9/11: Controlled Demolition Comparison

Compares the destruction of the World Trade Center buildings (North and South Towers and Building 7) with controlled demolitions. Uses voice-overs of Peter Jennings and Richard Gage of "Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth."

I encourage people to watch 9/11: Blueprint for Truth on youtube. It is a two hour scientific presentation by Richard Gage, founder of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth. It is impossible to provide evidence beyond a reasonable doubt in a three minute video like mine, and I don't claim to do so. I merely draw a comparison and ask people to engage in discussion about it. If you want more evidence for controlled demolition, I would watch this:

9/11: Blueprint for Truth
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b74nae...

• Category

  Nonprofits & Activism

[Ryu Hayabusa]

You are the clear definition of brainwashed. Why do you believe every lie they feed you on TV? Do your research then give me your facts with evidence.

[Ryu Hayabusa]

Fine if you believe it was the planes, by all means dude believe what you want to believe, it's a free country. You can't say this wasn't a planned demolition as many eye witnesses claimed they heard bomb blast from the bottom of the Twin Towers. I heard they are trying to re-build the Twin Towers, I guess they want to perform another 9/11. And this time blame it on the Russians or on Iran. Let's not forget that the CIA created Osama and Al-Qaeda and the fact that all Al-Qaeda members were Jews.

[7God7is7Good]

9-11 was def. planned. The planes were crashed into the towers on purpose to help cover up the explosives going off inside.

[hgfbob]

NO supporting evidence for the OFFICIAL STORY....

UNCHANGEABLE science that contradicts official HYPOTHESIZED claims...

here is the reason....9/11 Conspiracy Solved: Names, Connections, & Details Exposed!

watch?v=n_fp5kaVYhk&feature=yo­utu.be

[UniversalExpanse]

ahh thanks for those helpful comments, its good to know how it all works and what happened

[hgfbob]

"it lands on the next floor'

the floors hold NO load bearing from the building....it's the vertical support that needs to fail, NOT the floors.

there are NO floors within the core to act as a 'mechanism'.

columns were a straight shot from the bedrock to the hat truss.....and NO supporting evidence any failed from these FIRES PRESENT to allow collapse to occur.

also, WE SEE the debris being ejected in ALL directions....NOT possible from asymmetrical damage.

NOT adding to the dynamic weight!

[hgfbob]

btw..zero..accelerants do NOT explode.

so how does one officially claim YEARS After scientific investigation "NO explosives or accelerants were used", when the SCIENTIFIC investigation NEVER tested?

"NIST did not test for the residue from explosives or accelerants" wtc. nist. gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_200­6. htm

Presenting a claim within a scientific context by using NO actual experiment, testing or INVESTIGATION to validate the claim, is called BULLSHIT!

no matter WHO says it.

[hgfbob]

"I love how"

there is NO FIRE as claimed to do the work of REMOVING vertical support so collapse can ensue.

I love it how MORONS like you can ONLY understand ...'moving pictures'.

Both Chandler and NIST agree that the top of building reaches total free-fall for approx 2.5 Sec (NIST WTC7 fig 3-15). Regardless of how it achieved free fall, H.S. Physics tells you a free falling mass can do no work. Plus any constant acceleration, no jolts, means apparent weight is less than static weight.

[hgfbob]

First 1/3 of WTC7 collapse, GLOBAL ACCELERATION EQUAL to an object WITHIN a VACUUM, from FIRE we can't see?

NICSTAR 1A 4.3.4] Global Collapse:"The entire building above the buckled column region moved downward in a single unit"

NCSTAR 1A 3.6] "8 stories, traveled between t=1.75s and t=4.0s...constant, downward acceleration. This acceleration was 9.8m/s^2, equivalent to the acceleration of gravity."

NCSTAR1A-3.2]"It is likely that much of the burning took place beyond the views of the windows"