Arriva la risposta:

http://willyloman.wordpress.com/2010/06/27/major-problems-with-tom-sullivans-ae911truth-interview/



1. This image appears on the AE911Truth website in the story about the interview with Tom Sullivan and it is claimed that it is of a thermite cutter charge patent from 1984. It is not.

This is a “thermite igniter/heat source for igniting larger charges (like) propellant charges” in say a booster of some kind.



As you can see, AE911Truth presents this image as a “thermite cutter charge” patent from 1984 and that is false. (Notice that there is no reference given in the AE911Truth article linking to this 1984 document.)

It is actually an ignition system that used a small thermite core to lite a larger charge for a booster or some other kind of propellant

il brevetto:

http://www.freepatentsonline.com/4464989.html



Who fact checked this slide? Who included it with the article without any links to the original source? Who put that caption on it that claims this information relates to a “cutter charge designed for use with thermite” when it clearly is NOT? Who selectively edited the abstract taking out the mention of the fact that this is a “thermite igniter” for a propellant charge? Who chose an image of a MINING demolition controller which is incapable of being used for building demolitions when CDI has their own software driven system that is? These are serious questions that require immediate retractions for the good of the credibility of Richard Gage, Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth, and the entire Truth movement.


2. This image is also being used in the article claiming that it is the type of wireless demolition system used by controlled demolition companies and that it removes the need for the use of det cord. This is clearly factually inaccurate on several levels.

This system is NOT suited for highly delicate controlled demolitions of large buildings with multiple ignition initiations needed per floor.

The HiEx system displayed here is used for quarry excavations, as you can clearly see on their website, here. Their website contains the following description of their work… “We are a leader in technical and business development services in forestry, road construction and blasting operations”

La critica ovviamente non é a Sullivan ma al sito / gruppo che ha montato il tutto e strumentalizzato alcune affermazioni di Sullivan.