How the WTC towers fell, page 3

Originally posted by bsbray11
Simple question: do you or don't you think that an energy beam from space could effectively be intelligent enough to know to completely destroy some columns but leave all the others perfectly intact?

The idea is that devices developed as part of the "Star Wars" weapons programs were used, not necessarily that these weapons were deployed from space. Judy Wood elaborates on this point. She also emphasizes that DEWs are a broad class of possible weapon systems, each of which presumedly can be deployed in any number of ways, whether from satelites, or installed right there in the basements and/or along the cores of the towers.

The initial evidence that Judy Wood cites as leading her towards the DEW hypothesis is the intact bathtub following the collapse of the towers. She argues in fact that the towers really didn't collapse, as most of their mass was pulverized on the way down, before the impact of their collapse would likely have ruptured the bathtub and have caused much of lower Manhattan to be flooded.

Demolishing these structures posed a real problem for those who set out to do it: how to cleanly take out the entire WTC complex without allowing the towers in particular to damage nearby buildings and infrastructure from above (falling debris) or from below (flooding from the bathtub). They were successful for the most part. Judy Wood attributes this success to the use of some agent that dustified most of the towers before they could hit the ground, and she considers DEWs the most likely candidate... of course, it is an easy candidate insofar as it includes such a broad range of technologies and possible means of deployment. Zeroing in on the exact kind of device and means of deployment is necessarily difficult, however, because most of the information is classified. Nevertheless, so far it is the only hypothesis that can account for the soundness of the bathtub along with all of the other anomalies (the toasted cars in particular) that other accounts have not adequately explained.

In summary, this is Judy Wood's rational. If all of this has been explained in other ways, please tell me how & where.

It is true that there is a good deal of evidence to suggest the use of conventional explosives, e.g. in the photos of the cut steel you cited and in the diagonal sequence of squibs made apparent in this video.
Perhaps the collapse was intitiated conventionally and then immediately the collapse (i.e. the impact onto the ground and bathtub) was so-to-speak prevented by dustification.

So there's one scenario.... then there's the other scenario, explosives implanted at "birth"... Yes, that one takes the cake.