The main targets of 9/11 were the Pentagon, The US Capitol/Whitehouse, and WTC 7. It was easy to crash a plane to the first two targets.. but hard to crash one into 7 WTC since its surrounded by tall buildings (unlike the other two) so they planned to bomb it instead. They just used the Twin Towers for distraction and evacuation of the area and the crowd, and fires for pretending that the building just came down due to the fires. Think twice, not the twin towers..
Only one thing to think about: search for "Horrible Crane Accident " on youtube, and listen to the sound of the video. just listen. at around 0:40. sounds like explosions, eh? sounds like videos of WTC7, eh? The sound comes from steelframes who break out of their fixpoint. like it happend in WTC7, descriped in the NIST.
@FlashgottakaMK you are right, all sounds that day were unidentified except the 2 planes exploding, in this case there could also have been a medical room that the fire finally reached and could have exploded an oxygen tank, that would have turned an oxygen tank into a bomb, you will find my videos interesting, check out my featured video "how the towers fell"
@TheScottybobear Eh? really? i dont even sayed that. i wanted to make people think, the breaking steel frames of the crane accident sound similiar to the "explosions" of building 7. so I think, there were no explosions. there are just so many things, that cound like explosions.
@DanFrederiksen an elevator would make such a sound... hahahahahahahahahahahahahah... dont make people laugh please... clearly a CD bomb sound (in this case thermite)
I can confirm that this footage is real. There were a number of explosions at building 7, even after the twin towers collapsed. The official explanation was that it was a gas leak. Whatever it was these explosions could certainly have weakened the structure.
Watch David Vanadia's film of footage he took on 9/11: vanadia.com/nycstories/my911
at 26:30 you will hear an explosion in the direction of building 7. And people yelling about a gas leak. I think we know what was really going on.
I heard explosions in several videos of 7 world trade center building. I can only speculate that the building was brought down.
David Restuccio a lieutenant of the NY Fire Department said in an interview to Brian Williams, that they were going to bring building 7 down, or that it would fall on its own.
If they had plans to bring the building down that day, or even that week, this would mean they already had planned explosive devices in the building. It takes weeks to prepare.
The testimony of David Restuccio suggests the FDNY and Port Authority, and property owner Larry Silverstein already had plans to "bring down" building 7, if it didn't fall down that day.
If they had any plans for future controlled demolition, we must ask ourselves, what sort of team of experts can set up the explosive devices in a 650 foot tall 47 story skyscraper which is burning with fire?
This suggests devices were planted in the building basement, and core beams before the terror attacks.
The events of september 11th, are extremely suspicious. Extremely.
I admit I could be wrong, and all of the buildings may have been destroyed only by fire. But this seems unlikely, because steel frame buildings have never collapsed in the 100 years of sky scrapers, due simply to fire damage. And never in the fashion which building 7 collapsed, has a building fallen so neat and tidy into its own footprint due to several sporadic fires.
This could be the first case in history, but I doubt it.
@GarfoyleZanderfield i am removing your confusions, if tower 1 & 2 can fall due to fire in 2 hours from a plane hit, why building 7 felled WITHOUT a plane hit and took 8 hours, again how come fire transfer from one building to another and cause explotions, if you must know there was terror attack before in wtc buildings, it was on fire but never ever came down, and they said next attacks could come on this tall towers and from air strike,
Exactly. The buildings were rigged with explosions. Also there could have been a truck with explosives under the parking garage of tower 1 and 2. There were reports of vans and trucks loaded with explosives in NY that day driven by Israelis.
@GarfoyleZanderfield yes i remember mossad spys and all you need is to learn more about it, search youtube with - military knows israel did 9/11 , and also watch- project for new american century . most american people dont want to look at history to find an answer, its 1.30 hr documentary about how previous attacks were planned and what osama did before his relations to bush, but yes israel is using america everyway and again taking advantage in middlest at the same time. its 100% inside job
Yes. I think 9/11 was a CIA, Al-Cia-duh, Mossad, ISI operation.
They even arrested 60 Israelis in New York in the days after 9/11. Several vans loaded with ordnance, and explosives were detained by Police, one at the George Washington bridge the evening of 9/11 was had 28 explosive deviced in it. The 3 Israelis were arrested. Another van with 5 Israelis was arrested in New Jersey. Some of the men, failed polygraph tests and later admitted to being Mossad agents.
@GarfoyleZanderfield thanks for the info i got to tell u something more, the media, fox news they are also cia agents, surprised , have you noticed the way they debated and tell their story and organise their propaganda, where they get this information, they create it and people sink in confution, in middleast they know something from seeing and experiencing, in the west people believe from listening and without justifying. but u can learn more here- watch?v=yAtavakonRI&feature=related
@GarfoyleZanderfield thanks for the info i got to tell u something more, the media, fox news they are also cia agents, surprised , have you noticed the way they debated and tell their story and organise their propaganda, where they get this information, they create it and people sink in confution, in middleast they know something from seeing and experiencing, in the west people believe from listening and without justifying. but u can learn more here watch?v=yAtavakonRI&feature=related
Obviously 9/11 was an inside job. Anyone who disagrees is plain dumb, or ignorant. So building 7 just falls for no reason. Oh, no big deal there's nothing going on there. Wake up America!!! This is a global disaster! Ignorance is sweeping the world, and rich and powerful bastards are taking advantage to take complete monetary control over the whole world. Obviously this is a little much to try to explain in a youtube comment. Thumbs if you know what I mean.
@alecboi84 Well done, now explain why it took another 3 hours for WTC7 to collapse? Could the explosions be the diesel tanks within 7? Oh god forbid paranoid freaks accept rational explanations.
@hornetgag dumb skeptic,that was not a diesel tank.lmao.you ugly skeptics always have an explanation even after scientists,chemists,physicist found NANO THERMITE residue in all the WTC dust samples proving EXPLOSIVES/INCENDIARIES were used..Go spend 5 hours a day for 6 years studying everything about 9/11 then i'll listen to your mumbling idiocy.How do you account for dozens of explosions,flashes,free fall speeds,demo squibs 20 stories below the debris,100s of eyewitnesses seeing hearing bombs
@alecboi84 Sorry which chemist/physicist? Are you talking about Steven Jones? The man who put forward a theory that was rejected by all the experts and refused to publish his paper for scientific review and the paper was rejected by his own faculty? Ah the thermite which all the components were used in the construction, however no incendiary agent was found? That thermite? So why are these bombs not visible or audible? Who were the witnesses? Lay off the weed my friend, you're too paranoid.
@hornetgags Yeah Im talking about Neils Harrit,Steven Jones,whose theory of what was rejected??LIE..His peer reviewed paper was never rejected on THERMITE being found...LMFAO all the components of THERMITE were used in the construction???LOL where are you getting this bullshit???FOX NEWS!!LOL..So I guess the over 1500 professional Architects & Engineers are pot smoking crazies too right??And yeah there are multiple videos showing EXPLOSIONS,FLASHES..And you can most certainly hear them
@alecboi84 Check your truther bible AE for 911 Truth, they had to print a retraction/correction regarding the use of thermite on WTC7, sweetheart. Check it out for yourself, it's there. So, you're own so called experts can't even produce any evidence and believe me the burden of proof is squarely on your shoulders. Also adding LMAO is last hope of someone who does not know how to debate and provide evidence to back up their arguments. Why is it all other experts have rejected Jones' argument?
@hornetgags It's still not peer reviewed. The so called peer review that alecboi is touting was never properly done. The paper was passed without the review of the editor whom she blasted the handling of the paper.
@godzilla1077 Do me a favour and search on here for Hardfire SCHOLARS FOR 9/11 TRUTH / FETZER / ROBERTS / WIECK / 1ST PROGRAM - you will cry with laughter at James Fetzer's conspiracy evidence. Hardfire is a program where they debunk conspiracy theories and on it Fetzer also claims Bin Laden is dead, Saddam Hussein's body double was hanged and calls the FDNY liars. It was aired in 2007 and there are 3 programs. You will love it!
@alecboi84 It was never peer reviewed. The paper was passed without the editors consent for the sake of argument. When she found out it was printed without her knowledge she made a scoulding editorial blasting the handling of the papaer and resigned because the paper was poorly handled. There are no 1500 civil engineers you moron. Only 18 are civil engineers and of those some don't have liscences.
@godzilla1077 Are you kidding me? it was published online in the peer reviewed "Journal of 9/11 Studies" Also in "Global Outlook" paper,among others..I never said civil engineers,although i'm positive there are some in the movement..Of course those scared pussy cats at Brigham University fear for their jobs if going against the status quo..And there are ONCE again over 1500 petition singed Professional Engineers & Architects,Chemists,Scientist,etc for 9/11 TRUTH..AE911TRUTHorg..ALL ARE LICENSED
@alecboi84 I seen the list, and 96% of the engineers have nothing to do with structures. A lot of them are electrical engineers who can tell you how the lights are set up in the WTC's, landscaping engineers who would tell you how the lawn was set up around the WTC's, computer engineer who can tell you what kind of PC's were in the office. A bunch of engineers that have ZERO to do with structures. Not to mention a bunch of them have yet to have a liscence.
@godzilla1077 WRONG!!hahaha..you keep perpetrating fraudulent claims,MOST are Structural engineers & MOST if not all are LICENSED..You did not look at the names & credentials of those on the "Sign The Petition"??MOST come from prestigious colleges & backgrounds...I care not to explain any further to your stupefying theories..Oh i have tons of videos with CIVIL,STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS saying IMPOSSIBLE COLLAPSE DUE TO FIRE!!!!!
@alecboi84 You're wrong on many counts. I've seen the list and anyone else who chooses to see the list can do so and see that you're wrong. If you're going by one page alone then you're severly wrong. You're simply touting the 4% that's in there when you say "most if not all". By the way, the supposed number of members growing and growing is false also. There's a reason why A&ETruth only appears in conventions alongside UFO theorists.
@29render There's a reason why the truth movement is dying. The lack of evidence and the abundance of lies from the Truthers "scholars" gets killed everytime science and physics come into play.
@29render Nervous laughter usually conjours up when there are zero facts to back up an arguemnt that is fact based. That is why the truth movement has thier meetings in odd places like the Wellness Convention this past June. Wellness convention by the way is a convention where they sell "healing stones" that revitalizes your inner chakras. Very appropriate for Richard Gage and his crew.
@godzilla1077 u troll why dont you go slit your wrists...you say nothing. u send these long ass messages with nothing but insults and calling some a liar is not a fact...stop replying and go kill yourself, while your at it slap your mother right in the mouth for not swallowing you...nervous laughter my ass! you are braindead and waste oxygen...go kill yourself
@29render Here's a fact, not one of the survivors close to the WTC attacks or the Pentagon did not suffer from ruptured eardrums. You know why? Because there were no bombs or missiles to cause such trauma. In all ballistic style attacks, the common sympton for the survivors are ruptured ear drums. If it were a missile/bomb attack at the Pentagon, everyone within the vicinity would be dead or suffered ruptured eardrums. That's just one of many reasons as to why bombs were not used.
@godzilla1077 Nobody was in that part of the Pentagon, as it was under renovation. Being the Pentagon, its a bunker. Most people in there were protected from the shockwave that you're referring to.
As for applying your theory to WTC 7, nobody is saying a missile brought WTC down. Judging by the videos, it was clearly a demolition. Do you know anyone who has ruptured ear drums after a building demolition? I don't.
@NerdInHisShoe The reason why people during a demo havent suffered ruptured eardrums is because they're far from the explosion in a demo. They were a quarter mile away. The survivors who heard these explosions were in the vicinity.
@mamaloney1 Not at the least. The components that Steven Jones found could be discovered in everyday things like paint, drywall, freon from air units, PC's, and what not. The key components that make up thermite, Steven Jones never found. When Niels Harrit was asked how much thermite was needed to bring down the WTC's he said "over a 100,000 tons with very loud explosions." None of which has happend.
@29render I was agreeing with you and you say "keep your useless ass comments to themselves" so your calling your own comments useless? Well don't you just seem like a nice guy... NOT!
There were multiple diesel fueled generators in the building that was burning for 6-7 hours. Not to mention that in a controlled demolition you hear a series of consecutive explosions and it looks like strobe lights are running up the building and the building collapses immediately afterwards, it doesn't just stay up for an hour or so and then fall. Its not like a fucking cartoon where Wiley Coyote runs off a cliff and doesnt fall until he looks down you fucking idiots.
Once again you lame ass skeptics question everything..."conversation seems odd"LMFAO..I live in LI NY my father was 5 blocks from the wtc on Water St. he heard numerous thunderous,earth shaking explosions...100s of first responders,firefighters,people heard,SEEN,FELT explosions,flashes,molten metal...1500 professional Architects & Engineers,physics & chemical scientist say that the buildings came down in CD...AND THE VIDEO TO PROVE IT!! 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB BITCHES!!
So this is the explosive detonation that supposedly "instantaneously removed 8 stories of structural resistance" as WTC7 went into freefall? So why don't we hear this enormous explosion in any other video that shows the collapse of WTC7?
@unRompecabezas you moron its a DECEPTIVE DEMOLITION.Thats WHY they found THERMITE,an incendiary that melts rite through steel..a lot quieter than RDX,COMP B,so on & so forth...Stop denying the TRUTH,WAKE THE FUCK UP..You really need to stop drinking.watching Jersey Shore,Football,jerking off pal cause A MAJOR REVOLUTION IS UNDERWAY and you dumb downed Americans are the Only thing that stands in the way of restoring our REPUBLIC,not democracy you fools
@unRompecabezas Because this video was shot 30 feet from WTC7 and the other videos were shot from a couple buildings away with the sound of thousands of people panicking and hundreds of police and firetruck sirens drowning it out.
@EvilIntentions01 Wrong. In every building demo recorded, the explosion drowns out a crowd. And those recordings are from a mile away. If it's 30 feet from the WTC7 then the explosions would be deafening.
I have strong belief that this video was edited. Does anyone have a source. For hearing an explosion there demeanor is pretty tame. There conversation seems quiet odd as well.
And you think this is evidence. If anything it's counter evidence. So there were explosions, not surprising considering a skyscraper just fell on bld 7 and caused substantial damage and ignited diesel gens.
There is no reference to the timing of this. And controlled demolitions have a series of explosions, which have a much sharper sound.
And no I won't respond because I could have a better argument with my teapot, tea boy.
@beorhav listen papshmere breathe..Both my father & uncle were just a few blocks away along with thousands of others.Multiple explosions went off,I personaly have hundreds of videos showing flashes,explosions,sounds.and no the diesel generators were 7 stories below the earth in Wtc..Molten metal (which cannot be from any kind of office fire) was found under all 3 buildings.nano thermite was found in every dust sample saved from the destruction.Multiple motives for the elitest.you dont know shit
@beorhav 1. Bldg 7 collapsed at free fall speed. You can't dispute this, do some research. 2. The middle inner structure of the building folded in on itself. 3. No building in history has collapsed due to fire. 4. ABC news reported that they were going to "pull" Bldg 7. "Pull" is a term used by demolition teams. Later, ABC news recanted and said that wasn't the case...several days later changed their story back to the original and said that firefighters decided to pull the bldg for safety.
1. It took 18 seconds for the building to collapse because the south end fell first.
2. It did not, he collapse began at the south end.
3. Pull is used when huge cables bring down damaged structures that are still standing after the initial demolition. There were zero cables visible and bulldozers are always used to help pull a building down.
The day of the collapse Fire Chief Nigro said let's pull out.
@godzilla1077 1. What do you mean the "south end fell first" ? BOTH buildings pancaked down perfectly, leaving nothing but a big hole. 2. How do you exlain the fact that the building fell while black smoke was billowing out? Black smoke indicates a fire lacking oxygen. 3. Pull is also a term used by demoltion crews to drop the building with controlled demolition. I have no idea why your talking about bulldozers. 4. No building in history has fallen due to fire.
1. CBS video shows that the WTC 7 collapsed gradually and then it fell dramatically. There were zero explosions when the building collapsed. Rumbling sound doesn't count. A demo explosion can be heard from a mile away and it's deafining.
2. Huge plums of smoke have been pouring out for hours in 7. A car fire spews out blak smoke becuase of the complex parts inside, no diferent from generators or air units catching on fire.
3. Pull is not a term used for building implosions.
4. From fire alone. The other buildings that caught fire never had the north tower remove 20 stories near the baseline at the south end of the building. WTC 7 did.
@godzilla1077 Well if you want to think that all of those firemen, police, journalists and other eyewitnesses were lieing about hearing explosions, go ahead. That's a pretty big conspiracy theory your proposing though...just MAYBE they are telling the truth. Also, if there was nothing suspicious about the events of 9/11 why did they put authorities through the hearings? I guess you think Oliver North was innocent too? And JFK was shot by 1 shooter? Congressional hearings followed these too.
@delanogaston Explosions(or sounds resembling explosions) can be heard in any house/structure fire. Difference between explosions and bombings is that a bomb causes ruptured eardrums and produces shockwaves. The people that were interviewed that are near the WTC's that day didn't suffer from ruptured eardrums. A seismic reading as done and there was zero activity that would have resembled any type of bombing. I can show you a video where a school was fire and there were multiple explosions.
@godzilla1077 There weren't only ruptured eardrums but deaths and loss of limbs caused "somewhere below the 1st floow". Firefighters, cops, etc all said they felt and heard HUGE explosions coming from below the 1st floor. So how did the fire spread to the BOTTOMS of the buildings? And what caused the deaths and all the glass shattering and floor tiles breaking up into thousands of pieces and people saying they "flew up into the air"? You also didn't mention the hearings I noticed. ;)
@delanogaston Those were the elevators slamming down to basement level. Fire also traveled down teh elevator shaft and people nearby caught fire. It's called a back braft if you ever heard of it. The building violently shook from the planes slamming causing people to "fly". There was zero people with ruptured ear drums on 9/11. The hearings alone should tell you there's no inside job considering it was A PUBLIC HEARING. On subject at a time. Not enough room in here.
@godzilla1077 Dude, elevators slamming down caused the tile to break into thousands of pieces and kill people? Breaking all the glass and peoples bones? C'mon. Is this Silverstein? Plus, the explosions heard were AFTER the planes hit.....why else would there be police and fire there? You think they sent the fire and police BEFORE the planes hit? And the hearings were met with MUCH resistance. Nothing to hide? This is nothing new...throughout history governments create war. Look it up.
@delanogaston Now you're confusing yourself with the jumpers. Don't. Explosions do happen in simple house fires. Fire/electricity/gas are never a good mix. But guess what, the explosions didn't cause much in the seismic activty as conducted by the IIRC. Even at the inital collpase of all the structures, there was nothing that showed that there was any bomibngs at all. It only spiked when the towers impacted the floors. Not to mention ZERO thermite was ever found.
@godzilla1077 Prof Steven Jones and others found thermite. Also, if you read the results of the hearings you will see that the question was posed "where are the steel supports so we can analyze why they were severed below the 1st floor" but guess what? Someone had the steel cleaned up pretty fast and shipped to China to be melted down. Hmmm, don't we melt down steel here in the USA? Pretty sure we do. Also, are you kidding me with the IIRC? Government offices and most are not scientists
@delanogaston Jones made it up 4 years after 9/11. He never did understand thermite, and how its a gravity event. No thermite iron products has been found. Not a single device used to cut the big columns with thermite was found. Not one truther is able to say how much, and how it works, or show a method, full scale that would work. Free thermite flows with gravity, the WTC columns are vertical, the best use for thermite is mischief, but all with the help of gravity, it does not go sideways.
@godzilla1077 This is all I need to know. 2 towers dropped and it looked EXACTLY like controlled demoltion. No buildings have EVER imploded because of fire. Even when they burn hot for hours. All I see is black smoke coming from the top of the tower. There's no generators up there. If the top of the towers fell over, we wouldn't be having this conversation, but they didn't. They came down EXACTLY the same way. I used to believe what I was told too, so I don't blame you.
@delanogaston They didn't even fall on their own footprint. If they did fall like a demo they would not have damaged neighboring structures. The WTC's did not collapse from fire ALONE. The Towers were impacted by planes slamming into the WTC's. You have impact+explosion+fire=collapse. It was not just one thing. The towers would not have toppled over like trees because they're not a slab to fall over in that way. All the videos show the collapse began at the point of impact.
@godzilla1077 You mean the towers that were designed to take multiple 707 hits? What about when the Empire State building was hit by a B-2 bomber? There was fire, then black smoke, then nothing. Now go and build a giant structure from metal, clip a few spots on the SIDE, then even take out some of the cenetral supports (the ones actually holding it up) and tell me if it collapses in on itself. Oh and controlled demos do not always go perfectly in their footsteps either.
@delanogaston If it were just a few non-expert youtube posters making these claims I might have skepticism too..but you are arguing with Congressman, Senators, police officers, firemen, structural engineers, physicists, journalists, and many other credible ppl. The government has been caught multiple times covering things up and why? So we can have war..and then HUGE profits are made from it. Ask yourself what would it have taken to go to war in the middle east if not for a terrorist attack?
@delanogaston All the 9/11 truthers were once people who believed there's no way the government would do this...I was one of them. We changed our opinions after the overwhelming evidence we saw plus the fact that this is a tactic been used throughout history, all the way back to the Roman Empire. It's not new...business as usual. The people arguing against us refuse to believe anything that goes against the media no matter what. True scientific research means u must accept other possibility.
@delanogaston The towers were supposedly built to take a hit but they were never put ot the test. It was all in theory only, not fact. The B-2 bomber dwarfs in size compared to a commercial plane when the bomber crashed into the Empire State Building. The planes that crashed into the WTC's exploded through the other side. The B-2 bomber did not. The ESB only suffered from the front of the building and the fire didnt spread nor suffered the same damage like the WTC's. Not at all alike.
@godzilla1077 Well like I said, if your not willing to see the possibility the evidence suggests, and after years and years of proven corruption you STILL trust the people pulling the puppet strings? We will have to just agree to disagree. You make valid arguments but you can't prove anything scientifically if you think you already know the answer and don't want to be wrong. I on the other hand, WANT to be proven wrong, but it's looking pretty grim..for me and the millions worldwide who believe
@delanogaston You do realize that the physical evidence indeed kills any of the inside job theories. Let's take Steven Jones for example ( the same guy who believes Jesus walked with the Mayans in America) said he found Thermite. Far from the truth, he may have found components that are found in every day things such as dry walls, iron, computers, paint and the likes. 2 key ingredients that make up thermite was never found, nor where they on his paper from his findings.
@godzilla1077 Many religions believe wacky things. In fact, we Americans spend BILLIONS on one which believes God gave them some land and told them to abuse the existing residents! That's as wacky to me as anything Jones believes.
The two key ingredients of thermite, the REACTANTS, are aluminum and iron oxide. That's all you need! Iron microspheres and aluminum oxide are the PRODUCTS of the thermite reaction. "Dry walls" (I assume you mean "drywall") are irrelevant.
@Skeptic121 And what about Barium Nitrate? That's a byproduct of thermite, guess how much of that was found? I'll give you a clue....it begins with 'N' and ends with 'E'. The findings of Steven Jones were denounced by every expert including his own faculty at Brigham Young. The amount of thermite needed to bring WTC7 down would have been condiserable (over 100lbs) and strategically placed. The SEC, Amex and NY Office of Emergency Management were in WTC7 and they would have noticed.
@hornetgags You do not need barium nitrate for the thermate or thermite reactions. Barium nitrate, or most any nitrate, makes it ignite more easily, but is not necessary for the reaction. NOTE: barium nitrate is NOT a BYPRODUCT; it is a REACTANT. Did you take chemistry in HS? "Condiserable" thermate could have been placed in the electrical facility that comprised the first five floors of WTC7 without anyone noticing; least of all the SEC, who failed to notice Bernard Madoff. :)
@Skeptic121 Quote from AE for 9/11 truth: Richard Gage author: We incorrectly identified the thermite device illustrated in this article as a "cutter charge.” But, the device as described in the patent is only an igniter heat source only used to ignite larger charges. It does not in and of itself have the capability of cutting structural steel. They also talk about remote detonators removing the need for detcord, however they have no evidence to back it up? A little far fetched maybe?
@Skeptic121 So effectively what AE for 911 Truth are saying they would need a cutter charge to ignite the thermite and remote detonators, however as of 2001 they can't prove they existed however with further investigation they can find out. How convenient, and they sold that turkey to the conspiracy theorists and it was completely eaten up. Sorry, say what you want, nothing will convince me otherwise so I'll leave you to your paranoia. Good luck with it, hope you get the answers you want.
There are only two essential ingredients in thermite and nanothermite. Iron oxide and elemental aluminum. 'IF' Jones' findings are true, then both of these ingredients were found with 3:2 oxygen - iron ratios consistent with nanothermite. Iron oxide is NOT elemental iron, and iron oxide particles smaller than 120 nm and thoroughly mixed with elemental aluminum in the PRE-ignited source is classified as nanothermite. Period.
You can have a controlled demolition that doesnt look exactly like a classic controlled demo. They wouldnt want it to look like a controlled demo obviously. These were non traditional, top to bottom progressive collapses with increased resistance opposed to a traditional, bottom to top demo with much less, if not, no resistance at all. This would be why the buildings didnt reach free falls speeds and didnt create perfect footprints.
@splendid1000 Meaning there was no demo explosions at all. There was no seismic activity that would have registered as bombs, only large spikes when the buildings hit the floor. Not to mention there was zero evidence of any bombs what so ever.
@beorhav cnt'd....5. It takes demolition teams several weeks and bring in engineers to collapse buildings, so if they did decide to "pull" it, how did they do that? 6. Both WTC towers fell in the same manner. Firefighters and other eyewitnesses said they heard large series of explosions that originated from the floors below ground lvl. 7. If you take a plane into the air, you ask the tower for clearance...after taking off if you don't respond, the ATC notifies the FAA and the FBI yet the....
@beorhav ...planes continued to fly even though they broke contact with the ATC. None of this seems odd to you? I love it when sheeple who believe everything the government tells them tries to force the "truthers" to prove their theories. I ask YOU to prove YOURS? Which is the bigger conspiracy, that the government (iran-contras) is involved in yet another lie, or that thousands of congressman, senators, former CIA, judges, lawers, and scientists are all making this up?
there were 9 deisel generaters in building 7. Fire damage and the damage from the towers debris hitting it brought it down. Firefighters who were there to which my girfriend was one say the building buckling at 2 ;15 pm and they pulled all there gear just before 3. It buckled and collapsed. There were only 3 main beams in there and 1 was very bent from the heat.
@alecboi84: But the sound is not original. A friend of mine was there, he didn't hear this. And one should hear it, if it were loud like this. So i guess this video is a soundfake at least.
I'm thinking that maybe there was a malfunction in bringing down 7, thus the workers seen coming out of the building on a CNN clip saying that " watch that building, it will be coming down soon". As explosions went off behind them, these guys were wearing construction gear. They were leaving the area that Firefighters left at approx 11:30 am. Maybe # 7 was supposed to crumble at the same time as the closest tower and it never happened, giving Barry Jennings time to get out, wow, might be on to..
@sixdgrs It is supposed to be on the corner of W. Broadway and Murray, But HBO's "In Memorium: New York City" lists it as being on Chambers St. The photographer's name is Lucia Davis. You can follow her path to the towers from the North.
Another documentary pinpointed the time to within a half hour and location. I can't remember where I saw it, but I do know it is sometime before noon. Check out these clips.
This video occurs a little before noon(position of the sun at that phonebooth) and the blast did come from WT7 two blocks away from that phonebooth..
Other disturbing videos are: "CBS-Net Dub5 09" and "CBS-Net Dub5 13"
These were suppressed and released about two months ago from NIST. NIST lost a Freedom Of Information Act lawsuit. Almost 1,000TB of video was released.
Yes! There are many disturbing videos. The whole day was disturbing. 19 idiots doing such an act in the name of a primitive religion is indeed disturbing. The fact that there are more religious idiots following this example (Berlin, Madrid, London, Bali, etc.) is very disturbing. And it is very disturbing to see that some people, based on rumors and questionable inferences alone, think that somebody else did all of that.
What does the whole world know? Is it the following:
On September 11th 2001 19 hijackers hijacked 4 planes, crashed into3 buildings, destroying the WTC complex totally , the Pentagon partially and crashed one airplane in Shankesville. All hijackers were religiously motivated idiots trained by Al Qaeda and financed by Al Qaeda or islamic organization with close ties to Al Qaeda. Yes, indeed, all that is clear.
@wimahlers This video is not fake, it is established. And there are many more to back it up. I don't like it's implications, either.
National Institute of Standards and Technologies(NIST) is releasing suppressed videos after a Freedom Of Information Act lawsuit. YouTube is now being flooded with the new video. It is straight from the government.
Please look at this one: "9/11 FireFighters - THREE Explosions After Plane Hit WTC"
Which video are you talking about? And why is it supposedly important? What fact investigated and concluded in relation with the 9/11 incident is wrong and what is your proof that it is so? Please be clear about that.
.
For instance, as to WTC7, this building collapsed internally first before the outer shell/walls gave way. It is objectively visible that it internally failed first and the cause of the failure is backed by WTC5 and other facts.
@wimahlers I am speaking of the video on this page and any video, that I mention.
You say: "For instance, as to WTC7, this building collapsed internally first before the outer shell/walls gave way."
This is true with any controlled demolition, rapidly and symmetrically. Office fires won't collapse any part of a good steel cage, they don't get hot enough even with kerosene or jet fuel. WT7 had the strongest steel cage on the planet.
"[internal collapse] This is true with any controlled demolition, rapidly and symmetrically."
.
No it is not! A controlled demolition is noisy with explosive sounds. There were none of those sounds during any of the collapses of WTC1, 2 or 7.
Not to mention the fact that controlled demolition leaves certain demolition trademarks. None of these trademarks was ever reported by any clearer, investigator or visitor of the WTC site during the long period of cleanup.
@wimahlers You are not very aware. You seem to have all the correct answers, in your mind for yourself, but not for me. Do we threaten or scare you? Why are you here?
@Jackblind1000, . You: "You are not very aware." Me: Not very aware of what? Please be specific. . You: " You seem to have all the correct answers, in your mind for yourself, but not for me." Me: What answers are you talking about? Please be specific. . You: "Do we threaten or scare you?" Me: No. Do I threaten or scare you? . You: "Why are you here?" Me: Why are you?
@wimahlers Yup, all the interior collapsed and left the outer casing of # 7 standing like a house of cards so the shell fell at freefall speed. Yeah, and your pig can fly, right? Give me a break. How could the outercasing of the steel framework just stand there like nothing was happening inside of it? Without showing any true visible signs that the interior had completely collapsed? You are a fool, you believe your TV,you lie about what happened on 9/11, supporting a corrupt governments version.
"lol @ wimahlers trying to counter every proof ..."
.
You got that wrong! You should say:
"lol @ wimahlers awaiting every proof ..."
.
Show me your proof of explosives having been used, proof of thermite being able to cut support pillars almost instantly and silently and leaving no traces, proof of thermite able to maintain sustainable fires with temperatures that melts metal, etc.
.
I am awaiting all that. If you don't show me any of that than there is nothing to counter.
why is everyone always calling truther people names i think they make a good point all they want is an investigation.So why are you assholes so uptight about it?whats the worst that could happen they reinvestigate?some truthers lost friends and family as some of you may have wouldnt you want every stone turned?it just dont make any sence to me
"i think they make a good point all they want is an investigation"
.
Well, no! That is the whole point. They don't make good points. All they have is speculations that contradict each other and contradict known facts. And such a position is no basis to do an investigation all over again.
@wimahlers "all over again"? they never did one and such a momentous event you would think that it would be a good idea to investigate it even a tiny bit instead of covering it up.
@charlie123abc360, . "they never did one" [investigation] . Are you not aware of the indepedent and combined investigations of organizations like: FEMA, NTSB, FBI, NIST and various other experts and sources like Purdue university, etc.? . "good idea to investigate it even a tiny bit" . I am all in favor for that! So please mister Jones/ Gage/Harrit/Griffin explain the internal collapse of WTC5. And please perform a scientifical representative experiment with thermite.
@wimahlers Yes i knew of those hilarious excuses of investigations. Anyone who think this is what buildings that are collapsing look like is actually retarded, they were DEMOLISHED! its too obvious.
I am honered to meet a person which such great insight and perception who immediately see it is "obvious".
.
And of course it is obviously easy to prove that it was done with thermite which was, of course, obviously present in all the dust (see: Jones/Harrit/Gage/Griffin).
.
So, it must be obviously easy to do a non-hilarious investigation by making a representative cross section of a steel support construction and DEMOLISH it with thermite.
So please do the scientifically representative experiment instantly collapsing a representative mockup steel support section similar to the construction used on the WTC buildings by means of any deriviate or micture of deriviates of thermite. And show me you can indeed instantly cut through an actual support beam. Instantly, without sound and not leaving traces seen by any clearer that worked there during all the months of clearing.
@wimahlers Well i dont have any information on thermite and i never mentioned it, i have heard there are reports of thermite tho if u really want to talk about that. You also falsely state there were no sounds. There are many methods to collapsing a building. Anyways it looks exactly like a demolition and not a collapse...FULLSTOP. period. end of story. bye.
"Anyways it looks exactly like a demolition and not a collapse...FULLSTOP. period. end of story."
.
Actually, to me this collapse looks the same, though on a different scale as the collapse of the Delft university building that burned for several hours.
.
Anyway, it is irrelevant. "looks like" without justification never is a scientific argument. If a person (Harrit/Jones et.al.) thinks it is demolition than (s)he has to formulate a scientifically sound argument.
"Who are you and what makes you so insistent on pushing your view on this subject that you'll happily state such nonsense?"
.
I am who I say in my profile I am.
And since when is it nonsense to ask for some supporting proof for otherwise baseless claims?
To start with, convince the scientific community that it is possible to (almost) instantly collapse a representative steel support section using nothing but any micture and deriviate of thermite.
@wimahlers What is it with you and thermite? ill flip your agument and say "To start with, convince the scientific community that it is possible to (almost) instanly collapse a representative steel support section using nothing but" A PLANE.
But it seems to matter a great deal among truthers.
.
By the way, the planes were not responsible for the collapse. In that context they were insignificant. It was the OUT OF CONTROL fires that brought down these steel constructions. Without it the WTC would still be standing.
The fact that fire can easily bring down a steel constructed building is a well known fact. Ask any university, then you know.
"Melting point of steel: about 1400 degrees. Burning temperature of kerosene: 290 degrees. See the gap in your theory?"
.
That indeed would be a problem if anyone claimed that the support section had melted. It did not. And nobody claims that. Nor does anybody claim the additional kerosene was of any siginificant importance. See the gap in your theory?
@charlie123abc360: Steel doesnt need to melt in the scenerio, all it needs is to be weakened. An orange flame burns at about 1,100 degrees, enough to significantly weaken steel.
"why is everyone always calling truther people names"
Ridicule is a tactic to make people trying to expose the truth look stupid and to try to shut them up.
The last thing they want is for "truthers" to be taken seriously because they might expose the whole game, so to counter this the first line of defense is to make fun of them, if this stage fails, the second stage is the threats and intimidation which i dare say has already been carried out on lots of people.
I am just asking questions. But truthers refuse to answer hard questions. They must have something to hide. And when I stalk Mr.Gage, Rudkowski style, demanding answers, he reacts by ignoring me or instruct his bodyguards to remove me from his book sessions. This proves that Mr. Gage must have something to hide!
Now here is 1 of my questions:
.
WTC7 collapsed but was not hit by an airplane!
How could the conspirators have known WTC1 debris would set WTC7 on fire so they could blow it? How?
@wimahlers You are such a fuckwit and everyone but you knows it. Unfortunately you are totally devoid of all objective reasoning and to continue a rational debate with you is totally pointless as your capacity for critical thinking has obviously never past puberty. You stalk Richard gage? You sound like a pyscho. I shall no longer reply to you and give you the respect of a reasonable person as it would be a complete waste of my time and yours.
"You stalk Richard gage? You sound like a pyscho."
.
Thank you for that confirmation!
You just confirmed that Rudowski is a [sic] psycho. If you had understand the irony on which your statement was based you might have understand that I described WHY(!) people react the way they react when stalked by Rudowski. I showed how it was done by using the imaginary scenario of me stalking Gage in the same way. Of course I don't. I can't. I live in The Netherlands.
" I shall no longer reply to you and give you the respect of a reasonable person ."
.
You mean you will not give the respect any more to Luke Rudowski and Dylan Avary. Avary whom, by the way, interviewed Jennings. The Dylan Avary of which Jennings have requested to remove his interview from Dylan's [sic] documentary. The interview Dylan refuse to remove because he desperately need every ad hoc excuse to justify the message of his documentary.
they knew (by looking at previous building demolition statistics) that debris would hit nearby buildings that are as near as WTC7. and the debris don't have to start a fire, it just need to hit the building. they could still start the fire with pre-installed explosives inside WTC7.
"they knew (...) that debris would hit nearby buildings that are as near as WTC7. and the debris don't have to start a fire, it just need to hit the building. they could still start the fire with pre-installed explosives inside WTC7."
.
Really?
.
You wonder why CD companies do exist. Worse, every CD company is always woried that it goes wrong. Worse still, it sometimes does go wrong. Here everything went perfect on the first record attempt ... according to you!
Some added details to my previous reply. According to you:
Exotic explosives were installed in WTC1+2, airplanes were prepped and crashed into WTC1+2. They let it cook for an hour or so and somehow managed to start a collapse from the impacted floors whereby they also managed to direct the collapse towards WTC7, that was also prepped with explosives, and managed to start fires on exactly the impacted areas, let it cook for 7 hours. All this was and is unnoticed by anybody.
"wimahlers, its quite sad to see idiots like u who are only the product of America's poor excuse for an education- u lack any understanding for simple physics concepts, laws & notions"
.
Yes, very sad. Except:
a) I am not American.
b) I have taught mathematics and physics in high school - in that respect I am like Chandler!
c) You implicitly call organization like the AAAS, NAS, ASCE, NTSB and all universities 'idiots' too. For they all support the core NIST conclusions.
fires dont haphazardly cause massive explosions especially if there are no or exotic accelerants or explosives present. until u can scientifcally prove this otherwise, stop spoutin ur nonsense
The main targets of 9/11 were the Pentagon, The US Capitol/Whitehouse, and WTC 7. It was easy to crash a plane to the first two targets.. but hard to crash one into 7 WTC since its surrounded by tall buildings (unlike the other two) so they planned to bomb it instead. They just used the Twin Towers for distraction and evacuation of the area and the crowd, and fires for pretending that the building just came down due to the fires. Think twice, not the twin towers..
domitechture 1 month ago
@domitechture you read to much about conspiracy theorys. NO explosions in WTC 7.
FlashgottakaMK 1 month ago
Building 7 could NOT have imploded the way it did when it did without controlled demolition ... period!
Watch: " 9/11: Explosive Evidence - Experts Speak Out "
luvmyctd 2 months ago
Only one thing to think about: search for "Horrible Crane Accident " on youtube, and listen to the sound of the video. just listen. at around 0:40. sounds like explosions, eh? sounds like videos of WTC7, eh? The sound comes from steelframes who break out of their fixpoint. like it happend in WTC7, descriped in the NIST.
Think about.
Thumbs up, if you agree.
FlashgottakaMK 2 months ago
@FlashgottakaMK you are right, all sounds that day were unidentified except the 2 planes exploding, in this case there could also have been a medical room that the fire finally reached and could have exploded an oxygen tank, that would have turned an oxygen tank into a bomb, you will find my videos interesting, check out my featured video "how the towers fell"
loosechangeexposed 2 months ago
@loosechangeexposed thx, i´m gonna watch your vids. greetz
FlashgottakaMK 2 months ago
@FlashgottakaMK Eh? Building 7 was not a crane accident!
TheScottybobear 1 month ago
@TheScottybobear Eh? really? i dont even sayed that. i wanted to make people think, the breaking steel frames of the crane accident sound similiar to the "explosions" of building 7. so I think, there were no explosions. there are just so many things, that cound like explosions.
FlashgottakaMK 1 month ago
clearly that was an elevator falling. swamp gas amplified the effect. nothing to see here. move along
DanFrederiksen 4 months ago
@DanFrederiksen an elevator would make such a sound... hahahahahahahahahahahahahah... dont make people laugh please... clearly a CD bomb sound (in this case thermite)
zelenko2 3 months ago
lol, watch my comment somewhere here.. no bomb..
FlashgottakaMK 2 months ago
@FlashgottakaMK man... 911 was an inside job... people should know that by now... its 10 years... a lot of evidence came out
zelenko2 2 months ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
@zelenko2 911 was an inside job.. not..
FlashgottakaMK 2 months ago
Comment removed
alecboi84 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
WE HAVE THE VIDEO OF WTC7 BEING DEMOLISHED. THE VIDEO SHOWS THE EXPLOSIONS AND IT HAS THE AUDIO. ...ARREST LARRY SILVERSTEIN, NOW!!!
SEARCH: "!MUST WATCH NOW! Visible Explosions !NEW VIDEO! SEPT 2011 WTC Building 7 Controlled Demolition"
Born2Flesh 4 months ago
I can confirm that this footage is real. There were a number of explosions at building 7, even after the twin towers collapsed. The official explanation was that it was a gas leak. Whatever it was these explosions could certainly have weakened the structure.
Watch David Vanadia's film of footage he took on 9/11: vanadia.com/nycstories/my911
at 26:30 you will hear an explosion in the direction of building 7. And people yelling about a gas leak. I think we know what was really going on.
GarfoyleZanderfield 4 months ago
@GarfoyleZanderfield did you heard it after they claim of explotions, have you researched why they brought this building down
idrismetalcore 4 months ago
@idrismetalcore
I heard explosions in several videos of 7 world trade center building. I can only speculate that the building was brought down.
David Restuccio a lieutenant of the NY Fire Department said in an interview to Brian Williams, that they were going to bring building 7 down, or that it would fall on its own.
If they had plans to bring the building down that day, or even that week, this would mean they already had planned explosive devices in the building. It takes weeks to prepare.
GarfoyleZanderfield 4 months ago
The testimony of David Restuccio suggests the FDNY and Port Authority, and property owner Larry Silverstein already had plans to "bring down" building 7, if it didn't fall down that day.
If they had any plans for future controlled demolition, we must ask ourselves, what sort of team of experts can set up the explosive devices in a 650 foot tall 47 story skyscraper which is burning with fire?
This suggests devices were planted in the building basement, and core beams before the terror attacks.
GarfoyleZanderfield 4 months ago
The events of september 11th, are extremely suspicious. Extremely.
I admit I could be wrong, and all of the buildings may have been destroyed only by fire. But this seems unlikely, because steel frame buildings have never collapsed in the 100 years of sky scrapers, due simply to fire damage. And never in the fashion which building 7 collapsed, has a building fallen so neat and tidy into its own footprint due to several sporadic fires.
This could be the first case in history, but I doubt it.
GarfoyleZanderfield 4 months ago
@GarfoyleZanderfield i am removing your confusions, if tower 1 & 2 can fall due to fire in 2 hours from a plane hit, why building 7 felled WITHOUT a plane hit and took 8 hours, again how come fire transfer from one building to another and cause explotions, if you must know there was terror attack before in wtc buildings, it was on fire but never ever came down, and they said next attacks could come on this tall towers and from air strike,
idrismetalcore 4 months ago
@idrismetalcore
Exactly. The buildings were rigged with explosions. Also there could have been a truck with explosives under the parking garage of tower 1 and 2. There were reports of vans and trucks loaded with explosives in NY that day driven by Israelis.
9.11 was an inside job. Hands down.
GarfoyleZanderfield 4 months ago 2
@GarfoyleZanderfield yes i remember mossad spys and all you need is to learn more about it, search youtube with - military knows israel did 9/11 , and also watch- project for new american century . most american people dont want to look at history to find an answer, its 1.30 hr documentary about how previous attacks were planned and what osama did before his relations to bush, but yes israel is using america everyway and again taking advantage in middlest at the same time. its 100% inside job
idrismetalcore 4 months ago
@idrismetalcore
Yes. I think 9/11 was a CIA, Al-Cia-duh, Mossad, ISI operation.
They even arrested 60 Israelis in New York in the days after 9/11. Several vans loaded with ordnance, and explosives were detained by Police, one at the George Washington bridge the evening of 9/11 was had 28 explosive deviced in it. The 3 Israelis were arrested. Another van with 5 Israelis was arrested in New Jersey. Some of the men, failed polygraph tests and later admitted to being Mossad agents.
GarfoyleZanderfield 4 months ago
@GarfoyleZanderfield thanks for the info i got to tell u something more, the media, fox news they are also cia agents, surprised , have you noticed the way they debated and tell their story and organise their propaganda, where they get this information, they create it and people sink in confution, in middleast they know something from seeing and experiencing, in the west people believe from listening and without justifying. but u can learn more here- watch?v=yAtavakonRI&feature=related
idrismetalcore 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@GarfoyleZanderfield thanks for the info i got to tell u something more, the media, fox news they are also cia agents, surprised , have you noticed the way they debated and tell their story and organise their propaganda, where they get this information, they create it and people sink in confution, in middleast they know something from seeing and experiencing, in the west people believe from listening and without justifying. but u can learn more here watch?v=yAtavakonRI&feature=related
idrismetalcore 4 months ago
@idrismetalcore my video "how the towers fell" explains it all.
loosechangeexposed 2 months ago
well what the fuck, this shit just got strange
FissionNonStop 4 months ago
wow fuk me sideways this is mental. NO more doubts from this end. BUSTED!
galaxything 4 months ago
you wanna call your mother or something? .......Hell yeah! BOOM WTF was that?
MQhelper 4 months ago
Oh I see, they cut this out:
/watch?v=0YvrKfWkxdw
wildbill29303 5 months ago
Obviously 9/11 was an inside job. Anyone who disagrees is plain dumb, or ignorant. So building 7 just falls for no reason. Oh, no big deal there's nothing going on there. Wake up America!!! This is a global disaster! Ignorance is sweeping the world, and rich and powerful bastards are taking advantage to take complete monetary control over the whole world. Obviously this is a little much to try to explain in a youtube comment. Thumbs if you know what I mean.
Musicdudeyoutub 6 months ago
@alecboi84 Well done, now explain why it took another 3 hours for WTC7 to collapse? Could the explosions be the diesel tanks within 7? Oh god forbid paranoid freaks accept rational explanations.
hornetgags 8 months ago
@hornetgag dumb skeptic,that was not a diesel tank.lmao.you ugly skeptics always have an explanation even after scientists,chemists,physicist found NANO THERMITE residue in all the WTC dust samples proving EXPLOSIVES/INCENDIARIES were used..Go spend 5 hours a day for 6 years studying everything about 9/11 then i'll listen to your mumbling idiocy.How do you account for dozens of explosions,flashes,free fall speeds,demo squibs 20 stories below the debris,100s of eyewitnesses seeing hearing bombs
alecboi84 8 months ago
@alecboi84 Sorry which chemist/physicist? Are you talking about Steven Jones? The man who put forward a theory that was rejected by all the experts and refused to publish his paper for scientific review and the paper was rejected by his own faculty? Ah the thermite which all the components were used in the construction, however no incendiary agent was found? That thermite? So why are these bombs not visible or audible? Who were the witnesses? Lay off the weed my friend, you're too paranoid.
hornetgags 8 months ago
@hornetgags Yeah Im talking about Neils Harrit,Steven Jones,whose theory of what was rejected??LIE..His peer reviewed paper was never rejected on THERMITE being found...LMFAO all the components of THERMITE were used in the construction???LOL where are you getting this bullshit???FOX NEWS!!LOL..So I guess the over 1500 professional Architects & Engineers are pot smoking crazies too right??And yeah there are multiple videos showing EXPLOSIONS,FLASHES..And you can most certainly hear them
alecboi84 8 months ago
@alecboi84 Check your truther bible AE for 911 Truth, they had to print a retraction/correction regarding the use of thermite on WTC7, sweetheart. Check it out for yourself, it's there. So, you're own so called experts can't even produce any evidence and believe me the burden of proof is squarely on your shoulders. Also adding LMAO is last hope of someone who does not know how to debate and provide evidence to back up their arguments. Why is it all other experts have rejected Jones' argument?
hornetgags 8 months ago
@hornetgags It's still not peer reviewed. The so called peer review that alecboi is touting was never properly done. The paper was passed without the review of the editor whom she blasted the handling of the paper.
godzilla1077 8 months ago
@godzilla1077 Do me a favour and search on here for Hardfire SCHOLARS FOR 9/11 TRUTH / FETZER / ROBERTS / WIECK / 1ST PROGRAM - you will cry with laughter at James Fetzer's conspiracy evidence. Hardfire is a program where they debunk conspiracy theories and on it Fetzer also claims Bin Laden is dead, Saddam Hussein's body double was hanged and calls the FDNY liars. It was aired in 2007 and there are 3 programs. You will love it!
hornetgags 8 months ago
@alecboi84 It was never peer reviewed. The paper was passed without the editors consent for the sake of argument. When she found out it was printed without her knowledge she made a scoulding editorial blasting the handling of the papaer and resigned because the paper was poorly handled. There are no 1500 civil engineers you moron. Only 18 are civil engineers and of those some don't have liscences.
godzilla1077 8 months ago
@godzilla1077 Are you kidding me? it was published online in the peer reviewed "Journal of 9/11 Studies" Also in "Global Outlook" paper,among others..I never said civil engineers,although i'm positive there are some in the movement..Of course those scared pussy cats at Brigham University fear for their jobs if going against the status quo..And there are ONCE again over 1500 petition singed Professional Engineers & Architects,Chemists,Scientist,etc for 9/11 TRUTH..AE911TRUTHorg..ALL ARE LICENSED
alecboi84 8 months ago
@alecboi84 I seen the list, and 96% of the engineers have nothing to do with structures. A lot of them are electrical engineers who can tell you how the lights are set up in the WTC's, landscaping engineers who would tell you how the lawn was set up around the WTC's, computer engineer who can tell you what kind of PC's were in the office. A bunch of engineers that have ZERO to do with structures. Not to mention a bunch of them have yet to have a liscence.
godzilla1077 8 months ago
@godzilla1077 WRONG!!hahaha..you keep perpetrating fraudulent claims,MOST are Structural engineers & MOST if not all are LICENSED..You did not look at the names & credentials of those on the "Sign The Petition"??MOST come from prestigious colleges & backgrounds...I care not to explain any further to your stupefying theories..Oh i have tons of videos with CIVIL,STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS saying IMPOSSIBLE COLLAPSE DUE TO FIRE!!!!!
alecboi84 8 months ago
@alecboi84 You're wrong on many counts. I've seen the list and anyone else who chooses to see the list can do so and see that you're wrong. If you're going by one page alone then you're severly wrong. You're simply touting the 4% that's in there when you say "most if not all". By the way, the supposed number of members growing and growing is false also. There's a reason why A&ETruth only appears in conventions alongside UFO theorists.
godzilla1077 8 months ago
@godzilla1077 just go back to sleep and shut the fuck up
shermanr6 7 months ago
@shermanr6 Because it's so much easier to tell someone to shut the fuck than actually doing any research at all.
godzilla1077 7 months ago
@godzilla1077 I 2nd that...SHUT THE FUCK UP U TROLL! Go back to sleep u lumbering sloth...
29render 6 months ago
@29render There's a reason why the truth movement is dying. The lack of evidence and the abundance of lies from the Truthers "scholars" gets killed everytime science and physics come into play.
godzilla1077 6 months ago
@godzilla1077 lol
29render 6 months ago
@29render Nervous laughter usually conjours up when there are zero facts to back up an arguemnt that is fact based. That is why the truth movement has thier meetings in odd places like the Wellness Convention this past June. Wellness convention by the way is a convention where they sell "healing stones" that revitalizes your inner chakras. Very appropriate for Richard Gage and his crew.
godzilla1077 5 months ago
@godzilla1077 u troll why dont you go slit your wrists...you say nothing. u send these long ass messages with nothing but insults and calling some a liar is not a fact...stop replying and go kill yourself, while your at it slap your mother right in the mouth for not swallowing you...nervous laughter my ass! you are braindead and waste oxygen...go kill yourself
29render 5 months ago
@29render Here's a fact, not one of the survivors close to the WTC attacks or the Pentagon did not suffer from ruptured eardrums. You know why? Because there were no bombs or missiles to cause such trauma. In all ballistic style attacks, the common sympton for the survivors are ruptured ear drums. If it were a missile/bomb attack at the Pentagon, everyone within the vicinity would be dead or suffered ruptured eardrums. That's just one of many reasons as to why bombs were not used.
godzilla1077 5 months ago
Comment removed
Tsutomu6 5 months ago
@godzilla1077 Nobody was in that part of the Pentagon, as it was under renovation. Being the Pentagon, its a bunker. Most people in there were protected from the shockwave that you're referring to.
As for applying your theory to WTC 7, nobody is saying a missile brought WTC down. Judging by the videos, it was clearly a demolition. Do you know anyone who has ruptured ear drums after a building demolition? I don't.
NerdInHisShoe 5 months ago
@NerdInHisShoe The reason why people during a demo havent suffered ruptured eardrums is because they're far from the explosion in a demo. They were a quarter mile away. The survivors who heard these explosions were in the vicinity.
godzilla1077 5 months ago
@godzilla1077 What about thermite melting the steel beams? That is theoretically possible.
mamaloney1 4 months ago
@mamaloney1 THemite was never found, only fabricated by Steven Jones. And steel beams didnt melt.
godzilla1077 4 months ago
@godzilla1077 This was a hypothetical statement.
mamaloney1 4 months ago
@mamaloney1 Not at the least. The components that Steven Jones found could be discovered in everyday things like paint, drywall, freon from air units, PC's, and what not. The key components that make up thermite, Steven Jones never found. When Niels Harrit was asked how much thermite was needed to bring down the WTC's he said "over a 100,000 tons with very loud explosions." None of which has happend.
godzilla1077 4 months ago
@29render lol well said
galaxything 4 months ago
@galaxything I don't really want the person dead but at least keep your useless ass comments to themselves...thanks!
29render 4 months ago
@29render I was agreeing with you and you say "keep your useless ass comments to themselves" so your calling your own comments useless? Well don't you just seem like a nice guy... NOT!
galaxything 4 months ago
@galaxything no, i was talking about that person that i told to kill themself and their comments...sorry for the confusion
29render 4 months ago
@alecboi84 Good ear man.
Adrenaline91387 8 months ago
There were multiple diesel fueled generators in the building that was burning for 6-7 hours. Not to mention that in a controlled demolition you hear a series of consecutive explosions and it looks like strobe lights are running up the building and the building collapses immediately afterwards, it doesn't just stay up for an hour or so and then fall. Its not like a fucking cartoon where Wiley Coyote runs off a cliff and doesnt fall until he looks down you fucking idiots.
poopstainmcgoo 9 months ago
Once again you lame ass skeptics question everything..."conversation seems odd"LMFAO..I live in LI NY my father was 5 blocks from the wtc on Water St. he heard numerous thunderous,earth shaking explosions...100s of first responders,firefighters,people heard,SEEN,FELT explosions,flashes,molten metal...1500 professional Architects & Engineers,physics & chemical scientist say that the buildings came down in CD...AND THE VIDEO TO PROVE IT!! 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB BITCHES!!
alecboi84 9 months ago
So this is the explosive detonation that supposedly "instantaneously removed 8 stories of structural resistance" as WTC7 went into freefall? So why don't we hear this enormous explosion in any other video that shows the collapse of WTC7?
unRompecabezas 9 months ago
@unRompecabezas you moron its a DECEPTIVE DEMOLITION.Thats WHY they found THERMITE,an incendiary that melts rite through steel..a lot quieter than RDX,COMP B,so on & so forth...Stop denying the TRUTH,WAKE THE FUCK UP..You really need to stop drinking.watching Jersey Shore,Football,jerking off pal cause A MAJOR REVOLUTION IS UNDERWAY and you dumb downed Americans are the Only thing that stands in the way of restoring our REPUBLIC,not democracy you fools
alecboi84 8 months ago
@unRompecabezas Shhhh Truthers can't explain it, so we're not allowed to ask that question anymore, surely you know that. Duh, rookie mistake! ;-)
hornetgags 8 months ago
@unRompecabezas Because this video was shot 30 feet from WTC7 and the other videos were shot from a couple buildings away with the sound of thousands of people panicking and hundreds of police and firetruck sirens drowning it out.
EvilIntentions01 7 months ago
@EvilIntentions01 Wrong. In every building demo recorded, the explosion drowns out a crowd. And those recordings are from a mile away. If it's 30 feet from the WTC7 then the explosions would be deafening.
godzilla1077 5 months ago
@alecboi84 You do realize that fire and electricity cause explosions. That wasn't a bomb.
godzilla1077 9 months ago
I have strong belief that this video was edited. Does anyone have a source. For hearing an explosion there demeanor is pretty tame. There conversation seems quiet odd as well.
usindependent50 10 months ago
And you think this is evidence. If anything it's counter evidence. So there were explosions, not surprising considering a skyscraper just fell on bld 7 and caused substantial damage and ignited diesel gens.
There is no reference to the timing of this. And controlled demolitions have a series of explosions, which have a much sharper sound.
And no I won't respond because I could have a better argument with my teapot, tea boy.
beorhav 11 months ago
@beorhav listen papshmere breathe..Both my father & uncle were just a few blocks away along with thousands of others.Multiple explosions went off,I personaly have hundreds of videos showing flashes,explosions,sounds.and no the diesel generators were 7 stories below the earth in Wtc..Molten metal (which cannot be from any kind of office fire) was found under all 3 buildings.nano thermite was found in every dust sample saved from the destruction.Multiple motives for the elitest.you dont know shit
alecboi84 11 months ago
@beorhav 1. Bldg 7 collapsed at free fall speed. You can't dispute this, do some research. 2. The middle inner structure of the building folded in on itself. 3. No building in history has collapsed due to fire. 4. ABC news reported that they were going to "pull" Bldg 7. "Pull" is a term used by demolition teams. Later, ABC news recanted and said that wasn't the case...several days later changed their story back to the original and said that firefighters decided to pull the bldg for safety.
delanogaston 9 months ago
@delanogaston
1. It took 18 seconds for the building to collapse because the south end fell first.
2. It did not, he collapse began at the south end.
3. Pull is used when huge cables bring down damaged structures that are still standing after the initial demolition. There were zero cables visible and bulldozers are always used to help pull a building down.
The day of the collapse Fire Chief Nigro said let's pull out.
godzilla1077 9 months ago
@godzilla1077 1. What do you mean the "south end fell first" ? BOTH buildings pancaked down perfectly, leaving nothing but a big hole. 2. How do you exlain the fact that the building fell while black smoke was billowing out? Black smoke indicates a fire lacking oxygen. 3. Pull is also a term used by demoltion crews to drop the building with controlled demolition. I have no idea why your talking about bulldozers. 4. No building in history has fallen due to fire.
delanogaston 9 months ago
@delanogaston
1. CBS video shows that the WTC 7 collapsed gradually and then it fell dramatically. There were zero explosions when the building collapsed. Rumbling sound doesn't count. A demo explosion can be heard from a mile away and it's deafining.
2. Huge plums of smoke have been pouring out for hours in 7. A car fire spews out blak smoke becuase of the complex parts inside, no diferent from generators or air units catching on fire.
3. Pull is not a term used for building implosions.
godzilla1077 9 months ago
@delanogaston
4. From fire alone. The other buildings that caught fire never had the north tower remove 20 stories near the baseline at the south end of the building. WTC 7 did.
godzilla1077 9 months ago
@godzilla1077 Well if you want to think that all of those firemen, police, journalists and other eyewitnesses were lieing about hearing explosions, go ahead. That's a pretty big conspiracy theory your proposing though...just MAYBE they are telling the truth. Also, if there was nothing suspicious about the events of 9/11 why did they put authorities through the hearings? I guess you think Oliver North was innocent too? And JFK was shot by 1 shooter? Congressional hearings followed these too.
delanogaston 9 months ago
@delanogaston Explosions(or sounds resembling explosions) can be heard in any house/structure fire. Difference between explosions and bombings is that a bomb causes ruptured eardrums and produces shockwaves. The people that were interviewed that are near the WTC's that day didn't suffer from ruptured eardrums. A seismic reading as done and there was zero activity that would have resembled any type of bombing. I can show you a video where a school was fire and there were multiple explosions.
godzilla1077 9 months ago
@godzilla1077 There weren't only ruptured eardrums but deaths and loss of limbs caused "somewhere below the 1st floow". Firefighters, cops, etc all said they felt and heard HUGE explosions coming from below the 1st floor. So how did the fire spread to the BOTTOMS of the buildings? And what caused the deaths and all the glass shattering and floor tiles breaking up into thousands of pieces and people saying they "flew up into the air"? You also didn't mention the hearings I noticed. ;)
delanogaston 9 months ago
@delanogaston Those were the elevators slamming down to basement level. Fire also traveled down teh elevator shaft and people nearby caught fire. It's called a back braft if you ever heard of it. The building violently shook from the planes slamming causing people to "fly". There was zero people with ruptured ear drums on 9/11. The hearings alone should tell you there's no inside job considering it was A PUBLIC HEARING. On subject at a time. Not enough room in here.
godzilla1077 9 months ago
@godzilla1077 Dude, elevators slamming down caused the tile to break into thousands of pieces and kill people? Breaking all the glass and peoples bones? C'mon. Is this Silverstein? Plus, the explosions heard were AFTER the planes hit.....why else would there be police and fire there? You think they sent the fire and police BEFORE the planes hit? And the hearings were met with MUCH resistance. Nothing to hide? This is nothing new...throughout history governments create war. Look it up.
delanogaston 9 months ago
@delanogaston Now you're confusing yourself with the jumpers. Don't. Explosions do happen in simple house fires. Fire/electricity/gas are never a good mix. But guess what, the explosions didn't cause much in the seismic activty as conducted by the IIRC. Even at the inital collpase of all the structures, there was nothing that showed that there was any bomibngs at all. It only spiked when the towers impacted the floors. Not to mention ZERO thermite was ever found.
godzilla1077 9 months ago
@godzilla1077 Prof Steven Jones and others found thermite. Also, if you read the results of the hearings you will see that the question was posed "where are the steel supports so we can analyze why they were severed below the 1st floor" but guess what? Someone had the steel cleaned up pretty fast and shipped to China to be melted down. Hmmm, don't we melt down steel here in the USA? Pretty sure we do. Also, are you kidding me with the IIRC? Government offices and most are not scientists
delanogaston 9 months ago
@delanogaston Jones made it up 4 years after 9/11. He never did understand thermite, and how its a gravity event. No thermite iron products has been found. Not a single device used to cut the big columns with thermite was found. Not one truther is able to say how much, and how it works, or show a method, full scale that would work. Free thermite flows with gravity, the WTC columns are vertical, the best use for thermite is mischief, but all with the help of gravity, it does not go sideways.
godzilla1077 9 months ago
@godzilla1077 This is all I need to know. 2 towers dropped and it looked EXACTLY like controlled demoltion. No buildings have EVER imploded because of fire. Even when they burn hot for hours. All I see is black smoke coming from the top of the tower. There's no generators up there. If the top of the towers fell over, we wouldn't be having this conversation, but they didn't. They came down EXACTLY the same way. I used to believe what I was told too, so I don't blame you.
delanogaston 9 months ago
@delanogaston They didn't even fall on their own footprint. If they did fall like a demo they would not have damaged neighboring structures. The WTC's did not collapse from fire ALONE. The Towers were impacted by planes slamming into the WTC's. You have impact+explosion+fire=collapse. It was not just one thing. The towers would not have toppled over like trees because they're not a slab to fall over in that way. All the videos show the collapse began at the point of impact.
godzilla1077 9 months ago
@godzilla1077 You mean the towers that were designed to take multiple 707 hits? What about when the Empire State building was hit by a B-2 bomber? There was fire, then black smoke, then nothing. Now go and build a giant structure from metal, clip a few spots on the SIDE, then even take out some of the cenetral supports (the ones actually holding it up) and tell me if it collapses in on itself. Oh and controlled demos do not always go perfectly in their footsteps either.
delanogaston 9 months ago
@delanogaston If it were just a few non-expert youtube posters making these claims I might have skepticism too..but you are arguing with Congressman, Senators, police officers, firemen, structural engineers, physicists, journalists, and many other credible ppl. The government has been caught multiple times covering things up and why? So we can have war..and then HUGE profits are made from it. Ask yourself what would it have taken to go to war in the middle east if not for a terrorist attack?
delanogaston 9 months ago
@delanogaston All the 9/11 truthers were once people who believed there's no way the government would do this...I was one of them. We changed our opinions after the overwhelming evidence we saw plus the fact that this is a tactic been used throughout history, all the way back to the Roman Empire. It's not new...business as usual. The people arguing against us refuse to believe anything that goes against the media no matter what. True scientific research means u must accept other possibility.
delanogaston 9 months ago
@delanogaston The towers were supposedly built to take a hit but they were never put ot the test. It was all in theory only, not fact. The B-2 bomber dwarfs in size compared to a commercial plane when the bomber crashed into the Empire State Building. The planes that crashed into the WTC's exploded through the other side. The B-2 bomber did not. The ESB only suffered from the front of the building and the fire didnt spread nor suffered the same damage like the WTC's. Not at all alike.
godzilla1077 9 months ago
@godzilla1077 Well like I said, if your not willing to see the possibility the evidence suggests, and after years and years of proven corruption you STILL trust the people pulling the puppet strings? We will have to just agree to disagree. You make valid arguments but you can't prove anything scientifically if you think you already know the answer and don't want to be wrong. I on the other hand, WANT to be proven wrong, but it's looking pretty grim..for me and the millions worldwide who believe
delanogaston 9 months ago 14
@delanogaston You do realize that the physical evidence indeed kills any of the inside job theories. Let's take Steven Jones for example ( the same guy who believes Jesus walked with the Mayans in America) said he found Thermite. Far from the truth, he may have found components that are found in every day things such as dry walls, iron, computers, paint and the likes. 2 key ingredients that make up thermite was never found, nor where they on his paper from his findings.
godzilla1077 9 months ago
@godzilla1077 Many religions believe wacky things. In fact, we Americans spend BILLIONS on one which believes God gave them some land and told them to abuse the existing residents! That's as wacky to me as anything Jones believes.
The two key ingredients of thermite, the REACTANTS, are aluminum and iron oxide. That's all you need! Iron microspheres and aluminum oxide are the PRODUCTS of the thermite reaction. "Dry walls" (I assume you mean "drywall") are irrelevant.
Skeptic121 9 months ago
@Skeptic121 And what about Barium Nitrate? That's a byproduct of thermite, guess how much of that was found? I'll give you a clue....it begins with 'N' and ends with 'E'. The findings of Steven Jones were denounced by every expert including his own faculty at Brigham Young. The amount of thermite needed to bring WTC7 down would have been condiserable (over 100lbs) and strategically placed. The SEC, Amex and NY Office of Emergency Management were in WTC7 and they would have noticed.
hornetgags 8 months ago
@hornetgags You do not need barium nitrate for the thermate or thermite reactions. Barium nitrate, or most any nitrate, makes it ignite more easily, but is not necessary for the reaction. NOTE: barium nitrate is NOT a BYPRODUCT; it is a REACTANT. Did you take chemistry in HS? "Condiserable" thermate could have been placed in the electrical facility that comprised the first five floors of WTC7 without anyone noticing; least of all the SEC, who failed to notice Bernard Madoff. :)
Skeptic121 8 months ago
@Skeptic121 Quote from AE for 9/11 truth: Richard Gage author: We incorrectly identified the thermite device illustrated in this article as a "cutter charge.” But, the device as described in the patent is only an igniter heat source only used to ignite larger charges. It does not in and of itself have the capability of cutting structural steel. They also talk about remote detonators removing the need for detcord, however they have no evidence to back it up? A little far fetched maybe?
hornetgags 8 months ago
@Skeptic121 So effectively what AE for 911 Truth are saying they would need a cutter charge to ignite the thermite and remote detonators, however as of 2001 they can't prove they existed however with further investigation they can find out. How convenient, and they sold that turkey to the conspiracy theorists and it was completely eaten up. Sorry, say what you want, nothing will convince me otherwise so I'll leave you to your paranoia. Good luck with it, hope you get the answers you want.
hornetgags 8 months ago
@hornetgags Somebody needs a sense of humor!
Skeptic121 8 months ago
@Skeptic121 You're right, my bad.
hornetgags 8 months ago
@godzilla1077
There are only two essential ingredients in thermite and nanothermite. Iron oxide and elemental aluminum. 'IF' Jones' findings are true, then both of these ingredients were found with 3:2 oxygen - iron ratios consistent with nanothermite. Iron oxide is NOT elemental iron, and iron oxide particles smaller than 120 nm and thoroughly mixed with elemental aluminum in the PRE-ignited source is classified as nanothermite. Period.
splendid1000 8 months ago
@delanogaston well said
alecboi84 4 months ago
@godzilla1077
You can have a controlled demolition that doesnt look exactly like a classic controlled demo. They wouldnt want it to look like a controlled demo obviously. These were non traditional, top to bottom progressive collapses with increased resistance opposed to a traditional, bottom to top demo with much less, if not, no resistance at all. This would be why the buildings didnt reach free falls speeds and didnt create perfect footprints.
splendid1000 8 months ago
@splendid1000 Meaning there was no demo explosions at all. There was no seismic activity that would have registered as bombs, only large spikes when the buildings hit the floor. Not to mention there was zero evidence of any bombs what so ever.
godzilla1077 8 months ago
@beorhav cnt'd....5. It takes demolition teams several weeks and bring in engineers to collapse buildings, so if they did decide to "pull" it, how did they do that? 6. Both WTC towers fell in the same manner. Firefighters and other eyewitnesses said they heard large series of explosions that originated from the floors below ground lvl. 7. If you take a plane into the air, you ask the tower for clearance...after taking off if you don't respond, the ATC notifies the FAA and the FBI yet the....
delanogaston 9 months ago
@beorhav ...planes continued to fly even though they broke contact with the ATC. None of this seems odd to you? I love it when sheeple who believe everything the government tells them tries to force the "truthers" to prove their theories. I ask YOU to prove YOURS? Which is the bigger conspiracy, that the government (iran-contras) is involved in yet another lie, or that thousands of congressman, senators, former CIA, judges, lawers, and scientists are all making this up?
delanogaston 9 months ago
there were 9 deisel generaters in building 7. Fire damage and the damage from the towers debris hitting it brought it down. Firefighters who were there to which my girfriend was one say the building buckling at 2 ;15 pm and they pulled all there gear just before 3. It buckled and collapsed. There were only 3 main beams in there and 1 was very bent from the heat.
gladheateher4now 1 year ago
@alecboi84: But the sound is not original. A friend of mine was there, he didn't hear this. And one should hear it, if it were loud like this. So i guess this video is a soundfake at least.
francwalter 1 year ago
Is this the moment the second plane crashed into the tower?
francwalter 1 year ago
@francwalter No..this is after the demoliton of the Twin Towers..
alecboi84 1 year ago
Abolish the private,jewish control federal serve,turn back to God and bring your army home...
We have exterminated the property owners in Russia. We are going to do the same thing in Europe and America.
(The Jew, December 1925, Zinobit)
If you want the whole truth,the future of America,what is coming your ways,plase read this book for free on internet.
Who Is Esau-Edom,..Who Is Esau-Edom.
MsMihailescu 1 year ago
I'm thinking that maybe there was a malfunction in bringing down 7, thus the workers seen coming out of the building on a CNN clip saying that " watch that building, it will be coming down soon". As explosions went off behind them, these guys were wearing construction gear. They were leaving the area that Firefighters left at approx 11:30 am. Maybe # 7 was supposed to crumble at the same time as the closest tower and it never happened, giving Barry Jennings time to get out, wow, might be on to..
blite13 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Is there any evidence that this was anywhere near WTC7?
sixdgrs 1 year ago 2
@sixdgrs It is supposed to be on the corner of W. Broadway and Murray, But HBO's "In Memorium: New York City" lists it as being on Chambers St. The photographer's name is Lucia Davis. You can follow her path to the towers from the North.
Another documentary pinpointed the time to within a half hour and location. I can't remember where I saw it, but I do know it is sometime before noon. Check out these clips.
watch?v=AyIVFHYwN4Q
watch?v=wV69ZByB0xE&NR=1
Jackblind1000 1 year ago
@sixdgrs The time was 11:15 exactly, please watch:
watch?v=Lcs8JmqAdDg&NR=1
Jackblind1000 1 year ago
This video occurs a little before noon(position of the sun at that phonebooth) and the blast did come from WT7 two blocks away from that phonebooth..
Other disturbing videos are: "CBS-Net Dub5 09" and "CBS-Net Dub5 13"
These were suppressed and released about two months ago from NIST. NIST lost a Freedom Of Information Act lawsuit. Almost 1,000TB of video was released.
Jackblind1000 1 year ago
@Jackblind1000,
.
"Other disturbing videos ..."
.
Yes! There are many disturbing videos. The whole day was disturbing. 19 idiots doing such an act in the name of a primitive religion is indeed disturbing. The fact that there are more religious idiots following this example (Berlin, Madrid, London, Bali, etc.) is very disturbing. And it is very disturbing to see that some people, based on rumors and questionable inferences alone, think that somebody else did all of that.
wimahlers 1 year ago
Comment removed
Jackblind1000 1 year ago
Comment removed
Jackblind1000 1 year ago
@wimahlers Please watch the video: "Zero An Investigation into 9/11"
It will update you to 2008. Everything in that video is true, I checked everything out that was new for me.
The whole world knows about this, except us.
Jackblind1000 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Jackblind1000,
.
"The whole world knows about this, except us."
.
What does the whole world know? Is it the following:
On September 11th 2001 19 hijackers hijacked 4 planes, crashed into3 buildings, destroying the WTC complex totally , the Pentagon partially and crashed one airplane in Shankesville. All hijackers were religiously motivated idiots trained by Al Qaeda and financed by Al Qaeda or islamic organization with close ties to Al Qaeda. Yes, indeed, all that is clear.
wimahlers 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@wimahlers This video is not fake, it is established. And there are many more to back it up. I don't like it's implications, either.
National Institute of Standards and Technologies(NIST) is releasing suppressed videos after a Freedom Of Information Act lawsuit. YouTube is now being flooded with the new video. It is straight from the government.
Please look at this one: "9/11 FireFighters - THREE Explosions After Plane Hit WTC"
Jackblind1000 1 year ago
@Jackblind1000,
.
"This video is not fake"
.
Which video are you talking about? And why is it supposedly important? What fact investigated and concluded in relation with the 9/11 incident is wrong and what is your proof that it is so? Please be clear about that.
.
For instance, as to WTC7, this building collapsed internally first before the outer shell/walls gave way. It is objectively visible that it internally failed first and the cause of the failure is backed by WTC5 and other facts.
wimahlers 1 year ago
@wimahlers I am speaking of the video on this page and any video, that I mention.
You say: "For instance, as to WTC7, this building collapsed internally first before the outer shell/walls gave way."
This is true with any controlled demolition, rapidly and symmetrically. Office fires won't collapse any part of a good steel cage, they don't get hot enough even with kerosene or jet fuel. WT7 had the strongest steel cage on the planet.
Jackblind1000 1 year ago
@Jackblind1000,
.
"[internal collapse] This is true with any controlled demolition, rapidly and symmetrically."
.
No it is not! A controlled demolition is noisy with explosive sounds. There were none of those sounds during any of the collapses of WTC1, 2 or 7.
Not to mention the fact that controlled demolition leaves certain demolition trademarks. None of these trademarks was ever reported by any clearer, investigator or visitor of the WTC site during the long period of cleanup.
wimahlers 1 year ago
@wimahlers You are not very aware. You seem to have all the correct answers, in your mind for yourself, but not for me. Do we threaten or scare you? Why are you here?
Jackblind1000 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
wimahlers 1 year ago
@wimahlers Yup, all the interior collapsed and left the outer casing of # 7 standing like a house of cards so the shell fell at freefall speed. Yeah, and your pig can fly, right? Give me a break. How could the outercasing of the steel framework just stand there like nothing was happening inside of it? Without showing any true visible signs that the interior had completely collapsed? You are a fool, you believe your TV,you lie about what happened on 9/11, supporting a corrupt governments version.
blite13 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@blite13,
.
"How could the outercasing of the steel framework just stand there like nothing was happening inside of it?"
.
Answer: See building 5. Reference:
chapter: "4.3.2 WTC 5 - Local Collapse Mechanisms"
Source: fema. gov/pdf/library/fema403_ch4. pdf
Participating invesitgator: Jonathan Barnett asce. org/uploadedFiles/Communications/bio_jbarnett. pdf
.
And there you have it...
wimahlers 1 year ago
Comment removed
Jackblind1000 1 year ago
@X353N,
.
"lol @ wimahlers trying to counter every proof ..."
.
You got that wrong! You should say:
"lol @ wimahlers awaiting every proof ..."
.
Show me your proof of explosives having been used, proof of thermite being able to cut support pillars almost instantly and silently and leaving no traces, proof of thermite able to maintain sustainable fires with temperatures that melts metal, etc.
.
I am awaiting all that. If you don't show me any of that than there is nothing to counter.
wimahlers 1 year ago
why is everyone always calling truther people names i think they make a good point all they want is an investigation.So why are you assholes so uptight about it?whats the worst that could happen they reinvestigate?some truthers lost friends and family as some of you may have wouldnt you want every stone turned?it just dont make any sence to me
dustinlee8281 1 year ago
@dustinlee8281,
.
"i think they make a good point all they want is an investigation"
.
Well, no! That is the whole point. They don't make good points. All they have is speculations that contradict each other and contradict known facts. And such a position is no basis to do an investigation all over again.
wimahlers 1 year ago
@wimahlers "all over again"? they never did one and such a momentous event you would think that it would be a good idea to investigate it even a tiny bit instead of covering it up.
charlie123abc360 1 year ago
wimahlers 1 year ago
@wimahlers Yes i knew of those hilarious excuses of investigations. Anyone who think this is what buildings that are collapsing look like is actually retarded, they were DEMOLISHED! its too obvious.
charlie123abc360 1 year ago
@charlie123abc360,
.
"its too obvious."
.
I am honered to meet a person which such great insight and perception who immediately see it is "obvious".
.
And of course it is obviously easy to prove that it was done with thermite which was, of course, obviously present in all the dust (see: Jones/Harrit/Gage/Griffin).
.
So, it must be obviously easy to do a non-hilarious investigation by making a representative cross section of a steel support construction and DEMOLISH it with thermite.
wimahlers 1 year ago
@wimahlers yes...
charlie123abc360 1 year ago
@charlie123abc360,
.
So please do the scientifically representative experiment instantly collapsing a representative mockup steel support section similar to the construction used on the WTC buildings by means of any deriviate or micture of deriviates of thermite. And show me you can indeed instantly cut through an actual support beam. Instantly, without sound and not leaving traces seen by any clearer that worked there during all the months of clearing.
wimahlers 1 year ago
@wimahlers Well i dont have any information on thermite and i never mentioned it, i have heard there are reports of thermite tho if u really want to talk about that. You also falsely state there were no sounds. There are many methods to collapsing a building. Anyways it looks exactly like a demolition and not a collapse...FULLSTOP. period. end of story. bye.
charlie123abc360 1 year ago
@charlie123abc360,
.
"Anyways it looks exactly like a demolition and not a collapse...FULLSTOP. period. end of story."
.
Actually, to me this collapse looks the same, though on a different scale as the collapse of the Delft university building that burned for several hours.
.
Anyway, it is irrelevant. "looks like" without justification never is a scientific argument. If a person (Harrit/Jones et.al.) thinks it is demolition than (s)he has to formulate a scientifically sound argument.
wimahlers 1 year ago
@charlie123abc360,
.
"You also falsely state there were no sounds"
.
No! I correctly claim that there were no (=zero) explosive sounds during the collapse of WTC1, 2 or 7.
Note: the part that says: "during the collapse of WTC1, 2 or 7" is the all imported paart.
wimahlers 1 year ago
@wimahlers Who are you and what makes you so insistent on pushing your view on this subject that you'll happily state such nonsense?
charlie123abc360 1 year ago
@charlie123abc360,
.
"Who are you and what makes you so insistent on pushing your view on this subject that you'll happily state such nonsense?"
.
I am who I say in my profile I am.
And since when is it nonsense to ask for some supporting proof for otherwise baseless claims?
To start with, convince the scientific community that it is possible to (almost) instantly collapse a representative steel support section using nothing but any micture and deriviate of thermite.
wimahlers 1 year ago
@wimahlers What is it with you and thermite? ill flip your agument and say "To start with, convince the scientific community that it is possible to (almost) instanly collapse a representative steel support section using nothing but" A PLANE.
charlie123abc360 1 year ago
@charlie123abc360,
.
"What is it with you and thermite?"
.
Well, nothing!
But it seems to matter a great deal among truthers.
.
By the way, the planes were not responsible for the collapse. In that context they were insignificant. It was the OUT OF CONTROL fires that brought down these steel constructions. Without it the WTC would still be standing.
The fact that fire can easily bring down a steel constructed building is a well known fact. Ask any university, then you know.
wimahlers 1 year ago
@wimahlers Melting point of steel: about 1400 degrees. Burning temperature of kerosene: 290 degrees. See the gap in your theory?
charlie123abc360 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@charlie123abc360,
.
"Melting point of steel: about 1400 degrees. Burning temperature of kerosene: 290 degrees. See the gap in your theory?"
.
That indeed would be a problem if anyone claimed that the support section had melted. It did not. And nobody claims that. Nor does anybody claim the additional kerosene was of any siginificant importance. See the gap in your theory?
wimahlers 1 year ago
@charlie123abc360: Steel doesnt need to melt in the scenerio, all it needs is to be weakened. An orange flame burns at about 1,100 degrees, enough to significantly weaken steel.
athabascka 1 year ago
@athabascka Doesn't need to, but did.
charlie123abc360 1 year ago
@dustinlee8281
"why is everyone always calling truther people names"
Ridicule is a tactic to make people trying to expose the truth look stupid and to try to shut them up.
The last thing they want is for "truthers" to be taken seriously because they might expose the whole game, so to counter this the first line of defense is to make fun of them, if this stage fails, the second stage is the threats and intimidation which i dare say has already been carried out on lots of people.
louisevale2 1 year ago
...and "Dylan Avary" is of course "Dylan Avery". I am terrible with names. I am also slightly dyslectic.
wimahlers 1 year ago
errata
.
Error in name. "Rudowski" should be "Rudkowski".
Hereby corrected.
wimahlers 1 year ago
I am just asking questions. But truthers refuse to answer hard questions. They must have something to hide. And when I stalk Mr.Gage, Rudkowski style, demanding answers, he reacts by ignoring me or instruct his bodyguards to remove me from his book sessions. This proves that Mr. Gage must have something to hide!
Now here is 1 of my questions:
.
WTC7 collapsed but was not hit by an airplane!
How could the conspirators have known WTC1 debris would set WTC7 on fire so they could blow it? How?
wimahlers 1 year ago
@wimahlers You are such a fuckwit and everyone but you knows it. Unfortunately you are totally devoid of all objective reasoning and to continue a rational debate with you is totally pointless as your capacity for critical thinking has obviously never past puberty. You stalk Richard gage? You sound like a pyscho. I shall no longer reply to you and give you the respect of a reasonable person as it would be a complete waste of my time and yours.
Silverlin212 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Silverlin212,
.
"You stalk Richard gage? You sound like a pyscho."
.
Thank you for that confirmation!
You just confirmed that Rudowski is a [sic] psycho. If you had understand the irony on which your statement was based you might have understand that I described WHY(!) people react the way they react when stalked by Rudowski. I showed how it was done by using the imaginary scenario of me stalking Gage in the same way. Of course I don't. I can't. I live in The Netherlands.
wimahlers 1 year ago
@Silverlin212,
.
" I shall no longer reply to you and give you the respect of a reasonable person ."
.
You mean you will not give the respect any more to Luke Rudowski and Dylan Avary. Avary whom, by the way, interviewed Jennings. The Dylan Avary of which Jennings have requested to remove his interview from Dylan's [sic] documentary. The interview Dylan refuse to remove because he desperately need every ad hoc excuse to justify the message of his documentary.
wimahlers 1 year ago
@wimahlers here's an answer to your question:
they knew (by looking at previous building demolition statistics) that debris would hit nearby buildings that are as near as WTC7. and the debris don't have to start a fire, it just need to hit the building. they could still start the fire with pre-installed explosives inside WTC7.
snaileri 1 year ago
@snaileri,
.
"they knew (...) that debris would hit nearby buildings that are as near as WTC7. and the debris don't have to start a fire, it just need to hit the building. they could still start the fire with pre-installed explosives inside WTC7."
.
Really?
.
You wonder why CD companies do exist. Worse, every CD company is always woried that it goes wrong. Worse still, it sometimes does go wrong. Here everything went perfect on the first record attempt ... according to you!
wimahlers 1 year ago
@snaileri,
.
Some added details to my previous reply. According to you:
Exotic explosives were installed in WTC1+2, airplanes were prepped and crashed into WTC1+2. They let it cook for an hour or so and somehow managed to start a collapse from the impacted floors whereby they also managed to direct the collapse towards WTC7, that was also prepped with explosives, and managed to start fires on exactly the impacted areas, let it cook for 7 hours. All this was and is unnoticed by anybody.
wimahlers 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@swu880,
.
"wimahlers, its quite sad to see idiots like u who are only the product of America's poor excuse for an education- u lack any understanding for simple physics concepts, laws & notions"
.
Yes, very sad. Except:
a) I am not American.
b) I have taught mathematics and physics in high school - in that respect I am like Chandler!
c) You implicitly call organization like the AAAS, NAS, ASCE, NTSB and all universities 'idiots' too. For they all support the core NIST conclusions.
wimahlers 1 year ago
fires dont haphazardly cause massive explosions especially if there are no or exotic accelerants or explosives present. until u can scientifcally prove this otherwise, stop spoutin ur nonsense
swu880 1 year ago