I think it is good to discuss all the facts and ask questions to figure this out.
There is no Pentagon Video where you can clearly see the Boeing going in and the Final Nist Report didn`t test the debris for explosives.
The Media added a few different plane images..some people on the street who gave a live interview said the 2nd plane was a grey/black plane without windows or emblems on it..so it is very strange for me, though i live in Europe and don`t have nothing to do with the US.
@SuperYesyesyo i explain the pentagon in my video "loose change answer number 053" using clues evidence and facts, the plane flew by the camera at 777 fps, the footage is from servalence cam not a video cam.
like in bank footage of a robbery the guy is there then 5 feet over in the next frame the frames are slower and at the pentagon (same type of camera) the plane flew by so fast it flew by while the shutter was closed only opened to catch a glimpse.
they didn't need to test for explosives cuz the investigation showed it was the planes that brought down the towers, my video "how the towers fell" explains it all.
using what people said they think they saw is the entire backbone of the conspiracy theory movement. at what angle and for how long did those people see the plane? (was the sun in their view?) peoples eyes do play tricks sometimes.
loosechangeexposed I only have one question for you. If fire engineering magazine said that no building prior to 911 has ever collapsed from fire then how does wtc 7 come down in 10 seconds when there was no major damage to the building? Also why if you ask people about building 7 most people don't know what the hell your talking about?
@wratchet45 my video "how the towers fell" explains how the planes destroyed the towers, this video has the FDNY saying that they expected wtc 7 to fall due to the damage and fires, after hours of fires burning and weakening the structure it could no longer support the weight of 47 stories and fell, that magazine may have said no building ever fell due to fire before but did they mention the damage the FDNY did?
google "ground zero then and now" to see the extent of the destruction.
@chunkyboy100 the BBC has good videos but their channel is not available to me here in America, some of their videos are in my favorites and playlists.
video(dot)google(dot)com/videoplay?docid=3606159506368831731 << also this man doesn't believe in the maneuvers pulled to hit the towers.. We're bat shit crazy conspiracy theorists because we don't believe amateur pilots over took 4 planes and missed their ONE target that happened to be the white house while Drills for that exact same event were taking place? I must be completely delusional and need to watch more CNN I guess..
@JMcMac21 every claim that the conspiracy theory movement has is based on what they get from other people, it's the same things the ole' "earth is flat" scare was based on, it's all hearsay, rumors, speculations, and opinions, not facts, evidence or proof.
you said "this man doesn't believe in the maneuvers pulled to hit the towers" so you are basing your beliefs on anothers beliefs
no one proved the white house was a target, that is speculitive.
1. Does any of your videos explain why the government stonewalled 9/11 investigations for 2 months?
2. All the steel, as the buildings structural material and most important evidence to preserve to know what happened to it, and how it disintegrated, was quickly swept and sent to china for recycling at an astonishing rate of 400 truckloads a day. Why?
3. All these trucks were on the site that same morning, not long after the collapse. How?
@Tripnotik25 1) where is the proof that they did? i bet you heard that from other people, the FBI was on the scene that morning starting the investigation, they found out who got on the planes then found out they went to our flight schools, they did an investigation.
2) we knew how the WTC was destroyed so there was no need to inspect any of the steel, it was the planes that brought down the towers, my video "how the towers fell" explains the details.
3) where did you hear that the trucks were there that soon? from someone who is trying to make it look like a cover up, well there is no proof of that and you have no evidence backing up that claim, however i do have proof that a truther is covering up all the details and the facts to make it look like an inside job, my video "sept 11th the smoking gun" exposes him as a fraud.
@loosechangeexposed About trucks, again, i don't feed off "loose change", as i never even seen it. And i can sense you try to imply that all i know comes from them, it doesn't. Just some of the articles i had on favorites with all this were a few years old, and they were taken off meanwhile, or otherwise i would link you everything.
Even firemen had reported "a bunch of trucks" there that same morning. How did this company managed that? were they expecting the occurrence?
@Tripnotik25 every conspiracy theory group make the same claims and they all refer people to each other as for the trucks send me a link in a message, if they were there that does not prove the drivers or owners knew it was going to happen, that would just increase the number of thousands of people that would have needed to be involved.
new jersey is just accross the river and has more people per capita than any other state which means lots of businesses including trucking companies
@JMcMac21 lets say they hit the white house but not the pentagon... you would be sitting here saying the same thing about the pentagon..... sigh.... ppl just need conspiracy.
watch?v=Kanj8gx4E1M <<these people say there was a secondary explosion in the 1st tower after it was already hit.. I know it's loose change and I never reference from there but I believe this is pretty eligible evidence... explain?
@JMcMac21 all the reports were coming in as it was happening, they were reporting what other witnesses were saying about a second explosion, being inside the north tower they didn't know right away that it was the south tower that got hit by the plane,
if you listen to the 1st firefighter at 23 seconds he said seven eight, but the screen reads floors 7 and 8 (loose change trick) trying to make it look like 2 explosions when it was only 1.
in stressful situations the military, P.D. and firedept say #'s like 78 one at a time over the radio so they are understood better, 78 might sound like seventeen 8 or 267 might sound like 257 so they say 2 6 7 at 42 seconds of that video the firefighter is talking about the top of the tower hitting the impact zone which sounded like a loud explosion he followed up by saying major collapse, that was the so. tower collapse.
at 52 seconds it cuts to a firefighter talking about the lobby of the no. tower he said "it looked as though" truthers use a lot of it "sounded like" and "it was as if" and try to make opinions and speculations into fact, my video "loose change answer number 118 with witness" explains the damage to the lobby.
@loosechangeexposed lol, nice trick you trying to pull. i listened to him and he said "floors 7 and 8, 7,8." just like the screen reads.. i listened to it a few times closely, even slowed down, and he said 7 AND 8 (not 78) also if hes inside or at the base getting witnesses and their confessions, they wouldn't be confessions of the plane hitting the 78th floor, that also wouldn't explain how they have ppl covered in dust.
@LFOD4US if you listened to the firefighter he said "hey, i got ah an eyewitness who said there was an explosion on floor seven eight, seven eight" he said there was "AN" explosion not 2 explosions, he said "FLOOR" not floors.
when did the 7th and 8th floors of either tower explode? where is any evidence of that happening? i think that if that happened it would have made headlines, that firefighter was talking about the 78th floor, listen to the audio again. he says floor 7-8.
@loosechangeexposed Headlines lol. you've missed the point we're trying to get through to you. The government lies and the mainstream media sells their lies. watch?v=vOcFENODr1U&feature=related < this man among many others had seen secondary explosions.. How about basing your research off of something else rather than some kids documentary.
@JMcMac21 so where is the proof that they were behind 9/11? when the top of the so. tower fell over to the side it was hit just before it collapsed is proof that the plane penetrated the core (the no. tower suffered the same type of damage) why didn't the impacts distrupt the explosives which needed to be attached directly to the steel in order to destroy it, cuz there was no explosives, my video "how the towers fell" explains all the details of the collapses, and can't be proven wrong
How is shrugging off decades expertise evidence of a conspiracy, Dylan??? With an attitude like that, it's no wonder they're so quick to able to trample on the mass murder of innocents.
Nigro makes the key point there at 2:53. They don't need permission from Larry Silverstein; Larry Silverstein didn't have the authority to tell anyone anything. That's the part that "truth"ers like to forget.
@MrSkunkwork100 its like the cops needing the permission of the homeowner to shoot a home invader. same thing they are in charge cuz they know what the right thing to do is.
@loosechangeexposed Yeah, exactly. If the cops didn't have authority, we wouldn't call on them to handle the matter. "Truth"er anti-logic is at work at it's finest in their claims.
@lcexposed Yes, that's true. What happened in the North tower, is that it was struck more head-on. The impact was more centered than in the South Tower. The North tower collapsed more as a result of the fires, whereas the South Tower (being struck lower as you point out) collapsed more as a result of the plane impact damage. Aircraft impact damage was more detrimental in the South tower than it was in the North tower, because of the off-center impact and the debris being concentrated in 1 area.
@loosechangeexposed Also, the there was a difference in speed at impact between the two buildings: American Airlines flt. 11, was said to be travelling at mid-400's when it impacted the North Tower, while United Airlines, flt. 175 was said to have been travelling at 500+ mph. at impact. "Truth"ers try to ignore those facts as well.
@MrSkunkwork100 yes, even Einstien would do all the calculations and still not know how the explosives or incinerary devices survived the planes impacts, explosions, static electricity, and severed buildings electrical wiring, and didnt get set off and drop the towers upon impact.
if there was 5% more of the no. towers steel that survived then the so. it would have taken longer to weaken
0:13 there is a piece of debris that falls FASTER than gravity!!!!!! Expose that, troll.
After 100 excuses, explainations, improbabilities, and impossiblities your unified odds become beyond a trillion to one.
When you see 1/4 mile high buildings blast into dust to grade in less than 11 seconds you should test for demolition. The laws of motion, fire chemistry, thermodynamics, steel phase change, and the witnesses when unified and tested with the evidence tell us it was a demolition.
@911InvestigationVids nothing that isn't propelled can fall faster than gravity, (if a plane nose dives into the ground it will fall faster than gravity) it is against newton's law, but it does prove that the building fell slower than gravity.
@trolloftheplanetexposed There is a portion of the building seen in many other videos of this face, clearly seen here falling faster than the rest of the debris. What is it with you fools? Who are you protecting with your sale of a caveman story and rejection of scientific fact? If you missed the flaws in the script you are very dumb. You are too stupid to unify and test for reality. The south face of the south tower collapses faster than debris falls through air. Period.
@911InvestigationVids the debris that did not fall as fast as the tower was lighter than the weight of the tower so of course it fell faster, thats how physics work.
@911InvestigationVids No..It tells you that it's your opinion it is a demoltion. There is no evidence it was a demolition and the exprets agree it was NOT a demolition.
@Kyles45Angel food for thought, the so. tower had over twice as many floors above its impact zone than the no. tower did, and it fell in less than half the time, i calculated that if either plane hit either tower at the 50th floor that tower would have fell upon impact, and if they hit anywhere below the 50th floor, like say the 10th floor the no. tower would have fell to the side it was hit, and so would have the so. tower, killing a lot more people.
@loosechangeexposed No the tower would not have fallen over on it's side. I have no idea what you are calculating but it's wrong. Did you ever see the size of them towers? They werent skinny buildings they had an acre of space. Thats not something thats gonna topple over like a tree getting cut down.
@Kyles45Angel when the top of the so. tower leaned to the side it was hit it showed that the steel on that side was destroyed by the plane, it leaned over when the steel failed due to the fires weakening it, if the plane hit below the 50th floor the sheer amount of weight would have caused the undestroyed steel to fail right away, it was the amount of weight above each impact zone that dictated when each tower collapsed.
the no. tower had half the wt and took twice as long to fall
@TheFightaz this video is about wtc 7 which had nothing to do with any plane, and the fire department even said they knew it was going to collapse because of the damage and fire, so the govt didn't need explosives in wtc 7 and if you say the firefighters knew it was going to fall because of explosives then call the authorities because they are guilty of murder
@loosechangeexposed panicked people knew it was going to fall because of the explosives that detonated, they even said it. Some people will never wake up, its ok.
@TheFightaz if the firefighters knew it would fall because of explosives wouldn't they have told the FEDS? they lost many friends and brothers that day, no one ever reported anything that doesn't prove what happened that day, except truthers and they need to sell books and videos.
@loosechangeexposed lets not act like we were born yesterday. the thousands of witnesses that reported multiple explosions is all we need to connect the dots. the truth is not always pretty, remember that
@TheFightaz how many people were at the scene? many people heard the plane explode when it hit the so. tower, truthers try to make it look like they all heard different explosions when many of them are talking about the same one.
in a controlled demolition all the explosives are in a sequence, when 1 goes off the rest follow, and why would they set off any explosives before they needed to set of the ones that actually dropped the buildings?
@loosechangeexposed hundreds if not thousands were at the scene. there were "multiple explosions" right before the collapses. well if you dont know the answers then demand them from the government.
@TheFightaz truthers take parts of witness interviews and edit them to look like what they need, they may have talked to 10 people each said things like "i heard an explosion" but that is the only part of the interview they use, while all 10 could be talking about the plane exploding, they make it look like 10 different explosions.
none of the sounds except the 2 planes were ever identified as being from explosives, the towers were falling apart.
just before the so. tower fell the top fe;; to the side that was hit by the plane, showing that the plane did penetrate the core, many people heard BOOM when that happened that could sound like an explosion, the same way a car backfire can be mistaken for a gunshot. when the top fell over other things inside were also falling apart and making noises that sounded like explosions.
we know from the evidence that the planes penetrated the cores, so explain how the "explosives" did not get set off by the planes impacts. you can't cuz there were no explosives planted, truthers say the fires could not have melted the steel, but when you look at all the facts you can see they are not telling you the reality.
they twist things into what they need to get you to believe them.
the planes destroyed much of the steel upon impact, the fires weakened (not melted) the undestroyed steel to the point that the weight above each impact zone caused structural failure and collapses, this is why the so. tower fell 1st, more weight less weakening to the undestroyed steel.
my video "sept 11th the smoking gun" exposes a truther for covering up all the facts.
@TheFightaz my video "sept 11th the smoking gun" exposes truther jason bermis in a cover up, it is further proof that the conspiracy theory movement is based on hearsay, rumors, speculations, and opinions. not facts or proof, they wrote books and made videos for the money and my videos expose them for that, and none of my videos can be proven wrong, you have been lied to by them and i feel sorry for you if you keep believing them when you know they don't have the truth.
@loosechangeexposed processed, useless, biased, polished and fabricated footage. wander why many people dont know three buildings fell. what hit the pentagon then ? not a plane
@TheFightaz i read the video discription and didn't have time to watch the video but based on what i read i can tell you i agree with a new investigation, here's is what i don't agree with, i don't think the govt should have rushed the parts they did, me referring videos saves much typing. there are a few videos that tell the side that is kept quiet by truthers. these are all my videos and can be found in my uploads.
before i refer the videos i want to know one thing, why don't the people in the truth movement pool their money to pay for a new investigation? 2 reasons, 1 because they know that no new evidence will be found supporting their claims because they would have already found it, so when their investigators don't find any new evidence they will look stupid so why waste their money? 2 if and when the govt has a new one.
if there is a new investigation and when they don't find any new evidence truthers will be able to say they were paid off by the people who hired them, my research found proof that it was not an inside job and also that the truth movement twists what they tell you into what they need to get you to believe them, they only have hearsay, rumors, speculations, and opinions. not facts or proof, the following videos prove that.
this video shows the damage to wtc 7 by the collapse of the towers, it also has the fdny saying that they knew the building would fall due to that damage, so if it was a planned demo and the fdny knew it would fall that would mean they were in on it so why would they send so many to die?
my other videos "exposing the 9/11 truth" shows how a truther is trying to make it look like a bomb hit the lobby before the plane
@loosechangeexposed I like your vids bro. I think it is funny that the young guy is like "I don't care what kind of fucking experience he has, he is part of the system", things like that make me laugh! Ad Hominem using bunch of idiots if you ask me. Iv got one guy who is telling me that office furniture piled on one side would not be hot enough to weaken the steel, and all I can do is sit there and laugh even more!
@BaldurdashWoW that young guy is dylan avery, he made the video series loose change, he said he doesn't give a fuck about the guys 30 years experence because that was all he could come up with, notice he didn't explain how the guys experence did not prove himself wrong? dylan takes what he finds and makes it look like what he needs, my video "sept 11th the smoking gun" is the perfect example of that. check it out.
My thoughts on how concrete can explode and crumble like it did in WTC 1 & 2. Concrete expands and contracts with heat and cold. Take a look at your average concrete highway. It cracks under many cycles of warm and cold. Granted there's the weight of vehicles on it, but so does concrete in a building. Weight, that is. So you get a fire in these buildings that is allowed to burn unattended, and it begins to wear on the concrete and steel structure. And under the weight, it collapses.
@ThrashTillDeath73 i see what you are saying about the heat expanding concrete, but any concrete you hit with a heavy object such as a sledge hammer will break, and the weight of the towers did do that. and it wasn't so much the steel that failed it was more like the bolts and connectors that held the steel togeather that gave way.
@dangerouslytalented most of the people who believe them will repeat what they heard like "thousands of witnesses heard explosions" while all but the 2 planes exploding are unidentified sounds and they ignore the fact that there is video evidence of how widespread the fallout of the towers was and that every wtc building was destroyed because of it yet they can't admit wtc 7 could have also been destroyed by the collapses and have no evidence of controlled demolition.
@loosechangeexposed ... and they will often substitute the word "bombs" or "explosives" for "explosions". Explosions could happen for thousands of different reasons, overloaded transformers, overheated compressed air tanks, certain substances catching fire, or internal collapses can all either cause or resemble explosions.
It's one thing to point your finger and say "that doesn't make sense",or,"That never happened before".
It's ANOTHER-THING to dismiss things that can be proven by pictures,video,science and witnesses.
BUT it's down right crazy to think controlled demolition brought down the towers.
Crazy for many reasons, the top being, thousands of people were involved in the cleanup alone,hundreds in recycling the steel/metals, all would have to be "in on it" or blind to what demo blasts look like.
@Prospecting008 the only people who say fire brought down any buildings on 9/11 are truthers, they are not telling all the facts, the top of the so. tower leaned to the side it was hit indicating that the plane penetrated the core, it wasn't just fire, it was the steel that was destroyed by the impacts, the fires weakening the undestroyed steel and the weight above each impact zone that caused the collapses.
now that you have the facts, you know you were lied to.
@Prospecting008 but you are forgetting about all the facts, it was the initial damage by the planes, the fires weakening the undestroyed steel and the weight above the impact zones that contributed in the collapses of the towers, my video "how the towers fell" goes into all the details.
@Prospecting008 Actually bro, you are wrong, fire has brought down said buildings. You are lying if you say so even after websites have shown that it has happened before!
Great video man. I don't know why people simply refuse to believe what their own lying eyes see. My theory is that Conspiracy Theorist have wildly crazy creative minds that conjure up alternative explanations for things that their brain says are "unbelievable." And then when they get some shred of POSSIBLE evidence to support their crackpot theory, they stop there without then questioning whether or not their evidence is actually true. Like for instance Epstein's statement of "Pull It".
@ThrashTillDeath73 actually his name is silverstein. funny you made that mistake cuz the guy who played epstein on t.v. died yesterday. and they did the same thing with bush saying he had seen the plane hit the no. tower, his exact words were "i saw a plane hit the tower" translation "i saw that a plane had hit the tower on t.v."
its the 1 time bush mispoke that they use as if he said what he meant correctly.
how many comedians make fun of the way bush talks? alot.
@loosechangeexposed Whoops, sorry, yes, Silverstein. Ironically, I've been going 'round and 'round with a old friend of mine on Facebook on 9/11 and other conspiracies. And about WTC7 after I saw your upload here. From what I gather is that conspiracy theorists, like my friend, just have a hard time believing in things as they are. Ironically, he doesn't see a threat from Iran. He's also a Ron Paul supporter. 2 & 2 makes?
Good job, the sooner people realize conspiracy theorists don't use facts the better. All your videos use cold hard facts, not "holograms" or other lies conspiracy theorists make
@Mikester1200 conspiracy theorists only use what they can make look like they are right, they say thousands (which is an over statement) of people said they heard explosions, while the only 2 sounds ever identified as explosions were the 2 planes exploding, other noises could have been the towers falling apart or an elevator falling, they dismiss evidence that shows them to be wrong. check out my video "sept 11th the smoking gun" to see a truther being exposed in a cover up.
I think it is good to discuss all the facts and ask questions to figure this out.
There is no Pentagon Video where you can clearly see the Boeing going in and the Final Nist Report didn`t test the debris for explosives.
The Media added a few different plane images..some people on the street who gave a live interview said the 2nd plane was a grey/black plane without windows or emblems on it..so it is very strange for me, though i live in Europe and don`t have nothing to do with the US.
SuperYesyesyo 1 day ago
@SuperYesyesyo i explain the pentagon in my video "loose change answer number 053" using clues evidence and facts, the plane flew by the camera at 777 fps, the footage is from servalence cam not a video cam.
like in bank footage of a robbery the guy is there then 5 feet over in the next frame the frames are slower and at the pentagon (same type of camera) the plane flew by so fast it flew by while the shutter was closed only opened to catch a glimpse.
cont next post
loosechangeexposed 16 hours ago
@loosechangeexposed cont from prev post
they didn't need to test for explosives cuz the investigation showed it was the planes that brought down the towers, my video "how the towers fell" explains it all.
using what people said they think they saw is the entire backbone of the conspiracy theory movement. at what angle and for how long did those people see the plane? (was the sun in their view?) peoples eyes do play tricks sometimes.
loosechangeexposed 16 hours ago
@loosechangeexposed Okay.
TheMostAwesomeMan242 5 days ago
loosechangeexposed I only have one question for you. If fire engineering magazine said that no building prior to 911 has ever collapsed from fire then how does wtc 7 come down in 10 seconds when there was no major damage to the building? Also why if you ask people about building 7 most people don't know what the hell your talking about?
wratchet45 6 days ago
@wratchet45 my video "how the towers fell" explains how the planes destroyed the towers, this video has the FDNY saying that they expected wtc 7 to fall due to the damage and fires, after hours of fires burning and weakening the structure it could no longer support the weight of 47 stories and fell, that magazine may have said no building ever fell due to fire before but did they mention the damage the FDNY did?
google "ground zero then and now" to see the extent of the destruction.
loosechangeexposed 6 days ago
Awesome video!!! What's the name of the movie you used? I want to see it!!!
TheMostAwesomeMan242 6 days ago
@TheMostAwesomeMan242 i'm not sure a friend sent it to me for my channel he got it from somewhere else.
loosechangeexposed 5 days ago
@TheMostAwesomeMan242 its the BBC Conspirarcy files.....
chunkyboy100 4 days ago
@chunkyboy100 the BBC has good videos but their channel is not available to me here in America, some of their videos are in my favorites and playlists.
loosechangeexposed 3 days ago
video(dot)google(dot)com/videoplay?docid=3606159506368831731 << also this man doesn't believe in the maneuvers pulled to hit the towers.. We're bat shit crazy conspiracy theorists because we don't believe amateur pilots over took 4 planes and missed their ONE target that happened to be the white house while Drills for that exact same event were taking place? I must be completely delusional and need to watch more CNN I guess..
JMcMac21 1 week ago
@JMcMac21 every claim that the conspiracy theory movement has is based on what they get from other people, it's the same things the ole' "earth is flat" scare was based on, it's all hearsay, rumors, speculations, and opinions, not facts, evidence or proof.
you said "this man doesn't believe in the maneuvers pulled to hit the towers" so you are basing your beliefs on anothers beliefs
no one proved the white house was a target, that is speculitive.
why sidestep the subject of this video?
loosechangeexposed 1 week ago
@loosechangeexposed 3 questions.
1. Does any of your videos explain why the government stonewalled 9/11 investigations for 2 months?
2. All the steel, as the buildings structural material and most important evidence to preserve to know what happened to it, and how it disintegrated, was quickly swept and sent to china for recycling at an astonishing rate of 400 truckloads a day. Why?
3. All these trucks were on the site that same morning, not long after the collapse. How?
Tripnotik25 5 days ago
@Tripnotik25 1) where is the proof that they did? i bet you heard that from other people, the FBI was on the scene that morning starting the investigation, they found out who got on the planes then found out they went to our flight schools, they did an investigation.
2) we knew how the WTC was destroyed so there was no need to inspect any of the steel, it was the planes that brought down the towers, my video "how the towers fell" explains the details.
con't next post.
loosechangeexposed 5 days ago
@loosechangeexposed cont from prev post
3) where did you hear that the trucks were there that soon? from someone who is trying to make it look like a cover up, well there is no proof of that and you have no evidence backing up that claim, however i do have proof that a truther is covering up all the details and the facts to make it look like an inside job, my video "sept 11th the smoking gun" exposes him as a fraud.
you have nothing but hopes and wishes.
loosechangeexposed 5 days ago
@loosechangeexposed About trucks, again, i don't feed off "loose change", as i never even seen it. And i can sense you try to imply that all i know comes from them, it doesn't. Just some of the articles i had on favorites with all this were a few years old, and they were taken off meanwhile, or otherwise i would link you everything.
Even firemen had reported "a bunch of trucks" there that same morning. How did this company managed that? were they expecting the occurrence?
Tripnotik25 5 days ago
@Tripnotik25 every conspiracy theory group make the same claims and they all refer people to each other as for the trucks send me a link in a message, if they were there that does not prove the drivers or owners knew it was going to happen, that would just increase the number of thousands of people that would have needed to be involved.
new jersey is just accross the river and has more people per capita than any other state which means lots of businesses including trucking companies
loosechangeexposed 4 days ago
@JMcMac21 lets say they hit the white house but not the pentagon... you would be sitting here saying the same thing about the pentagon..... sigh.... ppl just need conspiracy.
What has Dan Brown done to this world :(
ExoSaint 1 week ago
watch?v=Kanj8gx4E1M <<these people say there was a secondary explosion in the 1st tower after it was already hit.. I know it's loose change and I never reference from there but I believe this is pretty eligible evidence... explain?
JMcMac21 2 weeks ago
@JMcMac21 all the reports were coming in as it was happening, they were reporting what other witnesses were saying about a second explosion, being inside the north tower they didn't know right away that it was the south tower that got hit by the plane,
if you listen to the 1st firefighter at 23 seconds he said seven eight, but the screen reads floors 7 and 8 (loose change trick) trying to make it look like 2 explosions when it was only 1.
cont next post
loosechangeexposed 2 weeks ago
@loosechangeexposed cont from prev post
in stressful situations the military, P.D. and firedept say #'s like 78 one at a time over the radio so they are understood better, 78 might sound like seventeen 8 or 267 might sound like 257 so they say 2 6 7 at 42 seconds of that video the firefighter is talking about the top of the tower hitting the impact zone which sounded like a loud explosion he followed up by saying major collapse, that was the so. tower collapse.
cont next post
loosechangeexposed 2 weeks ago
@loosechangeexposed cont from prev post
at 52 seconds it cuts to a firefighter talking about the lobby of the no. tower he said "it looked as though" truthers use a lot of it "sounded like" and "it was as if" and try to make opinions and speculations into fact, my video "loose change answer number 118 with witness" explains the damage to the lobby.
cont next post
loosechangeexposed 2 weeks ago
@loosechangeexposed cont from prev post
i have many videos with answers, they can all be found in my uploads.
"WTC 7 the hidden truth" shows proof that truthers don't want you to see.
"how the towers fell" explains exactly how the planes took down the towers and that planted devices would not have survived the impacts.
my video "sept 11th the smoking gun" exposes jason bermis (the guy who narrated the 1st half of loose change 2nd edit) in a cover up.
loosechangeexposed 2 weeks ago
@loosechangeexposed lol, nice trick you trying to pull. i listened to him and he said "floors 7 and 8, 7,8." just like the screen reads.. i listened to it a few times closely, even slowed down, and he said 7 AND 8 (not 78) also if hes inside or at the base getting witnesses and their confessions, they wouldn't be confessions of the plane hitting the 78th floor, that also wouldn't explain how they have ppl covered in dust.
LFOD4US 1 week ago
@LFOD4US if you listened to the firefighter he said "hey, i got ah an eyewitness who said there was an explosion on floor seven eight, seven eight" he said there was "AN" explosion not 2 explosions, he said "FLOOR" not floors.
when did the 7th and 8th floors of either tower explode? where is any evidence of that happening? i think that if that happened it would have made headlines, that firefighter was talking about the 78th floor, listen to the audio again. he says floor 7-8.
loosechangeexposed 1 week ago
@loosechangeexposed Headlines lol. you've missed the point we're trying to get through to you. The government lies and the mainstream media sells their lies. watch?v=vOcFENODr1U&feature=related < this man among many others had seen secondary explosions.. How about basing your research off of something else rather than some kids documentary.
JMcMac21 1 week ago
@JMcMac21 so where is the proof that they were behind 9/11? when the top of the so. tower fell over to the side it was hit just before it collapsed is proof that the plane penetrated the core (the no. tower suffered the same type of damage) why didn't the impacts distrupt the explosives which needed to be attached directly to the steel in order to destroy it, cuz there was no explosives, my video "how the towers fell" explains all the details of the collapses, and can't be proven wrong
loosechangeexposed 1 week ago
How is shrugging off decades expertise evidence of a conspiracy, Dylan??? With an attitude like that, it's no wonder they're so quick to able to trample on the mass murder of innocents.
MrSkunkwork100 3 weeks ago
Nigro makes the key point there at 2:53. They don't need permission from Larry Silverstein; Larry Silverstein didn't have the authority to tell anyone anything. That's the part that "truth"ers like to forget.
MrSkunkwork100 3 weeks ago
@MrSkunkwork100 its like the cops needing the permission of the homeowner to shoot a home invader. same thing they are in charge cuz they know what the right thing to do is.
loosechangeexposed 3 weeks ago
@loosechangeexposed Yeah, exactly. If the cops didn't have authority, we wouldn't call on them to handle the matter. "Truth"er anti-logic is at work at it's finest in their claims.
MrSkunkwork100 3 weeks ago
@MrSkunkwork100 i figured out something that any physist, scientist, engineer, or elementry school student can understand.
the south tower had about twice the weight above its impact zone as the north tower did and it fell in about half the time.
north tower about 14 floors, south tower about 32 floors.
north tower fell in 103 minutes, south tower fell in 56 minutes.
it took twice as long to weaken the undestroyed steel in the north tower cuz it had half the weight.
loosechangeexposed 3 weeks ago
@lcexposed Yes, that's true. What happened in the North tower, is that it was struck more head-on. The impact was more centered than in the South Tower. The North tower collapsed more as a result of the fires, whereas the South Tower (being struck lower as you point out) collapsed more as a result of the plane impact damage. Aircraft impact damage was more detrimental in the South tower than it was in the North tower, because of the off-center impact and the debris being concentrated in 1 area.
MrSkunkwork100 3 weeks ago
@MrSkunkwork100 i think my video "how the towers fell" explains how and why the towers collapsed
loosechangeexposed 3 weeks ago
@loosechangeexposed Also, the there was a difference in speed at impact between the two buildings: American Airlines flt. 11, was said to be travelling at mid-400's when it impacted the North Tower, while United Airlines, flt. 175 was said to have been travelling at 500+ mph. at impact. "Truth"ers try to ignore those facts as well.
MrSkunkwork100 3 weeks ago
@MrSkunkwork100 yes, even Einstien would do all the calculations and still not know how the explosives or incinerary devices survived the planes impacts, explosions, static electricity, and severed buildings electrical wiring, and didnt get set off and drop the towers upon impact.
if there was 5% more of the no. towers steel that survived then the so. it would have taken longer to weaken
loosechangeexposed 3 weeks ago
@loosechangeexposed That's true. "Truth"ers can't comprehend that, though.
As far as your video "how the towers fell" goes: I think you're right, that is the video that explains it.
MrSkunkwork100 3 weeks ago
0:13 there is a piece of debris that falls FASTER than gravity!!!!!! Expose that, troll.
After 100 excuses, explainations, improbabilities, and impossiblities your unified odds become beyond a trillion to one.
When you see 1/4 mile high buildings blast into dust to grade in less than 11 seconds you should test for demolition. The laws of motion, fire chemistry, thermodynamics, steel phase change, and the witnesses when unified and tested with the evidence tell us it was a demolition.
911InvestigationVids 1 month ago
@911InvestigationVids nothing that isn't propelled can fall faster than gravity, (if a plane nose dives into the ground it will fall faster than gravity) it is against newton's law, but it does prove that the building fell slower than gravity.
loosechangeexposed 1 month ago
@trolloftheplanetexposed There is a portion of the building seen in many other videos of this face, clearly seen here falling faster than the rest of the debris. What is it with you fools? Who are you protecting with your sale of a caveman story and rejection of scientific fact? If you missed the flaws in the script you are very dumb. You are too stupid to unify and test for reality. The south face of the south tower collapses faster than debris falls through air. Period.
911InvestigationVids 1 month ago
@911InvestigationVids the debris that did not fall as fast as the tower was lighter than the weight of the tower so of course it fell faster, thats how physics work.
loosechangeexposed 4 weeks ago
@911InvestigationVids No..It tells you that it's your opinion it is a demoltion. There is no evidence it was a demolition and the exprets agree it was NOT a demolition.
Kyles45Angel 1 month ago
@Kyles45Angel food for thought, the so. tower had over twice as many floors above its impact zone than the no. tower did, and it fell in less than half the time, i calculated that if either plane hit either tower at the 50th floor that tower would have fell upon impact, and if they hit anywhere below the 50th floor, like say the 10th floor the no. tower would have fell to the side it was hit, and so would have the so. tower, killing a lot more people.
loosechangeexposed 4 weeks ago
@loosechangeexposed No the tower would not have fallen over on it's side. I have no idea what you are calculating but it's wrong. Did you ever see the size of them towers? They werent skinny buildings they had an acre of space. Thats not something thats gonna topple over like a tree getting cut down.
Kyles45Angel 2 weeks ago
@Kyles45Angel when the top of the so. tower leaned to the side it was hit it showed that the steel on that side was destroyed by the plane, it leaned over when the steel failed due to the fires weakening it, if the plane hit below the 50th floor the sheer amount of weight would have caused the undestroyed steel to fail right away, it was the amount of weight above each impact zone that dictated when each tower collapsed.
the no. tower had half the wt and took twice as long to fall
loosechangeexposed 2 weeks ago
@Kyles45Angel 400 year old scientific law never disproven is 'opinion' to an idiot.
911InvestigationVids 4 weeks ago
controlled demolitions, and military planes.
TheFightaz 1 month ago
@TheFightaz this video is about wtc 7 which had nothing to do with any plane, and the fire department even said they knew it was going to collapse because of the damage and fire, so the govt didn't need explosives in wtc 7 and if you say the firefighters knew it was going to fall because of explosives then call the authorities because they are guilty of murder
loosechangeexposed 1 month ago
@loosechangeexposed panicked people knew it was going to fall because of the explosives that detonated, they even said it. Some people will never wake up, its ok.
TheFightaz 1 month ago
@TheFightaz if the firefighters knew it would fall because of explosives wouldn't they have told the FEDS? they lost many friends and brothers that day, no one ever reported anything that doesn't prove what happened that day, except truthers and they need to sell books and videos.
loosechangeexposed 1 month ago
@loosechangeexposed lets not act like we were born yesterday. the thousands of witnesses that reported multiple explosions is all we need to connect the dots. the truth is not always pretty, remember that
TheFightaz 1 month ago
@TheFightaz how many people were at the scene? many people heard the plane explode when it hit the so. tower, truthers try to make it look like they all heard different explosions when many of them are talking about the same one.
in a controlled demolition all the explosives are in a sequence, when 1 goes off the rest follow, and why would they set off any explosives before they needed to set of the ones that actually dropped the buildings?
loosechangeexposed 1 month ago
@loosechangeexposed hundreds if not thousands were at the scene. there were "multiple explosions" right before the collapses. well if you dont know the answers then demand them from the government.
TheFightaz 1 month ago
@TheFightaz truthers take parts of witness interviews and edit them to look like what they need, they may have talked to 10 people each said things like "i heard an explosion" but that is the only part of the interview they use, while all 10 could be talking about the plane exploding, they make it look like 10 different explosions.
none of the sounds except the 2 planes were ever identified as being from explosives, the towers were falling apart.
cont next post.
loosechangeexposed 1 month ago
@loosechangeexposed cont from prev post
just before the so. tower fell the top fe;; to the side that was hit by the plane, showing that the plane did penetrate the core, many people heard BOOM when that happened that could sound like an explosion, the same way a car backfire can be mistaken for a gunshot. when the top fell over other things inside were also falling apart and making noises that sounded like explosions.
cont next post
loosechangeexposed 1 month ago
@loosechangeexposed cont from prev post
we know from the evidence that the planes penetrated the cores, so explain how the "explosives" did not get set off by the planes impacts. you can't cuz there were no explosives planted, truthers say the fires could not have melted the steel, but when you look at all the facts you can see they are not telling you the reality.
they twist things into what they need to get you to believe them.
cont next post
loosechangeexposed 1 month ago
@loosechangeexposed cont from prev post
here is what they will never tell you
the planes destroyed much of the steel upon impact, the fires weakened (not melted) the undestroyed steel to the point that the weight above each impact zone caused structural failure and collapses, this is why the so. tower fell 1st, more weight less weakening to the undestroyed steel.
my video "sept 11th the smoking gun" exposes a truther for covering up all the facts.
i win again
loosechangeexposed 1 month ago
@loosechangeexposed dedicate a weekend to do some homework, thank you
TheFightaz 1 month ago
@TheFightaz i started doing homework on this subject feb 22 2009.
loosechangeexposed 2 weeks ago
@loosechangeexposed well good, join the movement for truth
TheFightaz 2 weeks ago
@TheFightaz my video "sept 11th the smoking gun" exposes truther jason bermis in a cover up, it is further proof that the conspiracy theory movement is based on hearsay, rumors, speculations, and opinions. not facts or proof, they wrote books and made videos for the money and my videos expose them for that, and none of my videos can be proven wrong, you have been lied to by them and i feel sorry for you if you keep believing them when you know they don't have the truth.
loosechangeexposed 2 weeks ago
@loosechangeexposed processed, useless, biased, polished and fabricated footage. wander why many people dont know three buildings fell. what hit the pentagon then ? not a plane
TheFightaz 2 weeks ago
@TheFightaz i explain the pentagon in my video "loose change answer number 053"
loosechangeexposed 2 weeks ago
@loosechangeexposed 9/11 Ground Zero NYC: A Decade Later
TheFightaz 2 weeks ago
@TheFightaz i read the video discription and didn't have time to watch the video but based on what i read i can tell you i agree with a new investigation, here's is what i don't agree with, i don't think the govt should have rushed the parts they did, me referring videos saves much typing. there are a few videos that tell the side that is kept quiet by truthers. these are all my videos and can be found in my uploads.
cont next post
loosechangeexposed 2 weeks ago
@loosechangeexposed cont from prev post.
before i refer the videos i want to know one thing, why don't the people in the truth movement pool their money to pay for a new investigation? 2 reasons, 1 because they know that no new evidence will be found supporting their claims because they would have already found it, so when their investigators don't find any new evidence they will look stupid so why waste their money? 2 if and when the govt has a new one.
cont next post
loosechangeexposed 2 weeks ago
@loosechangeexposed cont from prev post
if there is a new investigation and when they don't find any new evidence truthers will be able to say they were paid off by the people who hired them, my research found proof that it was not an inside job and also that the truth movement twists what they tell you into what they need to get you to believe them, they only have hearsay, rumors, speculations, and opinions. not facts or proof, the following videos prove that.
cont next post
loosechangeexposed 2 weeks ago
@loosechangeexposed cont from prev post
this video shows the damage to wtc 7 by the collapse of the towers, it also has the fdny saying that they knew the building would fall due to that damage, so if it was a planned demo and the fdny knew it would fall that would mean they were in on it so why would they send so many to die?
my other videos "exposing the 9/11 truth" shows how a truther is trying to make it look like a bomb hit the lobby before the plane
cont next post
loosechangeexposed 2 weeks ago
@loosechangeexposed cont from prev post
"sept 11th the smoking gun" shows a truther hiding evidence and all the facts in order to make it look like what he needs.
"how the towers fell" explains how the planes destroyed the towers and explosives were not possible.
"9/11 fires were starved for oxygen" explains how the fires were fed plenty of oxygen.
"evidence that steel can be weakened by a jet fuel fire" shows that the fires reached 2000 deg, hot enough to weaken the steel.
loosechangeexposed 2 weeks ago
What hit the pentagon then???
xBEAMER231 1 month ago
@xBEAMER231 i explain the pentagon in my video "loose change answer number 053"
loosechangeexposed 1 month ago
@loosechangeexposed I like your vids bro. I think it is funny that the young guy is like "I don't care what kind of fucking experience he has, he is part of the system", things like that make me laugh! Ad Hominem using bunch of idiots if you ask me. Iv got one guy who is telling me that office furniture piled on one side would not be hot enough to weaken the steel, and all I can do is sit there and laugh even more!
BaldurdashWoW 1 month ago
@BaldurdashWoW that young guy is dylan avery, he made the video series loose change, he said he doesn't give a fuck about the guys 30 years experence because that was all he could come up with, notice he didn't explain how the guys experence did not prove himself wrong? dylan takes what he finds and makes it look like what he needs, my video "sept 11th the smoking gun" is the perfect example of that. check it out.
loosechangeexposed 1 month ago
My thoughts on how concrete can explode and crumble like it did in WTC 1 & 2. Concrete expands and contracts with heat and cold. Take a look at your average concrete highway. It cracks under many cycles of warm and cold. Granted there's the weight of vehicles on it, but so does concrete in a building. Weight, that is. So you get a fire in these buildings that is allowed to burn unattended, and it begins to wear on the concrete and steel structure. And under the weight, it collapses.
ThrashTillDeath73 1 month ago
@ThrashTillDeath73 i see what you are saying about the heat expanding concrete, but any concrete you hit with a heavy object such as a sledge hammer will break, and the weight of the towers did do that. and it wasn't so much the steel that failed it was more like the bolts and connectors that held the steel togeather that gave way.
loosechangeexposed 1 month ago
The truthers won't tell you any theories anymore, because they know that anybody with a brain can pick apart their ideas.
dangerouslytalented 1 month ago
@dangerouslytalented most of the people who believe them will repeat what they heard like "thousands of witnesses heard explosions" while all but the 2 planes exploding are unidentified sounds and they ignore the fact that there is video evidence of how widespread the fallout of the towers was and that every wtc building was destroyed because of it yet they can't admit wtc 7 could have also been destroyed by the collapses and have no evidence of controlled demolition.
loosechangeexposed 1 month ago
@loosechangeexposed ... and they will often substitute the word "bombs" or "explosives" for "explosions". Explosions could happen for thousands of different reasons, overloaded transformers, overheated compressed air tanks, certain substances catching fire, or internal collapses can all either cause or resemble explosions.
dangerouslytalented 1 month ago
It's one thing to point your finger and say "that doesn't make sense",or,"That never happened before".
It's ANOTHER-THING to dismiss things that can be proven by pictures,video,science and witnesses.
BUT it's down right crazy to think controlled demolition brought down the towers.
Crazy for many reasons, the top being, thousands of people were involved in the cleanup alone,hundreds in recycling the steel/metals, all would have to be "in on it" or blind to what demo blasts look like.
Connected2U2 1 month ago in playlist More videos from loosechangeexposed
Sorry, no fire has ever brought down a steel frame building. Thats why they use steel .....
Prospecting008 1 month ago
@Prospecting008 the only people who say fire brought down any buildings on 9/11 are truthers, they are not telling all the facts, the top of the so. tower leaned to the side it was hit indicating that the plane penetrated the core, it wasn't just fire, it was the steel that was destroyed by the impacts, the fires weakening the undestroyed steel and the weight above each impact zone that caused the collapses.
now that you have the facts, you know you were lied to.
loosechangeexposed 1 month ago
@Prospecting008 but you are forgetting about all the facts, it was the initial damage by the planes, the fires weakening the undestroyed steel and the weight above the impact zones that contributed in the collapses of the towers, my video "how the towers fell" goes into all the details.
loosechangeexposed 1 month ago
@Prospecting008 Actually bro, you are wrong, fire has brought down said buildings. You are lying if you say so even after websites have shown that it has happened before!
BaldurdashWoW 1 month ago
Great video man. I don't know why people simply refuse to believe what their own lying eyes see. My theory is that Conspiracy Theorist have wildly crazy creative minds that conjure up alternative explanations for things that their brain says are "unbelievable." And then when they get some shred of POSSIBLE evidence to support their crackpot theory, they stop there without then questioning whether or not their evidence is actually true. Like for instance Epstein's statement of "Pull It".
ThrashTillDeath73 1 month ago
@ThrashTillDeath73 actually his name is silverstein. funny you made that mistake cuz the guy who played epstein on t.v. died yesterday. and they did the same thing with bush saying he had seen the plane hit the no. tower, his exact words were "i saw a plane hit the tower" translation "i saw that a plane had hit the tower on t.v."
its the 1 time bush mispoke that they use as if he said what he meant correctly.
how many comedians make fun of the way bush talks? alot.
loosechangeexposed 1 month ago
@loosechangeexposed Whoops, sorry, yes, Silverstein. Ironically, I've been going 'round and 'round with a old friend of mine on Facebook on 9/11 and other conspiracies. And about WTC7 after I saw your upload here. From what I gather is that conspiracy theorists, like my friend, just have a hard time believing in things as they are. Ironically, he doesn't see a threat from Iran. He's also a Ron Paul supporter. 2 & 2 makes?
ThrashTillDeath73 1 month ago
Good job, the sooner people realize conspiracy theorists don't use facts the better. All your videos use cold hard facts, not "holograms" or other lies conspiracy theorists make
Mikester1200 1 month ago
@Mikester1200 conspiracy theorists only use what they can make look like they are right, they say thousands (which is an over statement) of people said they heard explosions, while the only 2 sounds ever identified as explosions were the 2 planes exploding, other noises could have been the towers falling apart or an elevator falling, they dismiss evidence that shows them to be wrong. check out my video "sept 11th the smoking gun" to see a truther being exposed in a cover up.
loosechangeexposed 1 month ago