AE911TRUTH - TOM SULLIVAN - EXPLOSIVES TECHNICIAN FOR CDI

This interview is part of a New Documentary coming soon from Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, titled "9/11: Explosive Evidence - Experts Speak Out".

Tom Sullivan, an Explosives Technician, specifically a "Loader" whose experience includes CDI (Controlled Demolition Inc) gives his opinion on the collapse of the WTC Twin Towers and Building 7 on September 11, 2001.

I will be uploading several more interviews, most of which are supposedly from this new AE911Truth documentary in the next few days.

Please Subscribe, Like, and Favorite this video.

Category:

Nonprofits & Activism

Tags:

• 9/11
• September
• 11
• 2001
• Bush
• Cheney
• Black
• Ops
• False
• Flag
• WTC
• Conspiracy

[truthdonthurt]

willylomanDOTwordpressDOTcom/2­010/06/27/major-problems-with-­tom-sullivans-ae911truth-inter­view/

[99Eternal]

@truthdonthurt Your link presents two arguments:

1. "Cutter Charge" patent picture is actually a charge ignition patent that AE911TRUTH.

They are absolutely correct. And as Tom Sullivan says, and as the patent says, this type of ignition system usually causes a self consuming effect of the casing. It seems AE911TRUTH listed the picture as the charge itself. How that effects their work, level of credibility, I don't know. But it has nothing to do with the points Tom made, in fact it confirms.

[99Eternal]

@truthdonthurt continued..

2. The wireless detonation picture used by AE911TRUTH.

Again, your link states that the picture is of a quarry detonation system, not capable of the precision required at the WTC. This is absolutely correct, AE911TRUTH never states this is the specific system used, you fool. They are simply stating to those who say det cord should have been found, that wireless det exists, has for a long time, and would be preferable here for obvious reasons.

[99Eternal]

@truthdonthurt Your link also states:

"The caption that AE911Truth runs with under this image states that “Sullivan notes that “miles of det chord (sic)” are not required with modern wireless detonation devices like this one”…. but Tom Sullivan NEVER MAKES SUCH A CLAIM and it is obvious from the video and the article that he does not make any such claim what-so-ever. "

You should watch this video again. Tom clearly states exactly what your source says he doesn;t state:

4:50

:)

[ledaohio]

I'd love to see an animation of what it WOULD look like had only the corner or side structure failed. Nothing is my guess!

That core would be standing! And they removed all the beams to even check them

SIGH