• The shaking resulted from the use of a directed kinetic scalar weapon focused on building 7 using HAARP ELF (Extra Low Frequency) broadcasting. That would have weakened the structure significantly before they "pulled" the building with a small amount of sequentially detonated explosive charges. Building 7 was destroyed last because it was the command center for the 911 psyops.
I USED TO BE A TRUTHER. SEE WHY I CHANGED AND WHY THIS MOVIE IS COMPLETE BULLSHIT. If u want to know the truth, visit screwloosechange.blogspot.com Point by point it rebuts this. WTC was not destroyed by controller demolition. The Pentagon was not hit by a cruise missile. Terrorists did 9/11, not our government. Watch the video "Screw Loose Change" it COMPLETELY rebuts this movie scene by scene and point by point. You will see how ridiculous and manipulative Loose Change really is.
OK, so we all know that 9/11 was an inside job. Now here are the hard questions:
1. Why do people give their allegience to the great satan so easily.
2. Why is the USA limited in its ability to control itself. We obviously have people against the inside job. There is no representation in government for people who object to global terror. Where is this truth messiah!
3. Why do people say "don't kill the messenger?" Shouldn't we bomb CNN and FOX FIRST?
ppl r retarded. there would be no benefit to the collapse of building 7. anyone who looks at the south side of the building would realize there was more damage done then to any other buildings in the area, but loose change wouldnt show that side cuz theyre stupid
"cuz theyre stupid"?? Nice argument. I'm not sure one way or the other, but you can't deny that there are a lot of unanswered questions about what happened that day, and the days leading up to it.
Anybody who is skeptical with the story that came out is automatically labeled a 'conspiracy nut', which is sad, in my opinion. We should be skeptical and challenge everything that is 'handed to us'.
@PHOSPH3R And the days leading up to it? Are we supposed to know that it was going to happen in the future... I think 'conspiracy nut' was very well put by whoever said it.
You can put it like that and make everyone who questions the events sound like an asshole, or you could drop your bias, play both sides and actually try to find out what may or may not have happened. Check this out:
scribd . com/doc/49835251/Pre-9-11-Warnings-and-Intelligence-Timelines , I think the agencies that receive billions of dollars of our tax money could have done a bit better job.. or 'knowing what's going to happen in the future' according to you.
Jowenko appears to be having a shellshock, when he hears the collapse also occured ON 9/11. Just proves he knows that something is wrong here.
"Same day?", he asks? "Same day, are u sure? " he then asks, not understanding it because u can't prep a building like that within a day, especially not with the building on fire and damaged. Then he asks "Was it the 11th for sure? That can't be true" is what he actually says (I'm dutch myself). So yeah, he knows it a CD, so there's a problem, a big one.
interesting news clip at 0;39 wonder if the background behind the reporter was a still backdrop? seems kind of strange the image gets blurred and loses signal.
iceman...your are an idiot. Give us one example of a engineer, firefighter etc giving any kind of logical reason why this building fell, or how the BBC reported this collapse when the building is still standing behind the reporter. Either back up your words or fuck off.
hundreds of thousands of americans die from heart disease every year. 66 people die THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE GLOBE from terrorist attacks every year. Wheres the war on fast food?
You know why there's no Opposition to the Theorists? Because you can't Change an Extremists mind... and most Theorists don't accept the Facts... it's right in front of them, they just choose to keep their Tin-Foil hats on, when in the Real World... we consider Theorists Traitors, Terrorists, or sometimes just completely ignorant 18-Year-Old Kids... To most Engineers, Firefighters, and Pilots I know... they say all theorists should be tried for Treason...
@Iceman5164 then give a real explanation for WTC 7.. dont just babble ignorant jargon about pilots and engineers and firefighters that you know... either use intelligent hypothesis or dont say anything at all. we are all trying to have an open discussion to find the truth. It is a sign of intelligence.. not ignorance to question things.
koooooool... some ppl were saying this was debunked due to simple confusion on their behalf - he was saying that they said they didnt know if it was collapsed or not and that they jumped the gun - well clearly here i can see that more then 1 channell jumped the gun, and they clearly said it HAS collapsed - no confusion in that.
they lost the video feed when somebody realized they were showing the WTC 7 building behind the reporter..if they wouldn't have "lost" the signal then it would not have been a suspicious occurrence
the insurance was intended to cover 1 building. it was doubted that there would be more than 1 building that would fall at a time. the insurance plan intended to cover any one building that was destroyed.
WTC 7 =smoking gun, why was all of the evidence of the biggest crime in american history taken straight away on ships to china.....WHY? i could ask a hundred questions but they will never be answered,people who can't see what really happened will never accept what is front of there eyes,don't bother wasting time on the sheep,they're more to be pityed than scorned
Well, it's true that the production of Loose Change (editing and narration) is a bit obsessive, and they DO say improper things like "free-fall speed"; but what would be the reason NOT to take this seriously? There is a difference between taking seriously and believing blindly...
Loose Change is NOT a Bible; it's a reasonably digest compilation that makes a few important points; it also messes up in a few places, but it's not presented as a last instance, so that's OK: it encourages refinement.
Seriously, Loose Change has played its part in the process, but it certainly is getting old.
I, for example, was never very impressed with the interviews featured in Loose Change and elsewhere: I always feel like they're trying to present witness reports as evidence and expert comments as authority, which just doesn't work. They also aren't very clever about the physics of the whole thing. Fortunately, at this time there are resources on the web that are both more comprehensive and less vocal.
On another note, it would seriously help if everyone involved (not just the "conspiracy theorists") would refrain from cheap rhetorics, fallacy and sarcasm. I can't see why debunkers would be entitled to fight mean.
Suppose you didn't dismiss Loose Change as a whole and instead disputed specific points of THIS 10-minute fragment - appropriate enough. I have no doubt that we would have a very edifying conversation.
For example, would you say that the initial segments did not in fact air on BBC?
The evacuation of the area surrounding WTC 7 began about 4 PM, completed minutes before the 5:20 collapse. The warnings are absolutely consistent: a collapse WOULD occur. And that's because Silverstein ORDERED IT!!
It takes weeks to WIRE a controlled demolition, Silverstein revealed his GUILTY 'foreknowledge'.
i think that 9/11 morontwoofer idiot is responsible for 9/11. only someone that involved in what happened that day could possibly try to back up a theory that...well isn't really a theory. he needs to quit pullin stuff out of his ass, a fuckin blind man could see that this was set up
The notion that the total of collapse of smoking skyscrapers is a natural, predictable event is LUDICROUS and a BALD FACED LIE!
"Various various officials" issued VERBAL WARNINGS IN ADVANCE. The streets were evacuated an hour hour before the collapse. Network broadcasts ANNOUNCED the collapse at least 23 minutes before. BBC reported the collapse BEFORE it happened.
Conan Doyle, by way of his character Sherlock Holmes, said that when you have eliminated the impossible whatever remains --however improbable --must be the truth!
Simply --the BUSH COVER STORIES ARE ALL FUCKIN IMPOSSIBLE.
ONLY IDIOTS BELIEVE THEM!
I repeat: I will happily volunteer my services to the PROSECUTION when Bush, Silverstein, Cheney, Rice et al are INDICTED and charged with HIGH TREASON and MASS MURDER!
INSURANCE COMPANIES DO NOT PAY OFF WHEN THE OWNER DELIBERATELY DESTROYS THEIR PROPERTY.
Unless you think that all the lawyers and investigators from consortium of about a dozen insurance companies are so fucking dumb that they didn't do their own investigation in to the crash and the only reason those findings aren't published is because of corporate confidentiality.
(CTer argument will follow: "They weren't allowed on site". Well to me that would be a good enough reason to refuse to pay!)
@pigeonshouse Mate you are exactly right! Furthermore they claim that the twin towers were a controlled demolition because you can see the squibs blowing out floors below the collapse. But if a floor was blown out then it would collapse immediately - as they do in an actual controlled demolition - it wouldn't just sit there waiting patiently for the floors above it to collapse first. The whole idea is just completely moronic. No building in history has been demolished in a top-down fashion.
@tEWPtoo Yeah, I agree. But WTC 7 doesn't collapse in this way. It falls from the bottom to the top, like a classic demolition. My only question is how much preparation it would take to do this. If it could be done in a few hours, maybe the owner decided to pull the building after the attack for insurance/safety reasons. But if the explosives needed to be set up days beforehand, then it suggests that the owner did have pre-knowledge of the 9/11 attack.
They did get inaccurate info, they were told by american media it did collapse; which got confusing firefighter sources referring to a collapse, or a building that already collapsed. They in-turn thought it already did collapse. Confusing? Yes 9/11 was more than confusing.
The collapse of WTC7 is definitely a smoking gun when it comes to finding the REAL TRUTH about 9/11!!! So many crazy things happened that day I find it so amazing that so many people overlook the obvious. They've really done a great job at brainwashing the masses!
Re: quarter of north tower falling directly on top of wtc7
I didn't know about this. Which quarter of the north tower landed on top of WTC7?
If it was the top quarter of then it will affect the pancake theory proposed for the North Tower. Also, you should study more about the properties of steel buildings, fire and earthquake resistant. Amazing stuff.
Thanks in advance for you co-operation in this matter.
One profound peace of evidence often overlooked is the squibs you see on the east side BEFORE the ones on the west. Yes, if you look super closely at the video you see squibs on the east side shoot up the building before the east penthouse falls. This is all before the other squibs come as the whole building falls. This would support the NIST theory of a progressive collapse which started on the east side of the building and the squibs being due to breaking glass from falling floors.
Are we supposed to believe they forgot to fly a plane into wtc 7? Are we supposed to believe they waited 8 hours to detonate the building when they could've done it earlier.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
FACT:Building 7 suffered major structural damage from huge chunks of debris from one of mankind's biggest buildings ever. FACT:The fires were fed by 8 6,000 gallons of diesel fuel in WTC 7.
FACT:Larry said "They". Not once did he say me or we. Not once. FACT:Pull means bring a building down with cables not explosives.
FACT, he was talking about getting the firefighters out of the building and nothing else.
FACT:Steel Frame Buildings Have Never Before or Since 9/11 Collapsed Due to Fire. Yet three Steel Frame Buildings All Fall on the same day due to fire? Keep Drinking the Kool-aid. Look at the fire at that Chinese Hotel Fire last month. Fire Raged uncontrollably for HOURS and did not collapse. Wake Up.
3 QUESTIONS 911 TRUTHERS DON'T WANT YOU TO ASK THEM:
Larry Silverstein said "pull it", demolishing WTC 7 and collecting billions in insurance. Why would the insurance company pay the claim when there's evidence of fraud?
If WTC 1 & 2 were destroyed by demolition & NOT damaged by fire, how do you explain video of the exterior columns buckling under heat and stress loads?
Why doesnt Steven Jones say HOW he obtained the WTC dust samples and WHERE they were stored for the past 7.5 years?
WTC looks liike a controlled demolition because it was. "PULL IT" does NOT refer to firefighers. 'IT' refers to an object, in this case a building.
Secondly, NO OTHER STEEL FRAME BUILDINGS at any time or place have EVER collapsed due to fire.
Silverstein had METHOD, MOTIVE and OPPTY!
Any first year law student will tell you: THERE IS MORE THAN ENOUGH PROBABLE CAUSE RIGHT NOW TO ARREST SILVERSTEIN AND CHARGE HIM WITH COMPLICITY IN MASS MURDER.
Why would the insurance company pay the claim when there's evidence of fraud? Any first year law student says there is enough evidence to charge Silverstein with murder - but you can't charge him with insurance fraud?
What a moron!
What happpened to the Windsor Tower in Madrid in 2004, or the Kader Toy factory in Thailand?
I suppose a 300,000 lbs. plane hitting WTC at 500 mph had nothing to do with the collapse?
Indeed, Larry Silverstein said "PULL IT" ---NOT "pull them" Firefighters are NOT an 'IT"; they are, rather, people --NOT THINGS.
Secondly ---NO OTHER BUILDING of that size has ever collapsed as a result of mere fire.
WTC 7 was NOT struck by airplanes; 2) there is NO EVIDENCE to support the THEORY that the existing fires could have cause the PERFECTLY SYMETRICAL DEMOLITION OF WTC 7.
Burden of proof is upon those who have posited a LUDICROUS OFFICIAL THEORY for which there is NO evidence!
You've also neglected to answer any of 911morontwoofer's other points re insurance fraud. Coming to think of it. If there was any question of controlled demolition why were any of the buildings paid out on? How does that even f***ing work?!
Ever tried claiming on your car or home insurance when it's obvious you deliberately broke the damn thing you're insured for?
Oh, and there were diesel generators working in WTC7 which exploded btw. And 'official theory'?!??!
Fact:Again no other building has ever suffered the major structural damage from a giant 200 ton airliner with 10,000 gallons of jet fuel. None of them had columns severed or fireproofing knocked off. Or structural damage from one of the world's bigges buildings. These facts. Include these factors don't just ignore them.
Maybe planning. But not preparing. It would have taken months, to prepare wtc 7 without people noticing. But, you couldn't do that. Someone would notice.
Yeah, but the CTers will just come up with something like 'yeah but it was all government workers so they all knew about it and didn't say anything. You know, because if I was them I would just sit there as well and not do anything about it whilst explosive charges are drilled in to the wall. I wouldn't resign or anything!
Well... I mean, would the average person really care, if it's Government was going to kill thousands of it's own people, and blame it on radical Muslims? Who cares? As long as you get a couple hundred bucks, right?
Last I knew is that the conflicts in the middle east put us in debt and contributed to the deficit... Is that not correct. I dont think anyone really benefited from September 11th except "truth"ers
well thats cuz not all arabs wer in the war dumb ass and im not arab dumb ass if it wasnt for america they would have lost dumb ass plus the russians told them to stop or they wer gonna kick their ass dumb ass infact they own the us dumb ass plus im not against jews dumb ass im against zionists dumb ass what did i forget dumb ass !
1. The Israelis admitted to bombing the USS Liberty very shortly after it had done so, they did not blame any Arabs, or anyone else but themselves for that matter.
2. The King David Hotel bombing was carried by the Irgun, a Zionist group. No blame was placed on the Palestinians.
3. Just so long as your sure. You know, because you've been correct about things so far.
lol i think you should get them correct why were the irgun dressed as arabs???WHY they were caught by the british there was a shoot out the irgun is headed by who look it up and you will see menhem bagen !! if u didnt know uss liberty was confessed by the isreli pilot later on and the crew memeber on the ship later after then isreal gave them 7 mil for us families and what about the lavon affair ? so it is u who should get ur facts straight read real history next time
The Israli's admitted to the bombing 6 days after. The 7 million is called compensation.
If you look it up. You see 'Menachem Begin'. You need to learn to spell, or at least not copy/paste second hand info from anti-zionist websites. PS he wasn't prime-minister at the time.
"why were the irgun dressed as arabs?...". Hmm, was it to enter Palestine perhaps???? You seem to forget Israel didn't have any land at that point.
Lavon affair. OK so you've found *one* false flag attack. Which failed...
dumb ass did you know the celebrate the hotel bombing ur so called isreali goverment sick assholes the reason they admitted the bombing was cuz the british saw them READ IT ! ITS THERE U LIER
Could you please write something coherent? I know that txt language is the style of youtube - but the words that adjacent to eachother still need to make some kind of sense when constructing a sentence that you want someone to read.
read the history of it watch the interview from the people who were inside the hotel during the bombing then i suggest you watch the interview of one of the sailors on board the uss liberty or go on the site of the survivors and ASK THEM YOUR SELF CONTACT THEM THEN COME BACK TO ME AND COMMENT !!! all false flag operations
I refuse to do such follow-up as contacting survivors for the benefit of some 'tuber who can barely construct sentences.
In brief, the definition of a false flag attack is that one entity carries out an operation to look as if it had been carried out by another entity.
Although reasons for the attack have not been fully explained (hence the USS Liberty Veterans Assoc. push for transparancy by both govs), this does not make it a 'false flag'. Israel phoned US 90mins afterwards admitting attack.
The King David Hotel thing. This could be described more as an act of terrorism. The purpose or dressing up as Arabs was to gain entry in to the building, which, if the group dressed in their normal manner, they would have been treated with suspicion (they were in British-occupied Palestine, as I tried to point out earlier). Not so that the Arabs would be blamed. Bearing in mind Irgun had already advised it was planning to carry out the attacks.
The fact that one of the members of the group later became prime-minister of the latterly formed nation of Israel is of little consequence as he wasn't placed there, he was elected by the people of Israel. A conparison can easily drawn with Yasser Arafat (who carried out many attacks against the Israelis)
ok read the speech from the UK parliment on that issue you dont have to contact anyone but next time dont make things up im sure and im 100% if that was the case why did they establish a commison why dont you yoo tube ralph nader talking about it a few months ago dumb ass DONT MAKE THINGS UP JESUS !
I didn't make anything up! You said that Mossad carried out the attacks on the King David Hotel! MOSSAD didn't even exist! You made that up yourself!!!! All I've been doing is refuting what you've said. How can a government agency carry out an attack if the country it is an agency of has not even been formed yet?
I'm not making things up. Half of that stuff is on the website that was set up by the USS Liberty veterans association that you wanted me to visit!!!!!!!!!!
the IRGUN not the mossad !!! and what about the mexican congress were 2 isreali armed mossads were caught with pakistani passports when infact they were isreali thats not a false flag to your standard ? the king david was a terrorist act
You originally said Mossad. I am now quoting you, bobyloopo:
"2- the king david hotel bombing in which isreal did the same thing blame the arabs for it but it was later proven that isreali mossad did it" End of quote by you.
"the king david was a terrorist act". Yes! we agree! Excellent.
Mossads's in Mexico. One of them was in fact a retiree from the IDF (suspected but not proven to be Mossad agt) and the other one was a Mexican citizen who happened to be a Jew and no connections to Mossad.
Unfortunately you'll never ever get a clear picture on counter-intelligence/counter terrorism agencies from any country (whether you consider them to be an ally or not) on how they operate and why they do things, due to the nature of these agencies. This will always be the case.
The alternative is universal self-government which would require each & every citizen of all countries to display the same amount of trust/transparency. Even my ex who was anti-orwellian agrees this will never happen.
no i meant irgun anyways what are u trying to do then make them innocent ? or justify what they are doing ? if the so called ex mossad did it why did the isreali goverment beg the mexicans to take him back to isreal ?
No, I'm not trying to make them seem innocent. I'm trying to make sure you get your facts correct. You failed to get your facts correct 1st time then you just kept introducing new 'facts' which I refuted, then you accused me of lying/making things up and you're now claiming that when I quote you directly, that you actually meant 'Irgun' when you said 'Mossad'.
It's normal practice for govs to campaign for suspects to be tried on 'home turf'. Hence why UK gitmo detainees were xferred/released.
OK when i said mossad i meant irgun both are violent zionists false flag assholes let me add for you a new fact and this is from zionists themselves confession on the bombing of synagogues in arab countreis so that the jews their would come to the so isreal to give it more legality when the population has increased
Loose Change is full of lies and out-of-context straw man arguments....Avery has even admitted to many of these hence the multiple editions...to see my backing of this watch the full version of loose change with notes displayed on screen(and yes, its has sources for you to look up)...just try it!
Google "screw loose change video" its the first result
4:49 > interesting that they demolish the Deutsch Bank tower "beam by beam", and why not by controlled demolition? Afraid that it would look too much alike towers 1,2 & 7?
THE MOON!! people have had enough of the shit from the most evil government on the planet, fuck BU$H and his masonic secret cult of power hungry goons. Trillions of dollars and millions of lives cant be wrong. So many bullets in AmeriKKKa but not one has got BU$H yet. Do us all a favour and kill him.
did you actually spend time putting these videos together. what a loser. im sure your gonna say its about trying to get the truth out there but your just trying to get attention. no one gives a shit. whats done is done.
. . . the NIST director has determined that certain evidence . . is voluntarily provided . . not directly related to the building failure . . and that disclosure of that information would inhibit the voluntary provision of that type of information.
In other words: they aren't telling you all of their information. Only what they feel like. We can't check their work because they're not providing us with all of their information.
it make me mad, now we know that Bush is only after Oil, but you still using Oil, consumption Society, Cumfort and all Bullshits ruining the world!! If they can sell all this shit its because you buy it.
Use only what you need (like computers to communicate and avoid TV) and stop Buying things but food and clothes. Its so easy to say: "yeah Bush is a murderer" while eating macdonalds in your big car...
Watch the timer..a full minute was cut-out just as the anchor switches over to the "live reporter" Jane. This footage was edited to make it appear she was refering to WTC7 but you don't actually hear her say that with WTC7 behind her.
what bullshit on building #6 you can see a fireman's hose & ladder helping to put out the fires, while WTC7 burned for 7hrs unfought!. Misinformation.
the witnesses testaments 'are' detailing explosions, but not as this program is trying to assert as demolition explosions -
a diesel tank explosion would not sound vastly different from a demolition explosion, they just stated that explosions occured, & in a moment of sheer panic could you clarify accurately which type you heard?.
to all the conspiracy theorists did you also know that WTC7 had sprinklers installed but were inoperable due to the damage sustained during the fall of the twin towers collapse. this knocked out the buildings water supply & made the firefighters job inherently difficult.
but i guess alex jones & the boys of loose change neglected to tell you that!.
that argument of never before in history is a false representation perpetuated by the makers of loose change for example the building in i think it was Madrid the top section that was built out of steel & did fall but the lower concrete floors stood intact.
The top 1/3 of the madrid building collapsed, as it was NOT YET COMPLETED. And the REST of the building was still able to hold up not only the collapsed section, but all of the construction equipment on top of it. After burning at least 3 times hotter than the fires on 9/11. For over 24 hours.
WTC7 had a lot of weight distributed by only 2 main trusses and as the building got weaker & weaker from the fires that burnt uncontrolled for 7 hours fed by backup diesel tanks the weight of the building got more & more weight re-distributed to those 2 main trusses & it was too much for the building to sustain.
I challenge anyone to look at the latest explanation from NIST about WTC 7. It is so laughable that you'd think its a joke but they actually said that one column collapsed from heat and made the whole thing come down at free fall speed. As crazy as that sounds thats what they came up with.
NIST has no legs left to stand on and they are collapsing.
All of what is debunked?? NIST debunks their own hypothesis that is for sure. How does a building collapse due to fire when the Critical temperature is 600oC and yet they only find PHYSICAL EVIDENCE of 250oC? How can that be that they have a working hypothesis with 0.25% steel from WTC 1&2, and 0% steel from WTC 7? The definition of pseudoscience states "LACK OF SUPPORTING EVIDENCE" Find no critical temps is what? A LACK OF SUPPORTING EVIDENCE!!!
@sstearns34 NIST is government owned, you think the government would conduct a fair investigation. No... if there is nothing to fucking hide then why don't they just allow independent investigation like everything else................ No THEY WON't BECAUSE it was a fucking government conspiracy.
If it was an inside job then why did the fire fighters on that day say the building is leaning & it was going to collapse?
& in no conspiracy theory video do you see the section of the east-penthouse of WTC7 falling just before the entire building collapse? Because this further proves how it was 'not' a conspiracy & is consistent with a collapse.
it fell at a no faster rate of speed than any other building would have.
once collapse ignition has started there is no way of stopping it & thats why the NIST report only goes that far, because ANY structural engineer can tell you that the building cannot hold those kinds of forces, especially after the damage that was done to it before hand.
NIST was forced to retract their statement that 1/3 of the building was destroyed by debris. Also, if there's a steel core beneath the section that collapses, even IF that core is not strong en ough to support the collapsing section, its going to give MORE resistance than air. Unless you think steel = air.
buildings do not topple over like tree's due to it not being made all of one continuous material or segment, they reach their breaking point & then give way which explains your question of its footprint.
with the symetrical nature the two trusses supporting the most weight that i discussed before that held the building in place, they were located diagonally across from each-other on the lower floors of the WTC7 complex so that explains it further that it was not imploded.
The core is solid, like a tree. how do you explain the core imploding? I've seen trees burn, never seen one implode. And trees are made of a substance slightly more flammable than steel.
The force of the collapse at the tower that was struck at the higher floors was about a million pounds or more of force & 2 million in the case of the south tower & all that energy coming down was obviously more than enough power to make both structures give way.
the comment about the inner columns being one constant solid structure is just wrong, can you tell me when was the last time you've seen a single piece of steel thats 110 stories high?.
the building fell like a stack of dominos because that was how it was built 'in stages'.
the entire building doesn't need to similtaneously fail, just re-distribute the load until it can take no more & the did just that.
if it were a conspiracy then why are the remains of steel beams twisted? - if it were really a cover-up & explosions then that does not support your theory.
I'm fed up of seeing all this... they bombed the towers... blah ... blah... blah...
The hijackers = SAUDI.... reported hatred from SAUDIS for the USA having a base there as stated in the 9/11 report.... The Bushes... great 'crude oil' friends of the SAUDI royals.... Osama.. an ex SAUDI royal.... SAUDI ARABIA arch enemy = Iraq... Saudis do 9/11 and friend of the SAUDI... Bush... invades Iraq... "WIG" and an ex Bush offical both show evidence it was being planned long before 9/11.
We're fucked... Islam was never the enemy, the enemy was within, the enemy was the neo-conservatives, hijacked the government with puppet Bush... we're fucked people....
Relax don't call everyone an idiot simply for not sharing your point of view..especially when it comes to such massive issues as weather or not it was terrorists or our own government that killed people. It takes time with people but if your understanding lots more people will be willing to at least have a look. No one responds well to people screaming and insulting them. Just a thought.
I agree with your statement, except that people who even point out the Bld7 looks like it was controlled demolition are called idiots or worse. In this case people immediately dismiss evidence solely because of it's implication. In any other investigation that is called incompetence. But here you're are "crazy, anti-american, conspiracy-theorist,
stupid.....etc. person for even pointing out something that is obvious. Building 7 does LOOK like it was controlled demolished.
The big picture is this: with 911 America has had the excuse to not only invade the middle east, but now to pass legislation to take away freedoms for us at home. How long do you think the internet will exist before sites like youtube are bought out by mainstream media or buried under slow connection and download speeds. You'll only see the seriousness of 911 being an inside job when it effects you- and it will bitches.
So now You Tube is also in on the conspiracy? Including every major media corporation in the WORLD? None of you troofer IMBECILES even consider that if there was ANY credibility to this that AL-Jazzera, ITAR-TASS, or even Al-CNN wouldn't be beating the drums for the trials and executions of everyone in DC? How stupid can you people be?
Its funny when "Truthers" think they know what they're talking about. The real TRUTH is that most "Truthers" lack logic. WTC 7 was SEVERELY damaged at its base from the tower collapses. Yes, other surrounding buildings were more damaged, but there bases had very minor damage, while WTC 7 had major damage on its south side. What happens when you pile 47 stories on a weak base? It collapses. If you look closely, you'll notice WTC 7 leans to its south side slightly when it collapses.
If only one side of a base is severely damaged, then we would clearly see one side of the building start to give way first. We would see other failures take place before the whole thing collapses. On top of that, it was a symmetrical and simultaneous collapse, which contradicts the physics of steel itself.
You are in no position to say just how damaged it was either. The damage would not be called severe and it was only to one side. It does not match the simultaneous failure we saw.
How dare you consider yourself a professional when your grammar is equivalent to that of a typical high-school students...
If you're of such high rank in the demolition industry, explain to me when the Government would get the chance to plant explosives throughout the ENTIRE WTC with no one noticing. That's almost 300 STORIES.
Now I'm sure with your "expertise" you'd know that this would require many people, a lot of equipment, good concentration, and a load of time.
to put all this shit to an end..... the government is ran by men (men being human beings) and as long as they are in control, fucked up shit will happen. the government is not perfect. i dont give a fuck about some body blowing up the towers and America goin to war over it. the fact is that people died.. should it matter who did it? if we all found out today that bush organized 9/11 what would/could you possibly do?
sologroup said "if we all found out today that bush organized 9/11 what would/could you possibly do" ...karlam235 replied "we can do nothing about it...Yes Americans cannot do anything about it because all americans are faggot.
Of course in America intelligent=idiot, an idiot=intelligent, hypocrisy is virtue, to be truthful is weird, honesty is old-fashioned, a liar has a good PR, rich=success, to be poor is a loser. That's the America you grew up in. I don't care a fuck how i sound to you.
it is well known and widely reported by some us govt officials that the white house was sending "news" reports to the new york times and then the following day have press conferences and say "look..the new york times says this and says that.."...watch frontline special which was showed on television about what took place leading to iraq invasion..if they did it prior to iraq, do you think there s a remote chance they would have done it before 911?
why is this a video response to a rick roll video?? If you are gonna spam, then do it for Endgame by Alex Jones google video son, pas that around, espionage at WTC is obvious move on to other stuff
I have a question for all of you conspiracy theorists out there. If you did have some incontrovertible, hard evidence that the U.S. government had a hand in the 9/11 attacks, what's next? What do you do after you prove they did it? What's going to change in our country?
We take people to court and charge them for crimes against humanity, which will undoubtedly lead to massive government, military, and media reform, among other things. Then we outlaw the Federal Reserve, ban the Income Tax, and take control of our own lives!
plus even if some of that smoke is coming from wtc7, fire doesnt cause steel buildings to collapse. and at least 90% of the building is not on fire. in other views the penthouse dips in the middle, flashes and smoke can be seen in several windows during collapse, squibs run up the building during collapse, there were reports of countdowns and foreknowledge of collapse, and of course larry silverstein admitted they "pulled" it. finally, there is STILL NO OFFICIAL EXPLANATION for the collapse.
There is an official explanation, but you wont look into it. At least 90% of the building was not on fire??? Take a look at the south face of the building before collapse. There is a reason loose change refuses to show it.
This has been flagged as spam show
• The shaking resulted from the use of a directed kinetic scalar weapon focused on building 7 using HAARP ELF (Extra Low Frequency) broadcasting. That would have weakened the structure significantly before they "pulled" the building with a small amount of sequentially detonated explosive charges. Building 7 was destroyed last because it was the command center for the 911 psyops.
altgeldrarities 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
/watch?v=j5FhQc-LJ-o /watch?v=5qFsjdymqSk /watch?v=KhdppHwUJ9k /watch?v=zhnNy5EsebA /watch?v=iGqjzFQvfdI /watch?v=WxqoChniKVU /watch?v=9QWvkAgyIY4 /watch?v=qFpbZ-aLDLY /watch?v=HfmliaqIRBE /watch?v=HSjDCwN2i3w /watch?v=8XRMrMdn0NQ /watch?v=wKuLUu7SQU4
megamogx 4 months ago in playlist 9/11 - New York - WTC7 - Salomon Brothers Building
This has been flagged as spam show
I USED TO BE A TRUTHER. SEE WHY I CHANGED AND WHY THIS MOVIE IS COMPLETE BULLSHIT. If u want to know the truth, visit screwloosechange.blogspot.com Point by point it rebuts this. WTC was not destroyed by controller demolition. The Pentagon was not hit by a cruise missile. Terrorists did 9/11, not our government. Watch the video "Screw Loose Change" it COMPLETELY rebuts this movie scene by scene and point by point. You will see how ridiculous and manipulative Loose Change really is.
johnlindemann1 8 months ago
OK, so we all know that 9/11 was an inside job. Now here are the hard questions:
1. Why do people give their allegience to the great satan so easily.
2. Why is the USA limited in its ability to control itself. We obviously have people against the inside job. There is no representation in government for people who object to global terror. Where is this truth messiah!
3. Why do people say "don't kill the messenger?" Shouldn't we bomb CNN and FOX FIRST?
4. Where's the Revolution?
tropophyte 9 months ago
@tropophyte
Ron Paul.
PHOSPH3R 7 months ago 3
ppl r retarded. there would be no benefit to the collapse of building 7. anyone who looks at the south side of the building would realize there was more damage done then to any other buildings in the area, but loose change wouldnt show that side cuz theyre stupid
zackerykelly 10 months ago
@zackerykelly
"cuz theyre stupid"?? Nice argument. I'm not sure one way or the other, but you can't deny that there are a lot of unanswered questions about what happened that day, and the days leading up to it.
Anybody who is skeptical with the story that came out is automatically labeled a 'conspiracy nut', which is sad, in my opinion. We should be skeptical and challenge everything that is 'handed to us'.
PHOSPH3R 8 months ago
@PHOSPH3R And the days leading up to it? Are we supposed to know that it was going to happen in the future... I think 'conspiracy nut' was very well put by whoever said it.
MiskovProductionsCo 7 months ago
@MiskovProductionsCo
You can put it like that and make everyone who questions the events sound like an asshole, or you could drop your bias, play both sides and actually try to find out what may or may not have happened. Check this out:
scribd . com/doc/49835251/Pre-9-11-Warnings-and-Intelligence-Timelines , I think the agencies that receive billions of dollars of our tax money could have done a bit better job.. or 'knowing what's going to happen in the future' according to you.
PHOSPH3R 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@PHOSPH3R And the days leading up to it? Were we supposed to know that it was going to happen?
... I think 'conspiracy nut' was very well put by whoever said it.
MiskovProductionsCo 7 months ago
watch?v=I3pvPMh4prM
awesome effects, blood effects
NeoMiguelHD 10 months ago
Jowenko appears to be having a shellshock, when he hears the collapse also occured ON 9/11. Just proves he knows that something is wrong here.
"Same day?", he asks? "Same day, are u sure? " he then asks, not understanding it because u can't prep a building like that within a day, especially not with the building on fire and damaged. Then he asks "Was it the 11th for sure? That can't be true" is what he actually says (I'm dutch myself). So yeah, he knows it a CD, so there's a problem, a big one.
Sandberg1972 10 months ago
interesting news clip at 0;39 wonder if the background behind the reporter was a still backdrop? seems kind of strange the image gets blurred and loses signal.
parkerdonald1 11 months ago
i have tried soo hard to see this from the governments version an it brings me to this conclusion every time....911 WAS AN INSIDE JOB!!!!
0303940 1 year ago
iceman...your are an idiot. Give us one example of a engineer, firefighter etc giving any kind of logical reason why this building fell, or how the BBC reported this collapse when the building is still standing behind the reporter. Either back up your words or fuck off.
stevewoooow 1 year ago
Iceman, please regail us with some facts. Betcha can't.
ablomandicus 1 year ago
hundreds of thousands of americans die from heart disease every year. 66 people die THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE GLOBE from terrorist attacks every year. Wheres the war on fast food?
Smokethaweed 1 year ago
You know why there's no Opposition to the Theorists? Because you can't Change an Extremists mind... and most Theorists don't accept the Facts... it's right in front of them, they just choose to keep their Tin-Foil hats on, when in the Real World... we consider Theorists Traitors, Terrorists, or sometimes just completely ignorant 18-Year-Old Kids... To most Engineers, Firefighters, and Pilots I know... they say all theorists should be tried for Treason...
Iceman5164 1 year ago
@Iceman5164 then give a real explanation for WTC 7.. dont just babble ignorant jargon about pilots and engineers and firefighters that you know... either use intelligent hypothesis or dont say anything at all. we are all trying to have an open discussion to find the truth. It is a sign of intelligence.. not ignorance to question things.
23mbtx23 1 year ago
can't debunk truth science and physical evidence not to mention all the un answerd questions
irobot2009able 1 year ago
Amazing how they had all the answers to what happened that day in 24 hours "The Building was weakened"........................
VitaminsAndPiss 1 year ago
koooooool... some ppl were saying this was debunked due to simple confusion on their behalf - he was saying that they said they didnt know if it was collapsed or not and that they jumped the gun - well clearly here i can see that more then 1 channell jumped the gun, and they clearly said it HAS collapsed - no confusion in that.
floats69 1 year ago
they lost the video feed when somebody realized they were showing the WTC 7 building behind the reporter..if they wouldn't have "lost" the signal then it would not have been a suspicious occurrence
xadam2dudex 1 year ago
@xadam2dudex
This is what's known as a strawman argument. The condition you have implied relies heavily on a hypothetical event.
pigeonshouse 1 year ago
@pigeonshouse only if the hypothetical event didn't have much of a likelihood of being true
xadam2dudex 1 year ago
Stop voting for people who will only continue the lie.
unreal1one 2 years ago
the insurance was intended to cover 1 building. it was doubted that there would be more than 1 building that would fall at a time. the insurance plan intended to cover any one building that was destroyed.
misskazzy89 2 years ago
WTC 7 =smoking gun, why was all of the evidence of the biggest crime in american history taken straight away on ships to china.....WHY? i could ask a hundred questions but they will never be answered,people who can't see what really happened will never accept what is front of there eyes,don't bother wasting time on the sheep,they're more to be pityed than scorned
davyro66 2 years ago
9/11 was a masonic ritual
Iknowabout911 2 years ago
may i ask, why the fuk would they put bombs in it. I think the plane itsself would be enough to declair war.
headyoung 2 years ago
inside job 4 sure!
DesmoRob 2 years ago 10
@DesmoRob
piece of shit get the fuck out of america, and if you aren't in america, kill yourself.
awesomesauce0001 11 months ago
Serious question: Do people still take this video seriously?
PoetryHound 2 years ago
Well, it's true that the production of Loose Change (editing and narration) is a bit obsessive, and they DO say improper things like "free-fall speed"; but what would be the reason NOT to take this seriously? There is a difference between taking seriously and believing blindly...
Loose Change is NOT a Bible; it's a reasonably digest compilation that makes a few important points; it also messes up in a few places, but it's not presented as a last instance, so that's OK: it encourages refinement.
ParisKSP 2 years ago
Seriously, Loose Change has played its part in the process, but it certainly is getting old.
I, for example, was never very impressed with the interviews featured in Loose Change and elsewhere: I always feel like they're trying to present witness reports as evidence and expert comments as authority, which just doesn't work. They also aren't very clever about the physics of the whole thing. Fortunately, at this time there are resources on the web that are both more comprehensive and less vocal.
ParisKSP 2 years ago
AE911 truth.
ayahuascatrip 2 years ago
On another note, it would seriously help if everyone involved (not just the "conspiracy theorists") would refrain from cheap rhetorics, fallacy and sarcasm. I can't see why debunkers would be entitled to fight mean.
Suppose you didn't dismiss Loose Change as a whole and instead disputed specific points of THIS 10-minute fragment - appropriate enough. I have no doubt that we would have a very edifying conversation.
For example, would you say that the initial segments did not in fact air on BBC?
ParisKSP 2 years ago
The evacuation of the area surrounding WTC 7 began about 4 PM, completed minutes before the 5:20 collapse. The warnings are absolutely consistent: a collapse WOULD occur. And that's because Silverstein ORDERED IT!!
It takes weeks to WIRE a controlled demolition, Silverstein revealed his GUILTY 'foreknowledge'.
lennhart 2 years ago
i think that 9/11 morontwoofer idiot is responsible for 9/11. only someone that involved in what happened that day could possibly try to back up a theory that...well isn't really a theory. he needs to quit pullin stuff out of his ass, a fuckin blind man could see that this was set up
maarrcccooo 2 years ago
Bush govt has never explained the fall of wtc 7.
The notion that the total of collapse of smoking skyscrapers is a natural, predictable event is LUDICROUS and a BALD FACED LIE!
"Various various officials" issued VERBAL WARNINGS IN ADVANCE. The streets were evacuated an hour hour before the collapse. Network broadcasts ANNOUNCED the collapse at least 23 minutes before. BBC reported the collapse BEFORE it happened.
lennhart 2 years ago
BTW --I will still volunteer my services to the prosecution.
lennhart 2 years ago
EVERY video of WTC 7 shows it falling with a VERTICAL PRECISION seen ONLY in controlled demolitions.
There were NO MISSING corners.
NO aircraft CRASHED into it.
And there is NO EVIDENCE whatsoever that the unimpressive and disparate fires could have caused the collapse.
WORTH REPEATING: WTC7 looks like a CONTROLLED DEMOLITION because IT WAS A CONTROLLED DEMOLITION.
And we have SILVERSTEIN'S own words to back that up! He said "We made the decision to pull IT"
lennhart 2 years ago
SOME FACTS:
Building 7 had several fires of 'LIMITED EXTENT'. In other words DINKY, LITTLE FIRES.
Photographs of WTC7's west face show some areas with smoke stains but NO FLAMES of ANY SIZE!
Photographs of the building's north face show only small, barely visible fires.
It was NOT STRUCK by any AIRCRAFT.
And THERE WERE NO MISSING CORNERS!
In short --the MORON posting here is a goddamned liar!
lennhart 2 years ago
Conan Doyle, by way of his character Sherlock Holmes, said that when you have eliminated the impossible whatever remains --however improbable --must be the truth!
Simply --the BUSH COVER STORIES ARE ALL FUCKIN IMPOSSIBLE.
ONLY IDIOTS BELIEVE THEM!
I repeat: I will happily volunteer my services to the PROSECUTION when Bush, Silverstein, Cheney, Rice et al are INDICTED and charged with HIGH TREASON and MASS MURDER!
Let the trials begin!
lennhart 2 years ago
Why don't you help indict them yourselve if you're a real lawyer.
I didn't admit anything. I just utilied a 911 twoofer assumption to display how the actual results refute your moronic theories.
No, but WTC 7 nearly had the corner of the building chopped off.
I suppose large pieces of concrete and steel falling a thousand feet hitting WTC 7had nothing to with the collapse?
ROFL!
lennhart DEBUNKED!
911morontwoofer 2 years ago
"I didn't admit anything. I just utilied a 911 twoofer assumption to display how the actual results refute your moronic theories."
Either you cannot spell or you just make up words!
That's typical of morons!
"No, but WTC 7 nearly had the corner of the building chopped off."
By that MYTHICAL AIRPLANE that you BELIEVE crashed into WTC7 I suppose.
Fact is: YOU ARE TOTALLY FUCKIN IGNORANT OF WHAT HAPPENED but that has not kept you from making up BULLSHIT which you post here.
lennhart 2 years ago
"I suppose large pieces of concrete and steel falling a thousand feet hitting WTC 7had nothing to with the collapse?"
IDIOT! Falling pieces DID NOT cause the collapse but were the RESULTof whatever it was that DID!
And since you brought it up --why don't YOU tell us what that was. Do you still maintain that an AIRLINER crashed into WTC7?
If so, what is the FLIGHT NUMBER, the type and where are the passengers?
911morontwoofer, let me be blunt: YOU are a moron, an idiot, and a dipshit!
lennhart 2 years ago
ROFL!
lennhart volunteers his services as a FAKE LAWYER to prosecute Bush.
The first lawyer that lists his occupation as Producer/Journalist.
FAKE LAWYER! LIER! FRAUD!
911morontwoofer 2 years ago
"FAKE LAWYER! LIER! FRAUD! "
You are are NOT ONLY an idiot. You are a liar.
I did NOT say that I was a lawyer.
But you are a shithead, a liar, and an IDIOT!
And --being STUPID --you don't even know when you have been THOROUGHLY refuted.
lennhart 2 years ago
911morontwoofer is typical of IDIOTS who defend Bush and his neocon butt buddies.
LOL LOL LOL
WTC7 was NOT struck by a plane...the fires were DINKY and UNIMPRESSIVE.
There is simply NO OTHER CREDIBLE explanation for its collapse apart from CONTROLLED DEMOLITION.
It looks like a CONTROLLED DEMOLOTION because it WAS a controlled demolition.
When SILVERSTEIN is INDICTED FOR MURDER, I will volunteer my services to the prosecution!
lennhart 2 years ago
Six months before 9/11, Silverstein bought the WTC lease for $3.2 billion, calling it a 'dream come true!"
A DREAM for Silverstein! A NIGHTMARISH TRAGEDY for over 3,000 people!
Economically, WTC was a White Elephant that was subsidized since its inception.
The perfect collapse of the twin towers turned things around for Silverstein who would have GONE BUST!
A potential $7.1 billion pay off is MOTIVE for Silversteing to pull off a MASS MURDER! MOTIVE, METHOD, OPPTY
lennhart 2 years ago
INSURANCE COMPANIES DO NOT PAY OFF WHEN THE OWNER DELIBERATELY DESTROYS THEIR PROPERTY.
Unless you think that all the lawyers and investigators from consortium of about a dozen insurance companies are so fucking dumb that they didn't do their own investigation in to the crash and the only reason those findings aren't published is because of corporate confidentiality.
(CTer argument will follow: "They weren't allowed on site". Well to me that would be a good enough reason to refuse to pay!)
pigeonshouse 2 years ago
@pigeonshouse Mate you are exactly right! Furthermore they claim that the twin towers were a controlled demolition because you can see the squibs blowing out floors below the collapse. But if a floor was blown out then it would collapse immediately - as they do in an actual controlled demolition - it wouldn't just sit there waiting patiently for the floors above it to collapse first. The whole idea is just completely moronic. No building in history has been demolished in a top-down fashion.
tEWPtoo 1 year ago
@tEWPtoo Yeah, I agree. But WTC 7 doesn't collapse in this way. It falls from the bottom to the top, like a classic demolition. My only question is how much preparation it would take to do this. If it could be done in a few hours, maybe the owner decided to pull the building after the attack for insurance/safety reasons. But if the explosives needed to be set up days beforehand, then it suggests that the owner did have pre-knowledge of the 9/11 attack.
tabb041 1 year ago
I often wonder just HOW the BBC knew --in advance --that WTC was going to fall.
How was this possible unless Silverstein sent them a PRESS RELEASE!
lennhart 2 years ago
Comment removed
lennhart 2 years ago
America's time is up. All great civilization ultimately die it's inevitable.
Puspanjali1 2 years ago
Does anybody else think the funk soundtrack is in appropriate?
n136ha 2 years ago
They did get inaccurate info, they were told by american media it did collapse; which got confusing firefighter sources referring to a collapse, or a building that already collapsed. They in-turn thought it already did collapse. Confusing? Yes 9/11 was more than confusing.
PubicWi6 2 years ago
The collapse of WTC7 is definitely a smoking gun when it comes to finding the REAL TRUTH about 9/11!!! So many crazy things happened that day I find it so amazing that so many people overlook the obvious. They've really done a great job at brainwashing the masses!
Great video!
CosmicAdventures 2 years ago
wtc7 was bobmbarded with debris a quarter of the tower fell right on top of it, it then caught fire wtf do you expect to happen?
ericdelossantos1 2 years ago
Dear Eric Delossantos
Re: quarter of north tower falling directly on top of wtc7
I didn't know about this. Which quarter of the north tower landed on top of WTC7?
If it was the top quarter of then it will affect the pancake theory proposed for the North Tower. Also, you should study more about the properties of steel buildings, fire and earthquake resistant. Amazing stuff.
Thanks in advance for you co-operation in this matter.
Sincerely.
Dr. Andreas Ossolcroft, Sr.
bgg0071 2 years ago
CanaDUH Sucks
onetrickpony420 2 years ago
One profound peace of evidence often overlooked is the squibs you see on the east side BEFORE the ones on the west. Yes, if you look super closely at the video you see squibs on the east side shoot up the building before the east penthouse falls. This is all before the other squibs come as the whole building falls. This would support the NIST theory of a progressive collapse which started on the east side of the building and the squibs being due to breaking glass from falling floors.
sillybilly44444444 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
911 was an inside job
jblaz1024 3 years ago
Are we supposed to believe they forgot to fly a plane into wtc 7? Are we supposed to believe they waited 8 hours to detonate the building when they could've done it earlier.
AmericasFan 2 years ago
Facts are facts whether you believe them or not.
FACT: no airliner crashed into WTC7 which was reported collapse by the BBC before it did in fact.
FACT: Larry Silverstein himself said it was 'PULLED'.
At last, ONLY controlled demolitions are KNOWN and proven to bring down bldgs in precisely that manner.
lennhart 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
FACT:Building 7 suffered major structural damage from huge chunks of debris from one of mankind's biggest buildings ever. FACT:The fires were fed by 8 6,000 gallons of diesel fuel in WTC 7.
FACT:Larry said "They". Not once did he say me or we. Not once. FACT:Pull means bring a building down with cables not explosives.
FACT, he was talking about getting the firefighters out of the building and nothing else.
AmericasFan 2 years ago
change your name to NEWWORLDORDERSFAN faggot
soilworkr 2 years ago
FACT:Steel Frame Buildings Have Never Before or Since 9/11 Collapsed Due to Fire. Yet three Steel Frame Buildings All Fall on the same day due to fire? Keep Drinking the Kool-aid. Look at the fire at that Chinese Hotel Fire last month. Fire Raged uncontrollably for HOURS and did not collapse. Wake Up.
rkymtnrdr 2 years ago
The fires were sporadic...temperatures varying widely.
MOST FLOORS WERE NOT EVEN INVOLVED.
ONLY a controlled demolition explains what Silverstein, the building's owner, said was PULLED!
"PULLED" is firefighter jargon for: 'CONTROLLED DEMOLITION'
Who benefits?
LARRY SILVERSTEIN who had the WTC insured for BILLIONS.
lennhart 2 years ago
3 QUESTIONS 911 TRUTHERS DON'T WANT YOU TO ASK THEM:
Larry Silverstein said "pull it", demolishing WTC 7 and collecting billions in insurance. Why would the insurance company pay the claim when there's evidence of fraud?
If WTC 1 & 2 were destroyed by demolition & NOT damaged by fire, how do you explain video of the exterior columns buckling under heat and stress loads?
Why doesnt Steven Jones say HOW he obtained the WTC dust samples and WHERE they were stored for the past 7.5 years?
911morontwoofer 2 years ago
WTC looks liike a controlled demolition because it was. "PULL IT" does NOT refer to firefighers. 'IT' refers to an object, in this case a building.
Secondly, NO OTHER STEEL FRAME BUILDINGS at any time or place have EVER collapsed due to fire.
Silverstein had METHOD, MOTIVE and OPPTY!
Any first year law student will tell you: THERE IS MORE THAN ENOUGH PROBABLE CAUSE RIGHT NOW TO ARREST SILVERSTEIN AND CHARGE HIM WITH COMPLICITY IN MASS MURDER.
lennhart 2 years ago
Nice try, but you didn't ansewr the questions.
Why would the insurance company pay the claim when there's evidence of fraud? Any first year law student says there is enough evidence to charge Silverstein with murder - but you can't charge him with insurance fraud?
What a moron!
What happpened to the Windsor Tower in Madrid in 2004, or the Kader Toy factory in Thailand?
I suppose a 300,000 lbs. plane hitting WTC at 500 mph had nothing to do with the collapse?
lennhart DEBUNKED!
911morontwoofer 2 years ago
"lennhart DEBUNKED!"
LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL Dream on!
"Why would the insurance company pay the claim when there's evidence of fraud?"
So --you ADMIT Silverstein is a fraud!!
Nevertheless, his financial condition, I can assure you, would be admissible at his trial for mass murder!
"I suppose a 300,000 lbs. plane hitting WTC at 500 mph had nothing to do with the collapse?"
Are you CONSCIOUS???? NO PLANE OF ANY SIZE STRUCK WTC7!!!
lennhart 2 years ago
Indeed, Larry Silverstein said "PULL IT" ---NOT "pull them" Firefighters are NOT an 'IT"; they are, rather, people --NOT THINGS.
Secondly ---NO OTHER BUILDING of that size has ever collapsed as a result of mere fire.
WTC 7 was NOT struck by airplanes; 2) there is NO EVIDENCE to support the THEORY that the existing fires could have cause the PERFECTLY SYMETRICAL DEMOLITION OF WTC 7.
Burden of proof is upon those who have posited a LUDICROUS OFFICIAL THEORY for which there is NO evidence!
lennhart 2 years ago
'IT' refers to the operation.
You've also neglected to answer any of 911morontwoofer's other points re insurance fraud. Coming to think of it. If there was any question of controlled demolition why were any of the buildings paid out on? How does that even f***ing work?!
Ever tried claiming on your car or home insurance when it's obvious you deliberately broke the damn thing you're insured for?
Oh, and there were diesel generators working in WTC7 which exploded btw. And 'official theory'?!??!
pigeonshouse 2 years ago
Fact:Again no other building has ever suffered the major structural damage from a giant 200 ton airliner with 10,000 gallons of jet fuel. None of them had columns severed or fireproofing knocked off. Or structural damage from one of the world's bigges buildings. These facts. Include these factors don't just ignore them.
AmericasFan 2 years ago
hahahahahahahahahahaha where did you study steel framed buildings
oldmanwanker 2 years ago
Exactly, I mean consider me paid off forever when the government gives me a little extra towards my beer fund!
pigeonshouse 3 years ago
Oh my gosh! Now there adding MORE buildings into there conspiracy theories! When will these idiots stop?
mgsfan15 3 years ago
Really? Sadly for you, they DID say that WTC 7 was pulled down. A demolition takes weeks to be planned, so basically IT WAS PLANNED.
nicevidbro 3 years ago
Maybe planning. But not preparing. It would have taken months, to prepare wtc 7 without people noticing. But, you couldn't do that. Someone would notice.
mgsfan15 3 years ago
Yeah, but the CTers will just come up with something like 'yeah but it was all government workers so they all knew about it and didn't say anything. You know, because if I was them I would just sit there as well and not do anything about it whilst explosive charges are drilled in to the wall. I wouldn't resign or anything!
pigeonshouse 3 years ago
Well... I mean, would the average person really care, if it's Government was going to kill thousands of it's own people, and blame it on radical Muslims? Who cares? As long as you get a couple hundred bucks, right?
mgsfan15 3 years ago 2
@mgsfan15
Last I knew is that the conflicts in the middle east put us in debt and contributed to the deficit... Is that not correct. I dont think anyone really benefited from September 11th except "truth"ers
phlyegles43 11 months ago
OMG!
I'm sooo worried!
Who are we going to blame all our problems on now that Bush isn't president?
fgcbgo890 3 years ago
well if you think about it idont think that bush is behind it but history speaks for itself
1- uss liberty attacked by isrealis and blamed the arabs for it now it has been proven that isreal did it
2- the king david hotel bombing in which isreal did the same thing blame the arabs for it but it was later proven that isreali mossad did it
3- now 911 they did it im sure but hasnt been proven yet so i guess give it a few years u will know but im sure they are behind it no duobt
bobyloopo 3 years ago
You know what else Israel did?
They humiliated the Arab armies in the Six Day War.
LOL!
What a joke? It took only six days for a handful of jews to kick millions of Arab asses!
fgcbgo890 3 years ago
well thats cuz not all arabs wer in the war dumb ass and im not arab dumb ass if it wasnt for america they would have lost dumb ass plus the russians told them to stop or they wer gonna kick their ass dumb ass infact they own the us dumb ass plus im not against jews dumb ass im against zionists dumb ass what did i forget dumb ass !
bobyloopo 3 years ago
Please try and get your facts correct...
1. The Israelis admitted to bombing the USS Liberty very shortly after it had done so, they did not blame any Arabs, or anyone else but themselves for that matter.
2. The King David Hotel bombing was carried by the Irgun, a Zionist group. No blame was placed on the Palestinians.
3. Just so long as your sure. You know, because you've been correct about things so far.
pigeonshouse 3 years ago
lol i think you should get them correct why were the irgun dressed as arabs???WHY they were caught by the british there was a shoot out the irgun is headed by who look it up and you will see menhem bagen !! if u didnt know uss liberty was confessed by the isreli pilot later on and the crew memeber on the ship later after then isreal gave them 7 mil for us families and what about the lavon affair ? so it is u who should get ur facts straight read real history next time
bobyloopo 3 years ago
The Israli's admitted to the bombing 6 days after. The 7 million is called compensation.
If you look it up. You see 'Menachem Begin'. You need to learn to spell, or at least not copy/paste second hand info from anti-zionist websites. PS he wasn't prime-minister at the time.
"why were the irgun dressed as arabs?...". Hmm, was it to enter Palestine perhaps???? You seem to forget Israel didn't have any land at that point.
Lavon affair. OK so you've found *one* false flag attack. Which failed...
pigeonshouse 3 years ago
dumb ass did you know the celebrate the hotel bombing ur so called isreali goverment sick assholes the reason they admitted the bombing was cuz the british saw them READ IT ! ITS THERE U LIER
bobyloopo 3 years ago
Could you please write something coherent? I know that txt language is the style of youtube - but the words that adjacent to eachother still need to make some kind of sense when constructing a sentence that you want someone to read.
pigeonshouse 3 years ago
read the history of it watch the interview from the people who were inside the hotel during the bombing then i suggest you watch the interview of one of the sailors on board the uss liberty or go on the site of the survivors and ASK THEM YOUR SELF CONTACT THEM THEN COME BACK TO ME AND COMMENT !!! all false flag operations
bobyloopo 3 years ago
I refuse to do such follow-up as contacting survivors for the benefit of some 'tuber who can barely construct sentences.
In brief, the definition of a false flag attack is that one entity carries out an operation to look as if it had been carried out by another entity.
Although reasons for the attack have not been fully explained (hence the USS Liberty Veterans Assoc. push for transparancy by both govs), this does not make it a 'false flag'. Israel phoned US 90mins afterwards admitting attack.
pigeonshouse 3 years ago
The King David Hotel thing. This could be described more as an act of terrorism. The purpose or dressing up as Arabs was to gain entry in to the building, which, if the group dressed in their normal manner, they would have been treated with suspicion (they were in British-occupied Palestine, as I tried to point out earlier). Not so that the Arabs would be blamed. Bearing in mind Irgun had already advised it was planning to carry out the attacks.
pigeonshouse 3 years ago
The fact that one of the members of the group later became prime-minister of the latterly formed nation of Israel is of little consequence as he wasn't placed there, he was elected by the people of Israel. A conparison can easily drawn with Yasser Arafat (who carried out many attacks against the Israelis)
pigeonshouse 3 years ago
ok read the speech from the UK parliment on that issue you dont have to contact anyone but next time dont make things up im sure and im 100% if that was the case why did they establish a commison why dont you yoo tube ralph nader talking about it a few months ago dumb ass DONT MAKE THINGS UP JESUS !
bobyloopo 3 years ago
I didn't make anything up! You said that Mossad carried out the attacks on the King David Hotel! MOSSAD didn't even exist! You made that up yourself!!!! All I've been doing is refuting what you've said. How can a government agency carry out an attack if the country it is an agency of has not even been formed yet?
I'm not making things up. Half of that stuff is on the website that was set up by the USS Liberty veterans association that you wanted me to visit!!!!!!!!!!
pigeonshouse 3 years ago
the IRGUN not the mossad !!! and what about the mexican congress were 2 isreali armed mossads were caught with pakistani passports when infact they were isreali thats not a false flag to your standard ? the king david was a terrorist act
bobyloopo 3 years ago
You originally said Mossad. I am now quoting you, bobyloopo:
"2- the king david hotel bombing in which isreal did the same thing blame the arabs for it but it was later proven that isreali mossad did it" End of quote by you.
"the king david was a terrorist act". Yes! we agree! Excellent.
Mossads's in Mexico. One of them was in fact a retiree from the IDF (suspected but not proven to be Mossad agt) and the other one was a Mexican citizen who happened to be a Jew and no connections to Mossad.
pigeonshouse 3 years ago
Unfortunately you'll never ever get a clear picture on counter-intelligence/counter terrorism agencies from any country (whether you consider them to be an ally or not) on how they operate and why they do things, due to the nature of these agencies. This will always be the case.
The alternative is universal self-government which would require each & every citizen of all countries to display the same amount of trust/transparency. Even my ex who was anti-orwellian agrees this will never happen.
pigeonshouse 3 years ago
no i meant irgun anyways what are u trying to do then make them innocent ? or justify what they are doing ? if the so called ex mossad did it why did the isreali goverment beg the mexicans to take him back to isreal ?
bobyloopo 3 years ago
No, I'm not trying to make them seem innocent. I'm trying to make sure you get your facts correct. You failed to get your facts correct 1st time then you just kept introducing new 'facts' which I refuted, then you accused me of lying/making things up and you're now claiming that when I quote you directly, that you actually meant 'Irgun' when you said 'Mossad'.
It's normal practice for govs to campaign for suspects to be tried on 'home turf'. Hence why UK gitmo detainees were xferred/released.
pigeonshouse 3 years ago
OK when i said mossad i meant irgun both are violent zionists false flag assholes let me add for you a new fact and this is from zionists themselves confession on the bombing of synagogues in arab countreis so that the jews their would come to the so isreal to give it more legality when the population has increased
bobyloopo 3 years ago
Loose Change is full of lies and out-of-context straw man arguments....Avery has even admitted to many of these hence the multiple editions...to see my backing of this watch the full version of loose change with notes displayed on screen(and yes, its has sources for you to look up)...just try it!
Google "screw loose change video" its the first result
hotjoe300 3 years ago
These last couple of centuries are really weird and cheap!!!
muastik 3 years ago
I'm scared to be an American...I'm scared we will face a down fall one day in the future because we murdered our own heroes.
muastik 3 years ago
4:49 > interesting that they demolish the Deutsch Bank tower "beam by beam", and why not by controlled demolition? Afraid that it would look too much alike towers 1,2 & 7?
fr000tch 3 years ago
Slavery, Cuba, Vietnam, JFK, Monroe, Clinton, Watergate, Oliver North, Iraq, 9-11....
THE MOON!! people have had enough of the shit from the most evil government on the planet, fuck BU$H and his masonic secret cult of power hungry goons. Trillions of dollars and millions of lives cant be wrong. So many bullets in AmeriKKKa but not one has got BU$H yet. Do us all a favour and kill him.
misternylon 3 years ago
did you actually spend time putting these videos together. what a loser. im sure your gonna say its about trying to get the truth out there but your just trying to get attention. no one gives a shit. whats done is done.
djhbv23 3 years ago
what a brilliant perspective.
TheTruthVibrations 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
NIST's WTC 7 report disclaimer No. 3:
. . . the NIST director has determined that certain evidence . . is voluntarily provided . . not directly related to the building failure . . and that disclosure of that information would inhibit the voluntary provision of that type of information.
In other words: they aren't telling you all of their information. Only what they feel like. We can't check their work because they're not providing us with all of their information.
Criminal investigation.
bobbygnosis 3 years ago
It's not about oil you jerkoffs. If it was gas prices would not be anywhere near what they are now.
AmericasFan 3 years ago
it make me mad, now we know that Bush is only after Oil, but you still using Oil, consumption Society, Cumfort and all Bullshits ruining the world!! If they can sell all this shit its because you buy it.
Use only what you need (like computers to communicate and avoid TV) and stop Buying things but food and clothes. Its so easy to say: "yeah Bush is a murderer" while eating macdonalds in your big car...
kissfr91 3 years ago
Watch the timer..a full minute was cut-out just as the anchor switches over to the "live reporter" Jane. This footage was edited to make it appear she was refering to WTC7 but you don't actually hear her say that with WTC7 behind her.
chuck4842 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Human beings, for the most part are really FUCKING STUPID.
To believe this 9/11 conspirancy puts you into the level of retardeness once reserved only for the creationists.
*SIGHHH*
Redstick27 3 years ago
BWHAHAHA! Stupid lap-dog ass-kissing media.
I despise the lot of them. 5*
scriptum60 3 years ago 2
what bullshit on building #6 you can see a fireman's hose & ladder helping to put out the fires, while WTC7 burned for 7hrs unfought!. Misinformation.
the witnesses testaments 'are' detailing explosions, but not as this program is trying to assert as demolition explosions -
a diesel tank explosion would not sound vastly different from a demolition explosion, they just stated that explosions occured, & in a moment of sheer panic could you clarify accurately which type you heard?.
internetdv8 3 years ago
to all the conspiracy theorists did you also know that WTC7 had sprinklers installed but were inoperable due to the damage sustained during the fall of the twin towers collapse. this knocked out the buildings water supply & made the firefighters job inherently difficult.
but i guess alex jones & the boys of loose change neglected to tell you that!.
internetdv8 3 years ago
Even without sprinklers, how many steel reinforced buildings have collapsed due to fire?
None, ever, before or since 911.
wardpt1981 3 years ago
that argument of never before in history is a false representation perpetuated by the makers of loose change for example the building in i think it was Madrid the top section that was built out of steel & did fall but the lower concrete floors stood intact.
internetdv8 3 years ago
The top 1/3 of the madrid building collapsed, as it was NOT YET COMPLETED. And the REST of the building was still able to hold up not only the collapsed section, but all of the construction equipment on top of it. After burning at least 3 times hotter than the fires on 9/11. For over 24 hours.
sstearns34 3 years ago
WTC7 had a lot of weight distributed by only 2 main trusses and as the building got weaker & weaker from the fires that burnt uncontrolled for 7 hours fed by backup diesel tanks the weight of the building got more & more weight re-distributed to those 2 main trusses & it was too much for the building to sustain.
internetdv8 3 years ago
All of this propoganda is debunked, by NIST. Get a clue.
sstearns34 3 years ago
I challenge anyone to look at the latest explanation from NIST about WTC 7. It is so laughable that you'd think its a joke but they actually said that one column collapsed from heat and made the whole thing come down at free fall speed. As crazy as that sounds thats what they came up with.
NIST has no legs left to stand on and they are collapsing.
WTC7WasPulled 3 years ago
You mean covered up, just like JFK's death
BeccaShakur 3 years ago
@sstearns34
All of what is debunked?? NIST debunks their own hypothesis that is for sure. How does a building collapse due to fire when the Critical temperature is 600oC and yet they only find PHYSICAL EVIDENCE of 250oC? How can that be that they have a working hypothesis with 0.25% steel from WTC 1&2, and 0% steel from WTC 7? The definition of pseudoscience states "LACK OF SUPPORTING EVIDENCE" Find no critical temps is what? A LACK OF SUPPORTING EVIDENCE!!!
ctrackmonger 1 year ago
@sstearns34 NIST is government owned, you think the government would conduct a fair investigation. No... if there is nothing to fucking hide then why don't they just allow independent investigation like everything else................ No THEY WON't BECAUSE it was a fucking government conspiracy.
VitaminsAndPiss 1 year ago
If it was an inside job then why did the fire fighters on that day say the building is leaning & it was going to collapse?
& in no conspiracy theory video do you see the section of the east-penthouse of WTC7 falling just before the entire building collapse? Because this further proves how it was 'not' a conspiracy & is consistent with a collapse.
internetdv8 3 years ago
Why did it collapse so completely and so fast? It didn't topple, it fell entirely within its own footprint.
wardpt1981 3 years ago
it fell at a no faster rate of speed than any other building would have.
once collapse ignition has started there is no way of stopping it & thats why the NIST report only goes that far, because ANY structural engineer can tell you that the building cannot hold those kinds of forces, especially after the damage that was done to it before hand.
internetdv8 3 years ago
NIST was forced to retract their statement that 1/3 of the building was destroyed by debris. Also, if there's a steel core beneath the section that collapses, even IF that core is not strong en ough to support the collapsing section, its going to give MORE resistance than air. Unless you think steel = air.
sstearns34 3 years ago
buildings do not topple over like tree's due to it not being made all of one continuous material or segment, they reach their breaking point & then give way which explains your question of its footprint.
with the symetrical nature the two trusses supporting the most weight that i discussed before that held the building in place, they were located diagonally across from each-other on the lower floors of the WTC7 complex so that explains it further that it was not imploded.
internetdv8 3 years ago
The core is solid, like a tree. how do you explain the core imploding? I've seen trees burn, never seen one implode. And trees are made of a substance slightly more flammable than steel.
sstearns34 3 years ago
The force of the collapse at the tower that was struck at the higher floors was about a million pounds or more of force & 2 million in the case of the south tower & all that energy coming down was obviously more than enough power to make both structures give way.
the comment about the inner columns being one constant solid structure is just wrong, can you tell me when was the last time you've seen a single piece of steel thats 110 stories high?.
internetdv8 3 years ago
the building fell like a stack of dominos because that was how it was built 'in stages'.
the entire building doesn't need to similtaneously fail, just re-distribute the load until it can take no more & the did just that.
if it were a conspiracy then why are the remains of steel beams twisted? - if it were really a cover-up & explosions then that does not support your theory.
internetdv8 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Fuck talking about all the bomb and fake plane stuff... the clear facts are evident.
The Bushes and the Saudi royals rigged this thing to get rid of Sadam and sell off his oil....
They are selling off his oil with record profits.... because now they have a monopoly and who is paying dearly for the oil? we are....
Twopecshaker 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I'm fed up of seeing all this... they bombed the towers... blah ... blah... blah...
The hijackers = SAUDI.... reported hatred from SAUDIS for the USA having a base there as stated in the 9/11 report.... The Bushes... great 'crude oil' friends of the SAUDI royals.... Osama.. an ex SAUDI royal.... SAUDI ARABIA arch enemy = Iraq... Saudis do 9/11 and friend of the SAUDI... Bush... invades Iraq... "WIG" and an ex Bush offical both show evidence it was being planned long before 9/11.
Twopecshaker 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
We're fucked... Islam was never the enemy, the enemy was within, the enemy was the neo-conservatives, hijacked the government with puppet Bush... we're fucked people....
ngarey 3 years ago
i'm a total moron, but i believe this becasue i believe anything i see on the internet. 9111 was an onside job, down wit the NWO
ConspiracyNut 3 years ago
i agree with 911 being an inside job and not alqueda,down with the NWO
GovernmentGoneWild 3 years ago
This has shit to do with zombies. 1 star.
CamdenBloke 3 years ago
If you think building 7 was not brought down by controlled demolition, you are just f#$%ing stupid or blind.
pabloz1 3 years ago 2
Relax don't call everyone an idiot simply for not sharing your point of view..especially when it comes to such massive issues as weather or not it was terrorists or our own government that killed people. It takes time with people but if your understanding lots more people will be willing to at least have a look. No one responds well to people screaming and insulting them. Just a thought.
uniraptor 3 years ago
I agree with your statement, except that people who even point out the Bld7 looks like it was controlled demolition are called idiots or worse. In this case people immediately dismiss evidence solely because of it's implication. In any other investigation that is called incompetence. But here you're are "crazy, anti-american, conspiracy-theorist,
stupid.....etc. person for even pointing out something that is obvious. Building 7 does LOOK like it was controlled demolished.
pabloz1 3 years ago 2
The big picture is this: with 911 America has had the excuse to not only invade the middle east, but now to pass legislation to take away freedoms for us at home. How long do you think the internet will exist before sites like youtube are bought out by mainstream media or buried under slow connection and download speeds. You'll only see the seriousness of 911 being an inside job when it effects you- and it will bitches.
sjrosen9 3 years ago
youtube will continue to exist to pass out dissinformation,,, its excellent for that,,, theu can controll the internet knowlege that way!!
rogelio67 3 years ago
So now You Tube is also in on the conspiracy? Including every major media corporation in the WORLD? None of you troofer IMBECILES even consider that if there was ANY credibility to this that AL-Jazzera, ITAR-TASS, or even Al-CNN wouldn't be beating the drums for the trials and executions of everyone in DC? How stupid can you people be?
KarrensMan69 3 years ago
and i bet you still believe in the tooth ferry right,,,,
rogelio67 3 years ago
Its funny when "Truthers" think they know what they're talking about. The real TRUTH is that most "Truthers" lack logic. WTC 7 was SEVERELY damaged at its base from the tower collapses. Yes, other surrounding buildings were more damaged, but there bases had very minor damage, while WTC 7 had major damage on its south side. What happens when you pile 47 stories on a weak base? It collapses. If you look closely, you'll notice WTC 7 leans to its south side slightly when it collapses.
parrot201 3 years ago
If only one side of a base is severely damaged, then we would clearly see one side of the building start to give way first. We would see other failures take place before the whole thing collapses. On top of that, it was a symmetrical and simultaneous collapse, which contradicts the physics of steel itself.
You are in no position to say just how damaged it was either. The damage would not be called severe and it was only to one side. It does not match the simultaneous failure we saw.
dudepal187 3 years ago 2
Parrot201... You are an absolute idiot....
I am the chief demolition engineer for a German demolition company.
WTC7 was brought down by controlled demolition as where the twin towers period.
Get you head out of your ass... Thats right get it out you fool.
ROHZS2000 3 years ago 4
How dare you consider yourself a professional when your grammar is equivalent to that of a typical high-school students...
If you're of such high rank in the demolition industry, explain to me when the Government would get the chance to plant explosives throughout the ENTIRE WTC with no one noticing. That's almost 300 STORIES.
Now I'm sure with your "expertise" you'd know that this would require many people, a lot of equipment, good concentration, and a load of time.
You talk utter BS.
parrot201 3 years ago
to put all this shit to an end..... the government is ran by men (men being human beings) and as long as they are in control, fucked up shit will happen. the government is not perfect. i dont give a fuck about some body blowing up the towers and America goin to war over it. the fact is that people died.. should it matter who did it? if we all found out today that bush organized 9/11 what would/could you possibly do?
sologroup 3 years ago
solo - nothing....we can do nothing about it.
karlam325 3 years ago
sologroup said "if we all found out today that bush organized 9/11 what would/could you possibly do" ...karlam235 replied "we can do nothing about it...Yes Americans cannot do anything about it because all americans are faggot.
junevi2000 3 years ago
june - wow..don't you sound intelligent.
karlam325 3 years ago
Of course in America intelligent=idiot, an idiot=intelligent, hypocrisy is virtue, to be truthful is weird, honesty is old-fashioned, a liar has a good PR, rich=success, to be poor is a loser. That's the America you grew up in. I don't care a fuck how i sound to you.
junevi2000 3 years ago
it is well known and widely reported by some us govt officials that the white house was sending "news" reports to the new york times and then the following day have press conferences and say "look..the new york times says this and says that.."...watch frontline special which was showed on television about what took place leading to iraq invasion..if they did it prior to iraq, do you think there s a remote chance they would have done it before 911?
IamTLiveIam 3 years ago
this is a bunch of crock
tjnadrie 3 years ago
no kidding, the 9/11 commision is a joke
falkin12 3 years ago
why is this a video response to a rick roll video?? If you are gonna spam, then do it for Endgame by Alex Jones google video son, pas that around, espionage at WTC is obvious move on to other stuff
Tessiernyc 3 years ago
The bbc journalist could of well been standing behind a video wall of earlier footage.
escapeephil 3 years ago
As usual the truth comes from a Dutch man (final interview)!!!
You americans still have much to learn about conspiracy. Yes! it exists since the roman empire till 9/11. It has always existed!
cecarelo 3 years ago
I have a question for all of you conspiracy theorists out there. If you did have some incontrovertible, hard evidence that the U.S. government had a hand in the 9/11 attacks, what's next? What do you do after you prove they did it? What's going to change in our country?
shrontzy 3 years ago
We take people to court and charge them for crimes against humanity, which will undoubtedly lead to massive government, military, and media reform, among other things. Then we outlaw the Federal Reserve, ban the Income Tax, and take control of our own lives!
smitty121981 3 years ago
plus even if some of that smoke is coming from wtc7, fire doesnt cause steel buildings to collapse. and at least 90% of the building is not on fire. in other views the penthouse dips in the middle, flashes and smoke can be seen in several windows during collapse, squibs run up the building during collapse, there were reports of countdowns and foreknowledge of collapse, and of course larry silverstein admitted they "pulled" it. finally, there is STILL NO OFFICIAL EXPLANATION for the collapse.
dave2105 3 years ago 5
There is an official explanation, but you wont look into it. At least 90% of the building was not on fire??? Take a look at the south face of the building before collapse. There is a reason loose change refuses to show it.