It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Exclusive Interview: Tom Sullivan formerly of Controlled Demolition, Inc. interviewed by AE911Truth

page: 1
18
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 20 2011 @ 09:20 PM
link   
Here it is:






Everyone was wanting more information from him when he was introduced last year. Now, we finally hear from him personally about what he did for Controlled Demolition, Inc. and how he came to where he is today.




posted on Mar, 20 2011 @ 10:04 PM
link   
at the end there "windows breaking for blocks around, it just doesn't happen if it's a controlled demolition" - didn't really understand this point.

there were reports of broken windows in surrounding buildings, right? then what caused them?



posted on Mar, 20 2011 @ 10:24 PM
link   
Great interview S&F, thanks for posting it.
It goes a long way to have an expert confirm what seems obvious to me. I don't understand how anyone can honestly buy into the load of BS the media and the government have tried to pawn off on us.
Some of the most powerful statements that I took away from that video were, how a building can be taken down from just having access to the elevator shafts, and with having just the bottom third of the building wired up.
Thanks again for posting and keeping the truth out there.



posted on Mar, 20 2011 @ 10:44 PM
link   
well the only ones who want to deny the truth are all parties "involved" and the debunkers who will never grasp reality because they cant



posted on Mar, 21 2011 @ 12:16 AM
link   
Dave, hooper, Alfie, WW, now is when you tell me this guy cheated on his wife, beat the dog, and has no credibility whatsoever. Drivel, damn fool conspiracy site, blah blah blah.
Oh yeah, nice find and gov't is lying about 9/11 because those buildings were CD's, period.
edit on 3/21/2011 by budaruskie because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 21 2011 @ 03:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by budaruskie
Dave, hooper, Alfie, WW, now is when you tell me this guy cheated on his wife, beat the dog, and has no credibility whatsoever. Drivel, damn fool conspiracy site, blah blah blah.
Oh yeah, nice find and gov't is lying about 9/11 because those buildings were CD's, period.
edit on 3/21/2011 by budaruskie because: (no reason given)


I didn't know he cheated on his wife and beat the dog. Have you got a source for that ?

I did know he worked for CDI as a photographer. Anybody got any proof he has qualifications relevant to explosives and controlled demolition ?



posted on Mar, 21 2011 @ 06:53 AM
link   
Thanks bonez another excellent video and another nail in the coffin of the os fairy tale. I find alot of your threads informative. as for the resident in denile debunkers ignore them they want a response from us dont give it to them. Those buildings were 100% demolised by cd



posted on Mar, 21 2011 @ 07:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by budaruskie
Dave, hooper, Alfie, WW, now is when you tell me this guy cheated on his wife, beat the dog, and has no credibility whatsoever. Drivel, damn fool conspiracy site, blah blah blah.
Oh yeah, nice find and gov't is lying about 9/11 because those buildings were CD's, period.
edit on 3/21/2011 by budaruskie because: (no reason given)


And? So what, where and how? Still need answers to those nagging questions - and don't give me the old "new investigation" crap. If you think it was a CD then tell me what explosives where planted, where they were planted and how they were initiated to cause what we all witnessed on 9/11. This guy is your explosives professional so lets see the demolition design. You don't need a new investigation, the building design is public knowledge and readlily available to anyone.



posted on Mar, 21 2011 @ 12:01 PM
link   
reply to post by _BoneZ_
 


"Tom Sullivan, photographer and explosives loader." Not "Tom Sullivan, demolitions expert." Explosives loader doesn't design or plan anything, just does the labor.
Ask him how many people and long it took to place the charges in the two towers, WTC7 and the Pentagon.



posted on Mar, 21 2011 @ 12:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by pteridine
reply to post by _BoneZ_
 


"Tom Sullivan, photographer and explosives loader." Not "Tom Sullivan, demolitions expert." Explosives loader doesn't design or plan anything, just does the labor.
Ask him how many people and long it took to place the charges in the two towers, WTC7 and the Pentagon.


You people never cease to amaze me.
He works in the field of CD.

But since you dont want to hear what he has to say, you down play his actual job description.

I know a guy who owns an irrigation company. He does all the planning and design work.
Then he has a crew of people who work for him as laborers. They are the ones who actually install the sprinkler heads, the wire, the pipe, do the electrical work, the plumbing needed, etc...
But since they've been doing it long enough, they are capable of designing and planning if needed.
They know the ins and the outs of entire business.....minus probably payroll and accounting work.

Yeah Yeah....installing an irrigation system and installing explosives are two very different things. I get that.

But job titles and knowledge of how to do other jobs than what just your title states is common in every field.

But obviously he is just an under-educated man....because he is stating something you dont want to hear.



posted on Mar, 21 2011 @ 12:44 PM
link   
reply to post by pteridine
 
Ptery my boy, that's where you have it wrong. How many people, took how long ? Not relevant because what were dealing with was not conventional. Whatever it was that was used to bring those three buildings down, that turned concrete into dust, it was obviously not conventional. There are no rules in the game of destruction so what makes you think there is only one method of destroying a skyscraper? All you guys have to attack here is the General, because everything he says is true. On this one, you lose.



posted on Mar, 21 2011 @ 12:49 PM
link   
reply to post by DIDtm
 


It is not a question of Tom Sullivan being " under-educated " , he may be a brilliant and well qualified photographer, but I have seen no evidence that he is any sort of " demolition expert ".

In fact, his interview with AE 9/11t revealed so many technical flaws that other truthers were alarmed :-

willyloman.wordpress.com...



posted on Mar, 21 2011 @ 01:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by pteridine
reply to post by _BoneZ_
 


"Tom Sullivan, photographer and explosives loader." Not "Tom Sullivan, demolitions expert." Explosives loader doesn't design or plan anything, just does the labor.
Ask him how many people and long it took to place the charges in the two towers, WTC7 and the Pentagon.

Not even explosives loader. His license was linked when he first emerged last year, and iirc it showed that he was licensed as an powder carrier. He was basically allowed to carry the volatile stuff around and take pictures of it.



posted on Mar, 21 2011 @ 02:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by DIDtm

Originally posted by pteridine
reply to post by _BoneZ_
 


"Tom Sullivan, photographer and explosives loader." Not "Tom Sullivan, demolitions expert." Explosives loader doesn't design or plan anything, just does the labor.
Ask him how many people and long it took to place the charges in the two towers, WTC7 and the Pentagon.


You people never cease to amaze me.
He works in the field of CD.

But since you dont want to hear what he has to say, you down play his actual job description.

But obviously he is just an under-educated man....because he is stating something you dont want to hear.


He doesn't own the company; he carries explosives and det cord around and takes pictures of them. He never planned a demolition, calculated charges, determined placement of charges, estimated labor to demolish a building, bought insurance for a demolition, determined a safety zone, planned protection for surrounding buildings, dealt with inspectors, dealt with owners, dealt with the city/county/state, or put his name on a job. He is a nobody seeking attention and he is getting it.
Ask a kid who works at McDonald's cleaning up about a recipe for Pesto. He works in the restaurant field so he should know, right?



posted on Mar, 21 2011 @ 02:15 PM
link   
reply to post by dillweed
 


If it wasn't conventional, then the opinions of Sullivan are even more worthless.



posted on Mar, 21 2011 @ 02:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by jlv70
Great interview S&F, thanks for posting it.
It goes a long way to have an expert confirm what seems obvious to me. I don't understand how anyone can honestly buy into the load of BS the media and the government have tried to pawn off on us.
Some of the most powerful statements that I took away from that video were, how a building can be taken down from just having access to the elevator shafts, and with having just the bottom third of the building wired up.
Thanks again for posting and keeping the truth out there.


Underlined above thought it was top down for WTC silly me!!!



posted on Mar, 21 2011 @ 02:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by dillweed
reply to post by pteridine
 
Ptery my boy, that's where you have it wrong. How many people, took how long ? Not relevant because what were dealing with was not conventional. Whatever it was that was used to bring those three buildings down, that turned concrete into dust, it was obviously not conventional. There are no rules in the game of destruction so what makes you think there is only one method of destroying a skyscraper? All you guys have to attack here is the General, because everything he says is true. On this one, you lose.


So, "everything he says is true "; how would you know ?

Some truthers, with technical knowledge, are very much concerned that what he said was far from the truth :-

willyloman.wordpress.com...



posted on Mar, 21 2011 @ 03:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by pteridine


He doesn't own the company;

He doesn't need to.

he carries explosives and det cord around and takes pictures of them.

So he would be well versed on where and how to plant explosives. Right?

He never planned a demolition, calculated charges, determined placement of charges, estimated labor to demolish a building, bought insurance for a demolition, determined a safety zone, planned protection for surrounding buildings, dealt with inspectors, dealt with owners, dealt with the city/county/state, or put his name on a job.

He would be however, familiar with the planning, the charges, the placement, and labor.
Even if he WAS/IS familiar with purchasing of insurance, determining a safety zone, planning protection for surrounding buildings, dealing with inspectors, dealing with owners, dealing with the city/county/state, or knowing how to sign his name would be irrelevant in this case, now - wouldn't it?

He is a nobody seeking attention and he is getting it.

Exactly my point. You DID make it for me. Thanks.

Ask a kid who works at McDonald's cleaning up about a recipe for Pesto. He works in the restaurant field so he should know, right?

No, but ask the same kid what mixture to use of cleaning products for cleaning the floors and he would probably have a real good idea. Wouldn't this be a better comparison?



posted on Mar, 21 2011 @ 03:06 PM
link   
reply to post by DIDtm
 


If he is so well versed in explosives and demolitions why does he talk so much bs ?

willyloman.wordpress.com...



posted on Mar, 21 2011 @ 03:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by DIDtm

Ask a kid who works at McDonald's cleaning up about a recipe for Pesto. He works in the restaurant field so he should know, right?

No, but ask the same kid what mixture to use of cleaning products for cleaning the floors and he would probably have a real good idea. Wouldn't this be a better comparison?


He's in the food industry. You claimed Sullivan was in the explosives industry and should know all about explosives even if he was just manual labor.




top topics



 
18
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join