watch this presentation. Or if you have, you are motivated by nothing more than prejudice! The ‘thermite obsessed truth movement’ was set up in order to lead well-meaning but deluded individuals into a dead-end. They knew too many people would question the official version, so they set up their very own ‘controlled opposition version’. Once you have done that, it is easy to discredit it through misinformants, like Dr Steve Jones. You’ve been well and truly duped, Anonymous…. Wake up and start smelling the roses!

  25. Anonymous says:

    This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

  26. Jason 'Hasbara' Smith says:

    This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

  27. Anonymous says:

    This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

  28. Jason H. Smith says:

    It’s amazing how these exchanges quickly degenerate into meaningless accusations and insults! And who do you really think is laughing at that?

  29. Anonymous says:

    This paper proves the overwhelming implausibility of Wood’s Energy Beam Hypothesis by demonstrating that the minimum amount of power required to disassociate the steel in just one tower is astronomically large, some five times the total power output of the world. When extremely conservative calculations of all loss mechanisms are taken into account, this figure rises to thousands of times the world’s power output. One only needs an understanding of fundamental physical principles to conclusively prove that ‘Dr’ Wood is talking out of her very confused arse.
    This is why she has to invent words like ‘dustification’. Her ‘theory’ simply doesn’t stand up to scientific scrutiny.
    http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/200702/Implausibility-Directed-Energy-Beam-Demolish-WTC-by-Gregory-Jenkins.pdf
    Some four years ago, I was stating my belief that the Wood/Johnson cointelpro roadshow would be plugged relentlessly on every controlled ‘alternative media’ site, with the long term objective of burying the evidence for controlled demolition under a mountain of pseudoscientific garbage. You people really are boringly predictable!

  30. Jason H. Smith says:

    Show me another demolition that even begins to compare with this? She had to invent the word ‘dustification’ because there was simply no precedent for what had happened. Now I choose to believe
    Dr Judy Wood, because she has joined up the dots like no one else has. And your absurd accusations, insults and conclusions makes anything you might say, as an attempt to make a serious contribution, is just rendered utterly meaningless!

  31. Anonymous says:

    A scientific illiterate is talking about space lasers and dustification, whilst dismissing the widely accepted controlled demolition theory, backed by a mass of material evidence and shared by all of 911 academia, including more than 3000 architects and engineers, as absurd. You really couldn’t make this shit up.
    Please, either find fault with the equations presented, or admit that you are not up to the job. Surely one of you halfwit graduates at GCHQ has a physics degree? An A’ level, perhaps?

  32. Jason H. Smith says:

    Conventional explosives were used as an initial primer: it can clearly be seen in the upper stories. However, black ops technology cannot be explained using conventional, scientific laws or theories. I am sure you would agree that this sort of science exists, and is beyond what is publicly known or declared.

  33. Anonymous says:

    This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

  34. Jason H. Smith says:

    You really have lost the plot, buddy!

  35. Tapestry says:

    The number of times you read that the observed facts are impossible because of some scientific law written in a school book, should make you doubt scientific laws written in school books, not the facts observed.

  36. Jason H. Smith says:

    This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.