We don't need study science to know whether or not it is even possible that a building will fall only because of fire. If we see the history, we have many records of history of worse fire on buildings, building burning for hours together but did not fall freely. If we only see those video's we will come to know that it was impossible for a building specially a building "twin towers" to freely falling within hours. And that is why many American are asking for the real truth about 9/11.
Sorry but WTC 7 did not fall because it was weaken but because of control Demolition. There were many buildings and those buildings were closer then WTC 7 and still standing but WTC 7 was far from twin towers and that building collapsed? Even there was a building that was very badly damaged becuz the twin towers fell on it but that building's main structure was standing. And here we have WTC 7 free falling only becuz of fire. why? The only answer is control demolition.
Bhutto was a british Puppet representing british interests against her own people, her death it means nothing
The Rest of the Muslim countries are being held hostage by western financed gangsters and dictators from saudi to egypt to pakistan
The current Jihad movement is supported largly by the population because of the reality that the west wishs to maintain a slavery like control over the middle east
'No structural integrity in the building' caused by...??? And so it just fell at free fall speed leaving virtually nothing but dust...he's a plant. Who's the vegetable?
I agree with you on Bhutto, but I still have doubts about WTC 7. Even if the south side was blown out like OKC's Murrah bldg., the way it came down so quick and uniform had to be from explosives. It it fell from structural instability, it would have fallen much more sporadically and left core columns standing.
Building 7 was emploded! Didn`t you see the footage where the rescue workers counted down before it fell? Study the way it fell into its own footprints. Sure some material will fall off to the side, but you cant look at the way that building fell & tell me that it was not imploded.
even if this firefighter is dead on its because multiple floors where shut down prior the main beams i think where shape charged. if the floors pancaked all the way down you would see those huge steel risers sticking out all over 100s of feet long like pretzles.i did demolition on the steel plants those explosions going off at different intervals and the thermite was pretty clear to me.imo
Aaah!! I've emailed you again! I know your Hotmail address and have sent you a personal email! Just ignore the fact that the sender is "YouTube Service" and not thedman113.; That means nothing.
LOL! Idiot. I see from your post below you're still having trouble getting this newfangled internet thing to work.
about the fireman, i do believe that the govt. was involved in 9/11 but i am able to keep an open mind about hearing other opinions. But i have to say i have seen videos with 50-70 different firemen saying they heard bombs and it was like a controlled demolition and your video shows one fire man and not a very convincing video. but i like his point in posting the video. the supposed 9/11 truth is so bullshit at this point who knows what really happened.
I agree with the first half of the video, but you have to realize that exposing the FACT that the buildings were demolished is the ONLY way to stop all these foreign wars.
Once again, WTC7 was NOT leaning, this fireman is making a subjective statement and can barely even see the building through the smoke.
Nanothermite is now a proven FACT. There is NO reason for nanothermite to be found in the dust besides demolition. It's been PROVEN!! The time for debate is over, it's time to get them!
So i guess you speak for Bhutto then and you are the knower of all mispoken words.
Fact is she said BIN LADEN, and didnt bother to correct herself or on the other hand she meant to say BIN LADEN.
So dont just show a clip and say "oh this is what she meant to say" because you have no idea.
While some of your videos are very intriguing your videos debunking the truthers have no validity, in fact you should call those videos MISREPRESENTATIVE PRESS for they lack any substance what so ever!
leaning to a side, but still collapses straight down, you think u debunk wtc 7 after talking to one fireman (who may of known it was coming down with explosives). This is a sad attempt.
I know. NIST admitted WTC Building 7 accelerated to the speed of free fall , which they initially said was impossible. Where there is a cover-up there is unsolved crime.
That was very weak I agree! I hope others will look further than that. A good resource is the NIST, 911 CR, and FEMA report because they are full of omissions and distortions. You know, the dept. that screws up the things they are responsible for but investigates a building falling down. Even on the smallest of levels, 9/11 WAS an inside job!
I do not believe the government did this people, Yes is believe it was an inside job in the sense that the person who ownes the property (caugh caugh) is the one who arranged the fall of those buildings (especially number 7 which contained files for major company fraud), NOT THE GOVERNMENT BUT THE OWNER OF THE THE TWIN TOWER PROPERTIES. THINK ABOUT IT!!!!
Sorry bud. The way those buildings fell was all to bizarre. But people are free to believe what they want, after all it is the U.S. However, I will believe that these falling building were a planned job from the get go. Critism or not. Anyway, I do love the channel, respects Rep Press. You have conveyed much info I otherwise would have never researched myself.
Halo...if the United States and China can have nuclear weapons why can't Iran? Besides there is no way that Iran can hit the United States effectively with a nuclear weapon....do your own research besides listening to everything your told...just a pure sign of pure obedience. How many wars has Iran caused? Now how many wars has the U.S caused? See i love my nation but i don't support the elites who control it...wake up people.
hasent anyone relized that Iran is makeing nuclear wepons and people are saying its not right to stop them from makeing them? whats up with that? i know eaither Iran is gona get bombed or there gona unleash nuclear bombs on us and also Iran is a Terrost nation and hates us and they strap bombs on there back and come over here and blows up masses of groups of people? and everyone is saying leave Iran to make weapons of mass destruction???!?!? if we dont attack them soon were gona get attacked
911 is an inside job, the facts and science cant lie. everything points out to the fact that 911 is an inside job, either controlled demolition or planes in the end most people realize after investigating everything that 911 was an inside job.
"everything points out to the fact that 911 is an inside job" - HAHAHAHA you are talking about "FACTS", and yet the claim that "everything" is pointing to an inside job is clearly not a fact. This video alone disproves your claim. So why should anyone trust any of your "facts"?
"Among the most disturbing political phenomena of our time is the emergence in the newly created State of Israel, of the Freedom Party, a political party closely akin in its organization,methods,political philosophy & social appeal to the Nazi & Fascist parties. It was formed out of the membership & following of former Irgun Zvai Leumi... This is the unmistakable stamp of a Fascist party for whom terrorism and misrepresentation are the means, and a "Leader State" is the goal"
anyone wanna stop complaining about rep press's bizarre position and do something about it? ok listen its easy.
he claims he "debunks" or "knows" somehow that bhutto "misspoke" about bin laden being dad. how could he KNOW that? thats an odd claim, despite my numerous emails he wont answer. so everyone who wants to know, ust copy and paste this into an email to him
"rep press, how are you able to kow bhuttop was misspeaking about bin laden?"
and now that you have seen the Bhutto video. (Google "Bhutto didn't mean to say "Osama bin Laden" ) you say "this is a good point. this is something that makes a reasonable argument for the possibility of her mis speaking"
so you ignore daming physical evidence for 911 (the impssibly HIGH tempatures) and think i will want to ignore it as well?
rep you have been backed into a corner by someone with a piece of scientific knowledge and you want to pretend it isnt the case with me?! front for others no point in doing it with me.
as far as thjis vid, its more reasonable then i thought it COULD be. but after looking more into it, i realize israelnfp's theory makes alot more sense then this and YOU have ran from it
Not really: because the WTC is so big, the energy it costs to make it fall sideways is far greater than the energy it takes the WTC to collapse. So instead of falling off sideways, the building is forced to collapse downward, simply because any sideways-pushing force (like the result of having columns destroyed on one side of the building, but not the other) is extremely small compared to the force of gravity.
How can you be so sure? Did you make calculations to backup your claim? Until mathematical and physics simulations are done, common sense says that the top part cannot "beat" the bottom part. The bottom part is more massive and stuck into the ground.
Because the reports (which include mathematical and physical simulations) say so. If you would be convinced by such simulations, you would have looked them up: a simple google search shows such a simulation.
Why i don't just give you the link? So you might come across other evidence.
Look if it wasnt a C-D, Then WHY do NIST and similar fronts keep on producing reports that compleatly contradict there last ones?? Why Have I heard the countdown to implosion? Why did I see charges going up the side of the building before and whilst collapsing? Why are the DYING first responders trying to get the word out ...and why do you want to implicate them as Mass liers???????????????
A fuel fire can burn at over 800 degrees under specific conditions that could NOT be met at the plane crash sites. You usually need a pressized air supply, like in a blast furnace.
Can plastic and other desk furnitures sustain a fire for enough time to heat entire 110 stories high columns to the point they will lose strength and crumble? There's not enough joules potential for that. The part of the columns that were directly at the impact level could have been heated, but not at the remaining floors.
Unfortunately, I don't have calculations for that, but at that magnitude, it's just common sense. Imagine you have a steel beam 300m long and you heat it at the end. Do you think you could heat the ENTIRE beam that way?
If the steel, like you say, was cold on lower floors, how could the building be destroyed completely? Shouldn't only the top part crumble?
And as those other steel-framed buildings showed, it should still be enough.
And it's 30 floors vs 1 floor, 31 floors vs 1 floor, 32 floors vs 1 floor, etc. The top half was too heavy to fall sideways, while the individual floors were too weak to sustain the weight of all above floors.
When the group of 30-odd floors fall onto the remaining building, it's the entirety of the floors below that absorb the shock, not just the single floor that is smashed upon. The floors below the fire were not affected in any ways, not by impact, not by fire, nothing. They were at optimal solidity.
At worst, the top floors would have fell on the side, like a tree. Not telescope into the building in complete destruction.
Yeah, the building was leaning. The structural integrity was compromised. Your missing a key point though. The reason it was leaning was because of the explosions that were going off in the building BEFORE either one of the 2 towers fell. I WATCHED videos of firemen talking on a payphone while SHARP explosions emanated from WTC7. Barry Jennings was a great eyewitness to the explosions that occurred BEFORE the other towers collapsed. So yeah, it was leaning. The coup d grace came at 5:20.
No, he's a dude with an opinion like everybody else. He's simply putting noise into the echo chamber to promote the 19 hijackers story. The more stories in the echo chamber, the more real the whole hijacker story seems. Representative press has not done very many stories on the Israeli involvement in airport security, video security in the 911 attacks or the 7/7 attacks. This is a nation that has engaged in OVERT military attacks upon U.S. military assets in the past.
Yup, they're agents of the Federal Reserve and will only remain viable candidates as long as they kiss Israel's ass through "the lobby". AIPAC must be forced to register as an agent of a foreign power. That way AIPAC will not be allowed to bribe our congress and will be treated as potential spies. Which they are.
It's so laughable that I'M on the list of engineers. I never even got my engineering degree. They still call me to this day and I openly tell them I DO NOT believe in the NUTJOB theory they do, but they still list me on the site! Hilarious.
well, i clearly remember the firefighters saying it at the time, on the news, here in the UK.
not invokling the firemen, im just saying. if they did that, they would have to be in on it.
as they would according to the silverstein "pull the building" misquote. at the time, he was on the phone with a firechief, so that means he said "pull" to the firechief, thus, the FDNY were in on it. even though some of them knew they were gonna die, and the others lost their brothers, they still keep quiet?
wrong, silverstein said 'pull it', "not pull the building." There is so much more sh!t on 911 than WTC 7 it makes one's head spin. I just love all the coincidences of that day. We should call it, 'coincidence day.' One of those coincidences is the huge settlement Silverstein made, I believe $6 billion? Wow, he must've been very lucky to remember to put terrorism in his insurance policy only 2 weeks before the attacks. I got lots of reasons to be skeptic about the "official story."
There were no firefighters in the building. The fire chief has admitted that. All in all, I think people are making too much of the silverstein comment. Fact is, the building came down way too fast. No resistance. Sharp explosions were heard. Ground temperatures 21 days later were way to hot for this to have been just a building fire. NIST spokesman John Gross claimed to be ignorant of the NASA satellite info. /watch?v=wcqf5tL887o
the firefighters were in the building for a long time. otherwise why would the fire chief give the order to get them out of the building and clear the area?
there is footage of at least one firefighter, as they clear the street, saying "there is no way to stop it, its coming down". the damage, internal and external was immense, and it was common knowledge it was coming down.
what kind of explosives would keep a pile hot for weeks? none, so how does controlled demo explain it? it doesnt
This is interesting. Do you have any sources for that?
The idea behind the Silverstein issue is that, before he acquired the buildings, they were publicly leased. Only 6 months is very short term for such an incident. It doesn't proove anything, but it's still fishy...
Yes, that's right, it could be a coincidence. But when many coincidences happen at the same time, it starts sounding fishy. For example, the sudden peak in put options stock purchases in Airlines companies just days before the incidents cannot be only by chance. Some people must have had advance knowledge of the events for that to happen...
All put options should have gone up at that time: the entire economy went down a bit after 9/11 , because of the downtime at wall street. Or at least of all negatively effected companies (like those who had people working in the WTC).
And did stocks of airline companies go down more than other companies?
the firefighter clearly states that the building will fall, and i can clearly remember it from the day. at this time the bbc jumped the gun and said it had already fallen.
as for the silverstein insurance thing, thats crazy. that pariticular policy was created, to include everything including terrorism, back when the building was first leased, in 1987 or so. this was not a new policy, and it wasnt a terrorism specific policy. it just had terrorism as a clause
Gee, have you heard about the flight recorders being found at the WTC site? Lot's of witness' according to the 2 witness' that wrote about the event. FBI told people to not talk. Only 2 have spoken up about it. Leaks from within the NTSB substantiate the claims the the flight recorders are in their possession. Looks like the other witness' shut their mouths. Funny thing huh? As for Silverstein, he's a liar. A worm.
That's right, firefighters did NOT expect the building to fall, that's why they were scouting the building and were about to send units to extinguish the flames and help people stuck inside...
Bhutto was listing people who were killed by terrorists, (namely reporters) all in a row, and in the middle of this... she put Osama Bin Laden... of whom she was referring to prior to this comment...
IT IS OBVIOUS SHE MEANT TO SAY DANIEL CRAIG
It would be like saying "I love cereal... Captain Crunch, Cocoa puffs, Osam bin Laden, rice krispies"
On another note, if you thought she was going to make it more then a month in pakistan regardless... you were on the wrong side of that bet.
RP is an agent provocateur, who is trying to divide and conquer the truth movement with half facts. He is on the zionist payroll, his anti-bush stance is just for show. The guy is an actor, who shouldn't be trusted.
Haha. These conspiracy theorists are fascinating to watch! You guys are all crazy!!! Yes, Israel is paying RP to make videos on YouTube to convert the 300 million Americans who watch his channel every day and only YOU guys are smart enough to see through his scheme. Hilarious. I am glad that you guys are too crazy that anyone will ever take you seriously. The 911 truthers lead me to believe that evolution has stalled. Even the cro-magnons were not this stupid.
well done. the divisions occuring in the 911truthtard movement is better than a good sit-com. just not as intelligent.
I look forward to all-out brawls between all the wacky factions. the reptilian lizard-people camp, the non-lizard illuminati camp, the loose changers, the alex jones assclowns, the laser beam from space numbnuts,
the we let it happen fools...all the 911truthtards in a battle royal to outstupid each other. a real race to the bottom of the shit tower.
Those who believe the "Official Theory" are also conspiracy theorist, by the way. Whatever happened, it was a conspiracy. If it wasn't, then we would have been warned in advance...
The whole point is that we don't believe we would have been warned in advance, because the government is stupid, while you believe we wouldn't have been warned because the government is omnipotent.
the official theory is not about conspiracies, just failings.
we were warned in advance. both the french and german governments sent info on terror cells in the US plotting a major strike, less than 2 years before. this is the only thing the government did wrong, they didnt take these claims seriously enough. it MAYBE could have been prevented if the government had been more alert after the warnings
That is right, but there's also the possibility that it was the doing of local authorities. Or a mix of both, in which the hijackers were manipulated. Many possiblities exist.
All three buildings had molten metal in the basements. Jet fuel is a hydrocarbon and burns the same degrees as an office fire...900 to 1200 degrees....the only thing that melts steele is thermite combined with sulfur which is thermate. Forensic evidence: thermate chips were found in the debris and all 110 stories of building 7 were pulverized to dust like bldgs 1 and 2. NOT 1 floor wasn't pulverized. The steel beams defied the law of physics if if wasn't thermate.
Don't forget that NO building to date has EVER fell from fire EVER in history. These 3 buildings made history, if they weren't demolized. Also, that the architects who built them, built them to sustain plane hits and WERE built to withstand falling from fires. AMAZING?
Damn dude. NASA provides the satellite images showing hotspots that were over 1000 degrees 21 days later.
Thermate doesn't bend it cuts?
Yeah that's right, it doesn't "bend". Steel will bend when heated up BY thermite/thermate when there is weight on the steel. The building collapsing on itself would certainly bend the uncut steel beams right?
Evidence of Thermate? Yup. Dr. Stephen Jones has it.
1000 celsius? That's a fire for you. Fires burn slowly when limited by rubble, rock etc. (there are mine fires which last months, if not years).
"Steel will bend when heated up BY thermite/thermate when there is weight on the steel." You watch brainiac? It's a nice show. They do all sorts of stuff with thermite, like cutting straight through the engine of a car. Afterwards there is a neat circular hole in the middle of the bonnet, without ANY bending of the surrounding metal.
Steel where there's fire can bend and is weakened, but not the floors below. The remaining steel is at ambient temperature. Buildings are made redundant to avoid this kind of destruction.
The term "redundant" is an expression in structural engineering that means the number of structures of a building are multiplied to a certain ratio to support many times the expected charges. This is done to compensate for theoretical margins.
For example, if you have a structure that can support, say, 1 kilogram (in theory), you will build it to support 5 kilograms, as a safety measure.
The builders didn't anticipate on a fully-fueled airplane hitting the building, and like i said: steel can conduct heat. If one part gets hot, another part also gets hot.
they also didnt expect a plane travelling so fast to hit. under normal circumstances a plane accidentally hitting a building would be going very slowly, as the pilot would be trying to avert the disaster. on this occasion it wasnt an accident, and the planes were travelling over 500 mph.
although the design was able to withstand a smaller airliner hitting, it was expected to be at much slower speeds.
people often ignore these facts, as they make a mockery of the conspiracy claims
Right, but the total quantity of fuel that could have burned up there could not account for enough steel in the entire building to lose strength at the point of total destruction. Note that conducting heat also means dispersing heat.
Some reports say 24,000 gallons of fuel, but this is only the total capacity of the planes, not the actual volume of fuel at the time of the impact, which is estimated at 10,000 gallons.
Because the structure is a building, only one area needs to be damaged enough to no longer uphold the weight of the building above it, in order for it to collapse. Not the entire building needs to be heated.
In other places of the building, the collected heat can't disperse because of the insulation.
Office equipment can burn too, and played a significant role. All the black smoke is from plastics burning.
Quick research shows he has a small controlled demolition company, which has existed for 28 years and has been involved in about as much demolitions.
"pull it" is such an old trick - I'm suprised that you still use it. The only pulling of buildings meant for their destruction is pulling it, with ropes or chains, in a certain direction. "it" was, in this case, the contingent of firefighters present in building 7 - "pulling the contingent" is a commonly used phrase in firefighting.
My young friend,according to FEMA ,NIST and Firechief Frank Fallini ,the fireworkers were ordered out at 11.30 that morning.The building was completely evacuated ,when they "pulled it".Call a demolition company and ask what pull it means.They will tell you all the same.
Why couldn't Silverstein have been talking about that time too? (evidence for that too please)
Implosionworld [.] com states that "We have never, ever heard the term "pull it" being used to refer to the explosive demolition, and neither has any blast team we've spoken with" - google with limitation to that site only, with the search term "pull it".
What do you aspect from silverstein and his skull and bones guys? That they will tell you the truth and they won´t react because of the 911 Truth movement,which crows everyday ? I think you`re very naive.
Read the FEMA Report,watch 9/11 Coincidences (Part Seven) on Youtube .Btw it is impossible to take a 47 floor skycraper so clean down without dynamite.Ask an expert.6,5 sec. freefall-impossible.And this is only one "mistery" of so much. It was and ever will be an inside job or how the experts call it:" Under false flag attack".
In history fire has never take down a steelskyscraper.
Watch the pentagon :about 86 cameras around it and only 2 Tapes were released because of a court order.Watch the videos -there is no plane . All I could see was something that looked like a missle (btw I was in the army)
In history airplanes have never hit steel skyscrapers. And for WTC7: 25% of it's support columns taken down. Most steel skyscapers have concrete cores or columns. Fully steel buildings have collapsed of fire before: watch?v=_MRSr1MnFuk
The pentagon: watch?v=iBHi9CbrNf4
"btw I was in the army" Another evidence pointing to your insanity. You took a job where you have to kill people.
You don't have to be in the army to know what a missile looks like. Why would you think that?
Yeah, because of the explosives that were HEARD going off in the building just prior to the collapse. I saw the video of the firefighters being shocked by the loud explosions. The cop telling them to get away because the building was going to be "blown up". Couldn't keep it a secret? Hmmmm. How many people here know that 3 of the 4 flight recorders from the WTC strikes have been found and the FBI told people on the site to shut their mouths? Leaks from the NTSB confirm that they have them.
No, because of their experience with weakening of structures because of fire.
OMG the cop said the building was going to blow up? Then of course 9/11 must have been planned by the government! Of course he couldn't have been mistaken or malinformed in the chaos!
"3 of the 4...their mouths" Any evidence?
Any evidence besides 9/11 truthist webpages with people who lie to get attention?
If it was a site with evidence that it was a demolition, the it would obviously be a '9/11 truthist webpage' as you call it. So you ask for evidence while immediately declaring that any source of evidence is invalid. Nice logic. & I love how you official story huggers always fall back on 'all the chaos' to excuse every aspect of 9/11 that contradicts the official version.
The mainstream 9/11 truthist webpages have been proven to be full of crap (see youtube channel RKOwens4).
What I ask is that you do not send me a webpage, but the evidence itself. No video with truthist commentary included, but just the video. Then you yourself explain why it is evidence. You present it neatly and clearly so that I can easily sniff out any faults of logic.
And what is wrong with "falling back on" (i.e. explaining things using) the chaos?
How about this: 7 og the hijackers are sitll alive and well, and it has been known for quite some time now, but the hijacker list for 9/11 has not been updated with new info. Reason being that supposedly muhammed atta (spelling?) had left a list of all 19 hijackers, including the 7 that are still alive. So did these 7 men survive the suicide plane crashes, or did the fbi/cia fabricate evidence against innocent people to cover up their actual crime?
So when do I get to hear your response to the thing about Khalid Sheikh Mohammad being Daniel Pearl's killer, Reppress? That totally debunks your Bhutto debunking, don't ya think. Oh well, I'm guessing that like the other things I asked about, such as Rumsfeld's 'missile" comment, I won't get a response to the smoking gun things like that from you. So my dubbing of thee "RepresntativeFraud" stands until I see a plausible, satisfactory response. I've tried 6 times now, maybe this time?
This is THE most pathetic thing! RepPress gave his evidence that is clear, and all you dumbfucks alluded to these sometimes RIDICULOUS theories! And then more of you dumbfucks have been calling him Zionist-shill and the such? You guys are fucking disgraceful. I've tolerated 9/11 truthers for a long time now; I respected you guys; I had nice conversations with you guys---but I see that you're all brainwashed, and you are!!! You aren't be skeptical; you're being irrational! Thanks, RepPress!
Hey want don't you also do a piece about the varying faces of "Osama Bin Laden". You can see them to the right on the "Related Videos" as of now. They are two very different faces. Let me guess, coming from the guy who says Bhutto meant "Daniel Pearl" instead of "Osama Bin Laden", (and I haven't seen your reply to Rumsfeld's "Missile" remark, not to mention the "shot down" remark), you probably want us to believe he had plastic surgery in order to evade capture?
h t tp : / / w w w . the7thfire . com / 9-11 / many_faces_of_osama_bin_laden . htm
New York Times, July 11, 2002
"Osama bin Laden is dead. The news first came from sources in Afghanistan and Pakistan almost six months ago: the fugitive died in December and was buried in the mountains of southeast Afghanistan. Pakistan's president, Pervez Musharraf, echoed the information. The remnants of Osama's gang, however, have mostly stayed silent, either to keep Osama's ghost alive..."
Maybe that explains the first pic (and still doesn't look like the Al-Jazeera face, or the discrepencies in the ones in the yellow garmen)....
But first off, that's a pretty shocking thing to put in the official "Opinion" section of the NY times, even if it "just an opinion..." And about the Rumsfeld comments, were they connected to why he was let go? And what do you think about Khalid Sheikh Muhammad confessing to killing Daniel Pearl? How does that fit with your "Bhutto debunking"?
h t t p:// w w w .foxnews . com/story/0,2933,41576,00 . html
Usama bin Laden has died a peaceful death due to an untreated lung complication, the Pakistan Observer reported, citing a Taliban leader who allegedly attended the funeral of the Al Qaeda leader.
Bin Laden, according to the source, was suffering from a serious lung complication and succumbed to the disease in mid-December, in the vicinity of the Tora Bora mountains. The source claimed that bin Laden was laid to rest..."
Who pulls a building regardless of its means of demolition. Especially a building that just had fire. No object damage. 2 a building that was fortified paid by guiliani multimillions against attacks. 3 just hours of the rest. 4 and falls in its footprint. Any info that you think you have is CIA coverstory bs.
I just completed what I think will be a powerful video debunking the whole WTC7 "controlled demolition" conspiracy crap. I will be uploading it soon. I do help whoever can will help promote it so it can get the exposure it deserves.
Rep, Im not sure if you are saying that there is nothing strange about the WTC7 collapse or what. But you must be out of your mind if you think that steel framed buildings dive into their own footprint in 6.5 seconds, just .5 of a second slower than freefall speed. Even if the integrity of the building was compromised in any way, the building would tip or shear off. All things follow the path of least resistance, its simple physics.
Unlike a controlled demolition, the WTC towers were showing signs of structural changes well before they collapsed VERY UNLIKE A CONTROLLED DEMOLITION. Google "bowing debunks"
"the World Trade Center towers showed telltale signs they were about to collapse several minutes before each crumbled to the ground." There would not be telltale signs if it was explosives (Controlled Demolition) that caused the buildings to collapse.
You're acting like a child. I debunked your claims and now you think you have to block me no less! Another tantrum. My point is crystal clear, the buildings were undergoing structural changes which were visible to witnesses and were photographed WELL BEFORE the buildings collapsed and that simply is not how a "controlled demolition" happens. Why were columns bowing many minutes before the collapse? Because the fires were taking their toll on the steel, bending it. That's not a CD.
This has been flagged as spam show
look up "The Insanity of Christian Zionism!" Dr David Duke
hobo1975 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Youtube: "9/11 Insider Trading" and you will know that 9/11 was an inside job
wldeanml 4 months ago
The Websense category "Racism and Hate" is filtered in public wifi spots.
The user page on youtube that is being blocked is representativepress
Can somebody forward my message to representativepress. Thanks
esh1 1 year ago
If you want to know the truth about 9/11 you can see, "9/11 Loose Chance (1st, 2nd and final cut)" and 9/11 BLUEPRINT FOR TRUTH...
-Prejudice is Ignorant-
"Muslim and proud"
Partytime60 1 year ago
We don't need study science to know whether or not it is even possible that a building will fall only because of fire. If we see the history, we have many records of history of worse fire on buildings, building burning for hours together but did not fall freely. If we only see those video's we will come to know that it was impossible for a building specially a building "twin towers" to freely falling within hours. And that is why many American are asking for the real truth about 9/11.
Partytime60 1 year ago
Sorry but WTC 7 did not fall because it was weaken but because of control Demolition. There were many buildings and those buildings were closer then WTC 7 and still standing but WTC 7 was far from twin towers and that building collapsed? Even there was a building that was very badly damaged becuz the twin towers fell on it but that building's main structure was standing. And here we have WTC 7 free falling only becuz of fire. why? The only answer is control demolition.
Partytime60 1 year ago
@Partytime60 Exactly.
CHIPSTERO7 1 year ago
What is the name of the "Fireman" who was explaining "why WTC7 was going to collapse"? And have you contacted him?
rflosi 1 year ago
Jesus u are a dumb cunt!
LiberateEXinfernus 2 years ago
Bhutto was a british Puppet representing british interests against her own people, her death it means nothing
The Rest of the Muslim countries are being held hostage by western financed gangsters and dictators from saudi to egypt to pakistan
The current Jihad movement is supported largly by the population because of the reality that the west wishs to maintain a slavery like control over the middle east
TruthbHeard 2 years ago 2
'No structural integrity in the building' caused by...??? And so it just fell at free fall speed leaving virtually nothing but dust...he's a plant. Who's the vegetable?
maccka1 2 years ago
I agree with you on Bhutto, but I still have doubts about WTC 7. Even if the south side was blown out like OKC's Murrah bldg., the way it came down so quick and uniform had to be from explosives. It it fell from structural instability, it would have fallen much more sporadically and left core columns standing.
iggy6 2 years ago
If the building was actually leaning, how come it fell on it's footprint?
konnan84 2 years ago
Building 7 was emploded! Didn`t you see the footage where the rescue workers counted down before it fell? Study the way it fell into its own footprints. Sure some material will fall off to the side, but you cant look at the way that building fell & tell me that it was not imploded.
BlairWitch526 2 years ago
even if this firefighter is dead on its because multiple floors where shut down prior the main beams i think where shape charged. if the floors pancaked all the way down you would see those huge steel risers sticking out all over 100s of feet long like pretzles.i did demolition on the steel plants those explosions going off at different intervals and the thermite was pretty clear to me.imo
commando7144 2 years ago
It would be nice if we could post links here
search google firefighters for 911 truth
go to "Controlled Demolition"
Follow the links
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER TOM FITZPATRICK: ―I remember seeing, it looked like sparkling around one specific layer of the building.
Here Are A Couple Examples Of Firefighters From The Scene
FIREFIGHTER RICHARD BANACISKI: ―It seemed like it was going all around like a belt, all these explosions.
I will debate any Of Representative Presses Videos WITH PROOF
STAND UP
hottrod26 2 years ago 2
I`m not seeing what you`re seeing, Tom. Building 7 was NOT leaning. Have you watched p/11 Coincidences & Loose Change?
BlairWitch526 2 years ago
Aaah!! I've emailed you again! I know your Hotmail address and have sent you a personal email! Just ignore the fact that the sender is "YouTube Service" and not thedman113.; That means nothing.
LOL! Idiot. I see from your post below you're still having trouble getting this newfangled internet thing to work.
thedman113 2 years ago
Why is it when I click post comment, it doesnt appear?
BlairWitch526 2 years ago
about the fireman, i do believe that the govt. was involved in 9/11 but i am able to keep an open mind about hearing other opinions. But i have to say i have seen videos with 50-70 different firemen saying they heard bombs and it was like a controlled demolition and your video shows one fire man and not a very convincing video. but i like his point in posting the video. the supposed 9/11 truth is so bullshit at this point who knows what really happened.
lakoncers13 2 years ago
I agree with the first half of the video, but you have to realize that exposing the FACT that the buildings were demolished is the ONLY way to stop all these foreign wars.
Once again, WTC7 was NOT leaning, this fireman is making a subjective statement and can barely even see the building through the smoke.
Nanothermite is now a proven FACT. There is NO reason for nanothermite to be found in the dust besides demolition. It's been PROVEN!! The time for debate is over, it's time to get them!
smitty121981 2 years ago
Google:
dailymotion x1dh7n_911-fires-didnt-shred-the-wtc-to-du_news
prayfortruejustice 2 years ago
So i guess you speak for Bhutto then and you are the knower of all mispoken words.
Fact is she said BIN LADEN, and didnt bother to correct herself or on the other hand she meant to say BIN LADEN.
So dont just show a clip and say "oh this is what she meant to say" because you have no idea.
While some of your videos are very intriguing your videos debunking the truthers have no validity, in fact you should call those videos MISREPRESENTATIVE PRESS for they lack any substance what so ever!
F4O4U4R4S 2 years ago 5
UNSUSCRIBE
gammabun 2 years ago
MORE BULLSHIT FROM Subscribe representativepress
firefightersfor911truth org
911truthncDotOrg 2 years ago
Does it bother you to be stupider than the rest of the population? Oh yeah, you think you're smarter. Good luck in your career in food service.
TheRamenAvenger 2 years ago
Can the general public answer this question?
A typist types four letters and four envelopes. She places the letters in the envelopes at random.
What are the chances that only three letters are in their correct envelopes?
Come on TheRamenAvenger show us how Smart YOU are.
911truthncDotOrg 2 years ago
In other words, you only speak sheep.
BAAA ...
911truthncDotOrg 2 years ago
Where is my burger bitch?
TheRamenAvenger 2 years ago
Oh, Mooo ....
You like cattle instead.
You are a regular rancher TheRamenAvenger.
911truthncDotOrg 2 years ago
leaning to a side, but still collapses straight down, you think u debunk wtc 7 after talking to one fireman (who may of known it was coming down with explosives). This is a sad attempt.
jgavle 2 years ago
I know. NIST admitted WTC Building 7 accelerated to the speed of free fall , which they initially said was impossible. Where there is a cover-up there is unsolved crime.
onefodderunit 2 years ago
That was very weak I agree! I hope others will look further than that. A good resource is the NIST, 911 CR, and FEMA report because they are full of omissions and distortions. You know, the dept. that screws up the things they are responsible for but investigates a building falling down. Even on the smallest of levels, 9/11 WAS an inside job!
bigc028282 2 years ago
I do not believe the government did this people, Yes is believe it was an inside job in the sense that the person who ownes the property (caugh caugh) is the one who arranged the fall of those buildings (especially number 7 which contained files for major company fraud), NOT THE GOVERNMENT BUT THE OWNER OF THE THE TWIN TOWER PROPERTIES. THINK ABOUT IT!!!!
cpaddack2007 2 years ago
"THINK ABOUT IT!!!"
what did he have to gain? insurance money? he's spending it all and a lot more to rebuild.
unclesamsnephew666 2 years ago
Sorry bud. The way those buildings fell was all to bizarre. But people are free to believe what they want, after all it is the U.S. However, I will believe that these falling building were a planned job from the get go. Critism or not. Anyway, I do love the channel, respects Rep Press. You have conveyed much info I otherwise would have never researched myself.
theman4130 2 years ago 2
Halo...if the United States and China can have nuclear weapons why can't Iran? Besides there is no way that Iran can hit the United States effectively with a nuclear weapon....do your own research besides listening to everything your told...just a pure sign of pure obedience. How many wars has Iran caused? Now how many wars has the U.S caused? See i love my nation but i don't support the elites who control it...wake up people.
Inf0America 2 years ago 5
the reason iran cannot have nuclear weapons is because iran is decades away from being technologicaly advanced enough to produce them
gameplyr90 2 years ago
hasent anyone relized that Iran is makeing nuclear wepons and people are saying its not right to stop them from makeing them? whats up with that? i know eaither Iran is gona get bombed or there gona unleash nuclear bombs on us and also Iran is a Terrost nation and hates us and they strap bombs on there back and come over here and blows up masses of groups of people? and everyone is saying leave Iran to make weapons of mass destruction???!?!? if we dont attack them soon were gona get attacked
halo5549 3 years ago
911 is an inside job, the facts and science cant lie. everything points out to the fact that 911 is an inside job, either controlled demolition or planes in the end most people realize after investigating everything that 911 was an inside job.
PROOFPress 3 years ago 2
"everything points out to the fact that 911 is an inside job" - HAHAHAHA you are talking about "FACTS", and yet the claim that "everything" is pointing to an inside job is clearly not a fact. This video alone disproves your claim. So why should anyone trust any of your "facts"?
Yamazon3 2 years ago
ok one fireman saying that, find more please, one persons opinion is not enough
travisadrumsallday12 3 years ago
did you read what all those other firemen said? see the links in the video description)
representativepress 3 years ago
o ic, and i respect what you think but what do u think of our government? NOt relatng to 911
jujuslovesyou 3 years ago
So what if the structural integrity "is not there"...that doesn't mean free fall perfect collapse.
JSSTyger 3 years ago 2
it wasn't "free fall perfect," it did damage surrounding buildings, it wasn't "perfect".
representativepress 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"Among the most disturbing political phenomena of our time is the emergence in the newly created State of Israel, of the Freedom Party, a political party closely akin in its organization,methods,political philosophy & social appeal to the Nazi & Fascist parties. It was formed out of the membership & following of former Irgun Zvai Leumi... This is the unmistakable stamp of a Fascist party for whom terrorism and misrepresentation are the means, and a "Leader State" is the goal"
Albert Einstein
capelipl 3 years ago
or you can make your own email since i mis spell alot lol. you get the point though. do it LAZY!
peace
ONE
joopq 3 years ago
anyone wanna stop complaining about rep press's bizarre position and do something about it? ok listen its easy.
he claims he "debunks" or "knows" somehow that bhutto "misspoke" about bin laden being dad. how could he KNOW that? thats an odd claim, despite my numerous emails he wont answer. so everyone who wants to know, ust copy and paste this into an email to him
"rep press, how are you able to kow bhuttop was misspeaking about bin laden?"
its that easy. well do 911 later
HOLLA!
joopq 3 years ago 2
and now that you have seen the Bhutto video. (Google "Bhutto didn't mean to say "Osama bin Laden" ) you say "this is a good point. this is something that makes a reasonable argument for the possibility of her mis speaking"
well, at least that is progress.
representativepress 3 years ago
so you ignore daming physical evidence for 911 (the impssibly HIGH tempatures) and think i will want to ignore it as well?
rep you have been backed into a corner by someone with a piece of scientific knowledge and you want to pretend it isnt the case with me?! front for others no point in doing it with me.
as far as thjis vid, its more reasonable then i thought it COULD be. but after looking more into it, i realize israelnfp's theory makes alot more sense then this and YOU have ran from it
joopq 3 years ago
But if the building was leaning, doesn't it mean it should have toppled over, instead of falling straight down?
Simboiss 3 years ago
Not really: because the WTC is so big, the energy it costs to make it fall sideways is far greater than the energy it takes the WTC to collapse. So instead of falling off sideways, the building is forced to collapse downward, simply because any sideways-pushing force (like the result of having columns destroyed on one side of the building, but not the other) is extremely small compared to the force of gravity.
philip1201 3 years ago
How can you be so sure? Did you make calculations to backup your claim? Until mathematical and physics simulations are done, common sense says that the top part cannot "beat" the bottom part. The bottom part is more massive and stuck into the ground.
Simboiss 3 years ago
Because the reports (which include mathematical and physical simulations) say so. If you would be convinced by such simulations, you would have looked them up: a simple google search shows such a simulation.
Why i don't just give you the link? So you might come across other evidence.
philip1201 3 years ago
Look if it wasnt a C-D, Then WHY do NIST and similar fronts keep on producing reports that compleatly contradict there last ones?? Why Have I heard the countdown to implosion? Why did I see charges going up the side of the building before and whilst collapsing? Why are the DYING first responders trying to get the word out ...and why do you want to implicate them as Mass liers???????????????
BrodyLuv2 3 years ago
But it's people who elected him. Does it mean people are the worst thing that has happened to the States?
Simboiss 3 years ago
A fuel fire can burn at over 800 degrees under specific conditions that could NOT be met at the plane crash sites. You usually need a pressized air supply, like in a blast furnace.
Simboiss 3 years ago
Plastics burn at over 800 degrees too.
philip1201 3 years ago
Can plastic and other desk furnitures sustain a fire for enough time to heat entire 110 stories high columns to the point they will lose strength and crumble? There's not enough joules potential for that. The part of the columns that were directly at the impact level could have been heated, but not at the remaining floors.
Simboiss 3 years ago
Like I said, not the entire columns: the longer the distance from the fire, the colder the steel.
It didn't crumble. It bent and broke at the impact site, because half the colums were already severed there, and the fire was there.
"There's not enough joules potential for that." Can I see your calculation?
Only the part of the columns at and close to the impact site needs to be heated.
philip1201 3 years ago
Unfortunately, I don't have calculations for that, but at that magnitude, it's just common sense. Imagine you have a steel beam 300m long and you heat it at the end. Do you think you could heat the ENTIRE beam that way?
If the steel, like you say, was cold on lower floors, how could the building be destroyed completely? Shouldn't only the top part crumble?
Simboiss 3 years ago
It depends on the amount of heat, doesn't it? In this case, the heat energy was enough to
- propel a plane across America
- to power the production of tonnes of plastic
and
- to make thousands of trees from CO2 and water.
The lower part collapses because the top part falls onto it. The building is too big to crumble.
philip1201 3 years ago
Sure, it's a lot, but consider those other factors:
- A quantity of fuel burned on impact, some outside the building.
- The energy that dissipates during the process.
- There are 47 core columns and many hundreds of outer columns.
And:
30 floors vs 80 floors
Which side wins?
Simboiss 3 years ago
And as those other steel-framed buildings showed, it should still be enough.
And it's 30 floors vs 1 floor, 31 floors vs 1 floor, 32 floors vs 1 floor, etc. The top half was too heavy to fall sideways, while the individual floors were too weak to sustain the weight of all above floors.
philip1201 3 years ago
When the group of 30-odd floors fall onto the remaining building, it's the entirety of the floors below that absorb the shock, not just the single floor that is smashed upon. The floors below the fire were not affected in any ways, not by impact, not by fire, nothing. They were at optimal solidity.
At worst, the top floors would have fell on the side, like a tree. Not telescope into the building in complete destruction.
Simboiss 3 years ago
Representativepress mentions fitermen hall, 30 west broadway, in the sidebar, asking if fiterman hall was within the wtc7 footprint.
watch?v=dqLPWvpHU_I
No, it wasn't!
CNN911Fakes 3 years ago
Sorry, Fiterman Hall
My thumbs just aren't very talented.
CNN911Fakes 3 years ago
Yeah, the building was leaning. The structural integrity was compromised. Your missing a key point though. The reason it was leaning was because of the explosions that were going off in the building BEFORE either one of the 2 towers fell. I WATCHED videos of firemen talking on a payphone while SHARP explosions emanated from WTC7. Barry Jennings was a great eyewitness to the explosions that occurred BEFORE the other towers collapsed. So yeah, it was leaning. The coup d grace came at 5:20.
moichidomoichido 3 years ago
RepresentativePress is number one truth seeking press. Thumbs up to RepresentativePress.
invincibletruths 3 years ago
No, he's a dude with an opinion like everybody else. He's simply putting noise into the echo chamber to promote the 19 hijackers story. The more stories in the echo chamber, the more real the whole hijacker story seems. Representative press has not done very many stories on the Israeli involvement in airport security, video security in the 911 attacks or the 7/7 attacks. This is a nation that has engaged in OVERT military attacks upon U.S. military assets in the past.
moichidomoichido 3 years ago
oh yeah, what about Obama and McCain? You know, the RepubliCrats. They're both pro-war and ready to f*ck with Iran and Pakistan.
kiro30 3 years ago
Yup, they're agents of the Federal Reserve and will only remain viable candidates as long as they kiss Israel's ass through "the lobby". AIPAC must be forced to register as an agent of a foreign power. That way AIPAC will not be allowed to bribe our congress and will be treated as potential spies. Which they are.
"We control America and the Americans know it"
Ariel Sharon
moichidomoichido 3 years ago
It's so laughable that I'M on the list of engineers. I never even got my engineering degree. They still call me to this day and I openly tell them I DO NOT believe in the NUTJOB theory they do, but they still list me on the site! Hilarious.
davidcaspian 3 years ago
Firemen were expecting WTC7 to collapse? Is that the best you can come up with in the face of obvious demolition? Invoke the firemen?
firefightersfor911truth. org
smitty121981 3 years ago 2
well, i clearly remember the firefighters saying it at the time, on the news, here in the UK.
not invokling the firemen, im just saying. if they did that, they would have to be in on it.
as they would according to the silverstein "pull the building" misquote. at the time, he was on the phone with a firechief, so that means he said "pull" to the firechief, thus, the FDNY were in on it. even though some of them knew they were gonna die, and the others lost their brothers, they still keep quiet?
w0bbl3r 3 years ago
wrong, silverstein said 'pull it', "not pull the building." There is so much more sh!t on 911 than WTC 7 it makes one's head spin. I just love all the coincidences of that day. We should call it, 'coincidence day.' One of those coincidences is the huge settlement Silverstein made, I believe $6 billion? Wow, he must've been very lucky to remember to put terrorism in his insurance policy only 2 weeks before the attacks. I got lots of reasons to be skeptic about the "official story."
kiro30 3 years ago
silverstein didnt put the terrorism clause in the policy.
do your research. the insurance DEMANDED that all the WTC buildings had terrorist cover, after the first attack.
if he hadnt accepted the clause, his ownership of the building was forfeit.
have a look further than the truther lies, and you can find the ACTUAL facts.
and it was 7 months before, the insurance wasnt just taken out, it was renewed. he had the SAME policy since he took ownership
pull it means pull the operation to firefighters
w0bbl3r 3 years ago
There were no firefighters in the building. The fire chief has admitted that. All in all, I think people are making too much of the silverstein comment. Fact is, the building came down way too fast. No resistance. Sharp explosions were heard. Ground temperatures 21 days later were way to hot for this to have been just a building fire. NIST spokesman John Gross claimed to be ignorant of the NASA satellite info. /watch?v=wcqf5tL887o
This is a modern day Warren Commission coverup.
moichidomoichido 3 years ago
the firefighters were in the building for a long time. otherwise why would the fire chief give the order to get them out of the building and clear the area?
there is footage of at least one firefighter, as they clear the street, saying "there is no way to stop it, its coming down". the damage, internal and external was immense, and it was common knowledge it was coming down.
what kind of explosives would keep a pile hot for weeks? none, so how does controlled demo explain it? it doesnt
w0bbl3r 3 years ago
This is interesting. Do you have any sources for that?
The idea behind the Silverstein issue is that, before he acquired the buildings, they were publicly leased. Only 6 months is very short term for such an incident. It doesn't proove anything, but it's still fishy...
Simboiss 3 years ago
It was also within 6 months of somebody {quitting their job/taking a new job} in the WTC. You think he {planned it/was the actual target}?
Chance is key here. It's just coïncidence.
philip1201 3 years ago
Yes, that's right, it could be a coincidence. But when many coincidences happen at the same time, it starts sounding fishy. For example, the sudden peak in put options stock purchases in Airlines companies just days before the incidents cannot be only by chance. Some people must have had advance knowledge of the events for that to happen...
Simboiss 3 years ago
There are loads of peaks in stocks all the time.
All put options should have gone up at that time: the entire economy went down a bit after 9/11 , because of the downtime at wall street. Or at least of all negatively effected companies (like those who had people working in the WTC).
And did stocks of airline companies go down more than other companies?
philip1201 3 years ago
well, its right here on this vid.
the firefighter clearly states that the building will fall, and i can clearly remember it from the day. at this time the bbc jumped the gun and said it had already fallen.
as for the silverstein insurance thing, thats crazy. that pariticular policy was created, to include everything including terrorism, back when the building was first leased, in 1987 or so. this was not a new policy, and it wasnt a terrorism specific policy. it just had terrorism as a clause
w0bbl3r 3 years ago
Gee, have you heard about the flight recorders being found at the WTC site? Lot's of witness' according to the 2 witness' that wrote about the event. FBI told people to not talk. Only 2 have spoken up about it. Leaks from within the NTSB substantiate the claims the the flight recorders are in their possession. Looks like the other witness' shut their mouths. Funny thing huh? As for Silverstein, he's a liar. A worm.
moichidomoichido 3 years ago
Silverstein can laugh all he wants, he is a billionnaire...
Simboiss 3 years ago
That's right, firefighters did NOT expect the building to fall, that's why they were scouting the building and were about to send units to extinguish the flames and help people stuck inside...
Simboiss 3 years ago
While agree with much of what you present...We will not invade Iran..not under Bush's term anyway...
evel1969 3 years ago
I'll bet my ass he will hit iran in the next 8 weeks..
Adirtybird 3 years ago
Benazir Bhutto isn't George Walker Bush
Bhutto misspoke. Yeah. She didn't correct herself either. She told the truth and was 86'd for it.
StraightOuttaDC 3 years ago
Bhutto was listing people who were killed by terrorists, (namely reporters) all in a row, and in the middle of this... she put Osama Bin Laden... of whom she was referring to prior to this comment...
IT IS OBVIOUS SHE MEANT TO SAY DANIEL CRAIG
It would be like saying "I love cereal... Captain Crunch, Cocoa puffs, Osam bin Laden, rice krispies"
On another note, if you thought she was going to make it more then a month in pakistan regardless... you were on the wrong side of that bet.
clearsky24 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
philip1201 is all of 15 years old !
MasterMark123 3 years ago
I think Reppress is a infiltrator, and have never and never will have anything good to say about him. He has shown his true colors.
EliYah74 3 years ago 3
RP is an agent provocateur, who is trying to divide and conquer the truth movement with half facts. He is on the zionist payroll, his anti-bush stance is just for show. The guy is an actor, who shouldn't be trusted.
randomsleeze 3 years ago 5
I agree.
EliYah74 3 years ago 2
I totally agree.R.P. = Zionist shill.Debunk WTC7? Not fucking likely.
71z50 3 years ago 2
Haha. These conspiracy theorists are fascinating to watch! You guys are all crazy!!! Yes, Israel is paying RP to make videos on YouTube to convert the 300 million Americans who watch his channel every day and only YOU guys are smart enough to see through his scheme. Hilarious. I am glad that you guys are too crazy that anyone will ever take you seriously. The 911 truthers lead me to believe that evolution has stalled. Even the cro-magnons were not this stupid.
davidcaspian 3 years ago
Yes,I feel privilaged to be one of the few to see through this jew-bag`s scheme.Keep sipping your kool aid bitch.
71z50 3 years ago
well done. the divisions occuring in the 911truthtard movement is better than a good sit-com. just not as intelligent.
I look forward to all-out brawls between all the wacky factions. the reptilian lizard-people camp, the non-lizard illuminati camp, the loose changers, the alex jones assclowns, the laser beam from space numbnuts,
the we let it happen fools...all the 911truthtards in a battle royal to outstupid each other. a real race to the bottom of the shit tower.
unclesamsnephew666 3 years ago
Those who believe the "Official Theory" are also conspiracy theorist, by the way. Whatever happened, it was a conspiracy. If it wasn't, then we would have been warned in advance...
Simboiss 3 years ago
The whole point is that we don't believe we would have been warned in advance, because the government is stupid, while you believe we wouldn't have been warned because the government is omnipotent.
the official theory is not about conspiracies, just failings.
philip1201 3 years ago
we were warned in advance. both the french and german governments sent info on terror cells in the US plotting a major strike, less than 2 years before. this is the only thing the government did wrong, they didnt take these claims seriously enough. it MAYBE could have been prevented if the government had been more alert after the warnings
w0bbl3r 3 years ago
That is right, but there's also the possibility that it was the doing of local authorities. Or a mix of both, in which the hijackers were manipulated. Many possiblities exist.
Simboiss 3 years ago
Everyone needs to unsubscribe from this traitors channel, he knows the truth.
EliYah74 3 years ago
Strange... one time you think he's awesome and the next you hate him. Could it perhaps be that you are wrong, instead of him?
philip1201 3 years ago
To wtc 1-2-7:
All three buildings had molten metal in the basements. Jet fuel is a hydrocarbon and burns the same degrees as an office fire...900 to 1200 degrees....the only thing that melts steele is thermite combined with sulfur which is thermate. Forensic evidence: thermate chips were found in the debris and all 110 stories of building 7 were pulverized to dust like bldgs 1 and 2. NOT 1 floor wasn't pulverized. The steel beams defied the law of physics if if wasn't thermate.
Turboloch12 3 years ago
Don't forget that NO building to date has EVER fell from fire EVER in history. These 3 buildings made history, if they weren't demolized. Also, that the architects who built them, built them to sustain plane hits and WERE built to withstand falling from fires. AMAZING?
Turboloch12 3 years ago
Molten metal: watch?v=DhHzMttUKO0
Thermate residu: watch?v=OWpC_1WP8do
Thermate cuts: watch?v=ySHgiUxnLC0
philip1201 3 years ago
"Don't forget that NO building to date has EVER fell from fire EVER in history." Funny enough without adding anything.
watch?v=_MRSr1MnFuk
"built them to sustain plane hits"
watch?v=r3uq9zFT6xA
philip1201 3 years ago
"molten metal in the basements" Evidence?
"the only thing that melts steele is..." And i really thought steel was invented before thermite... (you need to melt steel to produce it).
"thermate chips" Evidence?
"all 110 stories of building 7" 1. Not so many stories. 2. How are you supposed to know which floor is which? 3. Evidence?
"The steel beams defied the law of physics if if wasn't thermate." You're referring to the bent ones? Thermate doesn't bend, it cuts.
philip1201 3 years ago
Damn dude. NASA provides the satellite images showing hotspots that were over 1000 degrees 21 days later.
Thermate doesn't bend it cuts?
Yeah that's right, it doesn't "bend". Steel will bend when heated up BY thermite/thermate when there is weight on the steel. The building collapsing on itself would certainly bend the uncut steel beams right?
Evidence of Thermate? Yup. Dr. Stephen Jones has it.
moichidomoichido 3 years ago
1000 celsius? That's a fire for you. Fires burn slowly when limited by rubble, rock etc. (there are mine fires which last months, if not years).
"Steel will bend when heated up BY thermite/thermate when there is weight on the steel." You watch brainiac? It's a nice show. They do all sorts of stuff with thermite, like cutting straight through the engine of a car. Afterwards there is a neat circular hole in the middle of the bonnet, without ANY bending of the surrounding metal.
philip1201 3 years ago
Hot plastic- and airplane fuel based fires can bend steel. That's what weakened the building which then caused it to collapse.
Steel bends long before it melts.
Does he now?
philip1201 3 years ago
Steel where there's fire can bend and is weakened, but not the floors below. The remaining steel is at ambient temperature. Buildings are made redundant to avoid this kind of destruction.
Simboiss 3 years ago
Steel can conduct heat well.
"Buildings are made redundant to avoid this kind of destruction."
Redundant:
1. Superfluous, exceeding what is neccisary.
2. Repetitive.
3. No longer needed.
What do you mean?
philip1201 3 years ago
The term "redundant" is an expression in structural engineering that means the number of structures of a building are multiplied to a certain ratio to support many times the expected charges. This is done to compensate for theoretical margins.
For example, if you have a structure that can support, say, 1 kilogram (in theory), you will build it to support 5 kilograms, as a safety measure.
Simboiss 3 years ago
Okay, thanks.
The builders didn't anticipate on a fully-fueled airplane hitting the building, and like i said: steel can conduct heat. If one part gets hot, another part also gets hot.
philip1201 3 years ago
they also didnt expect a plane travelling so fast to hit. under normal circumstances a plane accidentally hitting a building would be going very slowly, as the pilot would be trying to avert the disaster. on this occasion it wasnt an accident, and the planes were travelling over 500 mph.
although the design was able to withstand a smaller airliner hitting, it was expected to be at much slower speeds.
people often ignore these facts, as they make a mockery of the conspiracy claims
w0bbl3r 3 years ago
If the buildings had to be destroyed because of the plane's impact, then they would have crumbled instantly, not some 30 minutes later.
And Wobble, you tout about facts, but the idea of "expected speed" in design is not apparently based on facts either.
The buildings were designed for an impact of a 707, which weights less than a 767, but has a higher cruise speed.
Simboiss 3 years ago
Right, but the total quantity of fuel that could have burned up there could not account for enough steel in the entire building to lose strength at the point of total destruction. Note that conducting heat also means dispersing heat.
Some reports say 24,000 gallons of fuel, but this is only the total capacity of the planes, not the actual volume of fuel at the time of the impact, which is estimated at 10,000 gallons.
Simboiss 3 years ago
Because the structure is a building, only one area needs to be damaged enough to no longer uphold the weight of the building above it, in order for it to collapse. Not the entire building needs to be heated.
In other places of the building, the collected heat can't disperse because of the insulation.
Office equipment can burn too, and played a significant role. All the black smoke is from plastics burning.
philip1201 3 years ago
Unsubscribed.
You suck.
False representation of the facts.
Go fuck yourself, traitor.
RexNunc 3 years ago
Dutch Tv Reporter to Danny Jowenko,a controlled demolition expert ,when they showed him the collapse of the WTC7:
Reporter:"What you see at the WTC,these are pictures of Building 7(Like most people he was not aware that a third building collapsed on 911)".
Jowenko (Expert)"They simple blew up the columns and the rest caved in afterwards.This is controlled demolition."
Reporter: "Are you sure?"
Jowenko (Expert):"Absolutely,it´s been imploded.This was a hired job.A team of experts did this."
Turboloch12 3 years ago
When and where did that interview take place.
philip1201 3 years ago
Hi,this interview are few years old.
You can watch the whole video at
WTC7 Demolition Interviews, 1 of 3 on youtube.
Jowenko has a very large controlled demolition company,and he´isn`t the only expert that says ,"This is controlled demolition.(WTC7)
Also Silverstein (Owner of Wtc 7 ) said on TV:
....."pull it". "They made their decision to pull it and then we watched the building collapse"(WTC7) "
You can find this on
9/11 Coincidences (Part Seven) on Youtube
Turboloch12 3 years ago
Quick research shows he has a small controlled demolition company, which has existed for 28 years and has been involved in about as much demolitions.
"pull it" is such an old trick - I'm suprised that you still use it. The only pulling of buildings meant for their destruction is pulling it, with ropes or chains, in a certain direction. "it" was, in this case, the contingent of firefighters present in building 7 - "pulling the contingent" is a commonly used phrase in firefighting.
philip1201 3 years ago
My young friend,according to FEMA ,NIST and Firechief Frank Fallini ,the fireworkers were ordered out at 11.30 that morning.The building was completely evacuated ,when they "pulled it".Call a demolition company and ask what pull it means.They will tell you all the same.
or watch this watch?v=eJI6YvK_TK0 on Utube.
What Does "PULL IT" Mean?
Turboloch12 3 years ago
Sources? (that FEMA, NIST and Fallini said 11:30)
Why couldn't Silverstein have been talking about that time too? (evidence for that too please)
Implosionworld [.] com states that "We have never, ever heard the term "pull it" being used to refer to the explosive demolition, and neither has any blast team we've spoken with" - google with limitation to that site only, with the search term "pull it".
philip1201 3 years ago
wtc7lies [.] googlepages [.] com [/] %22pull%22%3Dwithdrawfirefightersfromdanger
has a list of first-person accounts from 9/11 using "pull" as "withdraw".
philip1201 3 years ago
What do you aspect from silverstein and his skull and bones guys? That they will tell you the truth and they won´t react because of the 911 Truth movement,which crows everyday ? I think you`re very naive.
Turboloch12 3 years ago
So now my evidence is invalid because of... nothing. You asked for evidence, I gave you evidence.
I think you're naive too.
philip1201 3 years ago
Read the FEMA Report,watch 9/11 Coincidences (Part Seven) on Youtube .Btw it is impossible to take a 47 floor skycraper so clean down without dynamite.Ask an expert.6,5 sec. freefall-impossible.And this is only one "mistery" of so much. It was and ever will be an inside job or how the experts call it:" Under false flag attack".
Turboloch12 3 years ago
In history fire has never take down a steelskyscraper.
Watch the pentagon :about 86 cameras around it and only 2 Tapes were released because of a court order.Watch the videos -there is no plane . All I could see was something that looked like a missle (btw I was in the army)
and that the 20th sec. was cut off ........
Wake up!
Turboloch12 3 years ago
In history airplanes have never hit steel skyscrapers. And for WTC7: 25% of it's support columns taken down. Most steel skyscapers have concrete cores or columns. Fully steel buildings have collapsed of fire before: watch?v=_MRSr1MnFuk
The pentagon: watch?v=iBHi9CbrNf4
"btw I was in the army" Another evidence pointing to your insanity. You took a job where you have to kill people.
You don't have to be in the army to know what a missile looks like. Why would you think that?
philip1201 3 years ago
FEMA says it collapsed on it's own.
That dumb movie says the same as you. 4:26 actually blames the fire department for predicting the collapse.
It is possible to take a 47 floor skyscraper so clean down if you take down one or several support columns.
1. It was 14.5 seconds (the interior started collapsing before the roof from the angles seen in the videos you use).
2. How is it supposed to fall faster than freefall? That's IMPOSSIBLE.
philip1201 3 years ago
Yeah, because of the explosives that were HEARD going off in the building just prior to the collapse. I saw the video of the firefighters being shocked by the loud explosions. The cop telling them to get away because the building was going to be "blown up". Couldn't keep it a secret? Hmmmm. How many people here know that 3 of the 4 flight recorders from the WTC strikes have been found and the FBI told people on the site to shut their mouths? Leaks from the NTSB confirm that they have them.
moichidomoichido 3 years ago
No, because of their experience with weakening of structures because of fire.
OMG the cop said the building was going to blow up? Then of course 9/11 must have been planned by the government! Of course he couldn't have been mistaken or malinformed in the chaos!
"3 of the 4...their mouths" Any evidence?
Any evidence besides 9/11 truthist webpages with people who lie to get attention?
philip1201 3 years ago
If it was a site with evidence that it was a demolition, the it would obviously be a '9/11 truthist webpage' as you call it. So you ask for evidence while immediately declaring that any source of evidence is invalid. Nice logic. & I love how you official story huggers always fall back on 'all the chaos' to excuse every aspect of 9/11 that contradicts the official version.
DaveIrie 3 years ago
Just word your statements as condescendingly & arrogantly as possible though & that will automaticaly make them true.
DaveIrie 3 years ago
The mainstream 9/11 truthist webpages have been proven to be full of crap (see youtube channel RKOwens4).
What I ask is that you do not send me a webpage, but the evidence itself. No video with truthist commentary included, but just the video. Then you yourself explain why it is evidence. You present it neatly and clearly so that I can easily sniff out any faults of logic.
And what is wrong with "falling back on" (i.e. explaining things using) the chaos?
philip1201 3 years ago
Does the official theory have any double standard prerogative pertaining to its credibility?
Simboiss 3 years ago
Yes. You have 5 of the thousands of controlled demolition experts there are in the western world, we have all except 5.
philip1201 3 years ago
No experience on that matter, because steel reinforced buildings never fell on their own in history. WTC 1, 2 and 7 were the "exception"...
Simboiss 3 years ago
watch?v=_MRSr1MnFuk shows some examples of (parts of) buildings which were only supported by steel, like the WTC, collapsing due to fire.
philip1201 3 years ago
Reporter:" But it also happend on september 11th."
Jowenko(Expert):"The same day?"......
Reporter:" The same day."
Jowenko(Expert):"The same day?!" Are you sure?"
Reporter:"Yes."
after a while...
Jowenko(Expert):"Are you sure it was the 11th?That can´t be true."
Reporter:"Seven hours after the World Trade Center came down."
Jowenko(Expert):(breathing) "Than they worked hard ."
Turboloch12 3 years ago
How about this: 7 og the hijackers are sitll alive and well, and it has been known for quite some time now, but the hijacker list for 9/11 has not been updated with new info. Reason being that supposedly muhammed atta (spelling?) had left a list of all 19 hijackers, including the 7 that are still alive. So did these 7 men survive the suicide plane crashes, or did the fbi/cia fabricate evidence against innocent people to cover up their actual crime?
9/11 was an inside job.
seanthelight 3 years ago
seanthelight, that is false. search 911myths
representativepress 3 years ago
Great videos, RP. As a New Yorker, I'm glad that someone is finally debunking the myths perpetuated by these 9/11-truth schizophrenics.
RayWilliamJohnson 3 years ago
you're wellcome RayWilliamJohnson
representativepress 3 years ago
So when do I get to hear your response to the thing about Khalid Sheikh Mohammad being Daniel Pearl's killer, Reppress? That totally debunks your Bhutto debunking, don't ya think. Oh well, I'm guessing that like the other things I asked about, such as Rumsfeld's 'missile" comment, I won't get a response to the smoking gun things like that from you. So my dubbing of thee "RepresntativeFraud" stands until I see a plausible, satisfactory response. I've tried 6 times now, maybe this time?
israelfnp 3 years ago
This is THE most pathetic thing! RepPress gave his evidence that is clear, and all you dumbfucks alluded to these sometimes RIDICULOUS theories! And then more of you dumbfucks have been calling him Zionist-shill and the such? You guys are fucking disgraceful. I've tolerated 9/11 truthers for a long time now; I respected you guys; I had nice conversations with you guys---but I see that you're all brainwashed, and you are!!! You aren't be skeptical; you're being irrational! Thanks, RepPress!
larma7 3 years ago
Hey want don't you also do a piece about the varying faces of "Osama Bin Laden". You can see them to the right on the "Related Videos" as of now. They are two very different faces. Let me guess, coming from the guy who says Bhutto meant "Daniel Pearl" instead of "Osama Bin Laden", (and I haven't seen your reply to Rumsfeld's "Missile" remark, not to mention the "shot down" remark), you probably want us to believe he had plastic surgery in order to evade capture?
israelfnp 3 years ago
oops my mistake the second one on the right is the wrong video.
israelfnp 3 years ago
Here we go
h t tp : / / w w w . the7thfire . com / 9-11 / many_faces_of_osama_bin_laden . htm
New York Times, July 11, 2002
"Osama bin Laden is dead. The news first came from sources in Afghanistan and Pakistan almost six months ago: the fugitive died in December and was buried in the mountains of southeast Afghanistan. Pakistan's president, Pervez Musharraf, echoed the information. The remnants of Osama's gang, however, have mostly stayed silent, either to keep Osama's ghost alive..."
israelfnp 3 years ago
911myths . com/html/fake_video . html
representativepress 3 years ago
Maybe that explains the first pic (and still doesn't look like the Al-Jazeera face, or the discrepencies in the ones in the yellow garmen)....
But first off, that's a pretty shocking thing to put in the official "Opinion" section of the NY times, even if it "just an opinion..." And about the Rumsfeld comments, were they connected to why he was let go? And what do you think about Khalid Sheikh Muhammad confessing to killing Daniel Pearl? How does that fit with your "Bhutto debunking"?
israelfnp 3 years ago
h t t p:// w w w .foxnews . com/story/0,2933,41576,00 . html
Usama bin Laden has died a peaceful death due to an untreated lung complication, the Pakistan Observer reported, citing a Taliban leader who allegedly attended the funeral of the Al Qaeda leader.
Bin Laden, according to the source, was suffering from a serious lung complication and succumbed to the disease in mid-December, in the vicinity of the Tora Bora mountains. The source claimed that bin Laden was laid to rest..."
israelfnp 3 years ago
theres nothing we can do, the schedule for a WW3 is set, they want it so they can end the world and start over their own way.
They own everything, how can anyone go against that. And I will stop right here.
iDroli 3 years ago
iDroli,
never say never.
representativepress 3 years ago
Who pulls a building regardless of its means of demolition. Especially a building that just had fire. No object damage. 2 a building that was fortified paid by guiliani multimillions against attacks. 3 just hours of the rest. 4 and falls in its footprint. Any info that you think you have is CIA coverstory bs.
Squirelbutt 3 years ago
That's right. If buildings did fell in their footprints because of fire, we wouldn't need demolition experts. Only fire experts...
Simboiss 3 years ago
Fuck Isreal
JoeMudonja 3 years ago
representativepress
representativepress | August 10, 2008
I just completed what I think will be a powerful video debunking the whole WTC7 "controlled demolition" conspiracy crap. I will be uploading it soon. I do help whoever can will help promote it so it can get the exposure it deserves.
representativepress 3 years ago
Rep, Im not sure if you are saying that there is nothing strange about the WTC7 collapse or what. But you must be out of your mind if you think that steel framed buildings dive into their own footprint in 6.5 seconds, just .5 of a second slower than freefall speed. Even if the integrity of the building was compromised in any way, the building would tip or shear off. All things follow the path of least resistance, its simple physics.
F4O4U4R4S 3 years ago
Vote Ralph Nader!
HughieGphiladelphia 3 years ago
I'm done commenting on this page, ZWO is right.
EliYah74 3 years ago 2
Can you please tell me what ZWO means? I'd really like to know.
Thanks.
MustacheVerra 3 years ago
watch?v=QpghEHXpsQo&feature=related
watch?v=3xo9LqeOmEM&feature=related
watch?v=73qK4j32iuo&feature=related
watch?v=SLDh2DbxYTU&feature=related
EliYah74 3 years ago
Unlike a controlled demolition, the WTC towers were showing signs of structural changes well before they collapsed VERY UNLIKE A CONTROLLED DEMOLITION. Google "bowing debunks"
"the World Trade Center towers showed telltale signs they were about to collapse several minutes before each crumbled to the ground." There would not be telltale signs if it was explosives (Controlled Demolition) that caused the buildings to collapse.
representativepress 3 years ago
I'm blocking you due to your ignorance, it's a waste of time.
EliYah74 3 years ago
EliYah74,
You're acting like a child. I debunked your claims and now you think you have to block me no less! Another tantrum. My point is crystal clear, the buildings were undergoing structural changes which were visible to witnesses and were photographed WELL BEFORE the buildings collapsed and that simply is not how a "controlled demolition" happens. Why were columns bowing many minutes before the collapse? Because the fires were taking their toll on the steel, bending it. That's not a CD.
representativepress 3 years ago