The evidence that this was a controlled demolition is irrefutable. I dont understand how everyone cant see it. The ejected beams is my fave, yea gravity flung multi tonne beams hundreds of feet away into buildings.

But i really dont think the truth should ever come out, it would bring eternal shame on USA which is not fair to the good 99.9% of the popluation.

9/11 conspiracies have become too much of a meme on the internet. No one will take them seriously no matter how convincing the evidence.

They don't take it serious because it's the internet. But there's also the issue of not having anyone to blame. The 9/11 demolitions were likely perpetrated by well connected individuals representing more than one government.

And then there's denial. People don't want to realize that the military-industrial complex doesn't have any quarrels with killing 3,000 civilians in order to usher in complete control.

Even the canadians that received the steel from the towers had to sign NDAs.

Remember how crisis actors are hired? They also have to usually sign NDAs too. I don't think hired military contractors have to sign NDAs, but it would be their check and future job clearance on the line AFAIK.

I have never ever seen this footage before, and I'm glad it's coming to the surface. In the real world, all it would take it a meeting with one demented person sent by some guy they employed that has high-level of confidence. I don't think it was entirely an insurance money grab, as it may be inferred. He was even planning renovations(?) or a new building to replace those. Maybe it was a "two birds with one stone" instance, in which he couldn't really demo the buildings, someone caught wind of it that also have high-level confidence, and they plotted together and then the rest of the high-level confidence birds conferred.

There has to be some more purpose to the 9/11 Committees(they still exist, right? or is that too a money-grab or seat-warming?), we should take a look into those too as they should've been the ones the evidence had came from in the first place.

Irrefutable...

Ok then, how was it possible for hundreds of demolition workers to work in the three buildings for a few months prior to 9/11, to go completely unnoticed?

How did they manage to hide the 1000's of meters of detonation cord running from column to column? How did they hide all the intrusive work they did, exposing ceilings, drilling and fixing onto beams and columns, without any of the 1000's of employees mentioning a single word of it?

Just think about the pluasibility of that scenario first.

Elevator upgrades. Wireless detonators.

Marvin Bush's company SecurCom kept all prying eyes away. There were reports of heavy equipment moving on some floors and concrete dust all throughout people's offices in the months leading up to Sept 11 2001.

Basic physics tells us that those buildings could never fall the way they did without removing the core columns. Never. Let alone three times in one day.

If you believe the 911 commission that's your business. I bet you are all excited Santa is coming next week too.

Basic physics tells us that those buildings could never fall the way they did without removing the core columns

That is objectively false.

Right. Newton fell asleep under that tree.

I have seen this type of argument before. Where the responder just deny any statement with nothing to back it up and move on. Maybe throw a question instead of an answer after too.

Now where did I see that...?

Oh yeah flat earth people who argue for the sake of argument and don't truly believe what they are saying. Now I remember!

I will refer you to the thousands of architects and engineers who know this was amiss.

Or are they a bunch of scienceless wackos too?

When one makes an assertion, the burden of prove lies with them. So if you think "basic physics" says that it's impossible for steel columns to fail from heat, please... tell me all about that.

I guess you missed the part from gage and crew.

It is a shame people tow the "official" story with little to no grounding in reality.

I understand protecting your world view and all

What gage and crew?

And btw, do you have expertise in the field of fire investigation?

Strawman.

You really love you some logical fallacies.

Tow the line. I ain't gonna.

You official story lovers won't be happy until they make a replica and hit it with a plane. Well your in luck!

Ignore the b thing. Ignore the money trail. Ignore the convenient area of the Pentagon hit. Ignore dancing Israelis. Ignore the Bin Laden being the first plane in the air. Ignore Silverstone and his family "luckily" not being I the building... the only day!

Ignore reality

Strawman.

Do... have any idea what that means? Because I literally just asked you a question. In fact, it was just a clarification question. I was making no assertions, I was not claiming you were making a certain argument, and I was certainly not framing a Straw Man Argument.

So wtf are you even talking about?

Do you need me to repeat the strawman bit? It was a hold over from the previous comment. It is now your tag. I think I will change it to scarecrow... what did he need again?

I find it hard to believe you pounce around the net defending that laughable government cover up.

There are people in prison right now on less circumstantial evidence than three is for 911 inside job.

History will remember it as America's Reichstag fire.

whoa man. i seriously regret replying to one of your comments. just leave me be, please. i don't want to get caught up in your delusions.

Yeah me and the 1000's of architects an engineers and countless nubers of non Americans. In Israel it is a running gag how you lot are their bitches.

And you piped in here. You replied to me. And keep doing so.

Your world view is gonna crumble man. Hang on tight it ain't going to be long now.

Who said they weren't noticed? How many times have you been walking past a few workmen in a skyscraper lobby? Did you assume they were setting up explosives or were there to fix the elevators? Hiding in plain sight... look it up.

Also, you're assuming they used a common explosive we know about... consider it could have easily been a military grade super nano-thermite with properties designed specifically to bring down a building in it's own footprint. We know the anthrax came from a military lab. Isn't it possible the military developed a newer, thermite that required less, less wiring, less traditional set up? It is possible.

When you understand how these operations go down, you realize anything is possible. Remember the Israelis who were living on the 90th floor doing an "art project". They lived in the towers undetected for several weeks. They built a balcony. Could they have been agents working quietly? http://www.nytimes.com/2001/08/18/nyregion/balcony-scene-unseen-atop-world-episode-trade-center-assumes-mythic-qualities.html

Ace elevator company (a small local company) won the contract to retrofit new systems into each of the entire buildings, as opposed to Otis or any other major company experienced in a project of that size.

Access to elevator shafts would have allowed access to the central support columns, which would need to be rigged in order to bring the buildings down.

Technicians would have been able to bring equipment in and out of the building without anyone batting an eye.

It's not irrefutable just because you say so. Everyone can't see it because it's not real.

WTC 1 and 2 were destroyed from the top down via tons of explosives lining the elevator shafts. WTC 7 was the usual controlled demolition, from the bottom via severing the support columns.

Also, what's your deal, why the denial?

The reason the towers came down from top to bottom boils down to this:

1. The fires raging weakened the steel supports enough that a collapse began onto already damaged floors.

2. These damaged floors were now holding more weight than designed to do so without the help of the support beams.

3. Now you have a cascading failure of supports, all the way down leading as well to the rather contained collapse of the towers.

I saw someone mention that beams were thrown out the sides of the tower like an explosion occurred... All I can say to that is a massive jet airliner just struck the side of the building. I wouldn't be surprised if secondary fuel explosions occurred.

The math in the fireball eliminates any fuel causing the weakening.

Even if the floors involved were removed and the top fell on the rest it wouldn't crush the building to rubble.

Newton figured this out centuries ago. Were his laws suspended this day?

Think this through. As soon as the first set of supports collapsed, the stress would have instantly been removed from all subsequent supports. And yet they all kept collapsing synchronously all the way down to the ground, so that a nice, neat pile was left in the building's footprint. A purely gravitational collapse would have left unstressed supports upright. But there were none.

The way I understood was it was a design flaw. Instead of having say a dozen major supports all the way to the top, each floor was reinforced and the supports were placed... not randomly but were in different locations. The floor of each level was the major support and once several floors were damaged, the cascading failure was inevitable.

The supports were damaged, causing an overload of force to come down. A floor that might have been able to contain it was damaged on impact. It now can't hold it. Cue floor collapse. Now you have floor after floor collapsing under weight it can't hold, all the way to the bottom.

It makes sense to me, and is the only thing that realistically explains the way the towers fell.

Only way to convince me otherwise is to provide eyewitness evidence of crews of men placing explosives in the building, because the amount needed to bring down two towers would have been noticed easily.

But that still doesn't make sense. Even if an upper floors collapse on the immediate lower floor (say floors 100-70 collapsing on 69 (hehehe) the point of greatest weakness) then there will still be an visible instant's delay between when 100-69 collapse on 68, and so on and so on. No way that collapse will be (a) symmetrical, and (b) synchronous at near-freefall speed all the way down. All the supports cannot give way simultaneously in two buildings with two different height impact points. The odds of that are impossibly small.

Also, (1) there were reports of dust coming out of the AC vents in the weeks prior to 9/11. This would be consistent with explosives wiring throughout the building at night.

(2) Three Israeli students did an "art project" that shows them on an upper floor of WTC surrounded by cardboard boxes with what is alleged to be an electronics detonator code written on the outside. There are photos and a coffee table book of said art project. (On mobile, do not have link. Recommend Google.)

(3) Gravitational collapse still cannot account for Building 7.

Also... if all the SEALS who "killed Bin Laden" are now dead, what makes you think the demo teams who wired WTC are alive?

And, you won't like this but many allege that those teams were MK subjects who would have no memory of their actions anyway.

And first responders, from police to fire to building security all report the sounds of explosions immediately before and during the collapse.

Any explanation you'd put forth must account for all of the above verifiable factors.

Also, (1) there were reports of dust coming out of the AC vents in the weeks prior to 9/11. This would be consistent with explosives wiring throughout the building at night.

Can't find anything for this

(2) Three Israeli students did an "art project" that shows them on an upper floor of WTC surrounded by cardboard boxes with what is alleged to be an electronics detonator code written on the outside. There are photos and a coffee table book of said art project. (On mobile, do not have link. Recommend Google.)

http://winteractionables.com/?p=25207

Yes that's the book link! Thank you.

Pretty sure the dust claim was made in a video I've watched about it. But not sure which one, as I've seen a few. :(

My first stop to look would be in here:

http://www.wanttoknow.info/9-11timeline25pg

Here is a pic that shows how the supports looked. The middle supports around the elevator shafts and then just supported by exterior. It was a poor design and officially, this is a partial reason for collapsing in its own footprint iirc.

I think 9/11 was like Pearl Harbor, they knew and let it happen, if not actually plan for it.

That's a cool picture! But I still don't believe it. Because literally two entire buildings, both inner inner structural supports and outer, non-load bearing steel, would have to shatter like glass for the buildings to collapse so symmetrically, so neatly, and so quickly. Only, steel doesn't perform like glass. It doesn't shatter. In fact, at the temperatures of jet fuel it doesn't even melt. Perhaps it bends, but that's the most.

And it still doesn't explain Building 7.

Agreed on 9/11 being Pearl Harbor. It's worth looking into the history of that, as well. There's documentation of FDR and his Cabinet provoking Japan into war. Not so we could fight Japan, though, because both the USA and Japan knew that Japan would lose that fight. But because Japan was Germany's ally, it gave us cause to enter the European theater. Openly, of course. Because we were participating covertly with arms and money long before that.

That picture is deceiving. Those core columns were massive and the outside web was stronger than most buildings as well. There is a documentary on the construction. You should watch that.

Video made in 1979 shows the core columns and the fact that only the express elevators ran the height of the building

https://www.youtube.com/shared?ci=bUNyAt-TOGk

I think you don't know the construction of these buildings well enough to comment. There were 47 massive columns in the center. They were box girder construction made from 5" plate at the base. There is no way in Newtons universe they just got crushed. No way.

Equal and opposite reaction. The bottom half of the building would have still been standing.

I watched live and said this as it happened. I was floored by the pancake garbage then and can't believe that some still regurgitate this scienceless garbage.

Barack Obama is an alien-built robot controlled by a small, sentient, super-intelligent hamster-like creature from Pluto.

Wait, are you denying it? What's your deal? What's wrong with you? Why the denial? Seems suspicious.

Ridicule, typical for someone who lacks real arguments.

Yeah, people that are right never ridicule idiots. No one that has ever made a joke has ever been correct ever.

Earning your salary today. :)

Super thermite dude, look it up. You wouldn't question a bounty hunter holding a thermal detonator!

[deleted]

Please don't say Judy Wood.

[deleted]

I think high tech explosives were the cause of the building turning to dust. A far more likely scenario than laser beams. Nano Thermite was used to cut the steel beams but there were also explosives. C4 or something more advanced.

[deleted]

Judy Garland is cool. James Woods, if you remember, claims he saw the highjackers on a practice run so he reported them to the FBI.

I posted this in response to another comment but I'll post here again.

That clip at the 9:40 mark, where you see flashes, is from an actual planned demolition of some other building. I think this clip was included to compare the sound of a known controlled demo to the sounds on 911. You can tell by the black wrap around the first couple floors. They do this to keep debris from flying out. Then the video switches to a clip inside the towers with firefighters and you can hear the explosions that are very similar to the explosions from the example video.

That's the first time I've seen this 9:40 video, thanks.

That clip at the 9:40 mark, where you see flashes, is from an actual planned demolition of some other building. I think this clip was included to compare the sound of a known controlled demo to the sounds on 911. You can tell by the black wrap around the first couple floors. They do this to keep debris from flying out. Then the video switches to a clip inside the towers with firefighters and you can hear the explosions that are very similar to the explosions from the example video.

The video you pointed out isn't even the WTC. It's some other building in another city. Notice the street being blocked and the orange flags. I do believe the demo theory but I do not believe that the video presented at 9:40 is the WTC.

Interesting, yes I did see the flash-explosion around 9:40. Also WTC7 looked like controlled demo. What does the msm say caused WTC7 to come down?

Office fires. That's the official reason for WTC7 collapse. Shills will try and blame the supposed gouge in the building or the diesel fuel tanks but neither were in the NIST report and are not cited as the reason for the collapse. They ignore the fact that the building fell at free fall for 8 stories and initially tried to deny it. They now admit free fall but provide no explanation for it.

Thanks, I'm a noob but what exactly does shill mean here? I can define it of course but how is it used on r/conspiracy?

I'm relatively new as well. I think "shill" in this context means "paid plant, pushing an agenda." More or less a semi-intelligent troll who redirects a thread.

Okay great, thank you!

I hate using that word but I don't know what you call these people who spout the governments official story like it's their job. A shill is someone who gets paid to CTR (Correct the record).

Hey man that looks like the start of the collapse outright cut into a small clip. I highly doubt that bit at 9:40 was the extent of the footage so why isn't the whole thing shown.

I'm more than willing to believe in conspiracies and cover ups but the 9/11 conspiracy just hasn't convinced me. Claims of tons of explosives in the elevator shafts? There's no damned way even MSM would cover it up if there was a shred of evidence to support it.

That clip at the 9:40 mark, where you see flashes, is from an actual planned demolition of some other building. I think this clip was included to compare the sound of a known controlled demo to the sounds on 911. You can tell by the black wrap around the first couple floors. They do this to keep debris from flying out. Then the video switches to a clip inside the towers with firefighters and you can hear the explosions that are very similar to the explosions from the example video.

Good observation.

whoa man. i seriously regret replying to one of your comments. just leave me be, please. i don't want to get caught up in your delusions.