for the people that think the tower did not come down at a free fall rate, how do you know have you even seen to 2 tall tower collapse before the the "explosions" on the day that that any loud sound can be anything remember people was freaking out didn't know what the hell was going. so before you day anything put all of those into conclusion
Did any of you think about this. If you're a Christian don't you think it's possible that God made them fall like that? I mean if they fell to the side so many buildings would've been destroyed. Only by the power of God did that happen.
@DephkonOne God lives in your closet, not in mine. I let go of my imaginary friend when I was 7. Why do you still have yours? Say I'm wrong, and yes I'm going to hell. That's fine. When you're at the gate though, could you ask a question for me? When your "God" let those planes get hijacked~ and let the towers be hit. When he let it get so bad, that people jumped to their deaths and popped open like cherry's on impact. Ask why he said "Ah, just playin' and brought the towers down straight?
@n8er204 God lets many things happen for a purpose. If 9/11 didn't happen the Middle East would be in ruins. Osama Bin Laden and Sadam Hussein would be killing millions and millions at a time. That's why.
@DephkonOne You're talking about men and their actions. It has nothing to do with a "god". Men planned 9/11. Men hijacked those planes. Men crashed those planes. Men attempted to stop flight 93. Men decide their own fate. Period. Everything can be tracked back to a decision, to a choice. We're taking about humanity here, and what we let go on. You can't say that anything goes back to religion, because a man decides to believe what he wants. A man makes decisions though, not his imaginary friend.
1:04 "to collapse as a result of fire"... SUCH BULLSHIT. They collapsed as a result of two jets laden with fuel exploding and creating fireballs over 2 and a half city blocks in length... this is not a normal office fire as truthers like to say. Office fires begin with short circuits or cigarette butts. Fireballs 625 feet in length could bring a building down.
ok ok ok, Heres the truth.....America doesnt exist out side of your tv screens. its all a studio set underneath Afghanistan. MLK and JFK are the same person.
GOOGLE about this: In 1945 much heavier B-25 bomber aircraft crashed into Empire State Building and exploded inside, setting building on fire for many hours and the building didnt collapse, there was just hole in the place of impact, no structural damage. There were also large parts of plane found all around. On 911, lighter planes send two much more modern buildings down very fast and there were no parts of planes found. Every thinking person must know there were explosives inside.
@Indy7272 b-52's are much lighter so they can hold bombs and travel a further distance. apparently all you know is what the first link on google gives you.
The problem with this video is that 99% of the sheeple in the truther movement will believe it without doing any research on the claims made in it and accept it as "truth" Free fall speed for the towers is 9.22 seconds, the towers fell in between 15-22 seconds. The myth that no steel frame buildings have ever collapsed form fire alone before 9/11...myth between 1970-2002 there were 22 fire indice collapses of multi story buildings around the world. Do the research!
total impossebel for soo big and strong building go down on fire...when you look you see wery clear exploxion..and fragment speed away from building..anyway silverboy pay some one and they get there needed war....but true will se the day soon
If it was a controlled demolition, the base of the building would be destroyed first. The Tower, starting at the point that the plane hit it, went down and the weight of it destroyed the base of the tower.
I think eco-terrorists were responsible for 9/11. They knew that the resulting invasion of Iraq would drive up oil and gas prices and cause America's dependence on foreign oil to become even more evident that it already was, leading to a green technology revolution and the end of the fossil fuel era. You damned dirty hippies can rot in hell, God bless the USA!
@waltereg0 More believe or should I say know the buildings were professionally 'pulled' than you could begin to imagine. Viva la truth my friend. And Free Assange while were at it.
Show me the buildings you're citing. show me them not only falling almost straight downward, very rapidly, but also show me where they projected debris (specifically vaporizing steel beams) hundreds of feet away. Also, make sure the buildings you're talking about turned largely into dust and mangled steel.
@mit26chell I already said the buildings' names, the McCormick bldg and the Sight & Sound Center. You can google them. They were both steel framed buildings that collapsed due to fire years before 9/11.
I know the building distributed steel debris as far as 100s of feet away from the footprint, as I said the WTC did not really fall just straight down, although that is the path of least resistance. WTC 2 fell to the south and WTC 1 fell to the north & west, impacting WTC 5,WTC 6, & WTC 7.
@waltereg0 if the collapse was due to gravity alone, a 300 ton section would not have embedded in the side of the american express building 400 feet away. only explosives could have down that.
@voodoowichdoctor No, because the buildings did not fall exactly straight down, they tipped just enough, that's the simple explanation for why the towers smashed other buldings like WTC 5, 6, & 7. So explosives would have not been necessary, and indeed explosives would have had far less force than the massive force of the weight of that building.
@waltereg0 nonsense. 7 was a controlled demolition. 3, 4, 5, and 6 although badly damaged remained standing and were demolished by a demolition team later
the official reason for 7 collapsing is the fires. the few small fires in 7 would not have caused that. the whole official story is lies- the magic passport. the pentagon. flight 77 vapourized. anybody who believes all this is stupid.
@voodoowichdoctor "Few small fires?" There was a massive raging INFERNO in WTC7 and huge structural damage caused when WTC2 collapsed down and gouged away a large portion of the south face of WTC7. The NYFD team fighting it heard groaning sounds indicating it was nearing collapse, which is why that unit was ordered pulled from WTC7.
You've just only watched the video shot from north of WTC7, from the unaffected angle, and you never bothered to examine the info debunking WTC7 tinfoiler theories.
@waltereg0 "Wrong buddy boy, the architects that built both Bldgs, said they built it like a large grid-like super steel structure, with retardant foam around the steel members, That would and should withstand planes running into it all day long. The chance that it would happen on both buildings is mathematically impossible without help fuckchops!!!
@Aglassact77 Flame retardant foam was blasted off the steel members by the impact of the planes. This left the steel members vulnerable and exposed to the intense fire which raged more than hot enough to cause them to buckle. The reason that steel buildings had only collapsed due to fire twice before 9/11 is because skyscrapers are normally built with flame retardant foam. But that foam is not made to resist the force of a jumbo jet smashing into it, comes right off under that condition.
@waltereg0 Fair assessment, and reasonable point. I'm just saying that there is more to the story than they are telling us. I watched a two hour special on that issue you talk about, and experts talk , and compare those valuable points. The Architects and designers both say they designed those towers to withstand planes practically running into them all day. There framing was designed like connect four grids, and could take it. the hot fuel explains two, or three floors, but not over hundred
@waltereg0 how would you know hes wrong. Has your government been telling you the truth im not trying say its a conspiracy because its not its reality your government has caused so they can fuck everyone and get free oil
@AmerikkazNightmare What free oil? 9/11 was a decade ago and the USA never got any free oil. It never got any oil in Iraq that it didn't have to buy, for a lot of money. The Iraq war cost the US govt billions, much of which was fuel costs, the profits of which went to the arabs. And oil today is more expensive than ever. So the free oil theory is clearly not true.
@waltereg0 man you've been lied to your government bunch of cowards and frauds realize that you people have been robbed by your banks. Search this info out by yourselves.
@waltereg0 How come all 3 towers fell at free fall speed? I live in N.Y and i heard people who worked in the basements of the wtc testify to explosives in the basements. Not only them, but multiple escapees testified to this who narrowly escaped with their lives. You want us to disregard these people as "conspiracy theorists" and believe the cover up story? Those poor people who died that day deserve an actual investigation and you don't seem to care about them.
@jabe55 None of the towers fell at free fall speed. Nobody heard explosives, they heard loud booming sounds caused by the impact of the planes. Nobody has testified to having witnessed explosive detonations, except here is a former janitor who has made a lot of money selling dvds to gullible conspiracy fans where he claims that he saw explosions, but he is doing it for the cash, and who can blame him, he was a poor janitor and now he hangs with Rosie Odonnell and makes $ off of tinfoilers.
@waltereg0 Did you watch the video? It is in fact falling at the speed of gravity. A 10 year old boy can see that. Tower 7 falls too without the assistance of a plane, but magically collapses at free fall speed by small fires and debris from nearby towers. Yes, they did testify to hearing multiple explosives. Check out Barry Jennings on 911 that is if you even pay attention to the testimonies from those who escaped. War on terror is a fraud, like you and your disinfo agenda is.
@jabe55 Yes I saw the video where you can see debris falling away FASTER than the rest of the collapse, so you can tell it is falling slower than free fall speed. Free Fall speed for towers would be 9 secs, but they took 15-20 secs to collapse. All Jennings witnesses are describing only the plane's impact that sounded like the boom of an explosion. None were inside WTC during COLLAPSE. WTC7 fell because the North Tower carved away the south face of it, & then it burned w/ fires unfought
@TimReed22222 I'd like to know how aluminum could have blasted through steel and concrete, not remotely possible to my knowledge. Ever wonder how a fairy tale, like the bible, could have been forced upon society? Look no further...
So ... you don't know where the 45-second figure came from either? Of course not, no one does - because he made it up.
Plus if he knew *anything* about physics, he'd know there is NO SUCH THING as free-fall "speed" - the term "free fall" refers to acceleration, not speed.
Free fall is the behavior of an object on which the only acting force is gravity. It's acceleration, not speed (rate).
Anyone who refers to free-fall "speed" doesn't know what they're talking about; a free-falling object is accelerating, e.g., speed is constantly changing (increasing).
None of which explains where this guy's 45 seconds comes from.
@TimReed22222 when they talk about free fall they mean terminal velocity which has a top speed of 120mph roughly. the speed will increase until its terminal velocity. once there it can go faster from its own power. ie gravitys effect. it u throw something off the building its in freefall its falling free. in sky diving you have freefall time ie time from leaving the plane to opening of the parachute hope this helps
@rtljmc "when they talk about free fall they mean terminal velocity"
No they don't! Free fall and terminal velocity are OPPOSING CONCEPTS.
TERMINAL VELOCITY is the SPEED at which air resistance exactly opposes gravity, and acceleration is zero. An object in FREE FALL has no opposing force; it's just falling - and accelerating.
And anyway, what does terminal velocity have to do with 9/11?
If you're going to advocate dubious theories you might at least understand them!
ok if i dropped a penny from 1368ft it would hit the ground in 9-10 seconds the towers collapsed in 9-10 seconds so what they mean is they fell at the same time it takes for an object falling from the same height with no resistance. so the 45 seconds means if the towers were going to fall from the weight it would take 45 seconds to go through all the rest of the building . they same freefall because in skydiving a freefall is a person falling through air at their max speed . starting for a stop
@rtljmc Ah, I think I see the problem here: The towers DID NOT FALL in 9-10 seconds. That's a myth. The actual collapse times were 15-20 seconds.
Time it yourself! Check this video - watch?v=ESaIEVxLnK4 - and use a stopwatch or the video's own timer, then come back & tell me that tower fell all the way to street level in 10 seconds.
MEANWHILE, I'm still waiting to learn who came up with the 45-second figure, and how. And DON'T just cite this law or that, SHOW SOME MATH.
@TimReed22222 well if you read the official report from the 911 commision. it say the tower 1 collapsed in 9.22 seconds and wtc 11 seconds and 40 stories of the core stood for 25 seconds after this doesnt make sense if it was ment to pancake. from the top of the tower to hitting the ground was 9 sec to 11 sec its on wiki as the offical story from the commision.
@rtljmc "well if you read the official report from the 911 commision. it say the tower 1 collapsed in 9.22 seconds and wtc 11 seconds"
NO IT DOESN'T! Read it again:
"NIST estimated the elapsed times FOR THE FIRST EXTERIOR PANELS TO STRIKE THE GROUND AFTER THE COLLAPSE INITIATED ... to be approximately 11 seconds for WTC 1 and approximately 9 seconds for WTC 2."
Not total collapse times; times for the first big debris to fall.
WTC1 took 20 seconds to come down. Check the video.
@TimReed22222 no. parts of the core stood that long and that video is not evidence. only the core was left. which takes away the pancake theory. look at it does it make sense to you. really in the bottom of your heart tell me that a huge building went in 11second with a part of the core left? and if only the outside of the building his the ground in 11 seconds how did it travel through the steel and the same rate a penny would have falling through the air?
"really in the bottom of your heart tell me that a huge building went in 11second with a part of the core left?"
No; really, in the bottom of my heart, that building went in 20 seconds (with part of the core left).
Let's not forget the question on the table: Did the tower collapse COMPLETELY, all the way to the street, in 9 seconds? That video (watch?v=ESaIEVxLnK4) and many others show that it did not.
@TimReed22222 no just the time it took to collapse. so you think the nist report is wrong? ha then you really dont think the towers fell because of some fire and a plane? is that your case? i dont agree with all of the report but the time it took to fall and what was left i do . this means i can have my own opinion. so if you dont believe to offical report then what are you talking about? discovery documentary says 9 - 11 second ha <<<<<<911
@rtljmc "i dont agree with all of the report but the time it took to fall and what was left i do"
Why?
You truthers are so funny! What POSSIBLE reason can you give for believing those times - other than that they conveniently support what you want to believe??
And not only that: You MISUNDERSTAND what it says! Reread the report, where does it say those are the total tower collapse times? NOWHERE.
@rtljmc Obviously I'm not seeing what you're seeing; I already posted what I found. Can you please paste the relevant passage here for all to see & straighten me out?
@TimReed22222north tower struck the ground 9 seconds after the collapse started, and parts of the South Tower after 11 seconds. The lower portions of both buildings' cores (60 stories of WTC 1 and 40 stories of WTC 2) remained standing for up to 25 seconds after the start of the initial collapse before they too collapsed
@rtljmc "north tower struck the ground 9 seconds after the collapse started"
The FIRST BIG PIECES struck the ground 9 seconds after the collapse started. Watch the video again (watch?v=ESaIEVxLnK4). See that big piece falling to the left ? THAT hit the ground 9 seconds after the collapse began. How much of the tower is left when that happens?
Maybe you just don't grasp the truthers' case which claims the entire tower came down in free fall - which, as we see, is false.
@TimReed22222 well if the top fell to the left how did the weight destroy the building? your not thinking my friend! so the pancake collapse could not have happend thank you for proving my point. and dont give me well what i ment was........
@rtljmc "well if the top fell to the left how did the weight destroy the building?" etc.
Before we change the subject, are we done with the free-fall argument? Are we in agreement that the towers DID NOT TOTALLY COLLAPSE IN FREE-FALL TIME, as alleged in this video?
I think the towers collapsed but in MUCH LONGER THAN FREE-FALL TIME (50-100% longer). THEREFORE the towers did NOT come down in free fall. THEREFORE one of the most repeated truther claims - that free-fall collapse proves controlled demolition - is DISPROVED because free fall didn't happen. Can't talk about it if it didn't happen.
@TimReed22222 that doesnt explain how the weight of the tower destroyed the floors below and how you say it fell sidewards so basically you cant have it both way monfrer
No what happened was there was so much smoke that the debris fell faster than the actual towers so therefor looking like it was a controlled bomb but we all know it was a fucking plane. RIP to all who have fallen.
@tecnolover2642 "pancake theory" lol? In Hong Kong in the early '90's an 11-story shopping mall came down because they put an air conditioning unit on the roof of the mall without checking the load-bearing ratings. The A/C unit fell through the roof and every floor on the way to the ground, pancaking the entire mall in the process. "Theory" "disproven" indeed. lol @ you dude.
@tecnolover2642 don't be a kool-aid drinking moron. None of the towers fell at "free-fall" speed. All you have to do is watch them to get visual proof (although tons of experts have made videos showing the math / metrics / measurements proving the buildings fell much slower than "free-fall").
Of course, retard nut-jobs probably aren't interested in facts and evidence. Are you one of those?
if you think 9/11 was an attack from another country ROFLMMFAO
First off i dont care how long you been "living in a cave" (in hollywood) sending a couple planes into a couple buildings out of the 10000000 square miles of america doesnt really justify an attack if you stand back from the map and look what they supposably did its a mosquitoe bite .... google bush laden family ties they have been in buisness for 20 + years and oil just went up and were in iraq cause of what "al quida" did?
5000+ of our troops dead more then doubling the total on 9/11 spending 1 billion US tax dollars a day to kill a few thousand hiding people that we cant find ? yea that makes since we got the money ..... Thermite at the scene the 3rd tower that wasnt even hit by a plane but imploded aswell ... come on people are you really that stupid?
This guy is an idiot! You can see it hit and resist at each floor until the debris and dust/smoke over took what you could see.
It you truly believe bombs were also in the building then the terrorist planted the bombs too just like they bombed the WTC in 1993. I do not understand how you can think Bush was involved, the terrorist wanted the WTC destroyed and succeeded on their 2nd attempt. Let's not forget the 1st time was a bomb under Clinton. Was Clinton behind the WTC collapse too?
And by the way, if you actually watch the towers fall, they fell far slower than the debris around them (which were falling at "free fall speed"), ergo this video is disproved so easily (by any person with working eyes and a working brain) that is has to be trolling.
So the guy in the video says very clearly that he has based his opinion on zero facts, zero evidence, and zero precedent. And people still believe him anyway? =/
he already gave the precedent if you would listen fool. No other steel framed building in history ever has fallen from fires. Buildings do not fall at freefall speed NATURALLY. There are your precedents. Learn to listen better next time. Now put your blinders back on as it's been 9 years since this event and you still haven't figured it out.
@tecnolover2642 stop being an ignorant fool. The towers did NOT fall at "free-fall" speed. In fact, there is a video listed to the right of this message proving it. The towers actually fell at 1/2 the speed of free fall. Stop drinking koolaid you f**king moron.
@ProcyofPM correct! true free fall can only happen in a vacuum (controlled environment..nist says 15 seconds other say a bit more
I'll allow you 25 seconds that would STILL be much to fast for a natural collapse which also would include the buildings to have fallen PARTIALLY and A symmetrically
@ishredu ... you fail. Give me some facts, some math proofs, anything other than your fail word as to why the time it took for the towers to fall was somehow "too fast for natural collapse." Oh, you can't, because all of the facts, all of the math, all of the proof, shows that the towers in fact fell normally (for being hit by an airplane of course).
@ProcyofPM first you need to understand what free fall actually is because I noticed 9above you mentioned to someone else the debris was in free fall) which is completely inaccurate
so I think YOU fail and aren't worth my time until you can tell me how free fall is measured
@ProcyofPM free fall is for these towers would be close to11 seconds at true free fall in a vacuum..nist has it it at 15 seconds (they fucked it up too lol) because they apparently assumed free fall was measured at real world. but it isn't THEREFORE 25 seconds would be EXTREMELY FAST for a building to fall naturally and impossible if the floors were not entirely disengaged
Ok. To those of you guys who think that 9/11 was a conspiracy, you seriously have too much time on your hands. You cannot tell me that the collapsing of the towers was planned. You can't give me an explanation for that or (for the people that say there was bombs on the plane) how the bombs somehow got on the outside of the plane because it wouldn't have gotten off the runway had they been there before. So you guys are the idiots!
hes right. there was resistance but because of the weight from the upper part of the tower the resistance at each floor wasn't enough to stop it or even slow it down.
Wrong. Pancake theory has already been disproved long ago. You had much more strength and support underneath from the undamaged floors which would have slowed the collapse. Both towers came down UNNATURALLY. How do you explain molten steel pouring down the walls? How do you explain the fact that witnesses said there were other explosions going off ?? There was way more happening in those towers that day then has been told. It was much more than planes. there were multiple events
@tecnolover2642 Yes, because molten steel could not possibly be present on a steel building that is on fire. Why have no witnesses come forward if they exist? Why would Ben Laden take credit for the attack if he didn't do it?
Steel, being a good conductor of heat, allowed super hot temperatures to flow all throughout the tower softening the steel and making the towers fall faster.
Try taking some physics and chemistry. Also, stop believing everything you hear or see.
I've seen so many conspiracy theories, WTF IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE!?
you elected the government, and no matter wich president, all you do is want to blame them for stabing you in the back. NEVER have I ever heard anybody praise, or even thank the government for things they did. I am not saying their haloed angels, but crap, the way you people are going on it sounds like they plan to kill all their lovely tax payers.
Elected officials run for office by choice; no one drafts them. Under our constitutional form of government, elected officials have only DUTIES; they have no RIGHTS to their office. They serve at the pleasure of the electorate. They may be replaced by election for any reason or for no reason. As Harry Truman said, if they can't stand the heat, they can get out of the kitchen.
What could be more dramatic than a jetliner hitting the WTC?
All eyes fixed on the point of impact. Then, while everyone is looking up, a second plane hits the other tower. All eyes are inexorably fixated on the smoldering towers while the substructure of all three buildings is being blown out (as confirmed by witness testimony) and the structural steel at the base of the structures is being cut for the final demolition sequence. (Accounting for "rivers of molten iron")
Then to draw attention away from the main event there is a diversionary attack at the most heavily defending building in the world, in the most heavily defended airspace on the planet, executed with precision accuracy, defying the laws of physics, and better judgment, with a minimal loss of life and property damage.
And of course, all of this is accomplished by 19 lone nuts with box-cutters. Come on folks, this is your country and your freedom at stake.
What is wrong with you people millions of political crime case files were stored in tower 7 which was taken down the next day.Also traces of thermite were found in the rubble.
so they said they found tones of iron oxide? I thought they said they found traces? Do you even know what it is? its comon rust, now I don't know about you it definately didn't look like any of the steel in the WTC could EVER rust. And ofcourse they didn't use ANY aluminium in the building, not even in the window frames.
First Steven Jones found thermite reaction products, iron microspheres, in the WTC dust. Not steel, iron.
Then, later, Jones and a Danish scientist, Niels Harrit, found unreacted material containing iron oxide and aluminum powder. It was obviously manufactured, containing layers and a binder. It also ignites at a comparatively low temperature, producing molten iron. It releases a large amount of heat per mass, even more than thermite.
I am interested to know what it is and how it got there.
Those things could very easily be formed, but befor we even go there, how do explain how the thousands of office workers never noticed the bundels and miles of cable running out their office, or the thousands and thousands of holes some is drilling inside their office walls?
and don't try and tell me they could have laid all those explosives in that one day.
i can't believe these people hvan't taken these vids off yet. i would cover my face with a paper bag if someone knew i was a truther. Then again it doesn't matter if 60 percent of the population are mentaly handicaped.
guy isn't credible at all. So anything he says is bullshit. No building collapsed from fire except on 911. My neighbors house collapsed from fire. Maybe he should have done some research.
"in 100 year history...bla...due to fire". Well you've already shot yourself in the foot haven't you-this was clearly no ordinary fire. It meant fire as a general term.And who is this IDIOT in the court room-no resistance; what is he suggesting that all the floors where cleared of furniture;think of the scale of doing so.IDIOT. ...he hasn't got a pot to piss into. There's a chunk of WTC in storage which is 4 floors compressed to 3ft. Noticed how the building "peeled" sideways - THIS IS CRUCIAL.
Its called fermite or along them lines it's oxidised steel (rust) mixed with alimminium once combusted burns at extremely high temperatures enough to burn through your cars engine or a safe..or a world trade centre
Lol this idiot mentions molten metal like 8 times. For starters, no tests were conducted on this molten metal to determine its composition. Secondly, it is never claimed ANYWHERE, except by twoofers such as yourself, that this metal is steel. My guess is that its the remnants of the ALUMINUM airplane that just crashed into the building. Wild theory. I know. But I believe the jet fuel fires' temperatures are easily hot enough to melt aluminum. Research for yourself.
o give me a fucking break. nutcases like this shouldnt be allowed to live. yea america would really kill 3000 people of its own kind for nothing. i mean come on, have some common sense people
No, not when all we're seeing is just another deliberate attempt to destroy the credibility of the 911 truth movement, from within the movement. (Does it have to be any more obvious?) ...confusing 15 seconds with free-fall, ignoring the construction of the towers, trashing the official view in the few places where the official view makes plain sense....
-cont- The controlled demolition of the towers would have required very little; first to initiate the collapses, and then to finish off the cores. The buildings did most of the work because the floor trusses were in fact rated for only 5x their normal capacity, and they snapped under increasingly heavy loads - progressive collapse. They want us to reject a part of the official view that's actually correct.
Bottom line?
Focus on the cores. 'Exploding in free-fall' & 'all that dust' is hoo-ha.
kk who gives huh remeber the jonestown mass suicide is that remembered no huh about 400 us troops have died in iraq there have been worse then that like kk the us was attacked by terraristest so what do we do we go to war and kill even more innacent people there because we what revenge for that and it will go on then a metorir falls from thae sky and you blame space for that and you go to war with space!
I think it is pretty easy to say that 9/11 is simply to laden with coincidences, the biggest one being who all stood to gain from this horrific catastrophe. Half of the original Bush Administration has resigned, we are over in Iraq, for God knows how long. And one by one our freedoms and liberties are being taken left and right. Take it from a professional aviator. 9/11 was orchestrated by a shadow Government above the President. Bush does not run the country, mark my words. Been in the Service.
What does the fact that you are a "professional aviator" have to do with anything? I'm a professional pilot as well, and I think you've been to too many Star Trek Conspiracy Theory Conventions....A "Shadow Government"??? Jeez, I don't want you anywhere near an airplane!
"A "Shadow Government"??? Jeez, I don't want you anywhere near an airplane! "
do you actually believe that the power structure does not go beyond the bozos you see in the white house, jeez I think you been spending too much time living with your head up your ass and not enough time at the library researching Political and Military history.
What facts? You're throwing out crazy opinions (not facts) about some made-up "shadow Government"...who's in charge of it Darth Vador? I thought he was too busy working on the death star??
The only real facts hear are that a bunch of psycho camel jockey's hijacked a few planes and flew them into buildings...knocking said buildings down.
Now, please sit down before you make yourself look well,....worse
This has been flagged as spam show
how many times do you tell us to vote, fuck off
conspiracy093 2 months ago
0:30 "The law of conservation of momentum would have predicted about 45 seconds [time for the towers to collapse]."
Can anyone produce the math on that? I'd like to know where the 45-second figure comes from.
TimReed22222 3 months ago
How does a building hit from the top collapses from the bottom?
behnamasid 3 months ago
@behnamasid I think its becuase the top collapsed hitting each floor like a domino effect then so on
conspiracy093 2 months ago
@conspiracy093
Now I ask you, as you do, have you ever had a physics class ?
kennjohnsen 2 weeks ago
3 QUESTIONS 911 TRUTHERS DON'T WANT YOU TO ASK THEM:
If NORAD was told to “stand down” how do you explain F-15 fighters ordered to intercept the high-jacked planes 6 minutes after WTC 1 was hit?
How can Dick Cheney order NORAD to “stand down” if he was never in charge of NORAD?
If WTC 7 was destroyed via controlled demolition, how do you explain firefighters predicting the building's collapse 7 hours in advance?
ctcole77 2 weeks ago
for the people that think the tower did not come down at a free fall rate, how do you know have you even seen to 2 tall tower collapse before the the "explosions" on the day that that any loud sound can be anything remember people was freaking out didn't know what the hell was going. so before you day anything put all of those into conclusion
masterplans1 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Fallen Towers, a new tribute song composed this week to mark the 10th anniversary of 9/11/01.
Click on to Always the Way name below and it will begin playing...hope you enjoy the sentiment.
alwaystheway 4 months ago
the same thing happened in the war of 1812.
dailygrime1 8 months ago
Did any of you think about this. If you're a Christian don't you think it's possible that God made them fall like that? I mean if they fell to the side so many buildings would've been destroyed. Only by the power of God did that happen.
DephkonOne 8 months ago
@DephkonOne God lives in your closet, not in mine. I let go of my imaginary friend when I was 7. Why do you still have yours? Say I'm wrong, and yes I'm going to hell. That's fine. When you're at the gate though, could you ask a question for me? When your "God" let those planes get hijacked~ and let the towers be hit. When he let it get so bad, that people jumped to their deaths and popped open like cherry's on impact. Ask why he said "Ah, just playin' and brought the towers down straight?
n8er204 4 months ago
@n8er204 God lets many things happen for a purpose. If 9/11 didn't happen the Middle East would be in ruins. Osama Bin Laden and Sadam Hussein would be killing millions and millions at a time. That's why.
DephkonOne 4 months ago
@DephkonOne You're talking about men and their actions. It has nothing to do with a "god". Men planned 9/11. Men hijacked those planes. Men crashed those planes. Men attempted to stop flight 93. Men decide their own fate. Period. Everything can be tracked back to a decision, to a choice. We're taking about humanity here, and what we let go on. You can't say that anything goes back to religion, because a man decides to believe what he wants. A man makes decisions though, not his imaginary friend.
n8er204 4 months ago
for the last fucking time it doesn't matter 3,000 Americans died, stop arguing!
jets8029 8 months ago
@jets8029 it matters if our own fucking government is responsible for it >:(
FewestReborn 7 months ago
@FewestReborn its not going to bring back any of the people who were killed that day
jets8029 7 months ago
@jets8029 true. and i understand wat ur saying. but the though of our own gov doing something burns me up.
FewestReborn 7 months ago
1:04 "to collapse as a result of fire"... SUCH BULLSHIT. They collapsed as a result of two jets laden with fuel exploding and creating fireballs over 2 and a half city blocks in length... this is not a normal office fire as truthers like to say. Office fires begin with short circuits or cigarette butts. Fireballs 625 feet in length could bring a building down.
rickyseabra 10 months ago
ok ok ok, Heres the truth.....America doesnt exist out side of your tv screens. its all a studio set underneath Afghanistan. MLK and JFK are the same person.
Blagga0muffin 11 months ago
@Indy7272 Hey, I thought we straightened these mistakes out:
- A B-25 is NOT heavier than a 767; in fact, it only weighs about 1/10 as much!
- The B-25 that hit the ESB was low on fuel; the 767s that hit the towers were carrying an estimated 10,000 gallons each.
- The planes that hit the towers were going about 3x FASTER than that B-25.
- Parts of the 767s WERE found (engines, landing gear, etc.)
No comparison.
TimReed22222 11 months ago
GOOGLE about this: In 1945 much heavier B-25 bomber aircraft crashed into Empire State Building and exploded inside, setting building on fire for many hours and the building didnt collapse, there was just hole in the place of impact, no structural damage. There were also large parts of plane found all around. On 911, lighter planes send two much more modern buildings down very fast and there were no parts of planes found. Every thinking person must know there were explosives inside.
Indy7272 11 months ago
@Indy7272 b-52's are much lighter so they can hold bombs and travel a further distance. apparently all you know is what the first link on google gives you.
67able1 8 months ago
mossad did ti
=nIH50KhpVWg
voodoowichdoctor 1 year ago
The problem with this video is that 99% of the sheeple in the truther movement will believe it without doing any research on the claims made in it and accept it as "truth" Free fall speed for the towers is 9.22 seconds, the towers fell in between 15-22 seconds. The myth that no steel frame buildings have ever collapsed form fire alone before 9/11...myth between 1970-2002 there were 22 fire indice collapses of multi story buildings around the world. Do the research!
CRAZYHORSE19682003 1 year ago
total impossebel for soo big and strong building go down on fire...when you look you see wery clear exploxion..and fragment speed away from building..anyway silverboy pay some one and they get there needed war....but true will se the day soon
MultiAirbrusher 1 year ago
what a fucking spack
CrazyLiam123 1 year ago
If it was a controlled demolition, the base of the building would be destroyed first. The Tower, starting at the point that the plane hit it, went down and the weight of it destroyed the base of the tower.
AntiRacismAndHateCom 1 year ago
I think eco-terrorists were responsible for 9/11. They knew that the resulting invasion of Iraq would drive up oil and gas prices and cause America's dependence on foreign oil to become even more evident that it already was, leading to a green technology revolution and the end of the fossil fuel era. You damned dirty hippies can rot in hell, God bless the USA!
GlassesInMyEyeball 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Free Energy is real and its here but the coverup is strong, if u r interested in a REAL free energy magnet motor then
just go to LT-MAGNET-MOTORdotCOM and download the blueprints ,it is probably the ONLY working magnet
motor out there. Join the free energy revolution!!
buchananfibbing 1 year ago
The towers did not collapse at free fall speed.
There are two instances of steel structured building collapsing due to fire PRIOR to 9/11. (McCormick bldg & Sight & Sound bldg)
Collapsing downwards is the path of least resistance, but the buildings did not fall exactly straight down into their own footprint.
This idiot is wrong on all counts. How many of you gullible dummies have bought his BS?
waltereg0 1 year ago 2
@waltereg0 More believe or should I say know the buildings were professionally 'pulled' than you could begin to imagine. Viva la truth my friend. And Free Assange while were at it.
eckyspondoolie 1 year ago
@waltereg0 You're lying. Quit. It's annoying.
Show me the buildings you're citing. show me them not only falling almost straight downward, very rapidly, but also show me where they projected debris (specifically vaporizing steel beams) hundreds of feet away. Also, make sure the buildings you're talking about turned largely into dust and mangled steel.
mit26chell 1 year ago
@mit26chell I already said the buildings' names, the McCormick bldg and the Sight & Sound Center. You can google them. They were both steel framed buildings that collapsed due to fire years before 9/11.
I know the building distributed steel debris as far as 100s of feet away from the footprint, as I said the WTC did not really fall just straight down, although that is the path of least resistance. WTC 2 fell to the south and WTC 1 fell to the north & west, impacting WTC 5,WTC 6, & WTC 7.
waltereg0 1 year ago
@waltereg0 if the collapse was due to gravity alone, a 300 ton section would not have embedded in the side of the american express building 400 feet away. only explosives could have down that.
voodoowichdoctor 1 year ago
@voodoowichdoctor No, because the buildings did not fall exactly straight down, they tipped just enough, that's the simple explanation for why the towers smashed other buldings like WTC 5, 6, & 7. So explosives would have not been necessary, and indeed explosives would have had far less force than the massive force of the weight of that building.
waltereg0 1 year ago
Comment removed
voodoowichdoctor 1 year ago
@waltereg0 nonsense. 7 was a controlled demolition. 3, 4, 5, and 6 although badly damaged remained standing and were demolished by a demolition team later
the official reason for 7 collapsing is the fires. the few small fires in 7 would not have caused that. the whole official story is lies- the magic passport. the pentagon. flight 77 vapourized. anybody who believes all this is stupid.
voodoowichdoctor 1 year ago
@voodoowichdoctor "Few small fires?" There was a massive raging INFERNO in WTC7 and huge structural damage caused when WTC2 collapsed down and gouged away a large portion of the south face of WTC7. The NYFD team fighting it heard groaning sounds indicating it was nearing collapse, which is why that unit was ordered pulled from WTC7.
You've just only watched the video shot from north of WTC7, from the unaffected angle, and you never bothered to examine the info debunking WTC7 tinfoiler theories.
waltereg0 11 months ago
@waltereg0 "Wrong buddy boy, the architects that built both Bldgs, said they built it like a large grid-like super steel structure, with retardant foam around the steel members, That would and should withstand planes running into it all day long. The chance that it would happen on both buildings is mathematically impossible without help fuckchops!!!
Aglassact77 1 year ago
@Aglassact77 Flame retardant foam was blasted off the steel members by the impact of the planes. This left the steel members vulnerable and exposed to the intense fire which raged more than hot enough to cause them to buckle. The reason that steel buildings had only collapsed due to fire twice before 9/11 is because skyscrapers are normally built with flame retardant foam. But that foam is not made to resist the force of a jumbo jet smashing into it, comes right off under that condition.
waltereg0 1 year ago
@waltereg0 Fair assessment, and reasonable point. I'm just saying that there is more to the story than they are telling us. I watched a two hour special on that issue you talk about, and experts talk , and compare those valuable points. The Architects and designers both say they designed those towers to withstand planes practically running into them all day. There framing was designed like connect four grids, and could take it. the hot fuel explains two, or three floors, but not over hundred
Aglassact77 1 year ago
@waltereg0 how would you know hes wrong. Has your government been telling you the truth im not trying say its a conspiracy because its not its reality your government has caused so they can fuck everyone and get free oil
AmerikkazNightmare 10 months ago
@AmerikkazNightmare What free oil? 9/11 was a decade ago and the USA never got any free oil. It never got any oil in Iraq that it didn't have to buy, for a lot of money. The Iraq war cost the US govt billions, much of which was fuel costs, the profits of which went to the arabs. And oil today is more expensive than ever. So the free oil theory is clearly not true.
waltereg0 10 months ago
@waltereg0 man you've been lied to your government bunch of cowards and frauds realize that you people have been robbed by your banks. Search this info out by yourselves.
AmerikkazNightmare 6 months ago
@waltereg0 How come all 3 towers fell at free fall speed? I live in N.Y and i heard people who worked in the basements of the wtc testify to explosives in the basements. Not only them, but multiple escapees testified to this who narrowly escaped with their lives. You want us to disregard these people as "conspiracy theorists" and believe the cover up story? Those poor people who died that day deserve an actual investigation and you don't seem to care about them.
jabe55 9 months ago
@jabe55 None of the towers fell at free fall speed. Nobody heard explosives, they heard loud booming sounds caused by the impact of the planes. Nobody has testified to having witnessed explosive detonations, except here is a former janitor who has made a lot of money selling dvds to gullible conspiracy fans where he claims that he saw explosions, but he is doing it for the cash, and who can blame him, he was a poor janitor and now he hangs with Rosie Odonnell and makes $ off of tinfoilers.
waltereg0 9 months ago
@waltereg0 Did you watch the video? It is in fact falling at the speed of gravity. A 10 year old boy can see that. Tower 7 falls too without the assistance of a plane, but magically collapses at free fall speed by small fires and debris from nearby towers. Yes, they did testify to hearing multiple explosives. Check out Barry Jennings on 911 that is if you even pay attention to the testimonies from those who escaped. War on terror is a fraud, like you and your disinfo agenda is.
jabe55 9 months ago
@jabe55 Yes I saw the video where you can see debris falling away FASTER than the rest of the collapse, so you can tell it is falling slower than free fall speed. Free Fall speed for towers would be 9 secs, but they took 15-20 secs to collapse. All Jennings witnesses are describing only the plane's impact that sounded like the boom of an explosion. None were inside WTC during COLLAPSE. WTC7 fell because the North Tower carved away the south face of it, & then it burned w/ fires unfought
waltereg0 9 months ago
@waltereg0 TROLOL ..Nothing is funnier than a dummy talking about dummies like he isn't a dummy himself.
You made my day.
hcuob 4 months ago 2
@hcuob "Wisdom and goodness to the vile seem vile: Filths savour but themselves." - King Lear, act 4, scene 2.
waltereg0 4 months ago
@waltereg0 -- for a building that is falling perfectly. people that blow buildings up would consider that a perfect detonation on a 3 accounts.
TheChineseEmpire 2 months ago
I agree with the theory that three towers are collapsed by the explosives, but I cannot observe all collapse time exactly from videos.
So, I suggest we should use initial collapse speed of the antenna of WTC 1.
If the antenna had near free-fall acceleration during significant time, we can prove no resistance of lower floors, which had no damage.
kerokku2000 1 year ago
i agtee with the guy
TatianaLerman90434 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
✈ ▌▌ HAPPY 9/11 EVERYONE!!!
jb345bobo 1 year ago
planes hijacked by terrorists hit the towers thats its there is no conspiracy
lilgeorge333 1 year ago
@lilgeorge333 Yeh right.... And Santa is real and so is the Easter Bunny. LOL
You need a little research. Look at Christopher Bollyn's site and we will chat.
eckyspondoolie 1 year ago
0:30 "The law of conservation of momentum would have predicted about 45 seconds [time for the towers to collapse]."
Can anyone produce the math on that? I'd like to know where the 45-second figure comes from.
TimReed22222 1 year ago
@TimReed22222 I'd like to know how aluminum could have blasted through steel and concrete, not remotely possible to my knowledge. Ever wonder how a fairy tale, like the bible, could have been forced upon society? Look no further...
JZJYRWO 1 year ago
@JZJYRWO
So ... you don't know where the 45-second figure came from either? Of course not, no one does - because he made it up.
Plus if he knew *anything* about physics, he'd know there is NO SUCH THING as free-fall "speed" - the term "free fall" refers to acceleration, not speed.
TimReed22222 1 year ago
@TimReed22222 no its the rate an object falls through a vacuum
rtljmc 1 year ago
@rtljmc
Free fall is the behavior of an object on which the only acting force is gravity. It's acceleration, not speed (rate).
Anyone who refers to free-fall "speed" doesn't know what they're talking about; a free-falling object is accelerating, e.g., speed is constantly changing (increasing).
None of which explains where this guy's 45 seconds comes from.
TimReed22222 1 year ago
@TimReed22222 when they talk about free fall they mean terminal velocity which has a top speed of 120mph roughly. the speed will increase until its terminal velocity. once there it can go faster from its own power. ie gravitys effect. it u throw something off the building its in freefall its falling free. in sky diving you have freefall time ie time from leaving the plane to opening of the parachute hope this helps
rtljmc 1 year ago
@rtljmc "when they talk about free fall they mean terminal velocity"
No they don't! Free fall and terminal velocity are OPPOSING CONCEPTS.
TERMINAL VELOCITY is the SPEED at which air resistance exactly opposes gravity, and acceleration is zero. An object in FREE FALL has no opposing force; it's just falling - and accelerating.
And anyway, what does terminal velocity have to do with 9/11?
If you're going to advocate dubious theories you might at least understand them!
TimReed22222 1 year ago
ok if i dropped a penny from 1368ft it would hit the ground in 9-10 seconds the towers collapsed in 9-10 seconds so what they mean is they fell at the same time it takes for an object falling from the same height with no resistance. so the 45 seconds means if the towers were going to fall from the weight it would take 45 seconds to go through all the rest of the building . they same freefall because in skydiving a freefall is a person falling through air at their max speed . starting for a stop
rtljmc 1 year ago
@rtljmc Ah, I think I see the problem here: The towers DID NOT FALL in 9-10 seconds. That's a myth. The actual collapse times were 15-20 seconds.
Time it yourself! Check this video - watch?v=ESaIEVxLnK4 - and use a stopwatch or the video's own timer, then come back & tell me that tower fell all the way to street level in 10 seconds.
MEANWHILE, I'm still waiting to learn who came up with the 45-second figure, and how. And DON'T just cite this law or that, SHOW SOME MATH.
TimReed22222 1 year ago
@TimReed22222 well if you read the official report from the 911 commision. it say the tower 1 collapsed in 9.22 seconds and wtc 11 seconds and 40 stories of the core stood for 25 seconds after this doesnt make sense if it was ment to pancake. from the top of the tower to hitting the ground was 9 sec to 11 sec its on wiki as the offical story from the commision.
rtljmc 1 year ago
@rtljmc "well if you read the official report from the 911 commision. it say the tower 1 collapsed in 9.22 seconds and wtc 11 seconds"
NO IT DOESN'T! Read it again:
"NIST estimated the elapsed times FOR THE FIRST EXTERIOR PANELS TO STRIKE THE GROUND AFTER THE COLLAPSE INITIATED ... to be approximately 11 seconds for WTC 1 and approximately 9 seconds for WTC 2."
Not total collapse times; times for the first big debris to fall.
WTC1 took 20 seconds to come down. Check the video.
TimReed22222 1 year ago
@TimReed22222 no. parts of the core stood that long and that video is not evidence. only the core was left. which takes away the pancake theory. look at it does it make sense to you. really in the bottom of your heart tell me that a huge building went in 11second with a part of the core left? and if only the outside of the building his the ground in 11 seconds how did it travel through the steel and the same rate a penny would have falling through the air?
rtljmc 1 year ago
@rtljmc "and that video is not evidence."
Better than anything you got!
"really in the bottom of your heart tell me that a huge building went in 11second with a part of the core left?"
No; really, in the bottom of my heart, that building went in 20 seconds (with part of the core left).
Let's not forget the question on the table: Did the tower collapse COMPLETELY, all the way to the street, in 9 seconds? That video (watch?v=ESaIEVxLnK4) and many others show that it did not.
TimReed22222 1 year ago
@TimReed22222 the offical report is on wiki and its says 9 seconds with 40stories of the core left so that video has been edited just like others .
rtljmc 1 year ago
@rtljmc So let me get this straight; you think the NIST report is TRUE, but the videos are FAKE? Is THAT your case??
TimReed22222 1 year ago
@TimReed22222 no just the time it took to collapse. so you think the nist report is wrong? ha then you really dont think the towers fell because of some fire and a plane? is that your case? i dont agree with all of the report but the time it took to fall and what was left i do . this means i can have my own opinion. so if you dont believe to offical report then what are you talking about? discovery documentary says 9 - 11 second ha <<<<<<911
rtljmc 1 year ago
@rtljmc "i dont agree with all of the report but the time it took to fall and what was left i do"
Why?
You truthers are so funny! What POSSIBLE reason can you give for believing those times - other than that they conveniently support what you want to believe??
And not only that: You MISUNDERSTAND what it says! Reread the report, where does it say those are the total tower collapse times? NOWHERE.
TimReed22222 1 year ago
@TimReed22222 you obviously havent read it or you are skipping bits because its on wiki under towers collapse.
rtljmc 1 year ago
@rtljmc Obviously I'm not seeing what you're seeing; I already posted what I found. Can you please paste the relevant passage here for all to see & straighten me out?
TimReed22222 1 year ago
@TimReed22222north tower struck the ground 9 seconds after the collapse started, and parts of the South Tower after 11 seconds. The lower portions of both buildings' cores (60 stories of WTC 1 and 40 stories of WTC 2) remained standing for up to 25 seconds after the start of the initial collapse before they too collapsed
rtljmc 1 year ago
@rtljmc "north tower struck the ground 9 seconds after the collapse started"
The FIRST BIG PIECES struck the ground 9 seconds after the collapse started. Watch the video again (watch?v=ESaIEVxLnK4). See that big piece falling to the left ? THAT hit the ground 9 seconds after the collapse began. How much of the tower is left when that happens?
Maybe you just don't grasp the truthers' case which claims the entire tower came down in free fall - which, as we see, is false.
TimReed22222 1 year ago
@TimReed22222 well if the top fell to the left how did the weight destroy the building? your not thinking my friend! so the pancake collapse could not have happend thank you for proving my point. and dont give me well what i ment was........
rtljmc 1 year ago
@rtljmc "well if the top fell to the left how did the weight destroy the building?" etc.
Before we change the subject, are we done with the free-fall argument? Are we in agreement that the towers DID NOT TOTALLY COLLAPSE IN FREE-FALL TIME, as alleged in this video?
TimReed22222 1 year ago
@TimReed22222 dude your the one who is throwing out crazy bullshit answers not me. not please state what you think happened! :)
rtljmc 1 year ago
Comment removed
TimReed22222 1 year ago
@rtljmc What *I* think happened?
I think the towers collapsed but in MUCH LONGER THAN FREE-FALL TIME (50-100% longer). THEREFORE the towers did NOT come down in free fall. THEREFORE one of the most repeated truther claims - that free-fall collapse proves controlled demolition - is DISPROVED because free fall didn't happen. Can't talk about it if it didn't happen.
TimReed22222 1 year ago
@TimReed22222 that doesnt explain how the weight of the tower destroyed the floors below and how you say it fell sidewards so basically you cant have it both way monfrer
rtljmc 1 year ago
@rtljmc
Ah, well now you're changing the subject - which is: Did the tower collapse in free fall or did they not?
They did not.
TimReed22222 1 year ago
@TimReed22222 well yes they did then. they fell from the top to the ground in just under and over 10 seconds
rtljmc 1 year ago
lol at pseudo science
R3TAAARD 1 year ago
No what happened was there was so much smoke that the debris fell faster than the actual towers so therefor looking like it was a controlled bomb but we all know it was a fucking plane. RIP to all who have fallen.
Superj888 1 year ago
@tecnolover2642 "pancake theory" lol? In Hong Kong in the early '90's an 11-story shopping mall came down because they put an air conditioning unit on the roof of the mall without checking the load-bearing ratings. The A/C unit fell through the roof and every floor on the way to the ground, pancaking the entire mall in the process. "Theory" "disproven" indeed. lol @ you dude.
ProcyofPM 1 year ago
@tecnolover2642 don't be a kool-aid drinking moron. None of the towers fell at "free-fall" speed. All you have to do is watch them to get visual proof (although tons of experts have made videos showing the math / metrics / measurements proving the buildings fell much slower than "free-fall").
Of course, retard nut-jobs probably aren't interested in facts and evidence. Are you one of those?
ProcyofPM 1 year ago
10 years of war from 1 attack
7 countrys have been occupied since that 1 attack
more freedoms that you can shake a stick at are gone or in the works to be gone because of that 1 attack 10 fucking years ago
fawkUtube 1 year ago
if you think 9/11 was an attack from another country ROFLMMFAO
First off i dont care how long you been "living in a cave" (in hollywood) sending a couple planes into a couple buildings out of the 10000000 square miles of america doesnt really justify an attack if you stand back from the map and look what they supposably did its a mosquitoe bite .... google bush laden family ties they have been in buisness for 20 + years and oil just went up and were in iraq cause of what "al quida" did?
OIL
fawkUtube 1 year ago
2nd compared to that mosquitoe bite
5000+ of our troops dead more then doubling the total on 9/11 spending 1 billion US tax dollars a day to kill a few thousand hiding people that we cant find ? yea that makes since we got the money ..... Thermite at the scene the 3rd tower that wasnt even hit by a plane but imploded aswell ... come on people are you really that stupid?
fawkUtube 1 year ago
This guy is an idiot! You can see it hit and resist at each floor until the debris and dust/smoke over took what you could see.
It you truly believe bombs were also in the building then the terrorist planted the bombs too just like they bombed the WTC in 1993. I do not understand how you can think Bush was involved, the terrorist wanted the WTC destroyed and succeeded on their 2nd attempt. Let's not forget the 1st time was a bomb under Clinton. Was Clinton behind the WTC collapse too?
adelyn123 1 year ago
And by the way, if you actually watch the towers fall, they fell far slower than the debris around them (which were falling at "free fall speed"), ergo this video is disproved so easily (by any person with working eyes and a working brain) that is has to be trolling.
ProcyofPM 2 years ago
So the guy in the video says very clearly that he has based his opinion on zero facts, zero evidence, and zero precedent. And people still believe him anyway? =/
ProcyofPM 2 years ago
@ProcyofPM
he already gave the precedent if you would listen fool. No other steel framed building in history ever has fallen from fires. Buildings do not fall at freefall speed NATURALLY. There are your precedents. Learn to listen better next time. Now put your blinders back on as it's been 9 years since this event and you still haven't figured it out.
tecnolover2642 1 year ago
@tecnolover2642 stop being an ignorant fool. The towers did NOT fall at "free-fall" speed. In fact, there is a video listed to the right of this message proving it. The towers actually fell at 1/2 the speed of free fall. Stop drinking koolaid you f**king moron.
ProcyofPM 1 year ago
@ProcyofPM correct! true free fall can only happen in a vacuum (controlled environment..nist says 15 seconds other say a bit more
I'll allow you 25 seconds that would STILL be much to fast for a natural collapse which also would include the buildings to have fallen PARTIALLY and A symmetrically
I think YOU may be the cool aaid drinker here
silly ass.
.
ishredu 1 year ago
@ishredu ... you fail. Give me some facts, some math proofs, anything other than your fail word as to why the time it took for the towers to fall was somehow "too fast for natural collapse." Oh, you can't, because all of the facts, all of the math, all of the proof, shows that the towers in fact fell normally (for being hit by an airplane of course).
ProcyofPM 1 year ago
@ProcyofPM first you need to understand what free fall actually is because I noticed 9above you mentioned to someone else the debris was in free fall) which is completely inaccurate
so I think YOU fail and aren't worth my time until you can tell me how free fall is measured
can you?
ishredu 1 year ago
@ProcyofPM normal for an buildingbeing hit by an airplane
explain normal
your a silly little child
go back and figure out what free fall is and how it's measured first
than get back to me
ishredu 1 year ago
@ProcyofPM free fall is for these towers would be close to11 seconds at true free fall in a vacuum..nist has it it at 15 seconds (they fucked it up too lol) because they apparently assumed free fall was measured at real world. but it isn't THEREFORE 25 seconds would be EXTREMELY FAST for a building to fall naturally and impossible if the floors were not entirely disengaged
ishredu 1 year ago
Ok. To those of you guys who think that 9/11 was a conspiracy, you seriously have too much time on your hands. You cannot tell me that the collapsing of the towers was planned. You can't give me an explanation for that or (for the people that say there was bombs on the plane) how the bombs somehow got on the outside of the plane because it wouldn't have gotten off the runway had they been there before. So you guys are the idiots!
kjm829 2 years ago
@kjm829 no offense but your a bbbaaaa baaa baaaa sheep who watches TV 24 hours a day and belives all he/she is told baa baa baaad sheeple
fawkUtube 1 year ago
anyone who doesn't think 911 was an inside jobs after looking at the facts are infact the true idiots. wake up and smell the evil.
fourthelder 2 years ago
That's not necessarily the case of 9/11 being an inside job.
It was America's support for repressive regimes that caused the attacks.
NYJared04 2 years ago
that bloke is a right twat. 45 seconds yeah ok.
g3org33r3 2 years ago
So you are now implying that the debris fell faster than free fall speed. You, sir, are an irrational fool.
KzrrainzYes 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
my penis is small;(
tsaeras 2 years ago 6
NOT freefall speed! Plenty of resistance. This bloke is an idiot, not a professor of anything:
watch?v=DoOp40E6UZg
MrOllyK 2 years ago
hes right. there was resistance but because of the weight from the upper part of the tower the resistance at each floor wasn't enough to stop it or even slow it down.
kjm829 2 years ago
That's right kjm829. Thumbs up.. :)
MrOllyK 2 years ago
@kjm829
Wrong. Pancake theory has already been disproved long ago. You had much more strength and support underneath from the undamaged floors which would have slowed the collapse. Both towers came down UNNATURALLY. How do you explain molten steel pouring down the walls? How do you explain the fact that witnesses said there were other explosions going off ?? There was way more happening in those towers that day then has been told. It was much more than planes. there were multiple events
tecnolover2642 1 year ago 15
@tecnolover2642 Yes, because molten steel could not possibly be present on a steel building that is on fire. Why have no witnesses come forward if they exist? Why would Ben Laden take credit for the attack if he didn't do it?
Steel, being a good conductor of heat, allowed super hot temperatures to flow all throughout the tower softening the steel and making the towers fall faster.
Try taking some physics and chemistry. Also, stop believing everything you hear or see.
AntiRacismAndHateCom 1 year ago
@tecnolover2642 how dare you say that you fucking idiot.
Tdiarocks123 4 months ago
two words. planned, implosion.
latetag 2 years ago
Folks, it is a mistake to say "free fall speed"
The correct term is "free fall acceleration"
David Chandler measured the acceleration of the north tower at about two thirds of free fall acceleration.
See: watch?v=xG2y50Wyys4
Skeptic121 2 years ago 2
THANKYOUTHANKYOUTHANKYOU ima send you a T-shirt with a lightbulb.
DaleSparrow 2 years ago
I've seen so many conspiracy theories, WTF IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE!?
you elected the government, and no matter wich president, all you do is want to blame them for stabing you in the back. NEVER have I ever heard anybody praise, or even thank the government for things they did. I am not saying their haloed angels, but crap, the way you people are going on it sounds like they plan to kill all their lovely tax payers.
DaleSparrow 2 years ago
Elected officials run for office by choice; no one drafts them. Under our constitutional form of government, elected officials have only DUTIES; they have no RIGHTS to their office. They serve at the pleasure of the electorate. They may be replaced by election for any reason or for no reason. As Harry Truman said, if they can't stand the heat, they can get out of the kitchen.
Skeptic121 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
What could be more dramatic than a jetliner hitting the WTC?
All eyes fixed on the point of impact. Then, while everyone is looking up, a second plane hits the other tower. All eyes are inexorably fixated on the smoldering towers while the substructure of all three buildings is being blown out (as confirmed by witness testimony) and the structural steel at the base of the structures is being cut for the final demolition sequence. (Accounting for "rivers of molten iron")
KevinMerck 2 years ago
thats so stupid. do you even know wat the WTC is?
DaleSparrow 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Then to draw attention away from the main event there is a diversionary attack at the most heavily defending building in the world, in the most heavily defended airspace on the planet, executed with precision accuracy, defying the laws of physics, and better judgment, with a minimal loss of life and property damage.
And of course, all of this is accomplished by 19 lone nuts with box-cutters. Come on folks, this is your country and your freedom at stake.
KevinMerck 2 years ago
This clown is an ambulance chaser in a cheap suit..
titanium9000 3 years ago
Nice dub work dickhead, it looked like an old kung fu movie. You and this clown are on some fucked up shit.
bradlez996 3 years ago
What is wrong with you people millions of political crime case files were stored in tower 7 which was taken down the next day.Also traces of thermite were found in the rubble.
vic2795 3 years ago
This is a lie, but what the hell, sounds good so the twoofers will keep repeating it ...
Denierbud11 2 years ago
you know what thermite is? it's iron oxide and aluminium. blody hell then I could just as well say my house is made of thermite.
DaleSparrow 2 years ago
If your house was made of iron oxide I don't think it would stand to well of look very pretty.
priapus512 2 years ago
so they said they found tones of iron oxide? I thought they said they found traces? Do you even know what it is? its comon rust, now I don't know about you it definately didn't look like any of the steel in the WTC could EVER rust. And ofcourse they didn't use ANY aluminium in the building, not even in the window frames.
DaleSparrow 2 years ago
Lol and they don't make planes out of Aluminium either >.>
9/11 truthers are the real conspiracy.
Laysoles 2 years ago
I can't believe they rated your coment -1 are they fucking stupid. they don't think planes are made out of aluminium?
DaleSparrow 2 years ago
First Steven Jones found thermite reaction products, iron microspheres, in the WTC dust. Not steel, iron.
Then, later, Jones and a Danish scientist, Niels Harrit, found unreacted material containing iron oxide and aluminum powder. It was obviously manufactured, containing layers and a binder. It also ignites at a comparatively low temperature, producing molten iron. It releases a large amount of heat per mass, even more than thermite.
I am interested to know what it is and how it got there.
Skeptic121 2 years ago
Those things could very easily be formed, but befor we even go there, how do explain how the thousands of office workers never noticed the bundels and miles of cable running out their office, or the thousands and thousands of holes some is drilling inside their office walls?
and don't try and tell me they could have laid all those explosives in that one day.
DaleSparrow 2 years ago
lol eh its ok. Truthers are a stupid bunch. If you dont agree with them they auto click the thumbs down.
Laysoles 2 years ago
i can't believe these people hvan't taken these vids off yet. i would cover my face with a paper bag if someone knew i was a truther. Then again it doesn't matter if 60 percent of the population are mentaly handicaped.
DaleSparrow 2 years ago
That's a pretty inaccurate statement.
z5550 2 years ago
If they click thumbs down it's because you begin your comment with "a stupid bunch". Kind of rude.
WJValente 2 years ago
Nah if you say something even as polite as 9/11 was not an inside job they will auto click the thumbs down.
As for my comment about truthers being a stupid bunch. It is not being rude, it is truthful.
:)
Laysoles 2 years ago
guy isn't credible at all. So anything he says is bullshit. No building collapsed from fire except on 911. My neighbors house collapsed from fire. Maybe he should have done some research.
fierospeeder 3 years ago
your neighbours house was a steel framed building?
where the fuck do you live!
a steel frame building in madrid burned for a few days, but didnt collapse...the empire state burned for a while..but oh wait, still there aint she!
what the guy says is true!
bane39 3 years ago 2
my neighbours house is a building. He said "building" didn't say "steel framed building with no concrete"
and houses do use a steel beam to support the load.
look up the toy factory that collapsed in Asia.
fierospeeder 3 years ago
The building in Madrid had a concrete core which stayed standing but had a steel outer casing which collapsed.
You should have pleaded the 5th because your other examples proved you ignorant or a liar.
jizzmonger 3 years ago
makes sense to me...iunno
TruthGuerrilla 3 years ago
"in 100 year history...bla...due to fire". Well you've already shot yourself in the foot haven't you-this was clearly no ordinary fire. It meant fire as a general term.And who is this IDIOT in the court room-no resistance; what is he suggesting that all the floors where cleared of furniture;think of the scale of doing so.IDIOT. ...he hasn't got a pot to piss into. There's a chunk of WTC in storage which is 4 floors compressed to 3ft. Noticed how the building "peeled" sideways - THIS IS CRUCIAL.
bertyUK 3 years ago
"Towers collapsed at free fall speed"
No they didn't. "Free fall speed" is and only was achievable only in a vacuum.
So unless there was no air at all in New York that mourning than how would any building fall at free fall speed? Impossible isn't it?
D3g1532 3 years ago
Saying it fell at free fall speed ,its obvious that u dont mean theoracly.
The point is a pancake effect would have taken WAY more time to fall
vegnagunL 3 years ago
How do you know that it would take longer? I don't necessarily beleive the pancake theory either.
D3g1532 3 years ago
Its called fermite or along them lines it's oxidised steel (rust) mixed with alimminium once combusted burns at extremely high temperatures enough to burn through your cars engine or a safe..or a world trade centre
brad213 3 years ago
Get this bullshit of the internet.
Guudenx 3 years ago
i thought war was happening
kasmerr 3 years ago
Lol this idiot mentions molten metal like 8 times. For starters, no tests were conducted on this molten metal to determine its composition. Secondly, it is never claimed ANYWHERE, except by twoofers such as yourself, that this metal is steel. My guess is that its the remnants of the ALUMINUM airplane that just crashed into the building. Wild theory. I know. But I believe the jet fuel fires' temperatures are easily hot enough to melt aluminum. Research for yourself.
theairupthere8 3 years ago
Fucking liberals.
theairupthere8 3 years ago 2
o give me a fucking break. nutcases like this shouldnt be allowed to live. yea america would really kill 3000 people of its own kind for nothing. i mean come on, have some common sense people
xdominologyx 3 years ago
For nothing? Why do you think we are in Iraq? Because Bush wants to?
danielsil15 3 years ago
I'm no physicist, but I did study physics for a while, and I don't think that what this man is saying makes any sense at all.
pepper1450 3 years ago
Which answers why your no longer studying physics
poparozi 3 years ago
who is this twat?
mazzini46 3 years ago
well when thousands of tonz of steal and cement come down then yes it will fall at free fall speed
belzigstine 3 years ago
Yeah... But what was the cause of thousands of tonz of steel and cement to fall at free fall speed?
poparozi 3 years ago
....no need to comment?
No, not when all we're seeing is just another deliberate attempt to destroy the credibility of the 911 truth movement, from within the movement. (Does it have to be any more obvious?) ...confusing 15 seconds with free-fall, ignoring the construction of the towers, trashing the official view in the few places where the official view makes plain sense....
Why are they doing it?
To give the official view APPARANT credibility.
Start thinking for a change.
music7564 3 years ago
-cont- The controlled demolition of the towers would have required very little; first to initiate the collapses, and then to finish off the cores. The buildings did most of the work because the floor trusses were in fact rated for only 5x their normal capacity, and they snapped under increasingly heavy loads - progressive collapse. They want us to reject a part of the official view that's actually correct.
Bottom line?
Focus on the cores. 'Exploding in free-fall' & 'all that dust' is hoo-ha.
music7564 3 years ago
kk who gives huh remeber the jonestown mass suicide is that remembered no huh about 400 us troops have died in iraq there have been worse then that like kk the us was attacked by terraristest so what do we do we go to war and kill even more innacent people there because we what revenge for that and it will go on then a metorir falls from thae sky and you blame space for that and you go to war with space!
pryce101 3 years ago
they built it so the building would not fall on other buildings so it dosent cause more destruction,retards
GhostRibs 3 years ago
I think it is pretty easy to say that 9/11 is simply to laden with coincidences, the biggest one being who all stood to gain from this horrific catastrophe. Half of the original Bush Administration has resigned, we are over in Iraq, for God knows how long. And one by one our freedoms and liberties are being taken left and right. Take it from a professional aviator. 9/11 was orchestrated by a shadow Government above the President. Bush does not run the country, mark my words. Been in the Service.
UALCaptain1956 3 years ago
What does the fact that you are a "professional aviator" have to do with anything? I'm a professional pilot as well, and I think you've been to too many Star Trek Conspiracy Theory Conventions....A "Shadow Government"??? Jeez, I don't want you anywhere near an airplane!
TECarlton 3 years ago
"A "Shadow Government"??? Jeez, I don't want you anywhere near an airplane! "
do you actually believe that the power structure does not go beyond the bozos you see in the white house, jeez I think you been spending too much time living with your head up your ass and not enough time at the library researching Political and Military history.
993365 3 years ago
Doest this even need a response?
TECarlton 3 years ago
translation of TECarltons above comment = I don't have a response
993365 3 years ago
What is there to respond to, a bunch of worthless drivel by some lunatic conspiracy theorist?
TECarlton 3 years ago
yeah keep telling yourself that, did it ever occur to you that you are just extremly ignorant? so ignorant that even facts appear like conspiricies??
993365 3 years ago
What facts? You're throwing out crazy opinions (not facts) about some made-up "shadow Government"...who's in charge of it Darth Vador? I thought he was too busy working on the death star??
The only real facts hear are that a bunch of psycho camel jockey's hijacked a few planes and flew them into buildings...knocking said buildings down.
Now, please sit down before you make yourself look well,....worse
TECarlton 3 years ago