9/11 Coincidences (Part One)
----------------------------
Three Burning Buildings - One Result
----------------------------
How much more evidence do we need before the government and mainstream m...
9/11 Coincidences (Part One) ---------------------------- Three Burning Buildings - One Result ----------------------------
How much more evidence do we need before the government and mainstream media finally talks about this issue? By ignoring this issue, the government and media are just insulting our intelligence. 9/11 witnesses - who include fire crew, police officers and media reporters - heard and saw explosions going off inside the towers, long before they actually fell. Many witnesses reported powerful explosions in the basements of the buildings long before they collapsed. Plus, controlled demolition experts agree that the collapses of the three buildings bear all of the hallmarks of a controlled demolition. For example, we see demolition "squibs" shooting out of the windows of the buildings before they started to collapse. All three buildings collapsed at near freefall speed. Building 7, which wasn't hit by a plane and contained only small scattered fires, came down symmetrically in just 6-seconds. And 6-weeks after 9/11, liquified steel was found under the rubble of all three buildings and the temperature was still in excess of 1500F. Jet-fuel simply cannot burn hot enough to reach that sort of temperature. And many of the steel beams found in the rubble of the three buildings were cut diagonally - in exactly the same way as shaped-charges slice through steel diagonally to bring a building straight down. Sulfur residue was also found on the steel beams. Sulfur used with thermite is called thermate -- which produces even faster results than thermite, reaching temperatures of over 4,000F. We also see red-hot molten steel dripping from the windows of the towers prior to their collapse. We really need to wake up to the facts and ask questions. If we don't, what does that say about us? If you haven't yet heard about this subject, please go to Google and find out about the melting point of steel, and about the maximum temperature that jet-fuel can reach, and about the use of thermate shaped-charges in controlled demolitions. Once you know these facts, you'll realise that those three buildings simply could NOT have collapsed in the way they did UNLESS they were brought down in a controlled demolition.
Like to rate videos and let people know what you think?
Automatically share your ratings, favorites, and more on Facebook, Twitter, and Google Reader with YouTube Autoshare.
Autoshare makes certain YouTube activities public on the services you choose. Select only the services you are comfortable with - like Facebook, Twitter, or Google Reader - to let your friends know what you like on YouTube. You can turn Autoshare off at any time.
Like to share videos with friends?
Automatically share your ratings, favorites, and more on Facebook, Twitter, and Google Reader with YouTube Autoshare.
Autoshare makes certain YouTube activities public on the services you choose. Select only the services you are comfortable with - like Facebook, Twitter, or Google Reader - to let your friends know what you like on YouTube. You can turn Autoshare off at any time.
well where is this so called evidence at? I personally find the evidence that supports an inside job conclusion more convincing as the terrorist hypothesis fails to explain several things such as the reason that 12 of the 19 were foound to be alive and well in the week after the attakcks
I can think of many but you seem to reject them all. That wasn't the question. Just name anything, anything that would convince you that 9/11 was not an inside job.
You see, what I think is that you're totally close minded and have never approached 9/11 scientifically. You started off with your conclusion and took little pieces of evidence and anomalies to support that whilst rejecting the massive amounts of evidence which contradict you.
what type of question is that why dont "YOU" put some fact or evidence fowred instead of trying too just too get me too admit Im wrong ? Im just exspressing a opinion, and I believe that that illminati or some new wold order group were behind jfk ass? why is that so hard too believe? I mean it certainly looks a lot like a plan too change america alot like 9/11
I believe that the same people that constructed 9/11 are the same people that orchestrated jfk........ they did because he actually stood up for people eg... black rights end the federal reserve .... bassically it sent a strong message out too those presidents..".know your place.. shut your face" thats why you havnt seen a press stand up for the people .. just do negative stuff since jfk.. god bless him
everyone seems to have an opinion and everyone seems to be an expert but ppl only no wat u tel them, so let me ask u dis,do u stil fink oswald shot j.f.k?
Autoshare makes certain YouTube activities public on the services you choose. Select only the services you are comfortable with - like Facebook, Twitter, or Google Reader - to let your friends know what you like on YouTube. You can turn Autoshare off at any time.
I personally find the evidence that supports an inside job conclusion more convincing as the terrorist hypothesis fails to explain several things such as the reason that 12 of the 19 were foound to be alive and well in the week after the attakcks
You see, what I think is that you're totally close minded and have never approached 9/11 scientifically. You started off with your conclusion and took little pieces of evidence and anomalies to support that whilst rejecting the massive amounts of evidence which contradict you.
What fact or piece of evidence would it take for you to admit you're wrong?