All of the experts are contracted by the U.S. government. The so called experts who work for a magazine are not experts. As a result of 9/11 we now have the Patriot Act that has taken away more civil liberties from Americans then anything in U.S. history. But look through history if you dare. You will find out that this has happened before.
I like people without engineering degrees claiming they know shit. Somehow being an anonymous pompous dick on the internet has made you an expert on everything.
i've had enough of this 'documentary'. it's not debunking anything. it's not refuting evidence. it's a sleazy attempt to slander people who want answers and a way to make those people 'conspiracy theorists' which now translates to 'wacko'. investigate 911.
Lol that's it? couple guys go on at the end and say that "loose change" is debunked and we believe them? I dunno about anyone else but I think Loose Change had a much more compelling argument.
@dachamp171 OK, you convinced me. But for the record the "experts" include structural engineers who claim the building didn't come down because of the airplanes but because of controlled demolitions and I might be an idiot but if they have nothing to hide how come the U.S. government didn't explain this? I don't disagree that its a terrorist attack, I just disagree on who the terrorists are...and I might be an idiot, but any monkey has eyes and can see the lies everywhere.
@dachamp171 ..and loose change definitely had a much more compelling argument that you calling me an idiot, but I get it, usually people will resort to name calling when they can't back their claims. If I'm an idiot, tell me why, and what did the "experts" prove exactly?
@mackayash the experts agree that there was NO demolition, a plane hit the pentagon not a missile, and flight 93 was NOT shot down it crashed due to the passengers thwarting the Al Qaeda guy's plans
@dachamp171 The experts also found a Passport that fell out of the burning plane that took down a superstructure, a hulk of a building, and the passport proves the involvement of Al Quaeda terrorists yet they only "found 1 of 4 black boxes" on the plane....funny enough that black boxes are made out of the most durable material imaginable, and I'll let you take a guess at what passports are made out of. There's a lot of contradictions in this story, even at the highest levels...
@dachamp171 i.e., don't eat up everything you hear the "experts" say...the experts are just as easy to corrupt as anyone else. The first day after 9/11 some "experts" went on air, some structural engineers, and claimed that the buildings could not have come down because of the planes and that they were definitely controlled demolitions, and a couple days later they echoed the American government as they refuted their statements. That only tells me that they've been paid off.
@mackayash they found 2 black boxes from the plane that hit the pentagon (it was broken) n the black box from flight 93 which they played for the public
@dachamp171 Uhuh...still doesn't explain how the rest of the black boxes went "missing" and doesn't explain how a passport makes it out intact and legitimate enough to make out who the passport belongs to. And the box they played the public they played in pieces (i.e., they probably left out the good stuff). Honestly man, with all my heart I hate whoever did this to the people in the WTC's that day I honestly to anything that is good in this world hate whoever did that that day with passion...
@dachamp171 ..but I just don't think they told the public the truth. The evidence available today for 9/11 leans way more in favor of an inside operation than an outside job from "terrorists", wouldn't you rather know the truth? what if you can prevent something like this from happening again in the future? I'll tell you what, its not the war on terror that's gonna stop it, its people speaking up and demanding answers. The world is more black and white than you think.
@mackayash whoa whoa whoa ur an idiot, u jus said that the evidence leans more towards it being an inside job?? ur a joke, there is no evidence saying it was an inside job, 20 years from now the kids in school will be learning the truth about 9/11 that it was a terrorist attack in their american history books
@mackayash it will be a terrorist attack until PROVEN that it was not so, until u and ur nut case friends show actual proof no one smart will believe u DUR
@dachamp171 Dude, none of the "experts" that were part of the official explanation ever tested anything for explosives residue. Other than that (since all of the visual indicators of controlled demolition were present) how could they know?
So what is your explantion for the molton steel? And why can't a few people do the job? It's not like they (who ever they are) have to do a great job at bring the towers down. Cut the steel columns and the towers fall. Use enough nano-thermite at the right columns and good bye towers. The guys in the buildings doing some sort of jobs had access. At lest the government should have checked out the possibility of explosives by checking the steel ruble. Oh thats right that evidence was destoryed.
@TahunaTheButcher1975 Thermite isnt used in controlled demolitions because its unpredictable. You would need to get all of the thermite bombs to burn through the columns at the same time. Thats like trying to get many fires to burn out at the same time. Not only that but it would take a hundred + guys to sneak pass office workers, tear down walls and remove fire proofing to get to the bare steel, and wire the bombs. It would at least take a week and a hundred guys.
@Alacazam777 And as for noise? What do you think it sounds like when anew firm has a floor remodeled? A construction site. I worked in a large museum, and the offices got computer rewired three times in seven years! One small set of offices with one owner. And they had to clear offices when they were working over head.
@TrutherCP30 From google search 9/11 Sirius, first link.
"Sirius was a Yellow labrador and was the only animal to die on 9/11..." One lie out of the way.
A couple of dogs to check some bags? I'm pretty sure that's a dramatic decrease in the former security levels. Also, the bombs weren't in trucks or bags, they were in the walls. If you had actually thought about what my comment said, you wouldn't have wasted our time on this pointless detail.
@Alacazam777 You might as well have said, "officeworkers" came to "work" on the "train" and sat at "Desks" and "Typed" into "computers". It still don't explain how you hide lots of precision explosives and detonation equipment that has to survive the planes hitting, the fires, and then blow on exactly the most heavily damaged floor, and then cause all the floors to fail under that floor in order.Magic, thats how.
@Alacazam777 What I am doing there, in case its above your head, is taking the piss out of your habit of putting quotation marks around words to try and make them look suspicious. Major buildings are supposed to have regular fire evacuation drills. Monthly if possible.
@SvenTviking "I am... taking the piss out of your habit of putting quotation marks around words to try and make them look suspicious."
Well, that way you don't whine that I heard you wrong or ignored what you said, and I'm actually explaining your quotes and answering your questions directly, not putting words in your mouth.
"Major buildings are supposed to have regular fire evacuation drills."
I know, but when the "knew internet" lines were being installed, they were much more common.
Lets pretend we are in a court of law. Let say the U.S. Government is being prosecuted for 9/11. What would the defense's argument to rebut the microspheres of Iron found in 9/11 dust? How could those spheres get in the dust if the government' s story is correct? How is steel melted by a contents fire that is oxygen starved? How could so many people believe that there were secondary explosions far below the impact area? Where are the government scientists that explain the symmetry of collapse?
@lizardfirefighter110 You get microspheres of iron from arc welding. Quite a lot of that goes on in the building of all those skyscrapers in Manhatten. Also, thermite is used in welding and was used on The WTC site in building the towers. And nobody has proved that microspheres of iron come from thermite. And thermite is a bloidy stupid, difficult way to cut structural beams. There. Just beat your arguement.
@SvenTviking It has been proven twice that a byproduct of thermite is microspheres of iron. Steven Jones did. I will send you the video of the other. If anyone had a half a brain they would INVESTIGATE the composition of the spheres. My guess is that welding spheres are different than thermite spheres. OK, If thermite was used in the construction of the towers then how is it possible to find Nano-thermite in 9/11 dust a half a mile away? Nano-thermite was invented in the 90s
@lizardfirefighter110 I missed the word "Just" from thermite. But Thermite is the most awkward way possible to conduct a demolition. Why use it at all? Its only mentioned in Loose change to try and explain a fall of liquid metal that has been explained as melted aluminium from the aircraft wreckage. The fall even comes from the corner of the building where the wreckage ended up and started after floor 81 visibly sagged letting the pooled metal flow.
@SvenTviking Yes, the fall of liquid metal was probably aluminum. But what about the pools of molten steel found underneath the rubble 2 and 3 weeks after 9/11? Aluminum (especially smaller amounts) cools much more quickly than steel... If it was just melted aluminum from the aircraft, it wouldn't still be hot liquid weeks later.
@lizardfirefighter110 The word "Thermite" was just tagged to this metal flow without any prior thought of the practicalities of its use. The amount needed, the huge crucibles needed to hold and direct it.how the hell you get it to cut a virtical beam? Steven Jones? The man who could not get support or a posative peer review from his own university? A man that even staff at his own 9/11 truth group have described as a liar?
@lizardfirefighter110 He demonstrated cutting a virtical beam with thermite by cutting a piece of thick wire. Not a six foot square I beam box. I would check if the man said the sky was blue. Of course they found Iron oxide, aluminium oxide and sulphur in the wreckage. all componants of THERMATE which was the first buzz word before nano thermite came into the picture. ie, rust, burnt aluminium and sulphur from burnt plastics.
@lizardfirefighter110 I watched "Loose Change" with an open mind. Saw at first, quite a shocking film. Then I started noticing the holes, then the silly mistakes, then the bloody lies. I looked at the "Debunking 9/11" site to see the opposite point of view. And they agreed with me. Mentioned everything I had. Told me lots of things I did not know about. Do yourself a favour. Start looking at this objectively. Not what you want to see .9
@lizardfirefighter110 and the secondary explosions below the floors on fire? You means the ones reported by the janitor guy on the ground flloor, heard from the basement? The ones he waited TWO YEAR to mention, after bighing up his own role in saving others. And after he converted to Islam and started going to neo Nazi rallys? Trustworthy witness!
@lizardfirefighter110 The defence to the microspheres of iron is simple. You get em with flame cutting and welding steel. As the samples containing microsheres were collected months after the attack, there had been rather a lot of flame cutting on the site. As for oxygen starved fires? Black smoke shows oxygen starvation somewhere, but not all over the fire. The draft caused by wind hitting a 110 story building is quite enough for high temps.
@lizardfirefighter110 Also, the samples containing microspheres had no custody log. They were not presented to any court, law enforcement or lawyer. They could have come from anywhere. They would and are inadmissable as evidence in any court.
ok its a bigger pidture it also spritual anyone not born again can be used by satan not knowing beause you dont know his plan we know the plan because we read the bible satan plan is to put a system up to track everyone on earth he wants this so he can know who will be on his side and sevehim those who dont will be killed this is why they are setting up a chipping system read revolations bible
One more thing I was a Freemason, and I can confidently assure you with nearly 110% I am loyal to the US and have served in the Coast Guard, there is no 9/11 cover up most of these truthers don't even know what a Freemason is and assume its some faciest group, our main purpose was to help the poor and orphaned.
@SvenTviking The explosives were installed in the months before 9/11. It was very easy to hide once the bomb sniffing dogs were taken out of the buildings.
@Alacazam777 Of Course! Cos Tonnes and Tonnes of explosives and miles upon miles of det chord is really easy to hide! You REALLY aint thought much about this, have you? You just make a glib statement. I've seen the inside of buildings set for explosive demolition. You can't miss the stuff. Plus the have to manually demolish loads of walls and structure first to make it work.
@SvenTviking You're acting like I'm saying that they just stuck all the bombs into the maintenance rooms and locked the door.
The bombs were wired into the buildings' walls. Staff reported all the power being cut off to the complex and so "new internet wiring" could be installed. Staff members also reported floors above them sounding like a construction zone (must have been quite the internet cable...), but when they checked in later, nothing looked different.
@Alacazam777 Plus, explosives are very, very loud. Glass hundreds of yards away breaks. The demo companys have to pay for it. The only glass broken in buildings surrounding the WTC was in buildings facing the towers, directly damaged by falling debris. No glass broke that was not facing the site. That does not happen with explosives. And who said that sniffer dogs were taken away for months? Another myth taken as gospel.
@Alacazam777 This is always the story. Dylan Avery says this. So its true. Steven Jones says that. So thats true. The Govt always lies. So everything they say is lies. But when Avery or Jones lie through their teeth (Like steel has to melt before it falls, the pair of knuckle dragging morons), oh, thats different!
@Alacazam777 Yeah they do that maintenance people,in the most heaviley computerised buildings in the world, 120 achres of office space. Hundresds of fims. People moving out and in. Floors being remodelled for new clients. Anyway, the truther mainstream story is that it all occured when there was a power outage on a quarter of the north tower for 12 hours.
@SvenTviking "Anyway, the truther mainstream story is that it all occured when there was a power outage on a quarter of the north tower for 12 hours."
So why did you even say the rest of that stuff? And we don't say that it ALL happened in 12 hours. Remember the part about more and more frequent evacuation drills?
@Alacazam777 The original Loosechange story was that it ALL occured during a 48 hour blackout that effected all the towers. This had to be changed after it was proved that it was twelve hours and only a quarter of one tower. But as it takes huge amounts of time to prepere a building for demolition (48 days for one tower a third the size of one WTC tower) all of this is a moot point.
@SvenTviking "The original Loosechange story was that it ALL occured during a 48 hour blackout that effected the towers."
Then I guess they were wrong about something, because it took way longer than that.
"And don't you think all these rich and powerfull banks in the WTC would complain if their staff was regularly being evacuated stopping their work making vast amounts of cash?"
So all the staff's employers automatically knew when there was an evacuation drill (which had happened before).
@Alacazam777 And don't you think all these rich and powerfull banks in the WTC would complain if their staff was regularly being evacuated stopping their work making vast amounts of cash? Of course the fact that the building was full of the most powerfull people in the world, bankers, rather screws up the illuminati theory.
@Alacazam777 And do you realise how difficult it would be to guide an aircraft into hitting just the right floor? It aint a laser guided bomb. Its a big slow turning airliner and one little gust of wind on those big wings and you've missed by ten floors. Another glib statement.
@SvenTviking "And do you realise how difficult it would be to guide an aircraft into hitting just the right floor? It aint a laser guided bomb."
No, it was a signal-guided plane - and the signal was probably coming from WTC 7. The paths of the planes lined up with the location of Building 7, and it would have been the perfect control center. Of course, when they were done with it they had to bring it down as well, to hide any evidence (such as computers and hard drives).
@Alacazam777 Why on eearth would building 7 make a good control point? Thats off the top of your head! . Control would mean a large military antenna and control system. This is just conjecture to fit the whole wild story. They don't remote fly real aircraft like radio controlled models. They have flight deck cameras so they fly it like a real plane. And at 570 mph, hitting the right floor is HARD. NYC is full of cross winds from the other towers.
@Alacazam777 What? Evacuation drills about once a month? Thats normal, as it should be. And have you got direct evidence of more and more drills or is it heresay used to fit the great conjecture? No hard evidence. And you still don't understand the amount of explosive, det chord and wire and the impossibility of hiding it or protecting it from premature detonation.
@Alacazam777 Can I advise you to check out the "debunking 9/11" site and the "Loose change 2nd edition viewers guide" site. Be objective. BE OBJECTIVE. I was. I saw all the bloody lies of the truth movement because I have reasonable general knowledge. You may learn a few things, like to stop coming out with debunked cliches like "Steel has to melt to fail".
@SvenTviking I know that steel does not have to melt to fail. The point is that the temp that jet fuel burns at, and only for a few minutes, is not enough to cause a collapse. You might say that the office supplies inside all burning reached a high enough temperature, but there have been many office fires in the past - some engulfing the entire building and lasting for almost 2 days. Why would the fires at WTC be so different?
(Remember, the jet fuel burned away in the first ten minutes).
@Alacazam777 So the hundreds and hundreds of tons of office furniture, paper, computers, wooden office devides, carpets, none of this burned when lit by 1000s of gallons of kerosene? This is old stupid shit. You can get 2000 degrees in a surburban house fire!! Fact. Now try five acres of office. Stop repeating tired claims that demean yourself. And the smoke plume was visible from the international space station!
@Alacazam777 1/ No other office building with the same design has burned. The WTC is NOT a steel frame building. You would not know that because you do not know what a steel frame building is.
2/ No other skyscraper fire involved five entire floors being ignited virtually all over at once. Fires in other cases started at a fixed point and moved out. None of thesebuildings had been hit by an airliner at iver 500 mph.
@Alacazam777 My dad was a wartime fireman, up to 1967. I have his books that show steel frame buildings with many times the structural redundancy of the WTC towers, with their beams twisted to fuck and collapsed thru simple fires. The Windsor tower fire had local collapse and that was a much stronger design. Don't believe this truther shit just because they keep repeating it.
@SvenTviking How do you know that those buildings were much stronger than the WTC? The WTC Towers were state-of-the-art. Besides, most of the fires that you're referring to either had a very large spread of the fire, had been burning for hours and hours, or both.
And I know that fires severely damage high-rise buildings, but they never cause them to suddenly fall straight into their own footprint at freefall speed.
@Alacazam777 The WTC design was only licensed for construction in New York. The tube within a tube construction was considered to have design flaws by every other city that built skyscrapers. It allowed for huge open office space but had little redundentcy. It was NOT a "Steel frame" design. These are very strong buildings but as they get taller and heavier, space is lost on the lower floors to large structural steelwork.
@Alacazam777 No other towers suffered 500+ mph widebody airliner impacts. Nor did they have instant floor wide ignition of five floors. And the WTC did not fall at free fall speed. Another old chestnut long repeated. Video evidence has disproved that. But still you repeat it, don't want anything inconvenient like the truth to spoil your theorys. WTC footprints cover 2 acres. Rubble covered 40 acres. How the hell is that "Falling in its own footprint"?
@Alacazam777 NO?!?!! Some of the rubble fell on the footpint. The rest fell over 40 acres. For a building to be defined as" falling in its own footprint", 80 or 90% has got to in the acre of ground over each foundation. Not spread over a fucking city block. See, you're at it again. Make some baseless statement that does not fit the facts. Makes it sound like demolition is the only answer. Repeat ad fucking nausium. WTC towers built to take a fucking asteroid strike!
@Alacazam777 Can you do me a favour and fuck off? I've been doing this back and forth for months. You just repeat garbage like some parrot. Don't matter how many times I shoot you down, on and bloody on. You are either a true idiot or you have your own agenda in repeating lies. You seem to think this turns them to truth. Hey, guess what? Nobody is taking any notice. You lot aint getting your day in court. Nobody of any worth believes you.
@SvenTviking - "repeating lies...think it turns them to truth." I think it DOES turn them to truth from the believers perspective.
The 9/11 "truth" movement is like a cargo cult. They'll keep interpreting the information to suit their cult no matter what evidence is put before them. In the U.K. aliens making crop circles is a multi million dollar industry. People that make them have filmed themselves doing it but still it persists. There have been death threats to "government agents" over it.
@SvenTviking@SvenTviking The airplane did not do nearly as much damage as suggested. The towers were designed to take MULTIPLE hits from planes just a little smaller. The Towers had swayed more during winter storms than when the planes hit.
"And the WTC did not fall at free fall speed."
The point is that they fell at only a couple seconds too long for free-fall speed, but still much faster than they should have.
@Alacazam777 "The towers were designed to take MULTIPLE hits from planes"
They were designed to take a SINGLE INDIRECT hit. The emergency stairs were in the center because they didn't think that a plane flying DIRECTLY into the center was realistic
"The airplane did not do nearly as much damage as suggested"
The planes severed over half of the support columns!
"Towers had swayed more during winter storms than when the planes hit"
@KayBeeEee1983 No, they were designed to take MULTIPLE hits, not that it really matters since each of them were hit once anyway...
"The planes severed over half of the support columns!"
So? The only way for the buildings to collapse in the way they did was for all the columns to go at once, which obviously wasn't done by the planes, as they collapsed an hour after impact.
"The swaying traumatized people!"
I was talking about at the base of the tower, since that is were the building is held up.
@Alacazam777 "No, they were designed to take MULTIPLE hits"
No, they weren't. Why would they be designed for that? How would 2 planes ever accidentally hit 1 tower at, roughly, the same time? There's a PBS documentary on YouTube called "Why the Towers Fell". Watch it.
"The only way for the buildings to collapse in the way they did was for all the columns to go at once"
What?! So if the columns broke 1 by 1, the building would remain standing?
@KayBeeEee1983 "How would 2 planes ever accidentally hit 1 tower at, roughly, the same time?"
Well, that doesn't really matter since only one plane hit each tower.
"So if the columns broke 1 by 1, the building would remain standing?"
I assume that you read my post as you quoted me, but I guess I have to point it out to you. I said, "The only way for the buildings to collapse IN THE WAY THEY DID was for all the columns to go at once." The fell in the wrong way.
@Alacazam777 "Well, that doesn't really matter since only one plane hit each tower."
You said the buildings were designed to take multiple hits from multiple planes. That just shows that you have no clue what you're talking about (shocker).
"The only way for the buildings to collapse IN THE WAY THEY DID was for all the columns to go at once."
They didn't ALL go at once. The plane took out 2/3 of them at once, then when the rest couldn't take it anymore, the remaining columns went at once.
@KayBeeEee1983 "You said the buildings were designed to take multiple hits from multiple planes...you have no clue what you're talking about."
No, it shows that there is no point in even arguing about this point when we both know that only one plane hit each tower (by the way, you said yourself that the towers could take one hit).
"...when the rest couldn't take it anymore, the remaining columns went at once."
How did they all go at once? Did they all suffer the exact same amount of damage?
@Alacazam777 This is what I'm saying. You said they were designed to take multiple hits. That is wrong. It doesn't matter what ACTUALLY happened. That's not the issue...The point is that you have no idea how these buildings were built because you think they were designed to take multiple hits.
When a person cuts down a tree, does he have to cut through the whole thing? No, he just has to cut enough to make the trunk unable to support the load, then the rest goes all at the same time.
@KayBeeEee1983 "It doesn't matter what ACTUALLY happened. That's not the issue...The point is that you have no idea how these buildings were built because you think they were designed to take multiple hits."
Yes that is the issue! Scroll up and watch the video! And I do know how the buildings were designed, but you started arguing against it, so I said that it doesn't even matter in order to prevent us from getting off topic and start insulting each other (guess it didn't work).
@KayBeeEee1983 "When a person cuts down a tree... he just has to cut enough to make the trunk unable to support the load, then the rest goes all at the same time."
I know, but does the tree fall straight down into a pulverized pile? No, it falls over because of the imbalanced weight.
@Alacazam777 Even if you put a bomb right in the middle of the trunk and exploded it, it wouldn't collapse straight down into a pulverized pile...Jesus Christ...Your brain really is incapable of forming a rational thought.
@Alacazam777 Yeah, because they are a little bit bigger than trees.
If there were bombs in the building, they would've been detonated as soon as the plane hit to kill all the witnesses of the bombs. And if you have a problem with that, they would've at least detonated them all at the same time, which means that people who heard explosions after the planes hit weren't hearing bomb detonations. Anyone who thinks otherwise is an idiot.
@Alacazam777 If they were outside, then that makes their "witness testimony" even less credible. The noises could've been anything that fell. Debris and bodies were falling constantly. As I've said before, when your building has been hit by an airplane and you're fleeing for your life, EVERY loud noise is going to sound like an explosion.
"No, because if they all went at the same time, it would sound like this"
Then they would've detonated the bombs when the building was hit by the plane.
@KayBeeEee1983 "If they were outside, that makes their "witness testimony" even less credible. EVERY loud noise is going to sound like an explosion."
I think that the police officers, firemen, camera crews, and many onlookers that weren't running away would be able to tell the difference between a falling desk and a huge explosion. This quote reminds me of the "official" explanation of 9/11 witness testimony: they were all panicking and were therefore hearing things and getting easily confused.
@Alacazam777 "I think that the police officers, firemen, camera crews, and many onlookers that weren't running away would be able to tell the difference between a falling desk and a huge explosion."
Well, you'd be wrong then.
"This quote reminds me of the "official" explanation of 9/11 witness testimony: they were all panicking and were therefore hearing things and getting easily confused."
@Alacazam777 Also, the collapse started AT the impact zones. That fact is plainly obvious. There is no evidence whatsoever that points to anything above or below the impact zone.
@KayBeeEee1983 What, do you think they would set off the chain reaction to bring down the building half-way down? Of course it would be started where the planes hit!
@Alacazam777 So you're saying the whole building was wired with explosives but they only detonated the ones in the impact zones? Or maybe the planes themselves were the detonators? But then the other bombs wired below the impact zones would have surely exploded as the buildings collapsed. Of course, there's no evidence of that and the people who survived the WTC 1 collapse in stairwell B don't attest to that. Also, the bombs ABOVE the impact zones wouldn't have exploded until they hit the ground
@KayBeeEee1983 The whole (or most of) of the building was wired with explosives. The bombs at the impact zones were detonated to start the collapse to get the building falling. Then, the bombs down below went off as the towers collapsed to get rid of any resistance that would slow down the collapse (like the support columns and where the floors were attached to them).
Some of those later bombs went of a tad too soon, which is what the "squibs" of debris shooting out below the debris wave are.
@Alacazam777 "So you're saying the whole building was wired with explosives but they only detonated the ones in the impact zones?"
That's the only question you answered. and this was your answer:
"The whole (or most of) of the building was wired with explosives. The bombs at the impact zones were detonated to start the collapse to get the building falling"
The fact that you think the broken windows during the the collapses were bomb detonations shows just how big of a joke you are.
@Alacazam777 Yes, the "squibs" you referred to are windows blowing out because of the air pressure. The Stairwell B survivors of the WTC 1 collapse said the wind pushed them all over the place and down stairs. Anyone who thinks those "squibs" are bomb detonations is retarded. Why would anyone plant just a few explosives like that? Why were they placed randomly?
@Alacazam777 Those doors would of been closed. The air would of rushed to the point where it would of been forced out and could no longer travel down, which is the bottom of the shafts at the sky lobbies. At that point it had nowhere to go but out after traveling downward through the shafts from the point of collapse. To say they were blasts of that magnitude ignores the fact that there are numerous videos of the collapse where no explosions are heard. They would of been clearly recorded.
@bonchie1 Wow, so the pressured air that was able to smash through a fully supported skyscraper, in which half the support is in the outer wall, and take debris with it wasn't able to get past elevator doors? Why use 4-foot thick steel columns when we can just use thin, hollow elevator doors to support our towers?
@bonchie1 "there are numerous videos of the collapse where no explosions are heard. They would of been clearly recorded."
You obviously have no idea how loud the collapse was. No you aren't going to be able to pick up the sounds of the squibs in all that noise. Explosions WERE heard, however, constantly from when the planes hit to when the towers fell (which is when you'd be able to hear them). Explosions were also heard just before the collapse.
@KayBeeEee1983 "So, the tower can sway at the bottom, but not at the top. Genius. I guess, according to you, the top of the building just hangs in the air?
@Alacazam777 "Towers had swayed more during winter storms than when the planes hit"
"I was talking about at the base of the tower, since that is were the building is held up."
If the base of the tower sways, whether by wind or by plane impact, the whole building is going to sway, and it's going to be felt a lot more on the upper floors. Are you saying that the people at the base of the tower didn't feel the building sway when the plane hit? Because that's totally wrong. It shattered windows.
@KayBeeEee1983 "Are you saying that the people at the base of the tower didn't feel the building sway when the plane hit? Because that's totally wrong. It shattered windows."
I'm saying that the towers had swayed more in violent winter storms (which is what I have been saying for a month!) And actually, the windows were blown out by unexplained explosions that went off at ground level in the towers seconds before the planes hit.
@Alacazam777 "I'm saying that the towers had swayed more in violent winter storms"
Like I've been saying, the swaying traumatized people. It threw people against walls and made people think the building was collapsing. You are just one more "truth"er who is not basing their statements on anything but their own thoughts. The windows were broken by the movement of the building. Then 1 second later they heard the plane explode. Sound travels at about 1100 feet/second. THAT is a fact!
@Alacazam777 Why do we sometimes see lightning flash in the sky, but we don't hear the thunder until some amount of time later? Is lightning a government conspiracy too? 10 year olds understand this better than you.
@KayBeeEee1983 What are you talking about? Was that terrible insult based in anything I have said - or were you just tired of keeping your inner douche bag bottled up through our little debate?
@KayBeeEee1983 "You've shown you have no ability to reason."
A debate is an argument, and in order to argue about anything you have to have reason (even if it is strange reasoning). So someone could argue about the supposed existence of the tooth fairy based on the missing tooth and sudden money.
@Alacazam777 Another Dylan Avery said it, it must be true. Firms were moving in and out, all the time. You get that with 220 floors, an acre each. This is all stuff where Dylan and Stephen and the rest take something some bod who worked in the WTC said, and then misquote them or change the emphesis. Amd suddenly its gospel.
@Alacazam777 When they move new firms in, they remodel the whole floor. The floors are concrete skimmed. They use jackhammers and drills to cut the floor off for new wiring.
@Alacazam777 Like the radio recording of the fire chief saying the fire on his floor could be put out with two hoses. Dylan didn't mention that this floor was the Least damaged, having only a wingtip pass thru it. And that it was a sky lobby with no office furniture to burn. Suddenly this proves that there was very little fire in the damaged floors. Thats lies that is. And quoting a dead man to do it.
@SvenTviking "Dylan didn't mention that this floor was the Least damaged, having only a wingtip pass thru it."
If this fire was supposedly hot enough to melt (or soften) steel columns a few inches thick and to make the buildings collapse, when no office fire in history has, then the fire would have had to be extremely intense all over. After all, the fire had to make every support column break at the exact same time to make the Towers collapse how they did (don't ask me how fire can do that).
@Alacazam777 The fires made the floors hot, about 650 degrees. They then sagged under their own weight. This pulled the floor edges in pulling the already compromised perimeter coloums in till they failed as the enormous forces unzipped. There are photos and video footage in closeup of this happening. Dylan avery in the last interview I saw of him SAID HE NOW THOUGHT THIS IS WHAT HAPPENED! Yeah, he's backtracked that far!
Truther are Better than you'll ever be.Doomsday800.Answer the bombs on the Washington Bridge on 911.....I can go on and on.Chopping the lie of 911.Calling people Truther / Birther all name calling with no Facts just slander.They want facts you want to name call due to lack of IQ.
@greenb1a Because the debunkers don't know what they're talking about. They do a lackluster job at at least reviewing what the "theorists" have to say. They're not theorists rather the anti-conspiracy theorists are the theorists because they haven't even looked at the other side of the debate. This documentary is just so biased I don't know where to begin. Funny how they don't bother to mention the pools of molten metal at the base of the three trade center buildings that collapsed...
The financial accounting office of the Pentagon gets hit, and the only offiste backup for their records was in WTC Building 7...
The criminals from Tyco, Worldcom, Enron, and Dyncorp benefitted from 9/11 way more than Al Qaeda or Osama Bin Laden who we still can't find. You want to know who caused 9/11, follow the MONEY and ask yourself who benefitted at every step? Who wanted the towers taken down? Who took out the record insurance policies? Who wanted a war in Iraq and Afghanistan?
Dillan Avery...An 18 year old that was "just finishing high school" figured it all out. The people who believe this 9/11 conspiracy nonsense must be real dunces.
This has been flagged as spam show
All of the experts are contracted by the U.S. government. The so called experts who work for a magazine are not experts. As a result of 9/11 we now have the Patriot Act that has taken away more civil liberties from Americans then anything in U.S. history. But look through history if you dare. You will find out that this has happened before.
stjohnsmanor 1 month ago
Oww this is just about discrediting critics,...
Kaandorpius 2 months ago in playlist History Channel on 9/11 Myths
"9/11 was used to make billions and billions of dollars."
Uh, aren't we over a trillion dollars in debt?
dw1992 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
How do they know it was an inside job, if they have no conclusive evidence? They think it is an inside job there is no way to know at this time.
nicpetnic 4 months ago
Comment removed
asdfghjkl6661 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
megamogx 6 months ago in playlist History Channel on 9/11 Myths
I like people without engineering degrees claiming they know shit. Somehow being an anonymous pompous dick on the internet has made you an expert on everything.
GreenKillerPuppet 9 months ago
Once again not a CT but the PNAC has been shut down!! Who gives a shit if the project is shut down, we are LIVING IT!
rmed30 9 months ago
Wtf? This so called documentary isnt talking about the evidence and the facts whatsoever because they cannot debunk that
fizwizx 9 months ago
@fizwizx You should actually watch what they said...they debunk every myth.
TheGold3nArRow 9 months ago
i've had enough of this 'documentary'. it's not debunking anything. it's not refuting evidence. it's a sleazy attempt to slander people who want answers and a way to make those people 'conspiracy theorists' which now translates to 'wacko'. investigate 911.
rhymepays 9 months ago
hahaha. If facts are watering down, LC was as dry as month old cake in the desert.
nivarion 10 months ago
April 18, Monday. National Geographic Channel rebroadcast of "911: Science and Conspiracy". I highly recommend seeing it.
andyt1313 11 months ago
@andyt1313 I don't have that channel, just upload it.
scottieman2 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Hello tupacami！自己紹介します、デイビッドと言います：－）鹿児島に住んでいます。メールしてください： dr50376272@gmail.com
tupacガ好き、TUPACのイレズミある
どこに住んでいますか？福岡？遠くない：－）何していますか？？仕事？学生？またね！デイビッド：－）
1973mazdarx4coupe 11 months ago
Find and download "Screw loose change" movie for a good explaination about all the lies in "Loose change"
carlosallerestevez 11 months ago
remind me who own's The History Channel again...
fmcname 1 year ago
Lol that's it? couple guys go on at the end and say that "loose change" is debunked and we believe them? I dunno about anyone else but I think Loose Change had a much more compelling argument.
mackayash 1 year ago
@mackayash ur an idiot, loose change is some stupid ass kids trying to get famous, over 90% of legit experts agree it was a terrorist attack
dachamp171 1 year ago
@dachamp171 OK, you convinced me. But for the record the "experts" include structural engineers who claim the building didn't come down because of the airplanes but because of controlled demolitions and I might be an idiot but if they have nothing to hide how come the U.S. government didn't explain this? I don't disagree that its a terrorist attack, I just disagree on who the terrorists are...and I might be an idiot, but any monkey has eyes and can see the lies everywhere.
mackayash 1 year ago
@dachamp171 ..and loose change definitely had a much more compelling argument that you calling me an idiot, but I get it, usually people will resort to name calling when they can't back their claims. If I'm an idiot, tell me why, and what did the "experts" prove exactly?
mackayash 1 year ago
@mackayash the experts agree that there was NO demolition, a plane hit the pentagon not a missile, and flight 93 was NOT shot down it crashed due to the passengers thwarting the Al Qaeda guy's plans
dachamp171 1 year ago
@dachamp171 That's damning evidence.
mackayash 1 year ago
@dachamp171 The experts also found a Passport that fell out of the burning plane that took down a superstructure, a hulk of a building, and the passport proves the involvement of Al Quaeda terrorists yet they only "found 1 of 4 black boxes" on the plane....funny enough that black boxes are made out of the most durable material imaginable, and I'll let you take a guess at what passports are made out of. There's a lot of contradictions in this story, even at the highest levels...
mackayash 1 year ago
@dachamp171 i.e., don't eat up everything you hear the "experts" say...the experts are just as easy to corrupt as anyone else. The first day after 9/11 some "experts" went on air, some structural engineers, and claimed that the buildings could not have come down because of the planes and that they were definitely controlled demolitions, and a couple days later they echoed the American government as they refuted their statements. That only tells me that they've been paid off.
mackayash 1 year ago
@mackayash they found 2 black boxes from the plane that hit the pentagon (it was broken) n the black box from flight 93 which they played for the public
dachamp171 1 year ago
@dachamp171 Uhuh...still doesn't explain how the rest of the black boxes went "missing" and doesn't explain how a passport makes it out intact and legitimate enough to make out who the passport belongs to. And the box they played the public they played in pieces (i.e., they probably left out the good stuff). Honestly man, with all my heart I hate whoever did this to the people in the WTC's that day I honestly to anything that is good in this world hate whoever did that that day with passion...
mackayash 1 year ago
@dachamp171 ..but I just don't think they told the public the truth. The evidence available today for 9/11 leans way more in favor of an inside operation than an outside job from "terrorists", wouldn't you rather know the truth? what if you can prevent something like this from happening again in the future? I'll tell you what, its not the war on terror that's gonna stop it, its people speaking up and demanding answers. The world is more black and white than you think.
mackayash 1 year ago
@mackayash whoa whoa whoa ur an idiot, u jus said that the evidence leans more towards it being an inside job?? ur a joke, there is no evidence saying it was an inside job, 20 years from now the kids in school will be learning the truth about 9/11 that it was a terrorist attack in their american history books
dachamp171 1 year ago
@dachamp171 Again you resort to name calling, OK dude, it wasn't an inside job, go eat up more lies from your government.
mackayash 1 year ago
@mackayash it will be a terrorist attack until PROVEN that it was not so, until u and ur nut case friends show actual proof no one smart will believe u DUR
dachamp171 1 year ago
@dachamp171 Dude, none of the "experts" that were part of the official explanation ever tested anything for explosives residue. Other than that (since all of the visual indicators of controlled demolition were present) how could they know?
iGirlFriday 6 months ago
So what is your explantion for the molton steel? And why can't a few people do the job? It's not like they (who ever they are) have to do a great job at bring the towers down. Cut the steel columns and the towers fall. Use enough nano-thermite at the right columns and good bye towers. The guys in the buildings doing some sort of jobs had access. At lest the government should have checked out the possibility of explosives by checking the steel ruble. Oh thats right that evidence was destoryed.
TahunaTheButcher1975 1 year ago
How did they not check the molten steel theory? What about the red/grey chips of thermite in the dust?
TahunaTheButcher1975 1 year ago
@TahunaTheButcher1975 Thermite isnt used in controlled demolitions because its unpredictable. You would need to get all of the thermite bombs to burn through the columns at the same time. Thats like trying to get many fires to burn out at the same time. Not only that but it would take a hundred + guys to sneak pass office workers, tear down walls and remove fire proofing to get to the bare steel, and wire the bombs. It would at least take a week and a hundred guys.
phlyegles43 1 year ago
@FlourNest it's all the Hitler propaganda on history channel, jews want you to remember Hitler 24/7 seems like the holocaust is a business,
sumstuff46 1 year ago
meeehhh, P-R-O-P-A-G-A-N-D-A LOL
DUMBED DOWN TRASH brought to you by the HITLERY CHANNEL
sumstuff46 1 year ago
"Horriffic death tolls" yeah, and I guess no innocent people are killed in these fucking wars over in the Mid East
tyu3456 1 year ago
@TrutherCP30
Alacazam777 1 year ago
why try to go this far to debunk conspiracy theorys?? unless it is having an effect on people.
dongerado 1 year ago
@TrutherCP30 Uhhh... I told you why. Read my comment... .
Alacazam777 1 year ago
@Alacazam777 And as for noise? What do you think it sounds like when anew firm has a floor remodeled? A construction site. I worked in a large museum, and the offices got computer rewired three times in seven years! One small set of offices with one owner. And they had to clear offices when they were working over head.
SvenTviking 1 year ago
@SvenTviking They were told that there was remodeling, but when it was done, no apparent changes had been made.
Alacazam777 1 year ago
I just LURVE Truthers! Like a battle of wits with a dead chimp.
SvenTviking 1 year ago
@TrutherCP30 From google search 9/11 Sirius, first link.
"Sirius was a Yellow labrador and was the only animal to die on 9/11..." One lie out of the way.
A couple of dogs to check some bags? I'm pretty sure that's a dramatic decrease in the former security levels. Also, the bombs weren't in trucks or bags, they were in the walls. If you had actually thought about what my comment said, you wouldn't have wasted our time on this pointless detail.
Alacazam777 1 year ago
@Alacazam777 You might as well have said, "officeworkers" came to "work" on the "train" and sat at "Desks" and "Typed" into "computers". It still don't explain how you hide lots of precision explosives and detonation equipment that has to survive the planes hitting, the fires, and then blow on exactly the most heavily damaged floor, and then cause all the floors to fail under that floor in order.Magic, thats how.
SvenTviking 1 year ago
@SvenTviking "You might as well have said, "officeworkers" came to "work" on the "train" and sat at "Desks" and "Typed" into "computers"."
What are you talking about?
And there couldn't have been a section that didn't have explosives in them where the planes would hit?
Alacazam777 1 year ago
@Alacazam777 What I am doing there, in case its above your head, is taking the piss out of your habit of putting quotation marks around words to try and make them look suspicious. Major buildings are supposed to have regular fire evacuation drills. Monthly if possible.
SvenTviking 1 year ago
@SvenTviking "I am... taking the piss out of your habit of putting quotation marks around words to try and make them look suspicious."
Well, that way you don't whine that I heard you wrong or ignored what you said, and I'm actually explaining your quotes and answering your questions directly, not putting words in your mouth.
"Major buildings are supposed to have regular fire evacuation drills."
I know, but when the "knew internet" lines were being installed, they were much more common.
Alacazam777 1 year ago
time for the two minute hate!
mutchanogos 1 year ago
heh, propaganda... anyone spot the hypocrite?
Cacmypants 1 year ago
1:11 - he was gonna say Compliment.
wprovo 1 year ago
Lets pretend we are in a court of law. Let say the U.S. Government is being prosecuted for 9/11. What would the defense's argument to rebut the microspheres of Iron found in 9/11 dust? How could those spheres get in the dust if the government' s story is correct? How is steel melted by a contents fire that is oxygen starved? How could so many people believe that there were secondary explosions far below the impact area? Where are the government scientists that explain the symmetry of collapse?
lizardfirefighter110 1 year ago
@lizardfirefighter110 You get microspheres of iron from arc welding. Quite a lot of that goes on in the building of all those skyscrapers in Manhatten. Also, thermite is used in welding and was used on The WTC site in building the towers. And nobody has proved that microspheres of iron come from thermite. And thermite is a bloidy stupid, difficult way to cut structural beams. There. Just beat your arguement.
SvenTviking 1 year ago
@SvenTviking It has been proven twice that a byproduct of thermite is microspheres of iron. Steven Jones did. I will send you the video of the other. If anyone had a half a brain they would INVESTIGATE the composition of the spheres. My guess is that welding spheres are different than thermite spheres. OK, If thermite was used in the construction of the towers then how is it possible to find Nano-thermite in 9/11 dust a half a mile away? Nano-thermite was invented in the 90s
lizardfirefighter110 1 year ago
@lizardfirefighter110 I missed the word "Just" from thermite. But Thermite is the most awkward way possible to conduct a demolition. Why use it at all? Its only mentioned in Loose change to try and explain a fall of liquid metal that has been explained as melted aluminium from the aircraft wreckage. The fall even comes from the corner of the building where the wreckage ended up and started after floor 81 visibly sagged letting the pooled metal flow.
SvenTviking 1 year ago
@SvenTviking Yes, the fall of liquid metal was probably aluminum. But what about the pools of molten steel found underneath the rubble 2 and 3 weeks after 9/11? Aluminum (especially smaller amounts) cools much more quickly than steel... If it was just melted aluminum from the aircraft, it wouldn't still be hot liquid weeks later.
iGirlFriday 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@lizardfirefighter110 The word "Thermite" was just tagged to this metal flow without any prior thought of the practicalities of its use. The amount needed, the huge crucibles needed to hold and direct it.how the hell you get it to cut a virtical beam? Steven Jones? The man who could not get support or a posative peer review from his own university? A man that even staff at his own 9/11 truth group have described as a liar?
SvenTviking 1 year ago
@lizardfirefighter110 He demonstrated cutting a virtical beam with thermite by cutting a piece of thick wire. Not a six foot square I beam box. I would check if the man said the sky was blue. Of course they found Iron oxide, aluminium oxide and sulphur in the wreckage. all componants of THERMATE which was the first buzz word before nano thermite came into the picture. ie, rust, burnt aluminium and sulphur from burnt plastics.
SvenTviking 1 year ago
@lizardfirefighter110 I watched "Loose Change" with an open mind. Saw at first, quite a shocking film. Then I started noticing the holes, then the silly mistakes, then the bloody lies. I looked at the "Debunking 9/11" site to see the opposite point of view. And they agreed with me. Mentioned everything I had. Told me lots of things I did not know about. Do yourself a favour. Start looking at this objectively. Not what you want to see .9
SvenTviking 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@lizardfirefighter110 and the secondary explosions below the floors on fire? You means the ones reported by the janitor guy on the ground flloor, heard from the basement? The ones he waited TWO YEAR to mention, after bighing up his own role in saving others. And after he converted to Islam and started going to neo Nazi rallys? Trustworthy witness!
SvenTviking 1 year ago
@lizardfirefighter110 The defence to the microspheres of iron is simple. You get em with flame cutting and welding steel. As the samples containing microsheres were collected months after the attack, there had been rather a lot of flame cutting on the site. As for oxygen starved fires? Black smoke shows oxygen starvation somewhere, but not all over the fire. The draft caused by wind hitting a 110 story building is quite enough for high temps.
SvenTviking 1 year ago
@lizardfirefighter110 Also, the samples containing microspheres had no custody log. They were not presented to any court, law enforcement or lawyer. They could have come from anywhere. They would and are inadmissable as evidence in any court.
SvenTviking 1 year ago
Why do these idiots believe in conspiracies!!!
Their no true!!!
AragonKingofmacedon 1 year ago
when people stop thinking for themselves theyve lost their human touch. Slaves
meth062 1 year ago
when people stop thinking for themselves theyve lost their human touch.
meth062 1 year ago
ok its a bigger pidture it also spritual anyone not born again can be used by satan not knowing beause you dont know his plan we know the plan because we read the bible satan plan is to put a system up to track everyone on earth he wants this so he can know who will be on his side and sevehim those who dont will be killed this is why they are setting up a chipping system read revolations bible
libbie7777 1 year ago
One more thing I was a Freemason, and I can confidently assure you with nearly 110% I am loyal to the US and have served in the Coast Guard, there is no 9/11 cover up most of these truthers don't even know what a Freemason is and assume its some faciest group, our main purpose was to help the poor and orphaned.
GunsOfThePhoenix 1 year ago
The best one I heard recently was that the buildings were laced with explosives for demolition WHEN THEY WERE BUILT!
Nobody told em explosives have a shelf life, due to them being very reactive chemicals.
And how was all these tons and tons of HE and the thousands of miles of Det chord hidden for 33 years?
SvenTviking 1 year ago
@SvenTviking The explosives were installed in the months before 9/11. It was very easy to hide once the bomb sniffing dogs were taken out of the buildings.
Alacazam777 1 year ago
@Alacazam777 Of Course! Cos Tonnes and Tonnes of explosives and miles upon miles of det chord is really easy to hide! You REALLY aint thought much about this, have you? You just make a glib statement. I've seen the inside of buildings set for explosive demolition. You can't miss the stuff. Plus the have to manually demolish loads of walls and structure first to make it work.
SvenTviking 1 year ago
@SvenTviking You're acting like I'm saying that they just stuck all the bombs into the maintenance rooms and locked the door.
The bombs were wired into the buildings' walls. Staff reported all the power being cut off to the complex and so "new internet wiring" could be installed. Staff members also reported floors above them sounding like a construction zone (must have been quite the internet cable...), but when they checked in later, nothing looked different.
Alacazam777 1 year ago
@SvenTviking Evacuations from the complex (more often then the drills) came often as "maintenance" came in to improve the towers' "wiring."
Alacazam777 1 year ago
@Alacazam777 And finally, do you really think George w. Foot in mouth Bush and his govt of stooges could pull all this off?
SvenTviking 1 year ago
@SvenTviking No, I do not think that, and I never said that. More like his puppeteers, the elite illuminati.
Alacazam777 1 year ago
@Alacazam777 Plus, explosives are very, very loud. Glass hundreds of yards away breaks. The demo companys have to pay for it. The only glass broken in buildings surrounding the WTC was in buildings facing the towers, directly damaged by falling debris. No glass broke that was not facing the site. That does not happen with explosives. And who said that sniffer dogs were taken away for months? Another myth taken as gospel.
SvenTviking 1 year ago
@Alacazam777 This is always the story. Dylan Avery says this. So its true. Steven Jones says that. So thats true. The Govt always lies. So everything they say is lies. But when Avery or Jones lie through their teeth (Like steel has to melt before it falls, the pair of knuckle dragging morons), oh, thats different!
SvenTviking 1 year ago
@Alacazam777 Yeah they do that maintenance people,in the most heaviley computerised buildings in the world, 120 achres of office space. Hundresds of fims. People moving out and in. Floors being remodelled for new clients. Anyway, the truther mainstream story is that it all occured when there was a power outage on a quarter of the north tower for 12 hours.
SvenTviking 1 year ago
@SvenTviking "Anyway, the truther mainstream story is that it all occured when there was a power outage on a quarter of the north tower for 12 hours."
So why did you even say the rest of that stuff? And we don't say that it ALL happened in 12 hours. Remember the part about more and more frequent evacuation drills?
Alacazam777 1 year ago
@Alacazam777 The original Loosechange story was that it ALL occured during a 48 hour blackout that effected all the towers. This had to be changed after it was proved that it was twelve hours and only a quarter of one tower. But as it takes huge amounts of time to prepere a building for demolition (48 days for one tower a third the size of one WTC tower) all of this is a moot point.
SvenTviking 1 year ago
@SvenTviking "The original Loosechange story was that it ALL occured during a 48 hour blackout that effected the towers."
Then I guess they were wrong about something, because it took way longer than that.
"And don't you think all these rich and powerfull banks in the WTC would complain if their staff was regularly being evacuated stopping their work making vast amounts of cash?"
So all the staff's employers automatically knew when there was an evacuation drill (which had happened before).
Alacazam777 1 year ago
@SvenTviking "The original Loosechange story was that it ALL occured during a 48 hour blackout that effected all the towers."
Funny, because before you were saying that it was 12 hours.
Alacazam777 1 year ago
@Alacazam777 The srory was 48 hours, the reality was 12 in one quarter of the north tower.
SvenTviking 1 year ago
@Alacazam777 And don't you think all these rich and powerfull banks in the WTC would complain if their staff was regularly being evacuated stopping their work making vast amounts of cash? Of course the fact that the building was full of the most powerfull people in the world, bankers, rather screws up the illuminati theory.
SvenTviking 1 year ago
@Alacazam777 And do you realise how difficult it would be to guide an aircraft into hitting just the right floor? It aint a laser guided bomb. Its a big slow turning airliner and one little gust of wind on those big wings and you've missed by ten floors. Another glib statement.
SvenTviking 1 year ago
@SvenTviking "And do you realise how difficult it would be to guide an aircraft into hitting just the right floor? It aint a laser guided bomb."
No, it was a signal-guided plane - and the signal was probably coming from WTC 7. The paths of the planes lined up with the location of Building 7, and it would have been the perfect control center. Of course, when they were done with it they had to bring it down as well, to hide any evidence (such as computers and hard drives).
Alacazam777 1 year ago
@Alacazam777 Why on eearth would building 7 make a good control point? Thats off the top of your head! . Control would mean a large military antenna and control system. This is just conjecture to fit the whole wild story. They don't remote fly real aircraft like radio controlled models. They have flight deck cameras so they fly it like a real plane. And at 570 mph, hitting the right floor is HARD. NYC is full of cross winds from the other towers.
SvenTviking 1 year ago
@Alacazam777 What? Evacuation drills about once a month? Thats normal, as it should be. And have you got direct evidence of more and more drills or is it heresay used to fit the great conjecture? No hard evidence. And you still don't understand the amount of explosive, det chord and wire and the impossibility of hiding it or protecting it from premature detonation.
SvenTviking 1 year ago
@Alacazam777 Can I advise you to check out the "debunking 9/11" site and the "Loose change 2nd edition viewers guide" site. Be objective. BE OBJECTIVE. I was. I saw all the bloody lies of the truth movement because I have reasonable general knowledge. You may learn a few things, like to stop coming out with debunked cliches like "Steel has to melt to fail".
SvenTviking 1 year ago
@SvenTviking I know that steel does not have to melt to fail. The point is that the temp that jet fuel burns at, and only for a few minutes, is not enough to cause a collapse. You might say that the office supplies inside all burning reached a high enough temperature, but there have been many office fires in the past - some engulfing the entire building and lasting for almost 2 days. Why would the fires at WTC be so different?
(Remember, the jet fuel burned away in the first ten minutes).
Alacazam777 1 year ago
@Alacazam777 So the hundreds and hundreds of tons of office furniture, paper, computers, wooden office devides, carpets, none of this burned when lit by 1000s of gallons of kerosene? This is old stupid shit. You can get 2000 degrees in a surburban house fire!! Fact. Now try five acres of office. Stop repeating tired claims that demean yourself. And the smoke plume was visible from the international space station!
SvenTviking 1 year ago
@Alacazam777 1/ No other office building with the same design has burned. The WTC is NOT a steel frame building. You would not know that because you do not know what a steel frame building is.
2/ No other skyscraper fire involved five entire floors being ignited virtually all over at once. Fires in other cases started at a fixed point and moved out. None of thesebuildings had been hit by an airliner at iver 500 mph.
SvenTviking 1 year ago
@Alacazam777 My dad was a wartime fireman, up to 1967. I have his books that show steel frame buildings with many times the structural redundancy of the WTC towers, with their beams twisted to fuck and collapsed thru simple fires. The Windsor tower fire had local collapse and that was a much stronger design. Don't believe this truther shit just because they keep repeating it.
SvenTviking 1 year ago
@SvenTviking How do you know that those buildings were much stronger than the WTC? The WTC Towers were state-of-the-art. Besides, most of the fires that you're referring to either had a very large spread of the fire, had been burning for hours and hours, or both.
And I know that fires severely damage high-rise buildings, but they never cause them to suddenly fall straight into their own footprint at freefall speed.
Alacazam777 11 months ago
@Alacazam777 The WTC design was only licensed for construction in New York. The tube within a tube construction was considered to have design flaws by every other city that built skyscrapers. It allowed for huge open office space but had little redundentcy. It was NOT a "Steel frame" design. These are very strong buildings but as they get taller and heavier, space is lost on the lower floors to large structural steelwork.
SvenTviking 11 months ago
@Alacazam777 No other towers suffered 500+ mph widebody airliner impacts. Nor did they have instant floor wide ignition of five floors. And the WTC did not fall at free fall speed. Another old chestnut long repeated. Video evidence has disproved that. But still you repeat it, don't want anything inconvenient like the truth to spoil your theorys. WTC footprints cover 2 acres. Rubble covered 40 acres. How the hell is that "Falling in its own footprint"?
SvenTviking 11 months ago
@SvenTviking "WTC footprints cover 2 Rubble covered 40 acres. How the hell is that 'Falling in its own footprint'?"
The buildings FELL into their own footprint, the rubble went all over. You can see this by watching the videos.
Alacazam777 11 months ago
@Alacazam777 NO?!?!! Some of the rubble fell on the footpint. The rest fell over 40 acres. For a building to be defined as" falling in its own footprint", 80 or 90% has got to in the acre of ground over each foundation. Not spread over a fucking city block. See, you're at it again. Make some baseless statement that does not fit the facts. Makes it sound like demolition is the only answer. Repeat ad fucking nausium. WTC towers built to take a fucking asteroid strike!
SvenTviking 11 months ago
@Alacazam777 Can you do me a favour and fuck off? I've been doing this back and forth for months. You just repeat garbage like some parrot. Don't matter how many times I shoot you down, on and bloody on. You are either a true idiot or you have your own agenda in repeating lies. You seem to think this turns them to truth. Hey, guess what? Nobody is taking any notice. You lot aint getting your day in court. Nobody of any worth believes you.
SvenTviking 11 months ago
@SvenTviking - "repeating lies...think it turns them to truth." I think it DOES turn them to truth from the believers perspective.
The 9/11 "truth" movement is like a cargo cult. They'll keep interpreting the information to suit their cult no matter what evidence is put before them. In the U.K. aliens making crop circles is a multi million dollar industry. People that make them have filmed themselves doing it but still it persists. There have been death threats to "government agents" over it.
WillShakespeare2007 10 months ago
@SvenTviking @SvenTviking The airplane did not do nearly as much damage as suggested. The towers were designed to take MULTIPLE hits from planes just a little smaller. The Towers had swayed more during winter storms than when the planes hit.
"And the WTC did not fall at free fall speed."
The point is that they fell at only a couple seconds too long for free-fall speed, but still much faster than they should have.
Alacazam777 11 months ago
@Alacazam777 "The towers were designed to take MULTIPLE hits from planes"
They were designed to take a SINGLE INDIRECT hit. The emergency stairs were in the center because they didn't think that a plane flying DIRECTLY into the center was realistic
"The airplane did not do nearly as much damage as suggested"
The planes severed over half of the support columns!
"Towers had swayed more during winter storms than when the planes hit"
The swaying traumatized people!
Where do you get your info from?
KayBeeEee1983 9 months ago in playlist 9/11
@KayBeeEee1983 No, they were designed to take MULTIPLE hits, not that it really matters since each of them were hit once anyway...
"The planes severed over half of the support columns!"
So? The only way for the buildings to collapse in the way they did was for all the columns to go at once, which obviously wasn't done by the planes, as they collapsed an hour after impact.
"The swaying traumatized people!"
I was talking about at the base of the tower, since that is were the building is held up.
Alacazam777 9 months ago
@Alacazam777 "No, they were designed to take MULTIPLE hits"
No, they weren't. Why would they be designed for that? How would 2 planes ever accidentally hit 1 tower at, roughly, the same time? There's a PBS documentary on YouTube called "Why the Towers Fell". Watch it.
"The only way for the buildings to collapse in the way they did was for all the columns to go at once"
What?! So if the columns broke 1 by 1, the building would remain standing?
Do you get all your info from Loose Change?
KayBeeEee1983 9 months ago
@KayBeeEee1983 "How would 2 planes ever accidentally hit 1 tower at, roughly, the same time?"
Well, that doesn't really matter since only one plane hit each tower.
"So if the columns broke 1 by 1, the building would remain standing?"
I assume that you read my post as you quoted me, but I guess I have to point it out to you. I said, "The only way for the buildings to collapse IN THE WAY THEY DID was for all the columns to go at once." The fell in the wrong way.
Alacazam777 9 months ago
@Alacazam777 "Well, that doesn't really matter since only one plane hit each tower."
You said the buildings were designed to take multiple hits from multiple planes. That just shows that you have no clue what you're talking about (shocker).
"The only way for the buildings to collapse IN THE WAY THEY DID was for all the columns to go at once."
They didn't ALL go at once. The plane took out 2/3 of them at once, then when the rest couldn't take it anymore, the remaining columns went at once.
KayBeeEee1983 9 months ago
@KayBeeEee1983 "You said the buildings were designed to take multiple hits from multiple planes...you have no clue what you're talking about."
No, it shows that there is no point in even arguing about this point when we both know that only one plane hit each tower (by the way, you said yourself that the towers could take one hit).
"...when the rest couldn't take it anymore, the remaining columns went at once."
How did they all go at once? Did they all suffer the exact same amount of damage?
Alacazam777 9 months ago
@Alacazam777 This is what I'm saying. You said they were designed to take multiple hits. That is wrong. It doesn't matter what ACTUALLY happened. That's not the issue...The point is that you have no idea how these buildings were built because you think they were designed to take multiple hits.
When a person cuts down a tree, does he have to cut through the whole thing? No, he just has to cut enough to make the trunk unable to support the load, then the rest goes all at the same time.
KayBeeEee1983 9 months ago
@KayBeeEee1983 "It doesn't matter what ACTUALLY happened. That's not the issue...The point is that you have no idea how these buildings were built because you think they were designed to take multiple hits."
Yes that is the issue! Scroll up and watch the video! And I do know how the buildings were designed, but you started arguing against it, so I said that it doesn't even matter in order to prevent us from getting off topic and start insulting each other (guess it didn't work).
Alacazam777 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@KayBeeEee1983 "When a person cuts down a tree... he just has to cut enough to make the trunk unable to support the load, then the rest goes all at the same time."
I know, but does the tree fall straight down into a pulverized pile? No, it falls over because of the imbalanced weight.
Alacazam777 9 months ago
@Alacazam777 Even if you put a bomb right in the middle of the trunk and exploded it, it wouldn't collapse straight down into a pulverized pile...Jesus Christ...Your brain really is incapable of forming a rational thought.
KayBeeEee1983 9 months ago
@KayBeeEee1983 You're right, you would have to place bombs all over the tree, kind of like what happened at the Trade Center...
Alacazam777 9 months ago
@Alacazam777 That still wouldn't do it. Only way is with 1 large bomb moving at 400+ mph.
KayBeeEee1983 9 months ago
@KayBeeEee1983 No, that would knock it over.
Alacazam777 9 months ago
@Alacazam777 Actually, it would blow it to pieces, just like placing bombs all over it would....
KayBeeEee1983 9 months ago
@KayBeeEee1983 The Towers weren't blown to pieces when the planes hit...
Alacazam777 9 months ago
@Alacazam777 Yeah, because they are a little bit bigger than trees.
If there were bombs in the building, they would've been detonated as soon as the plane hit to kill all the witnesses of the bombs. And if you have a problem with that, they would've at least detonated them all at the same time, which means that people who heard explosions after the planes hit weren't hearing bomb detonations. Anyone who thinks otherwise is an idiot.
KayBeeEee1983 9 months ago
@KayBeeEee1983 "they would've been detonated as soon as the plane hit to kill all the witnesses of the bombs."
Most of the witnesses were outside of the buildings.
"they would've at least detonated them all at the same time"
No, because if they all went at the same time, it would sound like this (and therefore be even more obvious): /watch?v=qk06ax1SRIM&feature=related
Alacazam777 9 months ago
@Alacazam777 If they were outside, then that makes their "witness testimony" even less credible. The noises could've been anything that fell. Debris and bodies were falling constantly. As I've said before, when your building has been hit by an airplane and you're fleeing for your life, EVERY loud noise is going to sound like an explosion.
"No, because if they all went at the same time, it would sound like this"
Then they would've detonated the bombs when the building was hit by the plane.
KayBeeEee1983 9 months ago
@KayBeeEee1983 "If they were outside, that makes their "witness testimony" even less credible. EVERY loud noise is going to sound like an explosion."
I think that the police officers, firemen, camera crews, and many onlookers that weren't running away would be able to tell the difference between a falling desk and a huge explosion. This quote reminds me of the "official" explanation of 9/11 witness testimony: they were all panicking and were therefore hearing things and getting easily confused.
Alacazam777 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Alacazam777 "I think that the police officers, firemen, camera crews, and many onlookers that weren't running away would be able to tell the difference between a falling desk and a huge explosion."
Well, you'd be wrong then.
"This quote reminds me of the "official" explanation of 9/11 witness testimony: they were all panicking and were therefore hearing things and getting easily confused."
Yes. Exactly.
KayBeeEee1983 9 months ago
@Alacazam777 Also, the collapse started AT the impact zones. That fact is plainly obvious. There is no evidence whatsoever that points to anything above or below the impact zone.
KayBeeEee1983 9 months ago
@KayBeeEee1983 What, do you think they would set off the chain reaction to bring down the building half-way down? Of course it would be started where the planes hit!
Alacazam777 9 months ago
@Alacazam777 So you're saying the whole building was wired with explosives but they only detonated the ones in the impact zones? Or maybe the planes themselves were the detonators? But then the other bombs wired below the impact zones would have surely exploded as the buildings collapsed. Of course, there's no evidence of that and the people who survived the WTC 1 collapse in stairwell B don't attest to that. Also, the bombs ABOVE the impact zones wouldn't have exploded until they hit the ground
KayBeeEee1983 9 months ago
@KayBeeEee1983 The whole (or most of) of the building was wired with explosives. The bombs at the impact zones were detonated to start the collapse to get the building falling. Then, the bombs down below went off as the towers collapsed to get rid of any resistance that would slow down the collapse (like the support columns and where the floors were attached to them).
Some of those later bombs went of a tad too soon, which is what the "squibs" of debris shooting out below the debris wave are.
Alacazam777 9 months ago
@Alacazam777 Okay now I know you're just fucking around.
KayBeeEee1983 9 months ago
@KayBeeEee1983 I'm just answering your bogus questions.
Alacazam777 9 months ago
@Alacazam777 "So you're saying the whole building was wired with explosives but they only detonated the ones in the impact zones?"
That's the only question you answered. and this was your answer:
"The whole (or most of) of the building was wired with explosives. The bombs at the impact zones were detonated to start the collapse to get the building falling"
The fact that you think the broken windows during the the collapses were bomb detonations shows just how big of a joke you are.
KayBeeEee1983 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@KayBeeEee1983 "The fact that you think the broken windows during the the collapses were bomb detonations shows just how big of a joke you are."
/watch?v=Pd8B-8Au-Wk
/watch?v=KRZ0ZUQU-3U
/watch?v=cjfoXbyffso
Broken windows?
Alacazam777 9 months ago
@Alacazam777 Yes, the "squibs" you referred to are windows blowing out because of the air pressure. The Stairwell B survivors of the WTC 1 collapse said the wind pushed them all over the place and down stairs. Anyone who thinks those "squibs" are bomb detonations is retarded. Why would anyone plant just a few explosives like that? Why were they placed randomly?
KayBeeEee1983 9 months ago
@KayBeeEee1983 Those are some very dirty windows...
Alacazam777 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Alacazam777 "Those are some very dirty windows..."
LMAO. Yeah, the buildings collapsed into dust.
"Also very big windows, I guess."
Huh?
KayBeeEee1983 9 months ago
@KayBeeEee1983 Also very big windows, I guess.
Alacazam777 9 months ago
@Alacazam777 That's air rushing out of the elevator shafts in the sky lobbies lol....
bonchie1 5 months ago
@bonchie1 Then there would have been "squibs" on almost every floor (there's elevator doors on every floor).
Alacazam777 5 months ago
@Alacazam777 Those doors would of been closed. The air would of rushed to the point where it would of been forced out and could no longer travel down, which is the bottom of the shafts at the sky lobbies. At that point it had nowhere to go but out after traveling downward through the shafts from the point of collapse. To say they were blasts of that magnitude ignores the fact that there are numerous videos of the collapse where no explosions are heard. They would of been clearly recorded.
bonchie1 5 months ago
@bonchie1 Wow, so the pressured air that was able to smash through a fully supported skyscraper, in which half the support is in the outer wall, and take debris with it wasn't able to get past elevator doors? Why use 4-foot thick steel columns when we can just use thin, hollow elevator doors to support our towers?
(Continued)
Alacazam777 5 months ago
@bonchie1 "there are numerous videos of the collapse where no explosions are heard. They would of been clearly recorded."
You obviously have no idea how loud the collapse was. No you aren't going to be able to pick up the sounds of the squibs in all that noise. Explosions WERE heard, however, constantly from when the planes hit to when the towers fell (which is when you'd be able to hear them). Explosions were also heard just before the collapse.
Alacazam777 5 months ago
@Alacazam777 Watch a video of a building being demolished and then compare it to the Twin Towers falling. There's a clear difference.
KomatiPoort 4 months ago
@KomatiPoort The only difference that I can see is that the WTC looks like a neater collapse than most other controlled demolitions.
Alacazam777 4 months ago
"I was talking about at the base of the tower, since that is were the building is held up."
So, the tower can sway at the bottom, but not at the top. Genius. I guess, according to you, the top of the building just hangs in the air?
You're the dumbest "truth"er on earth.
KayBeeEee1983 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@KayBeeEee1983 "So, the tower can sway at the bottom, but not at the top. Genius. I guess, according to you, the top of the building just hangs in the air?
You're the dumbest "truth"er on earth."
Wow... just, wow...
Alacazam777 9 months ago
@Alacazam777 "Towers had swayed more during winter storms than when the planes hit"
"I was talking about at the base of the tower, since that is were the building is held up."
If the base of the tower sways, whether by wind or by plane impact, the whole building is going to sway, and it's going to be felt a lot more on the upper floors. Are you saying that the people at the base of the tower didn't feel the building sway when the plane hit? Because that's totally wrong. It shattered windows.
KayBeeEee1983 9 months ago in playlist 9/11
@KayBeeEee1983 "Are you saying that the people at the base of the tower didn't feel the building sway when the plane hit? Because that's totally wrong. It shattered windows."
I'm saying that the towers had swayed more in violent winter storms (which is what I have been saying for a month!) And actually, the windows were blown out by unexplained explosions that went off at ground level in the towers seconds before the planes hit.
Alacazam777 9 months ago
@Alacazam777 "I'm saying that the towers had swayed more in violent winter storms"
Like I've been saying, the swaying traumatized people. It threw people against walls and made people think the building was collapsing. You are just one more "truth"er who is not basing their statements on anything but their own thoughts. The windows were broken by the movement of the building. Then 1 second later they heard the plane explode. Sound travels at about 1100 feet/second. THAT is a fact!
KayBeeEee1983 9 months ago
@Alacazam777 Why do we sometimes see lightning flash in the sky, but we don't hear the thunder until some amount of time later? Is lightning a government conspiracy too? 10 year olds understand this better than you.
KayBeeEee1983 9 months ago
@KayBeeEee1983 What are you talking about? Was that terrible insult based in anything I have said - or were you just tired of keeping your inner douche bag bottled up through our little debate?
Alacazam777 9 months ago
@Alacazam777 Debate? Don't flatter yourself. You've shown you have no ability to reason.
KayBeeEee1983 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@KayBeeEee1983 "You've shown you have no ability to reason."
A debate is an argument, and in order to argue about anything you have to have reason (even if it is strange reasoning). So someone could argue about the supposed existence of the tooth fairy based on the missing tooth and sudden money.
Alacazam777 9 months ago
@Alacazam777 Another Dylan Avery said it, it must be true. Firms were moving in and out, all the time. You get that with 220 floors, an acre each. This is all stuff where Dylan and Stephen and the rest take something some bod who worked in the WTC said, and then misquote them or change the emphesis. Amd suddenly its gospel.
SvenTviking 1 year ago
@SvenTviking "Firms were moving in and out, all the time."
Moving furniture around sound a lot different compared to jackhammers and drills. I'm sure the witnesses could tell.
Alacazam777 1 year ago
@Alacazam777 When they move new firms in, they remodel the whole floor. The floors are concrete skimmed. They use jackhammers and drills to cut the floor off for new wiring.
SvenTviking 1 year ago
@Alacazam777 Like the radio recording of the fire chief saying the fire on his floor could be put out with two hoses. Dylan didn't mention that this floor was the Least damaged, having only a wingtip pass thru it. And that it was a sky lobby with no office furniture to burn. Suddenly this proves that there was very little fire in the damaged floors. Thats lies that is. And quoting a dead man to do it.
SvenTviking 1 year ago
@SvenTviking "Dylan didn't mention that this floor was the Least damaged, having only a wingtip pass thru it."
If this fire was supposedly hot enough to melt (or soften) steel columns a few inches thick and to make the buildings collapse, when no office fire in history has, then the fire would have had to be extremely intense all over. After all, the fire had to make every support column break at the exact same time to make the Towers collapse how they did (don't ask me how fire can do that).
Alacazam777 1 year ago
@Alacazam777 The fires made the floors hot, about 650 degrees. They then sagged under their own weight. This pulled the floor edges in pulling the already compromised perimeter coloums in till they failed as the enormous forces unzipped. There are photos and video footage in closeup of this happening. Dylan avery in the last interview I saw of him SAID HE NOW THOUGHT THIS IS WHAT HAPPENED! Yeah, he's backtracked that far!
SvenTviking 1 year ago
Truther are Better than you'll ever be.Doomsday800.Answer the bombs on the Washington Bridge on 911.....I can go on and on.Chopping the lie of 911.Calling people Truther / Birther all name calling with no Facts just slander.They want facts you want to name call due to lack of IQ.
conspiracymedia 1 year ago
Why they keep giving people who ask legitimate questions as conspiracy theorists? instead of calling them "truth seekers"?
greenb1a 1 year ago
@greenb1a Because the debunkers don't know what they're talking about. They do a lackluster job at at least reviewing what the "theorists" have to say. They're not theorists rather the anti-conspiracy theorists are the theorists because they haven't even looked at the other side of the debate. This documentary is just so biased I don't know where to begin. Funny how they don't bother to mention the pools of molten metal at the base of the three trade center buildings that collapsed...
camreeno360 1 year ago
The financial accounting office of the Pentagon gets hit, and the only offiste backup for their records was in WTC Building 7...
The criminals from Tyco, Worldcom, Enron, and Dyncorp benefitted from 9/11 way more than Al Qaeda or Osama Bin Laden who we still can't find. You want to know who caused 9/11, follow the MONEY and ask yourself who benefitted at every step? Who wanted the towers taken down? Who took out the record insurance policies? Who wanted a war in Iraq and Afghanistan?
NanoThermite911 1 year ago
Dillan Avery...An 18 year old that was "just finishing high school" figured it all out. The people who believe this 9/11 conspiracy nonsense must be real dunces.
Gorilla196094 1 year ago
@Gorilla196094 Here we go again. Attack the messenger instead of the message. Classic ad hominem "nonsense" employed by many so-called debunkers.
camreeno360 1 year ago