What if I SHOWED you that, from the very beginning, they TOLD us what we were looking at wasn't real live footage? What if I showed you that they told us this dozens of times on the morning of 9/11?
Check into Dr. Judy Wood’s work. She has a PhD in engineering and knows her stuff. She wrote a book entitled Where Did the Towers Go? She’s claimed the towers were destroyed using some form of direct energy weapons and described the process as ’dustification’ because the towers literally turned into dust during their destruction.
Pay no mind to Petra.... She's of the opinion no one died, the buildings were gutted, all the eye witnesses are liars, the survivors between floors 2 and 22 of the north tower are actors and even more maligned talking points.... She's completely out of touch with reality...
With regards to the technology used on 9/11, MOST are missing the bigger picture!
Just as the hazardous and wasteful technology behind a nuclear bomb can also be used to provide hazardous and wasteful nuclear power, the technology which caused the clean and effortless molecular dissociation of the twin towers could also be used to give the whole world effortless clean energy.
Exposing this clean free energy technology means and end to the ruling elite's ability to control and exploit the general population through scarce, expensive, dirty and inefficient resources such as oil, coal, nuclear and "renewables".
Any group with an interest in maintaining the current paradigm of artificial scarcity and crappy energy technologies, which keeps the general population enslaved, would have an interest in helping to maintain the 9/11 cover up, because exposing the crime also exposes the TECHNOLOGY to commit it.
Maybe the people who did 9/11 operate under a code of conduct where they have to show this technology to the people, so they have the opportunity to claim it.
And if the people are too stupid or apathetic to show any interest, they will then feel justified in keeping it for themselves and continuing to control and exploit the human herd, like the CATTLE they have shown themselves to be.
You might think it's insane, and it is, but remember we're talking about a group of people who are willing to turn skyscrapers to DUST, live on TV.
In the final analysis there is no "grand" deception" or cover up.
There is only BLUFF!
Because everyone can see what happened to the buildings was clearly and PROVABLY NOT a structural failure (collapse) or a conventional controlled demolition by ANY thermal or kinetic mechanism!
Knows her stuff? She's an agent pushing one of the many streams of propaganda about how exactly the buildings came down. We have DEWs, nuclear, thermite, nanothermite.
It's all PROPAGANDA.
WTC-7 is a classic implosion - they obviously used normal explosives - so why would they use a different method for the Twin Towers? As Agent suggests (and so does Simon Shack) what we see could be phony.
"This rules-out any possibility of layering because the plane in the video “entered” the building correctly."
Seriously?
The plane did not enter the building correctly because 142-tonne 767-200 airliners don't "enter" 500,000 tonne steel frame buildings whose steel supports are very close together.
A 142-tonne airliner would COLLIDE with the building and show evidence of crash physics such as deceleration and destruction of its parts in the same way a sedan crashing into a semi-trailer would. Moreover, a 767 airliner would look like this, not the "plane object" we are shown. https://www.modernairliners.com/boeing-767
I don't need to know a thing about how the footage was faked, physics says it was faked, that is all I need. This is a good video showing how the faked plane crash in The Medusa Touch (1978) actually abides by crash physics better than Flight 175. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xuhNR6lx97E&feature=youtu.be
There are many streams though aren't there for the method of destruction. That's a simple fact. So if there are a number then we need to be suspicious, don't we? Why are they giving us a number of streams and is it likely that any one of those streams represents the truth? I'd say no. We can see that WTC-7 is a classic implosion using explosives so, a priori, why would they use a method that has NEVER been used in large building destruction before for the towers? Where did they test it? How could they be certain it would work? Why would they use a different method?
What you have to do is distinguish what might be faked or omitted and what is clear fact. Seismic data can be faked but in any case I wouldn't be surprised if a controlled demolition would register seismically. There's no sound! Are you kidding me? They didn't play it ... perhaps to hide the unmistakable sounds of explosions?? WTC-7 looks like a classic implosion - if it walks like a duck ... and we know that Controlled Demolition, Inc achieve three world records in large building demolition projects in the three years before 9/11. What would you say is the probability of those three world records constituting a PRACTICE RUN?
You need to address important facts and not place importance on things that don't tell you anything.
IMPORTANT FACT: Cars are missing door-handles and number plates indicating they are junkyard cars and Judy Wood is responsible for FAKED DATA which immediately undermines her theory.
If they'd really dustified the buildings can you imagine how choked up everyone would be. I know there was some suffering inevitably but dustifying ONE MILLION TONNES of building would have caused massive dust ... but we don't see that.
In any case the most important element of 9/11 isn't how the buildings came down - the buildings is distraction from the FAKERY OF THE MAIN CRIME. The real crime - or rather the real ALLEGED crime was the deaths of 3,000 people and injury to 6,000.
Didn't happen though so to distract people from the FAKERY OF THE MAIN CRIME they've got them chasing their tails on exactly how the buildings came down.
Here are some facts, that might hurt your feelings, Petra...
Do you know what forensic investigations entail?
How do you approach a crime scene?
Here is a hint: You collect evidence.
Why should you collect evidence?
To figure out what happened of course.
What are we going to do once we collected evidence?
First, let me remind you:
Sept 11 is a crime that should be solved by a forensic study of the evidence. Before it can be determined who did it, it must first be determined what was done and how it was done.
The order of crime solving is to determine
1) WHAT happened, then
2) HOW it happened (e.g., what weapon), then
3) WHO did it. And only then can we address
4) WHY they did it (i.e. motive).
Let us remember what is required to (legally) convict someone of a crime.
You cannot convict someone of a crime based on belief.
You cannot convict someone of a crime if you don’t even know what crime to charge them with.
If you accuse someone of murder using a gun, you’d better be sure the body has a bullet hole in it. And yet before noon on 9/11/01, we were told who did it, how they did it, and why they did it before any investigation had been conducted to determine what had even been done.
We do have a couple of FACTS though.
1. FACT: Although Hurricane Erin was located just off Long Island throughout the day of 9/11/01, both the approach in days before and the presence of the storm on that day went almost totally unreported. Hurricane Erin was omitted on the morning weather map, even though that portion of the Atlantic Ocean where she stood was covered by the map. Astronauts gazing down said they could see the drifting plume from the destruction of WTC2 and WTC1 but made no mention of the highly visible Erin. WHY?
2. FACT: Approximately 1,400 motor vehicles were "toasted" in strange ways during the destruction of the Twin Towers. WHY AND HOW?
3. FACT: During destruction, there appeared alongside the buildings curious corkscrew trails. WHY?
4. FACT: During the demise of each tower, large enough volumes of dust made of nano-sized particles went up, enough to block out 100% of sunlight in some areas. This nano-sized particulate dust in volume enough to achieve sun-light-blocking density constituted the remains of the greatest part of the destroyed buildings’ material substance. WHAT CAUSED THIS DUST TO FORM?
5. FACT: During the destruction, there was an absence of high heat. Witnesses reported that the initial dust cloud felt cooler than ambient temperatures. Additionally, there was scant evidence of burned bodies, although in one case a man was described as “crisped” even while his jacket remained un-crisped, indicating an “inside-out” combustion not possible with conventional fire. WHAT CAUSED THESE PHENOMENA?
6. FACT: Evidence that the WTC dust continued to break down and become finer and finer long after 9/11 itself came through the observable presence of "Fuzzballs". WHAT CAUSES THIS PHENOMENON?
7. FACT: First responders on 9/11 testified as to "toasted cars", spontaneous “fires” (including the flaming heavy coat of a running medic, who survived), the instant disappearance of people, a plane turning into a fireball in mid-air, electrical power cut off moments before WTC 2 destruction, and the sound of explosions. WHAT CAUSED THESE PHENOMENA?
8. FACT: For more than seven years, regions in the ground under where the main body of WTC4 stood have continued to fume. WHY?
9. FACT: Hazy clouds, called "Fuzzyblobs", appeared in the vicinity of material undergoing destruction. WHY?
10. FACT: Magnetometer readings from six stations in Alaska recorded abrupt shifts in the Earth’s magnetic field as each of the major destructive events unfolded at the WTC on 9/11. WHY?
11. FACT: Many cars in the neighborhood of the WTC complex were flipped upside down. They couldn’t have been flipped by hurricane-force winds, since they stood adjacent to trees with full foliage, not stripped by high wind. WHY?
12. FACT: More damage was done to the bathtub by earth-moving equipment during the clean-up process than from the destruction of more than a million tons of buildings above it WHY?
13. FACT: Most of the destroyed towers underwent mid-air pulverization and were turned to dust before they hit the ground. WHAT FORCE CAUSED THIS “DUSTIFICATION”?
14. FACT: Near-instant rusting of affected steel provided evidence of molecular dissociation and transmutation. WHY?
15. FACT: Of the estimated 3,000 toilets in WTC1 and WTC2, not one survived, nor was any recognizable portion of one whatsoever found. WHY?
16. FACT: Only one piece of office equipment in the entire WTC complex, a filing cabinet with folder dividers, survived. WHY?
17. FACT: Only the north wing of WTC4 was left standing, neatly sliced from the main body, which virtually disappeared. FACT
18. FACT: Rail lines, tunnels and most of the rail cars at levels under the WTC complex had only light damage, if any. WHY?
19. FACT: Cylindrical holes were cut into the vertical faces of buildings 4, 5 and 6. They were cut also into Liberty Street in front of Bankers Trust and into Vesey Street in front of WTC6. In addition, a cylindrical arc was cut into the façade of Bankers Trust WHY AND HOW?
20. FACT: Scott-Paks — portable air-tanks for firemen — frequently exploded for no visible reason. Entire fire trucks themselves that were parked near the WTC exploded. WHY? HOW?
21. FACT: Sheets of plain office paper were omnipresent throughout lower Manhattan after each tower’s destruction. This paper, however, remained unburned, even though it was often immediately adjacent to flaming cars or to steel beams glowing red, yellow, and even white. WHY?
22. FACT: Some steel beams and pieces of glass at and near GZ had what a Swiss-Cheese appearance. WHY?
23. FACT: Steel columns from the towers were curled around vertical axes like rolled- up carpets. Steel columns of this kind, however, when they buckle from being overloaded, would be bent around the horizontal, not the vertical, axis. WHY?
24. FACT: The “collapse” of the towers took place with remarkably little damage to neighboring buildings. The only seriously damaged or entirely destroyed buildings, in fact, were those with the WTC prefix, only those, that is, that were a part of the WTC complex. WHY?
25. FACT: The destruction of WTC7 in late afternoon on 9/11 was whisper quiet. The seismic signal during its disappearance, 0.6 was not significantly greater than background noise. WHY?
26. FACT: The facades of WFC1 and WFC2 showed no apparent structural damage from the destruction of WTC1 and WTC2. However, the decorative marble façade around the entry to the buildings was completely missing, entirely gone. WHY? FROM WHAT FORCE?
27. FACT: In the dirt pile, the Fuming was unusual for its quality of immediately decreasing when watered, contrary to fumes caused by fire or heat, where an initial steam-up is the response to watering. WHY?
28. FACT: The majority of the towers (WTC1, WTC2, WTC3, WTC7) did not remain as rigid bodies as they “fell.” WHY NOT?
29. FACT: The method of destruction in the case of each tower minimised damage to the bathtub and adjacent buildings, whereas terrorists would have been expected to maximize damage, including that of infrastructure.
30. FACT: The protective bathtub was not significantly damaged by the destruction of the Twin Towers.
31. FACT: The seismic impact was minimal during the destructions of WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7-and far too small to correspond with a conventional “collapse” as based on a comparison with the Kingdome controlled demolition.
32. FACT: The Twin Towers were destroyed from the top down, not from the bottom up.
33. FACT: The Twin Towers were destroyed in a shorter time than can be explained by physics as a “collapse” even at free-fall speed.
34. FACT: The upper 80 percent, approximately, of each tower was turned into fine dust and did not crash to the earth.
35. FACT: The upper 90 percent, approximately, of the inside of WTC7 was turned into fine dust and did not crash to the earth.
36. FACT: The WTC underground mall survived well, witnessed by Warner Brothers’ Road Runner and friends.
37. FACT: The WTC1 and WTC2 rubble pile was far too small to account for the total mass of the buildings. It did not even fill the lobby of 3 stories.
38. FACT: The WTC7 rubble pile was too small to account for the total mass of the building, and much of it consisted of mud.
39. FACT: Truckloads of dirt were hauled both into and out of the WTC site, a pattern that continued up to the construction of the new WTC years later.
40. FACT: What lather, thick clouds of dust and fumes, emanated from some faces of buildings before destruction, as if large volumes of the buildings’ mass was dissolving into the air. Lather poured from WTC7 for several hours before its destruction. WHY?
41. FACT: Weird fires appeared frequently on 9/11. This “fire” flamed but gave no evidence of providing heat, not even enough to burn nearby sheets of paper. WHY?
42. FACT: Glass windows on nearby buildings received circular and other odd-shaped holes without the entire panes breaking. WHY?
43. FACT: Changes and alterations in materials on 9/11 were similar or even identical in a great many ways to the changes and alterations in materials caused by The Hutchison Effect.
To determine what happened on 9/11, not just some, but ALL available evidence must be considered. We cannot pick and choose which observable facts we may want to explain and then ignore the others.
Now, you tell me if we should ignore these facts?
There are 3 issues most people have when faced with the truth regarding the events of 9/11
When has conventional explosive building demolition been used before on a building the size of the twin towers? Where did they test it? How could they be certain it would work?
I don't get how you see Revisionists's work and how he compares normal 'classic implosions' (like you put it) with regular explosives to the wtc complex event and not agree that it definitely wasn't done with regular explosives. Nevermind all of the things that cannot be explained by a 'classic implosion' such as flags, trees, paper, and *people* not burning right next to 'toasted and melted' cars, or the complete lack of debris, or the complete lack of sound of building 7 when it came down, or the strange hole in building 6, or the damage to building 8 that had no 'fire' in it, etc.
If you look at all of this evidence, it is evident that there was no 'classic implosion'
"Where did they test it? How could they be certain it would work?"
Well, the argument is that it is black technology (just like there are people doing stuff in the dark regarding faking other events, there are other groups of people doing sutff in the dark with powerful technology they don't want you to know about), therefore they would test it consistently as they develop it, which is very reasonable. I guarantee you this was not the first time this technology has been used.
"Why would they use a different method?"
Well, if they used regular explosives, 1) It would be obvious that it was an inside job because you would have plenty of videographic and eyewitness evidence of loud bangs and explosions, 2) using this fantastic method is a revelation of power to anyone looking closely, letting you know they have the technology to dominate you in ways you're not even aware of
because both Petra & 911 Revisionist are obvious plants.
(however in the interest of fairness, I was surprised at what a good counter argument Petra made here. While we have quite opposing views on many things on this she appears to be reasonable & insightful about the main problems, although I doubt the death toll she imagines is genuine!)
Thermite was defiantly used, other techniques as well most probably.
DEW's (what a phonetic joke!) can cause terrible biological issues, but so far there is no proof they can turn brick into dust, certainly not unless a stable /focused emission is made.
911 Divisionist & Dew'dy Wood can not specify what equipment was used , nor provide footage of any similar occurrence of DEWs destroying concrete & steel. A laser cutting metal from a few millimeters away is not proof of a DEW being capable of building demolition, just like lighting a candle is not comparable with setting fire to a forest.
Dew'dy Wood & 911 Retardist both make their claims from CONSTRUCTED FOOTAGE, as was uncannily pointed out to 911 Revizer only a few days ago!
There’s definitely no evidence of thermite not controlled demolition, as I pointed out in my precious comment. The buildings clearly turned to dust in midair. There is footage where you can clearly see solid objects dustifying before they fall to the ground. Anyone that denies this easily observable fact is sus
Also, there are images taken of a parking lot in the vecinity before and after the destruction of the complex. The before pictures show regular cars; the after pictures show the same cars, unmoved, and discolored, hinting at the 'toasting' effect. These couldn't have come from a junkyard because the cars are clearly unmoved throughout the event and we know they were ok before, but look 'toasted' after the event. Of course, you could argue it's all photoshopped, and that's a real possibility, but given that this effect is also seen in Lahaina, that there are so many videos and photographs of vehicles that have been 'toasted' in the 9/11 event, it makes me believe they are not photoshopped.
Of course, Judy Wood presents a series of strangely 'toasted' cars near the complex, and as I mentioned earlier, with unburned paper and trees around them. There are eyewitnesses claiming the cars where combusting spotaneously.
The lack of number plates and door handles are explained through the effect of the technology used to destroy the complex. The argument is that the technology dustified the towers, including all of the steel and ceramic and *polymers* inside it. The claim is that the attack hit the vehicles in the vecinity of its main target, albeit at a lower intensity, which would be why the cars are still standing but some things pertaining to the vehicles have been 'dustified' as well, such as the engines and license plates ('soft' iron) and the handlebars (polymers or plastics).
I think, all in all, the evidence doesn't show the effects of a controlled demolition but of some type of energy weapon technology: there were no loud explosions (see building 7 that was hollowed out and fell silently), there is a clear lack of material/debris on the ground to account for a regular demolition, there was way too much dust compared to regular demolitions, there are strange 'toasted' cars around the site, building 8 which was nowhere near the 'explosions' and didn't collapse had visible structural damage/corrosion to its steel which meant it had to be rebuilt, you can visibly see some pieces of steel become dust as they are falling to the ground, etc.)
LOL - First, let me correct you on wanting the discussion by using a phrase that is ad hominem, trying to steer the discussion on a false premise of what evidence Dr Wood presented in her request for correction to NIST, which made her a whistle blower back in 2007.
She pointed out the FRAUD being perpetuated by the 23 NIST subcontractors, with their flawed science reports. This allowed her to SUE the 23 NIST subcontractors for SCIENCE Fraud… Her case went as far as the US Supreme court in 2009, but unfortunately, the judge BROKE THE LAW, by not hearing the case.
Now, can you tell me why NOBOBY, pushing bombs, thermite, molten metal, or nukes have filed ANY court proceeding with their co-called “explosive evidence”?
Why did architects for an engineered truth, under the leadership of Richard Gage, NOT make mention of molten metal or thermite, when they filed a RFC to NIST, AFTER Dr Wood filed hers, which she based on SOLID evidence?
You can read about all her evidence in her book, “Where did the towers go?” Have you read it? You willing to be the first person to debunk, empirical, verifiable evidence?
You’ll be the first person in 12 years since she published it.
Ad hominems does not disprove evidence, so you should try harder…
Let’s figure out how smart you really are, shall we?
Do you know what forensic investigations entail?
How do you approach a crime scene?
Here is a hint: You collect evidence.
Why should you collect evidence?
To figure out what happened of course.
What are we going to do once we collected evidence?
Sept 11 is a crime that should be solved by a forensic study of the evidence. Before it can be determined who did it, it must first be determined what was done and how it was done.
The order of crime solving is to determine
1) WHAT happened, then
2) HOW it happened (e.g., what weapon), then
3) WHO did it. And only then can we address
4) WHY they did it (i.e. motive).
Let us remember what is required to (legally) convict someone of a crime.
You cannot convict someone of a crime based on belief.
You cannot convict someone of a crime if you don’t even know what crime to charge them with.
If you accuse someone of murder using a gun, you’d better be sure the body has a bullet hole in it. And yet before noon on 9/11/01, we were told who did it, how they did it, and why they did it before any investigation had been conducted to determine what had even been done.
We do have a couple of FACTS though.
1. FACT: Although Hurricane Erin was located just off Long Island throughout the day of 9/11/01, both the approach in days before and the presence of the storm on that day went almost totally unreported. Hurricane Erin was omitted on the morning weather map, even though that portion of the Atlantic Ocean where she stood was covered by the map. Astronauts gazing down said they could see the drifting plume from the destruction of WTC2 and WTC1 but made no mention of the highly visible Erin. WHY?
2. FACT: Approximately 1,400 motor vehicles were "toasted" in strange ways during the destruction of the Twin Towers. WHY AND HOW?
3. FACT: During destruction, there appeared alongside the buildings curious corkscrew trails. WHY?
4. FACT: During the demise of each tower, large enough volumes of dust made of nano-sized particles went up, enough to block out 100% of sunlight in some areas. This nano-sized particulate dust in volume enough to achieve sun-light-blocking density constituted the remains of the greatest part of the destroyed buildings’ material substance. WHAT CAUSED THIS DUST TO FORM?
5. FACT: During the destruction, there was an absence of high heat. Witnesses reported that the initial dust cloud felt cooler than ambient temperatures. Additionally, there was scant evidence of burned bodies, although in one case a man was described as “crisped” even while his jacket remained un-crisped, indicating an “inside-out” combustion not possible with conventional fire. WHAT CAUSED THESE PHENOMENA?
6. FACT: Evidence that the WTC dust continued to break down and become finer and finer long after 9/11 itself came through the observable presence of "Fuzzballs". WHAT CAUSES THIS PHENOMENON?
7. FACT: First responders on 9/11 testified as to "toasted cars", spontaneous “fires” (including the flaming heavy coat of a running medic, who survived), the instant disappearance of people, a plane turning into a fireball in mid-air, electrical power cut off moments before WTC 2 destruction, and the sound of explosions. WHAT CAUSED THESE PHENOMENA?
8. FACT: For more than seven years, regions in the ground under where the main body of WTC4 stood have continued to fume. WHY?
9. FACT: Hazy clouds, called "Fuzzyblobs", appeared in the vicinity of material undergoing destruction. WHY?
10. FACT: Magnetometer readings from six stations in Alaska recorded abrupt shifts in the Earth’s magnetic field as each of the major destructive events unfolded at the WTC on 9/11. WHY?
11. FACT: Many cars in the neighborhood of the WTC complex were flipped upside down. They couldn’t have been flipped by hurricane-force winds, since they stood adjacent to trees with full foliage, not stripped by high wind. WHY?
12. FACT: More damage was done to the bathtub by earth-moving equipment during the clean-up process than from the destruction of more than a million tons of buildings above it WHY?
13. FACT: Most of the destroyed towers underwent mid-air pulverization and were turned to dust before they hit the ground. WHAT FORCE CAUSED THIS “DUSTIFICATION”?
14. FACT: Near-instant rusting of affected steel provided evidence of molecular dissociation and transmutation. WHY?
15. FACT: Of the estimated 3,000 toilets in WTC1 and WTC2, not one survived, nor was any recognizable portion of one whatsoever found. WHY?
16. FACT: Only one piece of office equipment in the entire WTC complex, a filing cabinet with folder dividers, survived. WHY?
17. FACT: Only the north wing of WTC4 was left standing, neatly sliced from the main body, which virtually disappeared. FACT
18. FACT: Rail lines, tunnels and most of the rail cars at levels under the WTC complex had only light damage, if any. WHY?
19. FACT: Cylindrical holes were cut into the vertical faces of buildings 4, 5 and 6. They were cut also into Liberty Street in front of Bankers Trust and into Vesey Street in front of WTC6. In addition, a cylindrical arc was cut into the façade of Bankers Trust WHY AND HOW?
20. FACT: Scott-Paks — portable air-tanks for firemen — frequently exploded for no visible reason. Entire fire trucks themselves that were parked near the WTC exploded. WHY? HOW?
21. FACT: Sheets of plain office paper were omnipresent throughout lower Manhattan after each tower’s destruction. This paper, however, remained unburned, even though it was often immediately adjacent to flaming cars or to steel beams glowing red, yellow, and even white. WHY?
22. FACT: Some steel beams and pieces of glass at and near GZ had what a Swiss-Cheese appearance. WHY?
23. FACT: Steel columns from the towers were curled around vertical axes like rolled- up carpets. Steel columns of this kind, however, when they buckle from being overloaded, would be bent around the horizontal, not the vertical, axis. WHY?
24. FACT: The “collapse” of the towers took place with remarkably little damage to neighboring buildings. The only seriously damaged or entirely destroyed buildings, in fact, were those with the WTC prefix, only those, that is, that were a part of the WTC complex. WHY?
25. FACT: The destruction of WTC7 in late afternoon on 9/11 was whisper quiet. The seismic signal during its disappearance, 0.6 was not significantly greater than background noise. WHY?
26. FACT: The facades of WFC1 and WFC2 showed no apparent structural damage from the destruction of WTC1 and WTC2. However, the decorative marble façade around the entry to the buildings was completely missing, entirely gone. WHY? FROM WHAT FORCE?
27. FACT: In the dirt pile, the Fuming was unusual for its quality of immediately decreasing when watered, contrary to fumes caused by fire or heat, where an initial steam-up is the response to watering. WHY?
28. FACT: The majority of the towers (WTC1, WTC2, WTC3, WTC7) did not remain as rigid bodies as they “fell.” WHY NOT?
29. FACT: The method of destruction in the case of each tower minimised damage to the bathtub and adjacent buildings, whereas terrorists would have been expected to maximize damage, including that of infrastructure.
30. FACT: The protective bathtub was not significantly damaged by the destruction of the Twin Towers.
31. FACT: The seismic impact was minimal during the destructions of WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7-and far too small to correspond with a conventional “collapse” as based on a comparison with the Kingdome controlled demolition.
32. FACT: The Twin Towers were destroyed from the top down, not from the bottom up.
33. FACT: The Twin Towers were destroyed in a shorter time than can be explained by physics as a “collapse” even at free-fall speed.
34. FACT: The upper 80 percent, approximately, of each tower was turned into fine dust and did not crash to the earth.
35. FACT: The upper 90 percent, approximately, of the inside of WTC7 was turned into fine dust and did not crash to the earth.
36. FACT: The WTC underground mall survived well, witnessed by Warner Brothers’ Road Runner and friends.
37. FACT: The WTC1 and WTC2 rubble pile was far too small to account for the total mass of the buildings. It did not even fill the lobby of 3 stories.
38. FACT: The WTC7 rubble pile was too small to account for the total mass of the building, and much of it consisted of mud.
39. FACT: Truckloads of dirt were hauled both into and out of the WTC site, a pattern that continued up to the construction of the new WTC years later.
40. FACT: What lather, thick clouds of dust and fumes, emanated from some faces of buildings before destruction, as if large volumes of the buildings’ mass was dissolving into the air. Lather poured from WTC7 for several hours before its destruction. WHY?
41. FACT: Weird fires appeared frequently on 9/11. This “fire” flamed but gave no evidence of providing heat, not even enough to burn nearby sheets of paper. WHY?
42. FACT: Glass windows on nearby buildings received circular and other odd-shaped holes without the entire panes breaking. WHY?
43. FACT: Changes and alterations in materials on 9/11 were similar or even identical in a great many ways to the changes and alterations in materials caused by The Hutchison Effect.
To determine what happened on 9/11, not just some, but ALL available evidence must be considered. We cannot pick and choose which observable facts we may want to explain and then ignore the others.
Now, you tell me if we should ignore these facts?
There are 3 issues most people have when faced with the truth regarding the events of 9/11
Funny. I was just watching the National Geographic documentary on U tube 2days ago.
While watching the first episode I was reminded of a cameraman/crew with the fire men who caught the first plane footage. I was like who the heck he is? Why is he following fire men first thing in the morning? It made me suspicious when he repositioned to show the towers in the background once.
What are the odds a film crew supposedly captured the first plane? Has anyone found out who the cameraman is? Whose idea was it for him to be there?
WHAT exactly happened to ALL 7 buildings with a WTC prefix on Sept 11, 2001?
The following points need to be made regarding what exactly happened to the buildings and the observable evidence at ground zero, that the “9/11 truth movement” never touch on…
... and the firefighter testimonies are all 100% bullshit.
One firefighter stationed on the Upper East Side describes his route to the WTC as heading west along Houston and then down the West Side Hwy. Wrong way. Can't turn south from Houston the East Side Hwy would be much more convenient.
In all 118 testimonies not one mention of any of the alleged deaths of their 343 colleagues.
They call them "oral" histories but while we have transcripts, no audio. Why not, transcripts would be based on audio. Where is it?
The September 11, 2001 attacks left everyone dazed and confused, trying to make sense of a multitude of things happening around them at once and news reporters had a very difficult time putting into words what they were seeing and what they were hearing, and if you are a hardened 9/11 conspiracy theorist, you’ll be well aware the TV coverage and witness testimonies are a rabbit hole all by itself.
Math Easy Solutions downloaded and combined all 500 PDFs of 9/11 firefighters, paramedics, and EMT witness testimony from the NY Times archive and combined them into a searchable 7,058 page PDF! https://1drv.ms/b/s!As32ynv0LoaIirAetue35QI7OqdiLw
One of the Naudet brothers. They were NYU grads who happened to know a firefighter (who is also an actor). They were supposedly filming a documentary on the journey of a probie (probation period firefighter) and just so happened to conveniently pan to get that shot. There are three known shots of the first "plane" hitting.
Still stuck on calling it a collapse, when it wasn't a collapse, but a disintegration...
The real psy-op was the cover up of the 23 NIST subcontractors who'd later be sued in 2007, for science fraud for their flawed reports that made up the 10 000 page NIST report, but let's follow the 9/11 truther movements lead and not look at them..
Then also make no mention of the COINTELPRO agents that infiltrated the 9/11 truther movement, with the forming of the 2005, "Scholars for 9/11 truth" and then subsequently the formation of architects for an engineered truth in 2007, AFTER the 2 x Qui-Tam whistleblower cases were filed against the 23 NIST subcontractors, who were aligned with the US Military Industrial complex.
Then, do not read this article, spelling it out for you.
9/11 Truth Suppression Timeline
"The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves." - Vladimir Lenin
WHAT exactly happened to ALL 7 buildings with a WTC prefix on Sept 11, 2001?
The following points need to be made regarding what exactly happened to the buildings and the observable evidence at ground zero, that the “9/11 truth movement” never touch on…
Did you not get the part where he said, "Because this article is to show you things you haven’t seen, we will not be discussing holograms, thermite, exchange students, CGI and all the other topics that have been done well by phenomenal researchers..."
He was focusing on the words and footage used by the media. Your snarky comment is completely unnecessary.
There are bigger fish to fry with regards to the cover-up of the cover-up as to run with the so called TV fakery narrative that was discussed, and completely addressed over 15 years ago.
What's your deal Monica? What's the point you are trying to make? I have noticed you dropping these types of comments under a few of his articles.
How is the gender of the author relevant to the articles being published?
I couldn't care less if he was a she pretending to be a he. She also wouldn't be the first author to write under a male pseudonym - Remember Jane Eyer / Currer Bell?
To me, his entire appearance is make believe - I picture him as a stylised character consisting of a white suit and hat with glasses.
You really don't get how they pushed out multiple streams of propaganda for the building destructions: DEWs, nuclear, thermite, nanothermite - can't you see they're MULTIPLE STREAMS?
There were no incinerated cars - the cars were from junkyards TOLD TO US VERY OBVIOUSLY because they lack number plates and door handles.
Petra - You and I have danced more than once. I'm not going to get into it with you again.
Question - Were the buildings there on Sept 10, 2001? Then on September 12, were they still there?
Unfortunately all you bring to the table is bluff, talking points that have been discussed, debated and buried over 15 years ago - Pity you stick to certain talking points like a cult follower, but that's your right....
In the final analysis there is no "grand" deception" or cover up on WHAT happened to 7 buildings with a WTC prefix - Actually 8, when you included the anomalous Bankers Trust Building, that was deconstructed due to lingering effects affecting the steel of the building..
Everyone can see what happened to the buildings was clearly and PROVABLY NOT a structural failure (collapse) or a conventional controlled demolition by ANY thermal or kinetic mechanism!
Official narrative – Jet fuel.
Option behind door no 1 – explosives,
door no 2 – thermite,
door no 3 – buried or mini nukes.
Just don’t look at where the EVIDENCE points to.
There are 3 issues most people have when faced with the truth regarding the events of 9/11;
1. Problem solving skills
2. Group Think
3. They just can't handle the implications
9/11 Truth Suppression Timeline
"The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves." - Vladimir Lenin
Since we can agree that most of what we saw that day was pre-recorded and the whole thing was planned decades ago.. we now know the most important things. WE HAVE BEEN LIED TO. We are being lied to. Did they do it with thermite or DEW or magic detonating leprechauns? WHO THE F CARES? All that arguing about stupid details is useless, so why cling to one explanation or the other when in truth we have no fucking idea because we were not there, the site was closed for us peasants and we can only look at imagery that is clearly faked.
O, but again, that is where you're missing the bigger picture...
I do not agree that any of the feeds from the tower's disintegration was pre-recorded - All this is a blatant call on the discredited Loose Change and September Clues disinformation. FYI - Thermite has also been proven, time and time to be a government talking point planted by Steven E Jones and furthered by architects for an engineered truth, under leadership of Richard Gage. You really care about getting to the bottom of 9/11, or do you want your bias confirmed? Then read this article:
9/11 Truth Suppression Timeline
"The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves." - Vladimir Lenin
With regards to the technology used on 9/11, YOU are missing the bigger picture!
Just as the hazardous and wasteful technology behind a nuclear bomb can also be used to provide hazardous and wasteful nuclear power, the technology which caused the clean and effortless molecular dissociation of the twin towers could also be used to give the whole world effortless clean energy.
Exposing this clean free energy technology means and end to the ruling elite's ability to control and exploit the general population through scarce, expensive, dirty and inefficient resources such as oil, coal, nuclear and "renewables".
Any group with an interest in maintaining the current paradigm of artificial scarcity and crappy energy technologies, which keeps the general population enslaved, would have an interest in helping to maintain the 9/11 cover up, because exposing the crime also exposes the TECHNOLOGY to commit it.
Maybe the people who did 9/11 operate under a code of conduct where they have to show this technology to the people, so they have the opportunity to claim it.
And if the people are too stupid or apathetic to show any interest, they will then feel justified in keeping it for themselves and continuing to control and exploit the human herd, like the CATTLE they have shown themselves to be.
You might think it's insane, and it is, but remember we're talking about a group of people who are willing to turn skyscrapers to DUST, live on TV.
In the final analysis there is no "grand" deception" or cover up.
There is only BLUFF!
Because everyone can see what happened to the buildings was clearly and PROVABLY NOT a structural failure (collapse) or a conventional controlled demolition by ANY thermal or kinetic mechanism!
Official narrative – Jet fuel.
Option behind door no 1 – explosives,
door no 2 – thermite,
door no 3 – buried or mini nukes.
Just don’t look at where the EVIDENCE points to, which is some sort of COLD DEW tech.
Because everyone can see what happened to the buildings was clearly and PROVABLY NOT a structural failure (collapse) or a conventional controlled demolition by ANY thermal or kinetic mechanism!
Everyone can see? I think it was all pre-recorded and CGI, a show made by a few people on powerful computers. If you can agree that they used CGI and video editing/pre-recorded footage, why are you so firm in your position?
It is akin to the convid event. The most important thing to understand about convid is that it was all a scam and a huge deception of epic proportions, and States all over the world were being extra evil for a prolonged period of time.
But, if you look into the details of the convid scam, you'll understand the reality we live in a little better and we'll be better prepared for the next time they use the same technology on us, e.g. if we understand that viruses don't exist and contagion is a myth, then we'll be better prepared for the next time the powers that be push nonsense a convid-type scam on us, like a new AIDS-HIV or ebola escare. We'll be effectively immune from that nonsense, right?
Similary, with 9/11, when you look into the details, we'll understand reality a little better. In this case, we can see, as demonstrated by 9/11 Revisionist that there are very advanced technologies that can do freaky things, such as turn two 110-story steel and concrete (and plastic and ceramic, etc...) buildings into dust, or do 3D-volumetric holograms that can fool people (either through tv or live on the ground) into believing there was plane flying into a building when there were actually no planes there whatsoever.
By understanding this technology, just like with the convid scam, you get to be protected from future possible scams in a more intricate way. For example, knowing they have this technology in their hands, it is possible that they can create a fake event that can look like an Alien attack/invasion. They could use this 3D-volumetric hologram thing they have developed and fool millions of people that there is a spacecraft hovering above them, and using the weapons they have developed, make it seem as though they are utilizing some type of laser weapon to destroy something
All pre-recorded and CGI?? - Pity, you've fallen for the second layer of the cover up....
Here is another article you should read, as the whole plane / CGI narrative was already addressed in 2007, proven to be peddled by the disinfo agent Simon Shack, that worked for the European Space Agency, he also worked for the United Nations and his brother had connections to the Bin Laden family.
Now, just to put you at ease, Osama had NOTHING to do with the events on 9/11.
Absolutely agree. I feel the same about the terrain versus germ theory… It doesn’t matter, something was released on our population so that the US government can introduce its bio weapon: Covid clot shot
O, but if people woke up to the bamboozle that was 9/11, maybe covid would not have happened. It's time people wake up to how the 9/11 truth movement was infiltrated by cointelpro agents since it's inception....
9/11 Truth Suppression Timeline
"The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves." - Vladimir Lenin
Exactly. Then you can zoom out, realise it is not an isolated event and understand all governments on the world repeated these lies and will repeat new lies. From there you can take action and withdraw consent, start with building a new society, one person at a time in whatever way possible within the constraints of our reality.
Instead of childishly mocking people who have no idea if they used DEW or thermite and who DON’T CARE about those details.
They want you studying the numbers on the bomb heading your way, discussing if it says 666 or 33.
Very interesting, Agent ... but, indeed, they told us all over the damned place.
These two brilliant songs ... were made by THEM and the reporters were all scripted, they weren't speaking candidly as suggested by some 9/11 analysts. No reporter would allude to controlled demolition ... unless they were told to, unless they were scripted.
Conversation between Brian Williams, MSNBC News Anchor and David Restuccio, FDNY EMS Lieutenant about WTC-7, the third building to collapse at the WTC on 9/11, after its collapse:
"Can you confirm it was No 7 that just went in?" ["Went in" is a term used in controlled demolition that comes from the fact that the buildings fall in on themselves.]
"Yes, sir."
"And you guys knew this was comin' all day."
"We had heard reports that the building was unstable and that eventually it would either come down on its own or it would be taken down."
I thought the news reporter who said "the tops of both towers are gone" actually lends a bit of authenticity. He says that the smoke and dust clouds obscure whatever is left below. Since NO skyscraper has ever collapsed due to fire before or since, how would he know that the entire things just turned to dust? I'd have expected a huge twisted mess underneath. Ironically, it's a reminder that the twin collapse into its own footprint makes no sense unless you've been conditioned to accep it.
I would have expected a charred frame. Fires don't obliterate a building; they burn it. I speak as someone who has seen burned buildings, no special expertise.
To be clear, I have reservations about what happened that day and who was really responsible. However, I have to take exception to several of the things you have decided to point out as being illogical. First, the first witness, the CNN financial person. You keep pointing out that he doesn’t know which tower has been hit. I don’t think that’s a gotcha at all. Not everyone knows the North Tower versus the South Tower. Just because he was well aware of flight patterns is irrelevant to whether he knew which tower was which. Second, the 2nd witness I believe, stating that the tower just blew up, or exploded could have been a true perspective at the same time as it could have been true that a plane hit the tower. You never explained her position to the tower, only that she was closer than the CNN guy. If her view of the building was the opposite of where the plane entered it would make sense that what she saw was the building exploding. As far as all the reporters calling the video pictures doesn’t in and of itself point to conspiracy. While there was smoke billowing from the towers the image was completely static, non moving. Without any of the other deep dives into 911, especially regarding building 7 and the dustified theory, I’d have to look at this as being not so much really.
Most of your other digging has impressed me, though. To be clear.
You are so right to draw attention to the use of the word "picture" instead of live video, live feed, etc. So, yes, they fulfilled the disclaimer requirement, as you point out. In addition, if they had referred to having a film crew somewhere that was actually filming this, they would have had to say where they were, and how they knew to be there at this moment so they could be filming this completely unexpected event. I would think they would make a big point of the perspective from which they were shooting, how they even knew to be there, it was almost been using itself.
Besides their use of the word picture, the shocking nature of what is in those pictures also draws attention away from anybody questioning where this live feed is supposedly coming from. It reminds me of the supposed film of the Apollo astronauts, hopping around on the surface of the moon and planting an incredibly phony looking flag. And the spacecraft blasting off to return to earth. Who was behind that camera? That one question alone makes it clear that it's completely fake. We are so used to seeing realistic film of various events, such as in movies, or even news reports that are actually live, that we don't even wonder, who took these pictures? Who filmed this scene? Who is behind this camera?
Witness "Winston" = Winston Smith, the beleaguered protagonist of 1984 and the most widely known victim of propaganda in all of world literature. They think we're stupid.
DEW's (what a phonetic joke!) can cause terrible biological issues, but so far there is no proof they can turn brick into dust, certainly not unless a stable /focused emission is made.
911 Divisionist & Dew'dy Wood can not specify what equipment was used , nor provide footage of any similar occurrence of DEWs destroying concrete & steel. A laser cutting metal from a few millimeters away is not proof of a DEW being capable of building demolition, just like lighting a candle is not comparable with setting fire to an entire forest & making it instantaneously combust.
Dew'dy Wood & 911 Retardist both make their claims from CONSTRUCTED FOOTAGE, as was uncannily pointed out to 911 Revizer only a few days ago!
I see 2 holes in the side of the building but NO PLANE! Those 2 holes have a solid mass in between them... If a plane had hit there would be a hole right across....not 2 separate holes with a solid mass in between them!
The entire event was a fakery caused by frequency modulation weaponry. Hence the sonic boom the lady heard that knocked out her tv reception momentarily.
I watched a podcast a few months ago that mentioned the lack of people actually working in the towers. They were almost empty. (Wasn't there an issue with asbestos or something?) Also the complete lack of videos of people streaming out of the buildings during the attack. You would think people on the ground outside would be filming this. I wonder why that reporter kept asking something about what was on the street level? Also this podcaster mentioned the recorded city death levels did not rise during the event (though we know these figures can be faked, it's their system after all). He apparently asked Judy Wood for an interview several times and she ignored him.
2012 was also the year, when most of the US media was bought up by globalist investors... No wonder telling lies has been "legit" ever since (not that it wasn't before, but it may have been done more cautiously, but most of the time, real news were left untouched.
These videos are apparently using what I call the "shock effect," which can even be initiated by a little cussing. :) Most of the time, it's usually a Big Lie that is so terrible that it would be "criminal" (it often is) to question it:
You'll love this interaction with Alex Jones in relation to 9/11, way back in 2012, where Alex showed himself to be a limited hangout, when it comes to 9/11 truth...
With regards to the technology used on 9/11, MOST are missing the bigger picture!
Just as the hazardous and wasteful technology behind a nuclear bomb can also be used to provide hazardous and wasteful nuclear power, the technology which caused the clean and effortless molecular dissociation of the twin towers could also be used to give the whole world effortless clean energy.
Exposing this clean free energy technology means and end to the ruling elite's ability to control and exploit the general population through scarce, expensive, dirty and inefficient resources such as oil, coal, nuclear and "renewables".
Any group with an interest in maintaining the current paradigm of artificial scarcity and crappy energy technologies, which keeps the general population enslaved, would have an interest in helping to maintain the 9/11 cover up, because exposing the crime also exposes the TECHNOLOGY to commit it.
Maybe the people who did 9/11 operate under a code of conduct where they have to show this technology to the people, so they have the opportunity to claim it.
And if the people are too stupid or apathetic to show any interest, they will then feel justified in keeping it for themselves and continuing to control and exploit the human herd, like the CATTLE they have shown themselves to be.
You might think it's insane, and it is, but remember we're talking about a group of people who are willing to turn skyscrapers to DUST, live on TV.
In the final analysis there is no "grand" deception" or cover up.
There is only BLUFF!
Because everyone can see what happened to the buildings was clearly and PROVABLY NOT a structural failure (collapse) or a conventional controlled demolition by ANY thermal or kinetic mechanism!
I stated nukes are the 3rd layer of the cover up...
Go give this a watch the docci linked below and you'll wake up to what actually happened, which the 9/11 truther movement has been deflecting from, but before you do that - give this article a read, you'll thank me later.
9/11 Truth Suppression Timeline
"The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves." - Vladimir Lenin
Is that more projection, transference & irony from you feltcher addict?
One day you will realise that a sense of humor can be applied to the internet, & the horror of your own limitations will be so glaring it will blind you.
Now, lets see what hilarious , original response you have today, or is it just more regurgitated excrement from your tiny basement brain again?
They don't report the news,,, They broadcast it.
They CAST the spell BROADLY.
"Please stand by for our News "entertainment" broadcast."
They LITERALLY call it entertainment! Nough said.
EXCELLENT ARTICLE!
Also reminds me of N.E.W.S. North,East, West, South ....WITCHES, Broad Casting.
O, then you should look into who your truther celebrities are....
9/11 Truth Suppression Timeline
"The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves." - Vladimir Lenin
Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/911-truth-suppression-timeline
D.E.P.S.
You'll be surprised to hear who the members are.
Read the article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/deps-the-directed-energy-professional
Is the 9/11 "truth" movement a distraction movement?
What happens if you ask TRUTH questions?
Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/questions-for-the-911-truther-talking
Yep, Witches & Wizards ....War PIGS!
Verse 1]
Generals gathered in their masses
Just like witches at black masses
Evil minds that plot destruction
Sorcerer of death's construction
In the fields, the bodies burning
As the war machine keeps turning
Death and hatred to mankind
Poisoning their brainwashed minds .......
I rely on.....
Ephesians 5:11 - Have nothing to do with the unfruitful deeds of darkness, but expose them.
Galatians 4:16 - So have I become your enemy by telling you the truth?
EXPOSE THEM as THEY expose themselves in media & the lilke.
Especially Judy Wood. She is a fake government plant
Yes. They are all fake
Check into Dr. Judy Wood’s work. She has a PhD in engineering and knows her stuff. She wrote a book entitled Where Did the Towers Go? She’s claimed the towers were destroyed using some form of direct energy weapons and described the process as ’dustification’ because the towers literally turned into dust during their destruction.
Pay no mind to Petra.... She's of the opinion no one died, the buildings were gutted, all the eye witnesses are liars, the survivors between floors 2 and 22 of the north tower are actors and even more maligned talking points.... She's completely out of touch with reality...
With regards to the technology used on 9/11, MOST are missing the bigger picture!
Just as the hazardous and wasteful technology behind a nuclear bomb can also be used to provide hazardous and wasteful nuclear power, the technology which caused the clean and effortless molecular dissociation of the twin towers could also be used to give the whole world effortless clean energy.
Exposing this clean free energy technology means and end to the ruling elite's ability to control and exploit the general population through scarce, expensive, dirty and inefficient resources such as oil, coal, nuclear and "renewables".
Any group with an interest in maintaining the current paradigm of artificial scarcity and crappy energy technologies, which keeps the general population enslaved, would have an interest in helping to maintain the 9/11 cover up, because exposing the crime also exposes the TECHNOLOGY to commit it.
Maybe the people who did 9/11 operate under a code of conduct where they have to show this technology to the people, so they have the opportunity to claim it.
And if the people are too stupid or apathetic to show any interest, they will then feel justified in keeping it for themselves and continuing to control and exploit the human herd, like the CATTLE they have shown themselves to be.
You might think it's insane, and it is, but remember we're talking about a group of people who are willing to turn skyscrapers to DUST, live on TV.
In the final analysis there is no "grand" deception" or cover up.
There is only BLUFF!
Because everyone can see what happened to the buildings was clearly and PROVABLY NOT a structural failure (collapse) or a conventional controlled demolition by ANY thermal or kinetic mechanism!
Official narrative – Jet fuel.
Option behind door no 1 – explosives,
door no 2 – thermite,
door no 3 – buried or mini nukes.
Just don’t look at where the EVIDENCE points to.
Read Dr Wood’s book: Where did the towers go? https://www.wheredidthetowersgo.com
Andrew Johnson's two FREE E-Books on 9/11:
1. 9/11 – Finding the Truth - http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/pdf/9-11%20-%20Finding%20the%20Truth.pdf
2. 9/11 – Holding the Truth - http://checktheevidencecom.ipage.com/checktheevidence.com/pdf/911%20Holding%20The%20Truth%20-Andrew%20Johnson%20-%202017.pdf
This guy is a government agent
You need to do better with weak, woke ad hominems
There are 3 issues most people have when faced with the truth regarding the events of 9/11;
1. Problem solving skills
2. Group Think
3. They just can't handle the implications
And I agree that wordplay was used by the US government and MSM to pull of their false flag attack and start another war in the Middle East.
Knows her stuff? She's an agent pushing one of the many streams of propaganda about how exactly the buildings came down. We have DEWs, nuclear, thermite, nanothermite.
It's all PROPAGANDA.
WTC-7 is a classic implosion - they obviously used normal explosives - so why would they use a different method for the Twin Towers? As Agent suggests (and so does Simon Shack) what we see could be phony.
https://cluesforum.info/viewtopic.php?p=2388338&sid=86ddfc7e3d0c89e58464ed02bdd36a9d#p2388338
Petra - Here is some reading on September Clues, you can go do.
You're welcome...
September Clues - Layers of Deception - (Part One)
Exposing The Disinformation
Article: https://911planesresearch.substack.com/p/september-clues-layers-of-deception
September Clues - Layers of Deception - (Part Two)
Article: https://911planesresearch.substack.com/p/september-clues-layers-of-deception-086
September Clues - Layers of Deception - (Part Three)
Article: https://911planesresearch.substack.com/p/september-clues-layers-of-deception-3ff
September Clues - Addendum - Deceptions - Part One
Article: https://911planesresearch.substack.com/p/september-clues-addendum-deceptions
September Clues - Addendum Deceptions - Part Two
Article: https://911planesresearch.substack.com/p/september-clues-addendum-deceptions-bcd
Simon Shack’s Amateur Effort of Video Fakery
Cutting Through the Disinformation
Article: https://911planesresearch.substack.com/p/simon-shacks-amateur-effort-of-video
Simon Shack "Misrepresents" Plane Flight Path in 9/11 Video
Independent Analysis: Exposing Falsehoods of Simon Shack
Article: https://911planesresearch.substack.com/p/simon-shack-misrepresents-plane-flight
Why Ace Baker's Video Fakery Compositing Theory Is Invalid
Independent Analysis of Ace Baker's Video Compositing Theory
Article: https://911planesresearch.substack.com/p/why-ace-bakers-video-fakery-compositing
"This rules-out any possibility of layering because the plane in the video “entered” the building correctly."
Seriously?
The plane did not enter the building correctly because 142-tonne 767-200 airliners don't "enter" 500,000 tonne steel frame buildings whose steel supports are very close together.
A 142-tonne airliner would COLLIDE with the building and show evidence of crash physics such as deceleration and destruction of its parts in the same way a sedan crashing into a semi-trailer would. Moreover, a 767 airliner would look like this, not the "plane object" we are shown. https://www.modernairliners.com/boeing-767
I don't need to know a thing about how the footage was faked, physics says it was faked, that is all I need. This is a good video showing how the faked plane crash in The Medusa Touch (1978) actually abides by crash physics better than Flight 175. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xuhNR6lx97E&feature=youtu.be
9/11 Planes: 3D VIPT vs Video Fakery and CGI
Is seeing believing, or believing seeing on 9/11?
Article: https://911planesresearch.substack.com/p/911-planes-3d-volumetric-image-projection
Watch: 9/11 Alchemy - Facing Reality
Rumble Link: https://rumble.com/v42pr22-911-alchemy-facing-reality.html
YouTube Link: https://youtu.be/CrzNeZUp0tU
This guy is a government agent
You need to do better with weak, woke ad hominems
There are 3 issues most people have when faced with the truth regarding the events of 9/11;
1. Problem solving skills
2. Group Think
3. They just can't handle the implications
YOU ARE ´´an agent pushing one of the many streams´´!!!!
There are many streams though aren't there for the method of destruction. That's a simple fact. So if there are a number then we need to be suspicious, don't we? Why are they giving us a number of streams and is it likely that any one of those streams represents the truth? I'd say no. We can see that WTC-7 is a classic implosion using explosives so, a priori, why would they use a method that has NEVER been used in large building destruction before for the towers? Where did they test it? How could they be certain it would work? Why would they use a different method?
The 9/11 Building 7 HOAX
Building 7 did NOT go down to fire or explosives.
Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/the-building-7-hoax-video-of-2011
Building 7: A WAKE-UP CALL Discussion
Building 7 did NOT go down to fire or explosives.
Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/a-conversation-regarding-building
What you have to do is distinguish what might be faked or omitted and what is clear fact. Seismic data can be faked but in any case I wouldn't be surprised if a controlled demolition would register seismically. There's no sound! Are you kidding me? They didn't play it ... perhaps to hide the unmistakable sounds of explosions?? WTC-7 looks like a classic implosion - if it walks like a duck ... and we know that Controlled Demolition, Inc achieve three world records in large building demolition projects in the three years before 9/11. What would you say is the probability of those three world records constituting a PRACTICE RUN?
https://www.controlled-demolition.com/world-records/
You need to address important facts and not place importance on things that don't tell you anything.
IMPORTANT FACT: Cars are missing door-handles and number plates indicating they are junkyard cars and Judy Wood is responsible for FAKED DATA which immediately undermines her theory.
https://cluesforum.info/viewtopic.php?p=2388338&sid=86ddfc7e3d0c89e58464ed02bdd36a9d#p2388338
If they'd really dustified the buildings can you imagine how choked up everyone would be. I know there was some suffering inevitably but dustifying ONE MILLION TONNES of building would have caused massive dust ... but we don't see that.
In any case the most important element of 9/11 isn't how the buildings came down - the buildings is distraction from the FAKERY OF THE MAIN CRIME. The real crime - or rather the real ALLEGED crime was the deaths of 3,000 people and injury to 6,000.
Didn't happen though so to distract people from the FAKERY OF THE MAIN CRIME they've got them chasing their tails on exactly how the buildings came down.
https://petraliverani.substack.com/p/911
Here are some facts, that might hurt your feelings, Petra...
Do you know what forensic investigations entail?
How do you approach a crime scene?
Here is a hint: You collect evidence.
Why should you collect evidence?
To figure out what happened of course.
What are we going to do once we collected evidence?
First, let me remind you:
Sept 11 is a crime that should be solved by a forensic study of the evidence. Before it can be determined who did it, it must first be determined what was done and how it was done.
The order of crime solving is to determine
1) WHAT happened, then
2) HOW it happened (e.g., what weapon), then
3) WHO did it. And only then can we address
4) WHY they did it (i.e. motive).
Let us remember what is required to (legally) convict someone of a crime.
You cannot convict someone of a crime based on belief.
You cannot convict someone of a crime if you don’t even know what crime to charge them with.
If you accuse someone of murder using a gun, you’d better be sure the body has a bullet hole in it. And yet before noon on 9/11/01, we were told who did it, how they did it, and why they did it before any investigation had been conducted to determine what had even been done.
We do have a couple of FACTS though.
1. FACT: Although Hurricane Erin was located just off Long Island throughout the day of 9/11/01, both the approach in days before and the presence of the storm on that day went almost totally unreported. Hurricane Erin was omitted on the morning weather map, even though that portion of the Atlantic Ocean where she stood was covered by the map. Astronauts gazing down said they could see the drifting plume from the destruction of WTC2 and WTC1 but made no mention of the highly visible Erin. WHY?
2. FACT: Approximately 1,400 motor vehicles were "toasted" in strange ways during the destruction of the Twin Towers. WHY AND HOW?
3. FACT: During destruction, there appeared alongside the buildings curious corkscrew trails. WHY?
4. FACT: During the demise of each tower, large enough volumes of dust made of nano-sized particles went up, enough to block out 100% of sunlight in some areas. This nano-sized particulate dust in volume enough to achieve sun-light-blocking density constituted the remains of the greatest part of the destroyed buildings’ material substance. WHAT CAUSED THIS DUST TO FORM?
5. FACT: During the destruction, there was an absence of high heat. Witnesses reported that the initial dust cloud felt cooler than ambient temperatures. Additionally, there was scant evidence of burned bodies, although in one case a man was described as “crisped” even while his jacket remained un-crisped, indicating an “inside-out” combustion not possible with conventional fire. WHAT CAUSED THESE PHENOMENA?
6. FACT: Evidence that the WTC dust continued to break down and become finer and finer long after 9/11 itself came through the observable presence of "Fuzzballs". WHAT CAUSES THIS PHENOMENON?
7. FACT: First responders on 9/11 testified as to "toasted cars", spontaneous “fires” (including the flaming heavy coat of a running medic, who survived), the instant disappearance of people, a plane turning into a fireball in mid-air, electrical power cut off moments before WTC 2 destruction, and the sound of explosions. WHAT CAUSED THESE PHENOMENA?
8. FACT: For more than seven years, regions in the ground under where the main body of WTC4 stood have continued to fume. WHY?
9. FACT: Hazy clouds, called "Fuzzyblobs", appeared in the vicinity of material undergoing destruction. WHY?
10. FACT: Magnetometer readings from six stations in Alaska recorded abrupt shifts in the Earth’s magnetic field as each of the major destructive events unfolded at the WTC on 9/11. WHY?
11. FACT: Many cars in the neighborhood of the WTC complex were flipped upside down. They couldn’t have been flipped by hurricane-force winds, since they stood adjacent to trees with full foliage, not stripped by high wind. WHY?
12. FACT: More damage was done to the bathtub by earth-moving equipment during the clean-up process than from the destruction of more than a million tons of buildings above it WHY?
13. FACT: Most of the destroyed towers underwent mid-air pulverization and were turned to dust before they hit the ground. WHAT FORCE CAUSED THIS “DUSTIFICATION”?
14. FACT: Near-instant rusting of affected steel provided evidence of molecular dissociation and transmutation. WHY?
15. FACT: Of the estimated 3,000 toilets in WTC1 and WTC2, not one survived, nor was any recognizable portion of one whatsoever found. WHY?
16. FACT: Only one piece of office equipment in the entire WTC complex, a filing cabinet with folder dividers, survived. WHY?
17. FACT: Only the north wing of WTC4 was left standing, neatly sliced from the main body, which virtually disappeared. FACT
18. FACT: Rail lines, tunnels and most of the rail cars at levels under the WTC complex had only light damage, if any. WHY?
19. FACT: Cylindrical holes were cut into the vertical faces of buildings 4, 5 and 6. They were cut also into Liberty Street in front of Bankers Trust and into Vesey Street in front of WTC6. In addition, a cylindrical arc was cut into the façade of Bankers Trust WHY AND HOW?
20. FACT: Scott-Paks — portable air-tanks for firemen — frequently exploded for no visible reason. Entire fire trucks themselves that were parked near the WTC exploded. WHY? HOW?
21. FACT: Sheets of plain office paper were omnipresent throughout lower Manhattan after each tower’s destruction. This paper, however, remained unburned, even though it was often immediately adjacent to flaming cars or to steel beams glowing red, yellow, and even white. WHY?
22. FACT: Some steel beams and pieces of glass at and near GZ had what a Swiss-Cheese appearance. WHY?
23. FACT: Steel columns from the towers were curled around vertical axes like rolled- up carpets. Steel columns of this kind, however, when they buckle from being overloaded, would be bent around the horizontal, not the vertical, axis. WHY?
24. FACT: The “collapse” of the towers took place with remarkably little damage to neighboring buildings. The only seriously damaged or entirely destroyed buildings, in fact, were those with the WTC prefix, only those, that is, that were a part of the WTC complex. WHY?
25. FACT: The destruction of WTC7 in late afternoon on 9/11 was whisper quiet. The seismic signal during its disappearance, 0.6 was not significantly greater than background noise. WHY?
26. FACT: The facades of WFC1 and WFC2 showed no apparent structural damage from the destruction of WTC1 and WTC2. However, the decorative marble façade around the entry to the buildings was completely missing, entirely gone. WHY? FROM WHAT FORCE?
27. FACT: In the dirt pile, the Fuming was unusual for its quality of immediately decreasing when watered, contrary to fumes caused by fire or heat, where an initial steam-up is the response to watering. WHY?
28. FACT: The majority of the towers (WTC1, WTC2, WTC3, WTC7) did not remain as rigid bodies as they “fell.” WHY NOT?
29. FACT: The method of destruction in the case of each tower minimised damage to the bathtub and adjacent buildings, whereas terrorists would have been expected to maximize damage, including that of infrastructure.
30. FACT: The protective bathtub was not significantly damaged by the destruction of the Twin Towers.
31. FACT: The seismic impact was minimal during the destructions of WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7-and far too small to correspond with a conventional “collapse” as based on a comparison with the Kingdome controlled demolition.
32. FACT: The Twin Towers were destroyed from the top down, not from the bottom up.
33. FACT: The Twin Towers were destroyed in a shorter time than can be explained by physics as a “collapse” even at free-fall speed.
34. FACT: The upper 80 percent, approximately, of each tower was turned into fine dust and did not crash to the earth.
35. FACT: The upper 90 percent, approximately, of the inside of WTC7 was turned into fine dust and did not crash to the earth.
36. FACT: The WTC underground mall survived well, witnessed by Warner Brothers’ Road Runner and friends.
37. FACT: The WTC1 and WTC2 rubble pile was far too small to account for the total mass of the buildings. It did not even fill the lobby of 3 stories.
38. FACT: The WTC7 rubble pile was too small to account for the total mass of the building, and much of it consisted of mud.
39. FACT: Truckloads of dirt were hauled both into and out of the WTC site, a pattern that continued up to the construction of the new WTC years later.
40. FACT: What lather, thick clouds of dust and fumes, emanated from some faces of buildings before destruction, as if large volumes of the buildings’ mass was dissolving into the air. Lather poured from WTC7 for several hours before its destruction. WHY?
41. FACT: Weird fires appeared frequently on 9/11. This “fire” flamed but gave no evidence of providing heat, not even enough to burn nearby sheets of paper. WHY?
42. FACT: Glass windows on nearby buildings received circular and other odd-shaped holes without the entire panes breaking. WHY?
43. FACT: Changes and alterations in materials on 9/11 were similar or even identical in a great many ways to the changes and alterations in materials caused by The Hutchison Effect.
To determine what happened on 9/11, not just some, but ALL available evidence must be considered. We cannot pick and choose which observable facts we may want to explain and then ignore the others.
Now, you tell me if we should ignore these facts?
There are 3 issues most people have when faced with the truth regarding the events of 9/11
1. Problem solving skills
2. Group Think
3. They just can't handle the implications
Read Dr Wood’s book: Where did the towers go? Wheredidthetowersgo.com
When has conventional explosive building demolition been used before on a building the size of the twin towers? Where did they test it? How could they be certain it would work?
I don't get how you see Revisionists's work and how he compares normal 'classic implosions' (like you put it) with regular explosives to the wtc complex event and not agree that it definitely wasn't done with regular explosives. Nevermind all of the things that cannot be explained by a 'classic implosion' such as flags, trees, paper, and *people* not burning right next to 'toasted and melted' cars, or the complete lack of debris, or the complete lack of sound of building 7 when it came down, or the strange hole in building 6, or the damage to building 8 that had no 'fire' in it, etc.
If you look at all of this evidence, it is evident that there was no 'classic implosion'
"Where did they test it? How could they be certain it would work?"
Well, the argument is that it is black technology (just like there are people doing stuff in the dark regarding faking other events, there are other groups of people doing sutff in the dark with powerful technology they don't want you to know about), therefore they would test it consistently as they develop it, which is very reasonable. I guarantee you this was not the first time this technology has been used.
"Why would they use a different method?"
Well, if they used regular explosives, 1) It would be obvious that it was an inside job because you would have plenty of videographic and eyewitness evidence of loud bangs and explosions, 2) using this fantastic method is a revelation of power to anyone looking closely, letting you know they have the technology to dominate you in ways you're not even aware of
because both Petra & 911 Revisionist are obvious plants.
(however in the interest of fairness, I was surprised at what a good counter argument Petra made here. While we have quite opposing views on many things on this she appears to be reasonable & insightful about the main problems, although I doubt the death toll she imagines is genuine!)
Thermite was defiantly used, other techniques as well most probably.
DEW's (what a phonetic joke!) can cause terrible biological issues, but so far there is no proof they can turn brick into dust, certainly not unless a stable /focused emission is made.
911 Divisionist & Dew'dy Wood can not specify what equipment was used , nor provide footage of any similar occurrence of DEWs destroying concrete & steel. A laser cutting metal from a few millimeters away is not proof of a DEW being capable of building demolition, just like lighting a candle is not comparable with setting fire to a forest.
Dew'dy Wood & 911 Retardist both make their claims from CONSTRUCTED FOOTAGE, as was uncannily pointed out to 911 Revizer only a few days ago!
There’s definitely no evidence of thermite not controlled demolition, as I pointed out in my precious comment. The buildings clearly turned to dust in midair. There is footage where you can clearly see solid objects dustifying before they fall to the ground. Anyone that denies this easily observable fact is sus
What is your response to the alleged "toasted" cars being junkyard fakeries - no number plates and no door handles?
https://cluesforum.info/viewtopic.php?p=2388338&sid=86ddfc7e3d0c89e58464ed02bdd36a9d#p2388338
Are you aware of any evidence of "toasted" cars outside data connected to Judy Wood?
I would say that the toasted car phenomenon was also seen in Lahaina, so it is not only connected to Judy Wood.
Here, look at this video. 'Toasted' cars surrounded by unburned trees in Lahaina:
https://twitter.com/WillingWitness/status/1696182951552455068
Also, there are images taken of a parking lot in the vecinity before and after the destruction of the complex. The before pictures show regular cars; the after pictures show the same cars, unmoved, and discolored, hinting at the 'toasting' effect. These couldn't have come from a junkyard because the cars are clearly unmoved throughout the event and we know they were ok before, but look 'toasted' after the event. Of course, you could argue it's all photoshopped, and that's a real possibility, but given that this effect is also seen in Lahaina, that there are so many videos and photographs of vehicles that have been 'toasted' in the 9/11 event, it makes me believe they are not photoshopped.
Of course, Judy Wood presents a series of strangely 'toasted' cars near the complex, and as I mentioned earlier, with unburned paper and trees around them. There are eyewitnesses claiming the cars where combusting spotaneously.
The lack of number plates and door handles are explained through the effect of the technology used to destroy the complex. The argument is that the technology dustified the towers, including all of the steel and ceramic and *polymers* inside it. The claim is that the attack hit the vehicles in the vecinity of its main target, albeit at a lower intensity, which would be why the cars are still standing but some things pertaining to the vehicles have been 'dustified' as well, such as the engines and license plates ('soft' iron) and the handlebars (polymers or plastics).
I think, all in all, the evidence doesn't show the effects of a controlled demolition but of some type of energy weapon technology: there were no loud explosions (see building 7 that was hollowed out and fell silently), there is a clear lack of material/debris on the ground to account for a regular demolition, there was way too much dust compared to regular demolitions, there are strange 'toasted' cars around the site, building 8 which was nowhere near the 'explosions' and didn't collapse had visible structural damage/corrosion to its steel which meant it had to be rebuilt, you can visibly see some pieces of steel become dust as they are falling to the ground, etc.)
By the way, without any disrespect, I need no explanations from any of what someone post. I will get my own opinion from what I read !
This guy is probably not a government agent
Dr. Judy is counter intel to make you look foolish. We have pics of mossad next to boxes of fuses for demolition. https://peakd.com/conspiracy/@budz82/9-11-and-the-israeli-bomb-expert-infiltrated-art-groups-gelatin-demo-wiring-team-and-e-team-sol-gel-team
LOL - First, let me correct you on wanting the discussion by using a phrase that is ad hominem, trying to steer the discussion on a false premise of what evidence Dr Wood presented in her request for correction to NIST, which made her a whistle blower back in 2007.
She pointed out the FRAUD being perpetuated by the 23 NIST subcontractors, with their flawed science reports. This allowed her to SUE the 23 NIST subcontractors for SCIENCE Fraud… Her case went as far as the US Supreme court in 2009, but unfortunately, the judge BROKE THE LAW, by not hearing the case.
Now, can you tell me why NOBOBY, pushing bombs, thermite, molten metal, or nukes have filed ANY court proceeding with their co-called “explosive evidence”?
Why did architects for an engineered truth, under the leadership of Richard Gage, NOT make mention of molten metal or thermite, when they filed a RFC to NIST, AFTER Dr Wood filed hers, which she based on SOLID evidence?
You can read about all her evidence in her book, “Where did the towers go?” Have you read it? You willing to be the first person to debunk, empirical, verifiable evidence?
You’ll be the first person in 12 years since she published it.
Ad hominems does not disprove evidence, so you should try harder…
Let’s figure out how smart you really are, shall we?
Do you know what forensic investigations entail?
How do you approach a crime scene?
Here is a hint: You collect evidence.
Why should you collect evidence?
To figure out what happened of course.
What are we going to do once we collected evidence?
Judy wood is definitely a fake characther
First, let me remind you:
Sept 11 is a crime that should be solved by a forensic study of the evidence. Before it can be determined who did it, it must first be determined what was done and how it was done.
The order of crime solving is to determine
1) WHAT happened, then
2) HOW it happened (e.g., what weapon), then
3) WHO did it. And only then can we address
4) WHY they did it (i.e. motive).
Let us remember what is required to (legally) convict someone of a crime.
You cannot convict someone of a crime based on belief.
You cannot convict someone of a crime if you don’t even know what crime to charge them with.
If you accuse someone of murder using a gun, you’d better be sure the body has a bullet hole in it. And yet before noon on 9/11/01, we were told who did it, how they did it, and why they did it before any investigation had been conducted to determine what had even been done.
We do have a couple of FACTS though.
1. FACT: Although Hurricane Erin was located just off Long Island throughout the day of 9/11/01, both the approach in days before and the presence of the storm on that day went almost totally unreported. Hurricane Erin was omitted on the morning weather map, even though that portion of the Atlantic Ocean where she stood was covered by the map. Astronauts gazing down said they could see the drifting plume from the destruction of WTC2 and WTC1 but made no mention of the highly visible Erin. WHY?
2. FACT: Approximately 1,400 motor vehicles were "toasted" in strange ways during the destruction of the Twin Towers. WHY AND HOW?
3. FACT: During destruction, there appeared alongside the buildings curious corkscrew trails. WHY?
4. FACT: During the demise of each tower, large enough volumes of dust made of nano-sized particles went up, enough to block out 100% of sunlight in some areas. This nano-sized particulate dust in volume enough to achieve sun-light-blocking density constituted the remains of the greatest part of the destroyed buildings’ material substance. WHAT CAUSED THIS DUST TO FORM?
5. FACT: During the destruction, there was an absence of high heat. Witnesses reported that the initial dust cloud felt cooler than ambient temperatures. Additionally, there was scant evidence of burned bodies, although in one case a man was described as “crisped” even while his jacket remained un-crisped, indicating an “inside-out” combustion not possible with conventional fire. WHAT CAUSED THESE PHENOMENA?
6. FACT: Evidence that the WTC dust continued to break down and become finer and finer long after 9/11 itself came through the observable presence of "Fuzzballs". WHAT CAUSES THIS PHENOMENON?
7. FACT: First responders on 9/11 testified as to "toasted cars", spontaneous “fires” (including the flaming heavy coat of a running medic, who survived), the instant disappearance of people, a plane turning into a fireball in mid-air, electrical power cut off moments before WTC 2 destruction, and the sound of explosions. WHAT CAUSED THESE PHENOMENA?
8. FACT: For more than seven years, regions in the ground under where the main body of WTC4 stood have continued to fume. WHY?
9. FACT: Hazy clouds, called "Fuzzyblobs", appeared in the vicinity of material undergoing destruction. WHY?
10. FACT: Magnetometer readings from six stations in Alaska recorded abrupt shifts in the Earth’s magnetic field as each of the major destructive events unfolded at the WTC on 9/11. WHY?
11. FACT: Many cars in the neighborhood of the WTC complex were flipped upside down. They couldn’t have been flipped by hurricane-force winds, since they stood adjacent to trees with full foliage, not stripped by high wind. WHY?
12. FACT: More damage was done to the bathtub by earth-moving equipment during the clean-up process than from the destruction of more than a million tons of buildings above it WHY?
13. FACT: Most of the destroyed towers underwent mid-air pulverization and were turned to dust before they hit the ground. WHAT FORCE CAUSED THIS “DUSTIFICATION”?
14. FACT: Near-instant rusting of affected steel provided evidence of molecular dissociation and transmutation. WHY?
15. FACT: Of the estimated 3,000 toilets in WTC1 and WTC2, not one survived, nor was any recognizable portion of one whatsoever found. WHY?
16. FACT: Only one piece of office equipment in the entire WTC complex, a filing cabinet with folder dividers, survived. WHY?
17. FACT: Only the north wing of WTC4 was left standing, neatly sliced from the main body, which virtually disappeared. FACT
18. FACT: Rail lines, tunnels and most of the rail cars at levels under the WTC complex had only light damage, if any. WHY?
19. FACT: Cylindrical holes were cut into the vertical faces of buildings 4, 5 and 6. They were cut also into Liberty Street in front of Bankers Trust and into Vesey Street in front of WTC6. In addition, a cylindrical arc was cut into the façade of Bankers Trust WHY AND HOW?
20. FACT: Scott-Paks — portable air-tanks for firemen — frequently exploded for no visible reason. Entire fire trucks themselves that were parked near the WTC exploded. WHY? HOW?
21. FACT: Sheets of plain office paper were omnipresent throughout lower Manhattan after each tower’s destruction. This paper, however, remained unburned, even though it was often immediately adjacent to flaming cars or to steel beams glowing red, yellow, and even white. WHY?
22. FACT: Some steel beams and pieces of glass at and near GZ had what a Swiss-Cheese appearance. WHY?
23. FACT: Steel columns from the towers were curled around vertical axes like rolled- up carpets. Steel columns of this kind, however, when they buckle from being overloaded, would be bent around the horizontal, not the vertical, axis. WHY?
24. FACT: The “collapse” of the towers took place with remarkably little damage to neighboring buildings. The only seriously damaged or entirely destroyed buildings, in fact, were those with the WTC prefix, only those, that is, that were a part of the WTC complex. WHY?
25. FACT: The destruction of WTC7 in late afternoon on 9/11 was whisper quiet. The seismic signal during its disappearance, 0.6 was not significantly greater than background noise. WHY?
26. FACT: The facades of WFC1 and WFC2 showed no apparent structural damage from the destruction of WTC1 and WTC2. However, the decorative marble façade around the entry to the buildings was completely missing, entirely gone. WHY? FROM WHAT FORCE?
27. FACT: In the dirt pile, the Fuming was unusual for its quality of immediately decreasing when watered, contrary to fumes caused by fire or heat, where an initial steam-up is the response to watering. WHY?
28. FACT: The majority of the towers (WTC1, WTC2, WTC3, WTC7) did not remain as rigid bodies as they “fell.” WHY NOT?
29. FACT: The method of destruction in the case of each tower minimised damage to the bathtub and adjacent buildings, whereas terrorists would have been expected to maximize damage, including that of infrastructure.
30. FACT: The protective bathtub was not significantly damaged by the destruction of the Twin Towers.
31. FACT: The seismic impact was minimal during the destructions of WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7-and far too small to correspond with a conventional “collapse” as based on a comparison with the Kingdome controlled demolition.
32. FACT: The Twin Towers were destroyed from the top down, not from the bottom up.
33. FACT: The Twin Towers were destroyed in a shorter time than can be explained by physics as a “collapse” even at free-fall speed.
34. FACT: The upper 80 percent, approximately, of each tower was turned into fine dust and did not crash to the earth.
35. FACT: The upper 90 percent, approximately, of the inside of WTC7 was turned into fine dust and did not crash to the earth.
36. FACT: The WTC underground mall survived well, witnessed by Warner Brothers’ Road Runner and friends.
37. FACT: The WTC1 and WTC2 rubble pile was far too small to account for the total mass of the buildings. It did not even fill the lobby of 3 stories.
38. FACT: The WTC7 rubble pile was too small to account for the total mass of the building, and much of it consisted of mud.
39. FACT: Truckloads of dirt were hauled both into and out of the WTC site, a pattern that continued up to the construction of the new WTC years later.
40. FACT: What lather, thick clouds of dust and fumes, emanated from some faces of buildings before destruction, as if large volumes of the buildings’ mass was dissolving into the air. Lather poured from WTC7 for several hours before its destruction. WHY?
41. FACT: Weird fires appeared frequently on 9/11. This “fire” flamed but gave no evidence of providing heat, not even enough to burn nearby sheets of paper. WHY?
42. FACT: Glass windows on nearby buildings received circular and other odd-shaped holes without the entire panes breaking. WHY?
43. FACT: Changes and alterations in materials on 9/11 were similar or even identical in a great many ways to the changes and alterations in materials caused by The Hutchison Effect.
To determine what happened on 9/11, not just some, but ALL available evidence must be considered. We cannot pick and choose which observable facts we may want to explain and then ignore the others.
Now, you tell me if we should ignore these facts?
There are 3 issues most people have when faced with the truth regarding the events of 9/11
1. Problem solving skills
2. Group Think
3. They just can't handle the implications
I suggest you read Dr Wood’s book: Where did the towers go? Wheredidthetowersgo.com
Revisionist is a government agent
Ba ha ha ha ha ha - The standard fallback woke answer....
Here is some reading for you to do...
9/11 Truth Suppression Timeline
"The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves." - Vladimir Lenin
Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/911-truth-suppression-timeline
Whatever you say Jayro.
Funny. I was just watching the National Geographic documentary on U tube 2days ago.
While watching the first episode I was reminded of a cameraman/crew with the fire men who caught the first plane footage. I was like who the heck he is? Why is he following fire men first thing in the morning? It made me suspicious when he repositioned to show the towers in the background once.
What are the odds a film crew supposedly captured the first plane? Has anyone found out who the cameraman is? Whose idea was it for him to be there?
@ R U Kidding me - You'll find these articles educational...
9/11 Truth Suppression Timeline
"The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves." - Vladimir Lenin
Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/911-truth-suppression-timeline
WHAT exactly happened to ALL 7 buildings with a WTC prefix on Sept 11, 2001?
The following points need to be made regarding what exactly happened to the buildings and the observable evidence at ground zero, that the “9/11 truth movement” never touch on…
Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/what-exactly-happened-to-all-7-buildings
This guy is one of the worst government agents
You seem to have a serious aversion to finding truth or do you suffer from the main issues?
There are 3 issues most people have when faced with the truth regarding the events of 9/11;
1. Problem solving skills
2. Group Think
3. They just can't handle the implications
Read Dr Wood’s book: Where did the towers go? https://www.wheredidthetowersgo.com
... and the firefighter testimonies are all 100% bullshit.
One firefighter stationed on the Upper East Side describes his route to the WTC as heading west along Houston and then down the West Side Hwy. Wrong way. Can't turn south from Houston the East Side Hwy would be much more convenient.
In all 118 testimonies not one mention of any of the alleged deaths of their 343 colleagues.
They call them "oral" histories but while we have transcripts, no audio. Why not, transcripts would be based on audio. Where is it?
https://petraliverani.substack.com/p/nonsensicalities-in-the-911-firefighter
The September 11, 2001 attacks left everyone dazed and confused, trying to make sense of a multitude of things happening around them at once and news reporters had a very difficult time putting into words what they were seeing and what they were hearing, and if you are a hardened 9/11 conspiracy theorist, you’ll be well aware the TV coverage and witness testimonies are a rabbit hole all by itself.
Math Easy Solutions downloaded and combined all 500 PDFs of 9/11 firefighters, paramedics, and EMT witness testimony from the NY Times archive and combined them into a searchable 7,058 page PDF! https://1drv.ms/b/s!As32ynv0LoaIirAetue35QI7OqdiLw
The Sounds of Explosions on 9/11
Was every BOOM a BOMB?
Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/the-explosions-on-911
One of the Naudet brothers. They were NYU grads who happened to know a firefighter (who is also an actor). They were supposedly filming a documentary on the journey of a probie (probation period firefighter) and just so happened to conveniently pan to get that shot. There are three known shots of the first "plane" hitting.
James Hanlon James Hanlon James HanlonJames HanlonJames HanlonJames HanlonJames HanlonJames HanlonJames HanlonJames HanlonJames HanlonJames HanlonJames HanlonJames HanlonJames HanlonJames HanlonJames HanlonJames HanlonJames HanlonJames HanlonJames HanlonJames HanlonJames HanlonJames HanlonJames HanlonJames HanlonJames Hanlon
O, dear
Still stuck on calling it a collapse, when it wasn't a collapse, but a disintegration...
The real psy-op was the cover up of the 23 NIST subcontractors who'd later be sued in 2007, for science fraud for their flawed reports that made up the 10 000 page NIST report, but let's follow the 9/11 truther movements lead and not look at them..
Case 1 - https://nomoregames.net/2011/06/12/request-for-correction-by-nist-for-its-invalid-wtc-jetliner-animations-and-analyses/
Case 2 - https://www.drjudywood.com/wp/court-case-qui-tam/
Then also make no mention of the COINTELPRO agents that infiltrated the 9/11 truther movement, with the forming of the 2005, "Scholars for 9/11 truth" and then subsequently the formation of architects for an engineered truth in 2007, AFTER the 2 x Qui-Tam whistleblower cases were filed against the 23 NIST subcontractors, who were aligned with the US Military Industrial complex.
Then, do not read this article, spelling it out for you.
9/11 Truth Suppression Timeline
"The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves." - Vladimir Lenin
Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/911-truth-suppression-timeline
And don't read this article either...
The controlled demolition of the thermite & nuke theory?
Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/the-controlled-demolition-of-thermite
Lastly, don't watch this excellent 2018 documentary;
9/11 Alchemy - Facing Reality
Rumble Link: https://rumble.com/v42pr22-911-alchemy-facing-reality.html
YouTube Link: https://youtu.be/CrzNeZUp0tU
WHAT exactly happened to ALL 7 buildings with a WTC prefix on Sept 11, 2001?
The following points need to be made regarding what exactly happened to the buildings and the observable evidence at ground zero, that the “9/11 truth movement” never touch on…
Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/what-exactly-happened-to-all-7-buildings
Did you not get the part where he said, "Because this article is to show you things you haven’t seen, we will not be discussing holograms, thermite, exchange students, CGI and all the other topics that have been done well by phenomenal researchers..."
He was focusing on the words and footage used by the media. Your snarky comment is completely unnecessary.
O, my remark is totally necessary.
There are bigger fish to fry with regards to the cover-up of the cover-up as to run with the so called TV fakery narrative that was discussed, and completely addressed over 15 years ago.
This guy is a loser
There are 3 issues most people have when faced with the truth regarding the events of 9/11;
1. Problem solving skills
2. Group Think
3. They just can't handle the implications
Not "he, but "she" said... That is important.
What's your deal Monica? What's the point you are trying to make? I have noticed you dropping these types of comments under a few of his articles.
How is the gender of the author relevant to the articles being published?
I couldn't care less if he was a she pretending to be a he. She also wouldn't be the first author to write under a male pseudonym - Remember Jane Eyer / Currer Bell?
To me, his entire appearance is make believe - I picture him as a stylised character consisting of a white suit and hat with glasses.
You really don't get how they pushed out multiple streams of propaganda for the building destructions: DEWs, nuclear, thermite, nanothermite - can't you see they're MULTIPLE STREAMS?
There were no incinerated cars - the cars were from junkyards TOLD TO US VERY OBVIOUSLY because they lack number plates and door handles.
https://cluesforum.info/viewtopic.php?p=2353131&sid=142edfde8c75559f71e16ae75924efa2#p2353131
These are three simple facts:
--- We were told that Controlled Demolition, Inc (CDI) presented its cleanup plan for the WTC eleven days after the fateful event. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controlled_Demolition,_Inc.
--- Three of CDI’s four world records in large building demolition projects were achieved in the three years before 9/11: 1998 (2) and 2000 (1). https://www.controlled-demolition.com/world-records/
--- CDI is very proud of its safety culture. https://www.controlled-demolition.com/about-us-explosives-controlled-demolition-implosion/safety/
They used tried and tested methods - but what they showed us as Agent suggests may not have been real.
Petra - You and I have danced more than once. I'm not going to get into it with you again.
Question - Were the buildings there on Sept 10, 2001? Then on September 12, were they still there?
Unfortunately all you bring to the table is bluff, talking points that have been discussed, debated and buried over 15 years ago - Pity you stick to certain talking points like a cult follower, but that's your right....
In the final analysis there is no "grand" deception" or cover up on WHAT happened to 7 buildings with a WTC prefix - Actually 8, when you included the anomalous Bankers Trust Building, that was deconstructed due to lingering effects affecting the steel of the building..
Everyone can see what happened to the buildings was clearly and PROVABLY NOT a structural failure (collapse) or a conventional controlled demolition by ANY thermal or kinetic mechanism!
Official narrative – Jet fuel.
Option behind door no 1 – explosives,
door no 2 – thermite,
door no 3 – buried or mini nukes.
Just don’t look at where the EVIDENCE points to.
There are 3 issues most people have when faced with the truth regarding the events of 9/11;
1. Problem solving skills
2. Group Think
3. They just can't handle the implications
9/11 Truth Suppression Timeline
"The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves." - Vladimir Lenin
Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/911-truth-suppression-timeline
9/11 The Plane / No Plane debate settled.
Most probably the best distraction of WHAT happened on September 11, 2001
Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/911-the-plane-no-plane-argument
Watch: 9/11 Alchemy - Facing Reality
Rumble Link: https://rumble.com/v42pr22-911-alchemy-facing-reality.html
YouTube Link: https://youtu.be/CrzNeZUp0tU
Loser. I would smoke this guy with his bullshit fake knowledge.
You need to do better with weak, woke ad hominems
There are 3 issues most people have when faced with the truth regarding the events of 9/11;
1. Problem solving skills
2. Group Think
3. They just can't handle the implications
Since we can agree that most of what we saw that day was pre-recorded and the whole thing was planned decades ago.. we now know the most important things. WE HAVE BEEN LIED TO. We are being lied to. Did they do it with thermite or DEW or magic detonating leprechauns? WHO THE F CARES? All that arguing about stupid details is useless, so why cling to one explanation or the other when in truth we have no fucking idea because we were not there, the site was closed for us peasants and we can only look at imagery that is clearly faked.
O, but again, that is where you're missing the bigger picture...
I do not agree that any of the feeds from the tower's disintegration was pre-recorded - All this is a blatant call on the discredited Loose Change and September Clues disinformation. FYI - Thermite has also been proven, time and time to be a government talking point planted by Steven E Jones and furthered by architects for an engineered truth, under leadership of Richard Gage. You really care about getting to the bottom of 9/11, or do you want your bias confirmed? Then read this article:
9/11 Truth Suppression Timeline
"The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves." - Vladimir Lenin
Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/911-truth-suppression-timeline
With regards to the technology used on 9/11, YOU are missing the bigger picture!
Just as the hazardous and wasteful technology behind a nuclear bomb can also be used to provide hazardous and wasteful nuclear power, the technology which caused the clean and effortless molecular dissociation of the twin towers could also be used to give the whole world effortless clean energy.
Exposing this clean free energy technology means and end to the ruling elite's ability to control and exploit the general population through scarce, expensive, dirty and inefficient resources such as oil, coal, nuclear and "renewables".
Any group with an interest in maintaining the current paradigm of artificial scarcity and crappy energy technologies, which keeps the general population enslaved, would have an interest in helping to maintain the 9/11 cover up, because exposing the crime also exposes the TECHNOLOGY to commit it.
Maybe the people who did 9/11 operate under a code of conduct where they have to show this technology to the people, so they have the opportunity to claim it.
And if the people are too stupid or apathetic to show any interest, they will then feel justified in keeping it for themselves and continuing to control and exploit the human herd, like the CATTLE they have shown themselves to be.
You might think it's insane, and it is, but remember we're talking about a group of people who are willing to turn skyscrapers to DUST, live on TV.
In the final analysis there is no "grand" deception" or cover up.
There is only BLUFF!
Because everyone can see what happened to the buildings was clearly and PROVABLY NOT a structural failure (collapse) or a conventional controlled demolition by ANY thermal or kinetic mechanism!
Official narrative – Jet fuel.
Option behind door no 1 – explosives,
door no 2 – thermite,
door no 3 – buried or mini nukes.
Just don’t look at where the EVIDENCE points to, which is some sort of COLD DEW tech.
Read Dr Wood’s book: Where did the towers go? https://www.wheredidthetowersgo.com
Andrew Johnson's two FREE E-Books on 9/11:
1. 9/11 – Finding the Truth - http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/pdf/9-11%20-%20Finding%20the%20Truth.pdf
2. 9/11 – Holding the Truth - http://checktheevidencecom.ipage.com/checktheevidence.com/pdf/911%20Holding%20The%20Truth%20-Andrew%20Johnson%20-%202017.pdf
Watch: 9/11 Alchemy - Facing Reality
Rumble Link: https://rumble.com/v42pr22-911-alchemy-facing-reality.html
YouTube Link: https://youtu.be/CrzNeZUp0tU
NO, I don't care for those details. To quote you;
Because everyone can see what happened to the buildings was clearly and PROVABLY NOT a structural failure (collapse) or a conventional controlled demolition by ANY thermal or kinetic mechanism!
Everyone can see? I think it was all pre-recorded and CGI, a show made by a few people on powerful computers. If you can agree that they used CGI and video editing/pre-recorded footage, why are you so firm in your position?
It is akin to the convid event. The most important thing to understand about convid is that it was all a scam and a huge deception of epic proportions, and States all over the world were being extra evil for a prolonged period of time.
But, if you look into the details of the convid scam, you'll understand the reality we live in a little better and we'll be better prepared for the next time they use the same technology on us, e.g. if we understand that viruses don't exist and contagion is a myth, then we'll be better prepared for the next time the powers that be push nonsense a convid-type scam on us, like a new AIDS-HIV or ebola escare. We'll be effectively immune from that nonsense, right?
Similary, with 9/11, when you look into the details, we'll understand reality a little better. In this case, we can see, as demonstrated by 9/11 Revisionist that there are very advanced technologies that can do freaky things, such as turn two 110-story steel and concrete (and plastic and ceramic, etc...) buildings into dust, or do 3D-volumetric holograms that can fool people (either through tv or live on the ground) into believing there was plane flying into a building when there were actually no planes there whatsoever.
By understanding this technology, just like with the convid scam, you get to be protected from future possible scams in a more intricate way. For example, knowing they have this technology in their hands, it is possible that they can create a fake event that can look like an Alien attack/invasion. They could use this 3D-volumetric hologram thing they have developed and fool millions of people that there is a spacecraft hovering above them, and using the weapons they have developed, make it seem as though they are utilizing some type of laser weapon to destroy something
Please quote me correctly.
All pre-recorded and CGI?? - Pity, you've fallen for the second layer of the cover up....
Here is another article you should read, as the whole plane / CGI narrative was already addressed in 2007, proven to be peddled by the disinfo agent Simon Shack, that worked for the European Space Agency, he also worked for the United Nations and his brother had connections to the Bin Laden family.
Now, just to put you at ease, Osama had NOTHING to do with the events on 9/11.
Go do some reading real quick and learn a bit...
9/11 Planes: 3D VIPT vs Video Fakery and CGI
Is seeing believing, or believing seeing on 9/11?
Article: https://911planesresearch.substack.com/p/911-planes-3d-volumetric-image-projection
And listen to this 2024 podcast interview of 9/11 Planes Research: https://jermwarfare.com/conversations/mark-conlon-on-there-being-no-planes-on-9-11
So arrogant. I will ignore you from now on.
Peace.
@Inverted Reality - Maybe you just define the term "truth seeker" a way lot more different than me?
Maybe you don't really want to learn the truth?
There are 3 issues most people have when faced with the truth regarding the events of 9/11;
1. Problem solving skills
2. Group Think
3. They just can't handle the implications
9/11 Truth Suppression Timeline
"The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves." - Vladimir Lenin
Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/911-truth-suppression-timeline
Hey revision you suck
You need to do better with weak, woke ad hominems
There are 3 issues most people have when faced with the truth regarding the events of 9/11;
1. Problem solving skills
2. Group Think
3. They just can't handle the implications
Absolutely agree. I feel the same about the terrain versus germ theory… It doesn’t matter, something was released on our population so that the US government can introduce its bio weapon: Covid clot shot
O, but if people woke up to the bamboozle that was 9/11, maybe covid would not have happened. It's time people wake up to how the 9/11 truth movement was infiltrated by cointelpro agents since it's inception....
9/11 Truth Suppression Timeline
"The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves." - Vladimir Lenin
Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/911-truth-suppression-timeline
Exactly. Then you can zoom out, realise it is not an isolated event and understand all governments on the world repeated these lies and will repeat new lies. From there you can take action and withdraw consent, start with building a new society, one person at a time in whatever way possible within the constraints of our reality.
Instead of childishly mocking people who have no idea if they used DEW or thermite and who DON’T CARE about those details.
They want you studying the numbers on the bomb heading your way, discussing if it says 666 or 33.
O, inverted reality, if you read this article, you'd wake up.
9/11 Truth Suppression Timeline
"The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves." - Vladimir Lenin
Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/911-truth-suppression-timeline
This guybsaid something smart. The rest of these people are govt agents
You need to do better with weak, woke ad hominems
There are 3 issues most people have when faced with the truth regarding the events of 9/11;
1. Problem solving skills
2. Group Think
3. They just can't handle the implications
Exactly. On point.
God I hate this fake agent
You need to do better with weak, woke ad hominems
There are 3 issues most people have when faced with the truth regarding the events of 9/11;
1. Problem solving skills
2. Group Think
3. They just can't handle the implications
Superb Agent. You also just solved the Trump "assasination" attempt
Very interesting, Agent ... but, indeed, they told us all over the damned place.
These two brilliant songs ... were made by THEM and the reporters were all scripted, they weren't speaking candidly as suggested by some 9/11 analysts. No reporter would allude to controlled demolition ... unless they were told to, unless they were scripted.
Free Fallin' (to Tom Petty's song) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vgx8Uwo-Vxc
I Believe in Miracles - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=71fwKA9Udso
From the Free Fallin' song
Conversation between Brian Williams, MSNBC News Anchor and David Restuccio, FDNY EMS Lieutenant about WTC-7, the third building to collapse at the WTC on 9/11, after its collapse:
"Can you confirm it was No 7 that just went in?" ["Went in" is a term used in controlled demolition that comes from the fact that the buildings fall in on themselves.]
"Yes, sir."
"And you guys knew this was comin' all day."
"We had heard reports that the building was unstable and that eventually it would either come down on its own or it would be taken down."
I thought the news reporter who said "the tops of both towers are gone" actually lends a bit of authenticity. He says that the smoke and dust clouds obscure whatever is left below. Since NO skyscraper has ever collapsed due to fire before or since, how would he know that the entire things just turned to dust? I'd have expected a huge twisted mess underneath. Ironically, it's a reminder that the twin collapse into its own footprint makes no sense unless you've been conditioned to accep it.
I would have expected a charred frame. Fires don't obliterate a building; they burn it. I speak as someone who has seen burned buildings, no special expertise.
To be clear, I have reservations about what happened that day and who was really responsible. However, I have to take exception to several of the things you have decided to point out as being illogical. First, the first witness, the CNN financial person. You keep pointing out that he doesn’t know which tower has been hit. I don’t think that’s a gotcha at all. Not everyone knows the North Tower versus the South Tower. Just because he was well aware of flight patterns is irrelevant to whether he knew which tower was which. Second, the 2nd witness I believe, stating that the tower just blew up, or exploded could have been a true perspective at the same time as it could have been true that a plane hit the tower. You never explained her position to the tower, only that she was closer than the CNN guy. If her view of the building was the opposite of where the plane entered it would make sense that what she saw was the building exploding. As far as all the reporters calling the video pictures doesn’t in and of itself point to conspiracy. While there was smoke billowing from the towers the image was completely static, non moving. Without any of the other deep dives into 911, especially regarding building 7 and the dustified theory, I’d have to look at this as being not so much really.
Most of your other digging has impressed me, though. To be clear.
If you were working every day for many years on a high floor with a view of the area and the Hudson, you'd have a fair idea of where the planes fly.
You are so right to draw attention to the use of the word "picture" instead of live video, live feed, etc. So, yes, they fulfilled the disclaimer requirement, as you point out. In addition, if they had referred to having a film crew somewhere that was actually filming this, they would have had to say where they were, and how they knew to be there at this moment so they could be filming this completely unexpected event. I would think they would make a big point of the perspective from which they were shooting, how they even knew to be there, it was almost been using itself.
Besides their use of the word picture, the shocking nature of what is in those pictures also draws attention away from anybody questioning where this live feed is supposedly coming from. It reminds me of the supposed film of the Apollo astronauts, hopping around on the surface of the moon and planting an incredibly phony looking flag. And the spacecraft blasting off to return to earth. Who was behind that camera? That one question alone makes it clear that it's completely fake. We are so used to seeing realistic film of various events, such as in movies, or even news reports that are actually live, that we don't even wonder, who took these pictures? Who filmed this scene? Who is behind this camera?
This article is a word salad, bringing up a talking point that was discussed and buried 15 years ago already... This article will open your eyes...
9/11 Truth Suppression Timeline
"The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves." - Vladimir Lenin
Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/911-truth-suppression-timeline
Witness "Winston" = Winston Smith, the beleaguered protagonist of 1984 and the most widely known victim of propaganda in all of world literature. They think we're stupid.
DEW's (what a phonetic joke!) can cause terrible biological issues, but so far there is no proof they can turn brick into dust, certainly not unless a stable /focused emission is made.
911 Divisionist & Dew'dy Wood can not specify what equipment was used , nor provide footage of any similar occurrence of DEWs destroying concrete & steel. A laser cutting metal from a few millimeters away is not proof of a DEW being capable of building demolition, just like lighting a candle is not comparable with setting fire to an entire forest & making it instantaneously combust.
Dew'dy Wood & 911 Retardist both make their claims from CONSTRUCTED FOOTAGE, as was uncannily pointed out to 911 Revizer only a few days ago!
I see 2 holes in the side of the building but NO PLANE! Those 2 holes have a solid mass in between them... If a plane had hit there would be a hole right across....not 2 separate holes with a solid mass in between them!
The entire event was a fakery caused by frequency modulation weaponry. Hence the sonic boom the lady heard that knocked out her tv reception momentarily.
I watched a podcast a few months ago that mentioned the lack of people actually working in the towers. They were almost empty. (Wasn't there an issue with asbestos or something?) Also the complete lack of videos of people streaming out of the buildings during the attack. You would think people on the ground outside would be filming this. I wonder why that reporter kept asking something about what was on the street level? Also this podcaster mentioned the recorded city death levels did not rise during the event (though we know these figures can be faked, it's their system after all). He apparently asked Judy Wood for an interview several times and she ignored him.
Exceptional research.
2012 was also the year, when most of the US media was bought up by globalist investors... No wonder telling lies has been "legit" ever since (not that it wasn't before, but it may have been done more cautiously, but most of the time, real news were left untouched.
These videos are apparently using what I call the "shock effect," which can even be initiated by a little cussing. :) Most of the time, it's usually a Big Lie that is so terrible that it would be "criminal" (it often is) to question it:
https://rayhorvaththesource.substack.com/p/the-shock-effect
Everything is fake and gay. Everything is fake and gay. EVERYTHING IS FAKE... AND GAY.
Is that a desperate admission regarding your own state of being Thworsh?
NEWTOWN was a total joke and ALEX JONES is CONTROLLED OPPOSITION ...keeping the stupid evil LIE alive...
You'll love this interaction with Alex Jones in relation to 9/11, way back in 2012, where Alex showed himself to be a limited hangout, when it comes to 9/11 truth...
Link: https://rumble.com/v4xbyyc-alex-jones-wants-you-to-forget-about-this-911-interview.html
The way the rowers came down indicated professional demolition, Investigate that!
With regards to the technology used on 9/11, MOST are missing the bigger picture!
Just as the hazardous and wasteful technology behind a nuclear bomb can also be used to provide hazardous and wasteful nuclear power, the technology which caused the clean and effortless molecular dissociation of the twin towers could also be used to give the whole world effortless clean energy.
Exposing this clean free energy technology means and end to the ruling elite's ability to control and exploit the general population through scarce, expensive, dirty and inefficient resources such as oil, coal, nuclear and "renewables".
Any group with an interest in maintaining the current paradigm of artificial scarcity and crappy energy technologies, which keeps the general population enslaved, would have an interest in helping to maintain the 9/11 cover up, because exposing the crime also exposes the TECHNOLOGY to commit it.
Maybe the people who did 9/11 operate under a code of conduct where they have to show this technology to the people, so they have the opportunity to claim it.
And if the people are too stupid or apathetic to show any interest, they will then feel justified in keeping it for themselves and continuing to control and exploit the human herd, like the CATTLE they have shown themselves to be.
You might think it's insane, and it is, but remember we're talking about a group of people who are willing to turn skyscrapers to DUST, live on TV.
In the final analysis there is no "grand" deception" or cover up.
There is only BLUFF!
Because everyone can see what happened to the buildings was clearly and PROVABLY NOT a structural failure (collapse) or a conventional controlled demolition by ANY thermal or kinetic mechanism!
Official narrative – Jet fuel.
Option behind door no 1 – explosives,
door no 2 – thermite,
door no 3 – buried or mini nukes.
Just don’t look at where the EVIDENCE points to.
Read Dr Wood’s book: Where did the towers go? https://www.wheredidthetowersgo.com
Andrew Johnson's two FREE E-Books on 9/11:
1. 9/11 – Finding the Truth - http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/pdf/9-11%20-%20Finding%20the%20Truth.pdf
2. 9/11 – Holding the Truth - http://checktheevidencecom.ipage.com/checktheevidence.com/pdf/911%20Holding%20The%20Truth%20-Andrew%20Johnson%20-%202017.pdf
Nukes are fake man so if you don't know that hard to take your other outlandish tech insights seriously.
It seems what I wrote went over your head?
I stated nukes are the 3rd layer of the cover up...
Go give this a watch the docci linked below and you'll wake up to what actually happened, which the 9/11 truther movement has been deflecting from, but before you do that - give this article a read, you'll thank me later.
9/11 Truth Suppression Timeline
"The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves." - Vladimir Lenin
Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/911-truth-suppression-timeline
Watch: 9/11 Alchemy - Facing Reality
Rumble Link: https://rumble.com/v42pr22-911-alchemy-facing-reality.html
YouTube Link: https://youtu.be/CrzNeZUp0tU
911 Repulsivist, You write just like other plants here such as EverLyin' Bumsick, Protrue (Proturd) & Francis Leader. How uncanny is that 🙄🥱😴
You are a really, really sad sad person. If you are a real person....
One can only pity you.
You must lead such an empty life.
Is that more projection, transference & irony from you feltcher addict?
One day you will realise that a sense of humor can be applied to the internet, & the horror of your own limitations will be so glaring it will blind you.
Now, lets see what hilarious , original response you have today, or is it just more regurgitated excrement from your tiny basement brain again?
tROT ON Norman,
it's all you can do these days.
WORD...thanks DR TOM COWAN
Much like how they took down world fairs I imagine.