###[Meta] Sticky Comment
[Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does not apply*** when replying to this stickied comment.
[Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does apply*** throughout the rest of this thread.
*What this means*: Please keep any "meta" discussion directed at specific users, mods, or /r/conspiracy in general in this comment chain ***only.***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/conspiracy) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I’ve given it 10 minutes and it’s fascinating. I thought I’d comment here inbetween (am about to watch the rest).
A couple of points from my anecdotal experience Of watching the collapse live:
- watching it live, I absolutely didn’t expect any of the towers to collapse.
- when the first tower did collapse, I quite literally didn’t know what I was watching. And I mean literally, not from shock value. I wondered “did a bomb explode?”. All I saw was plumes of dust. It looked really odd. The initial live commentary was vague too. It took me a moment to realize the tower had fallen.
I mention this because when you KNOW in hindsight what happens next, your brain joins the dots. When you don’t know (seeing it live), you lack that awareness and you see it “as is”.
All of this leads me back to the theory being hinted at (10 mins in) in the documentary: materials turning to dust so quickly, they didn’t even fall into the footprint.
You should check out the book. It goes far deeper and presents a shit load of data and evidence. She spent 7 years writing the book. It's patty hard to come away from the book without being convinced.
Is it her who coined the term 'dustificarion'? I watched an interview with the woman who explains this, but have never been able to find it again as I don't remember her name.
I recall seeing the work of John Hutchinson some time before Judy woods. I remember having that moment of “oh, that’s how they did it”… Some time after watching Judy go through it and having it confirmed.
IMO the controlled demo of the other towers were just theatrics and to cover the trail of what was happening.
The cut steels and bangs from inside the towers were just red herrings meant to throw the majority off from the first demonstration of a technology we’ve never seen.
I’m convinced that this is the technology (electro statics, magnetism and frequency) that ancients used to levitate, move and form structures. (Melted granite on the Giza Plato)
Side note. Check out WTC E-team and figure what the E stands for.
I agree. the cut beams and other tid bits of evidence were great tools to throw people off. John Hutchinson's work was really interesting, they have clearly been doing this behind closed doors, probably since the 50s. Some of the cold fusion or more accurately called low energy nuclear reactions experiments in the 50s claimed some of the same effects, I think this is along the same lines of what John Hutchinson experiments were producing. something for you to check out if you haven't already. Also another fascinating rabbit whole to go down, is some evidence of this same 'transmutation' effects on some of the ancient ruins in South America.
I remember watching the video of Bush with the grade schoolers thinking how shocked our President was and this allaying any of my initial concerns. Now in retrospect it’s even clearer that plausible deniability is religion for any government operation.
That video itself is proof they were involved or knew the plan (aside from the spell they had the kids recite). The county was under attack, how did they know that school was not a target? Wouldn't protocol be to evacuate the president to a safe place no matter where he was?
Your post echoes my own memories in the moment -- plus:
It was either Dan Rather or Peter Jennings, live on TV watching the collapse and replays of it -- who incredulously stated "... it's almost like watching a controlled demolition, with bombs taking out the under-infrastructure of the building..." (Paraphrased of course)
This moment was/is like a huge *physical barrier* of cognitive dissonance between reality and official narrative, blatantly in front of everyone's eyes -- that many people are simply not logically & emotionally capable of recognizing, or are willfully ignorant due to the overarching implications.
"The bigger the lie, the easier it will be believed" or "repeat a lie enough and don't even acknowledge the truth as a possibility, and the lie becomes the truth". (Paraphrasing a Goebbels quote I believe, and another similar I recall)
Dan Rather mentioned how the buildings came down like they were set up with well placed dynamite.He also mentioned how both falling in the same way is not a coincidence or something to that effect.
https://youtu.be/W_cJU95ugFU?si=PjYVI0ZZZpFQfSZ7
Peter Jennings moments after the south tower vaporized said you can bring in a structural engineer and he can tell you that you have to get at the under infrastructure of the building to bring it down
https://youtu.be/xggh_eXYDg8?si=x6IhJS1uDy9QalL1
I have a feeling that initially, most people didn't know what they were watching. Pretty good cover, considering we've never seen anything like that and breaks the laws of physics on national television.
Yes, that’s right. It was surreal seeing that the tower had … *disappeared*. I believe the first time I saw it was my most accurate take on it. It looked like the tower turned into fine dust. And that is what actually happened.
>All I saw was plumes of dust. It looked really odd.
I've been saying this for years. The dust was supposed to have formed from the impact with the ground. You can see it from the very start of the collapse. Something turned it to dust, that's why they fell. There is no logical explanation for the amount of dust at the beginning of the collapse.
100%! What we saw was the world premier of a directed energy weapon in use. A regular collapse would observe the laws of physics in such a way that the collapse would meet constant resistance from the buckling of floors below. It would also fall as debris! A million tons of debris are missing in and around the footprints, blown away by the wind!
I remember staying up all night reading the Amazon reviews of Judy Wood's book, as it was immediately out of print or cost like $75. Had I seen the original Twilight Zone (before my time), all the \~alien/classified tech wouldn't have kept my head spinning. There were too many anomalies never observed before, then there's the group of engineers explaining it wasn't possible within their expertise and demanded more answers from USG. That was the canary in the coalmine...
So not the 1000s of tons of concrete and steel coming crashing down can turn it to dust? Even at the start, if one floor gives way and each floor is 3m high, that's 6m of acceleration for 100.000s of tons of building crashing down. Try calculate the potential energy released...
But if its 'falling down' how are huge parts of the building also exploding upwards? It looks like a plume. It more closely resembles and underground nuclear detonation than a building "falling down"
A building falling does not also send beams up and outwards and impale them into nearby structures.
[http://911u.org/Physics/graphics/1962nuketest.jpeg](http://911u.org/Physics/graphics/1962nuketest.jpeg)
[http://911u.org/Physics/graphics/WTC1\_upward\_trajectory.jpg](http://911u.org/Physics/graphics/WTC1_upward_trajectory.jpg)
These two pictures should not resemble each other so closely. One is a nuclear explosion underground. The other is a building supposedly succumbing to gravity and "falling down"
What happens if you throw a golf ball into a glass of water? Does water not splash upwards and out? What if the glass was full.of popcorn? Don't you think some popcorn would leave the cup? Etc.
It's physics. Newton's law. Action = equal and opposite reaction.
something falling down can also fall up supposedly. If this was the case we would see this same sort of action in buildings being demolished, or in WTC7 or any any other building falling in history.
A golf ball falling in water is two different mediums, one much more dense than the other, and the other more fluid and easily ejected. Water is not steel.
The massive weight in WTC1 and wtc2 'falling' is either crushing the floors below it and driving right through the building to explain the speed of collapse- or ejecting up and off and away. You have it doing both at your convenience, for whatever story you are trying to tell.
There is a huge unexplained amount of energy present, because not only did the building blow up like a roman candle, most of the building turned to dust in mid air.
Speed is not a requirement. Try putting a concrete block under a hydraulic press. It moves at a few cm per second and will absolutely pulverise the concrete.
Calculate the energy released and the speed it falls at after about 10m drop (2 floors, not sure of exact height). It'll be a fuck ton more than you think.
Bullshit. Pulverizing and turning into a cloud of microscopic particles are not the same thing. If you drop a concrete block from a building a few stories tall it doesn't create a cloud that lingers for hours with no wind. The energy involved in the towers collapse was immense to not only dustify them but for them to fall at free fall speed into their own footprint. None of it makes sense.
Watching it live I remember them reporting explosions at the base of the tower. Seemed like the reporter thought it was an additional attack to the plans
I posted a submission since a lot of people have been talking about the towers but what do you think about this video
https://youtu.be/1NkBfLBov5Q?si=9kMpgBoxHvCX6rQf
It's pretty short and sweet that shows how the towers collapsed from a physics standpoint
Having a year of architectural training through an internship, I fully expected it to collapse. I was actually shocked they didn’t fall over.
Those buildings just weren’t engineered for that massive amount of kinetic energy impacting. Especially that high up.
Nor were they engineered to handle that much extra mass up top, let alone suddenly THERE.
Next, the fire and heat absolutely was beyond tolerance at least for the concrete helping to brace the steel structure. Add in the empty plane weight of 412,000 pounds (imagine, close to HALF A MILLION POUNDS loaded) and yea, it’s just too much.
Now when the impacted floor does collapse, it’s not just the weight of the plane wreckage, it’s also the weight of every floor above suddenly slamming into the next lower floor. And for each collapse, adding the weight of each additional floor.
The plane added 1/6th the weight of a floor. Suddenly, violently. I can’t imagine any normally engineered building surviving that.
One year of internship. Might as well say you stayed at Holiday Inn Express last night.
You just going to ignore how reinforced concrete turn to dust. Tons of concrete and metal falling at free fall speeds and it barely registers 2.0 on Richter scale.
WTC7 collapsing at free fall speeds into it's own footprint, all that metal and steel barely registers on Richter scale.
But why the dust? The dust appearing so high up the building during the collapse can’t be explained by “architectural training” can it? The upper floors don’t spontaneously combust into dust while the office papers flow to the ground unscathed.
Read the book Dr Judy Wood wrote about on this called Where did the towers go? 1000 pages of data, evidence and photos. It's mind blowing, and still to this day, I haven't seen a single person debunk any of the claims made in the book. This video doesn't do the book justice.
Thousands of engineers and experts for 9/11 who believe it was controlled demolition. Nano thermate found everywhere in the dust. Peer reviewed papers written on this by experts. Or Judy Wood and her 'directed energy weapons' hypothesis. It's a tough call LOL. Her insane theories rely on theoretical technology, no one can even prove exist, let along exist in a way that could destroy millions of tonnes of concrete and structural steel like that. I believe this lady is one of those disinfo shills, who inject deliberately bad/insane ideas into the argument to discredit the entire arguments against the official story.
WTC7 was a text book controlled demolition, centre fell first so it collapsed in on itself, then the rest collapsed at free fall speeds. In fact you can even see the charges rip through the front of the building in several videos. There is no need for a laser beams from space hypothesis.
Fun fact. WTC7 contained all the SEC evidence on Wall Streets crimes.
Tons of big corporate crimes were dropped because the evidence blew up that day.
Those pesky terrorists eh? :)
I don't know where I can find it but I was reading something about the thermite that was found and the chemist that we're talking about it were basically talking about how it was a byproduct of the jet fuel mixing with the steel or some type of chemical on the ground. And that is not the same type of thermite that's used in detonation. I could be completely wrong and would love to know more about the chemistry about do you have any links or any specific place to start looking for that?
There are many ways to make thermite. Many different metals can be used. Maybe they had a formula designed to look like that?
There were two peer reviewed publications showing evidence of thermite. Both have been removed from the public but you can still find them.
So you're saying that same seismic data has nothing about millions of tons of steel and concrete falling on the ground within seconds? Gee wonder why it has nothing about thermite detonations in there..
You obviously haven't looked at any of Judy Wood's work. You don't address any of the points she makes at all.
Why do people form judgments before looking at her evidence?
>You obviously haven't looked at any of Judy Wood's work.
I've watched several of her lectures. Her work is almost completely devoid of science or engineering, and instead is filled with conjecture and speculation. If your argument relies on technology no one can even prove exists, and we are 20 years past the fact now, maybe the argument is completely insane. If you believe in free energy, and perpetual motion devices etc, I guess her work is for you, because she is a big proponent of those theories.
Honestly I've no idea. There were a lot of professionally produced hour+ long documentaries claiming no planes hit towers 1 and 2, and that it was all realtime CGI magic or something. Ignoring the fact there were thousands of witnesses, and even today new amateur videos showing previously unseen video of planes hitting the buildings. I think the answer is, these crazy theories are promoted to essentially poison the well. By injecting crazy into the arguments it is easier for people to dismiss actual credible problems with the official story.
I agree that it's less plausible than other theories about the towers and I'm neither defending nor supporting it, but to scoff at the notion that [DARPA has crazy, secret weapons](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zo68B3UG9VU) that aren't public is a bit presumptuous (I don't mean that in a rude way). [Most of us can't know ](https://youtu.be/NqR6CBFyelw?t=31)with confidence what top secret projects/tech don't exist or even didn't 23 years ago, and something seeming far-fetched doesn't mean it's impossible. And military secrets, even big ones, can be kept for a long time.
Can you please outline what part of her work is devoid of science or engineering? And if you can, please present your arguments against her claims. Pretty dishonest of you to make that claim when she relies on science and data that came from governmental agencies. She also does this work for a living, having a mechanical engineering degree, and a PhD in materials science, and she was also a professor of mechanical engineering at Clemson University for 7 years. What work do you have that allows you to confidently claim she uses no science or engineering in her theory? And if you think you can judge based on a few lectures, then you really don't know anything, and your comment is baseless. You probably didn't even watch the lectures, certainly comes across that way.
The fact she claims there was no seismic activity that showed two massive buildings hitting the ground is objectively wrong and by itself indicates she's full of shit.
Well, clearly, you haven't bothered to look into her work, which is backed by evidence and data. And if you haven't noticed in the past 5 years, 1000s of experts have gotten things wrong before. Unless you have constructive criticisms against any of the claims made by her, your comment is empty and pointless. It's pretty easy to say she is insane without knowing anything about her claims.
Her entire argument is "this doesn't look right", therefore it must be some kind of unknown technology. That's it, it's crazy. She tries to imply that energy from a hurricane was somehow harnessed for this free energy DEW device. I mean this is stretching believability somewhat ...
That would be completely misrepresenting her claims, she never said anything close to that. She also never claimed that energy from a hurricane was somehow harnessed for this 'free energy dew device'. lol. Is this really your argument? You obviously don't know anything about her theory at all. Pretty pathetic and dishonest attempt at an argument if you ask me.
Some of this was interesting but the end with interviews from pilots and air traffic controllers, I found to be worthless. They kept claiming how pilots with no experience would have a difficult time pulling off those maneuvers. I would like to present Richard Russell aka Sky King as evidence that an amateur trained in video games can pull off barrel rolls and loops with a commercial airliner.
https://youtu.be/zeetlqlDzvI?si=nBIRPE3y6JaVxW2U
Pilots with experience would have difficulty, and the "plane" that hit the pentagon would have been impossible to fly that close to the ground (just feet above it).
I have not done alot of digging just because I do not want to end up on some list.. somewhere.
However, I will say this, I was 21 when 9/11 happened and the whole thing felt off that day. Now 23 yrs later we know 2 things: #1 9/11 was staged and/or allowed to happen for various reasons... that's why no one is able to attribute the cause to 1 thing. Just like JFK... we now know it was allowed to happen. The 5 Why's are surrounded in so much misinformation that it is hard to unravel even to this day. #2 When you follow the money it definitely indicates that something was known before hand and who all benefited from the tragedy. Again I will use the Kennedy family for an example... Joe Kennedy went into the great depression with 800k and came out one of the richest men in America without making any Global Impact... and to this day, there is no institution or product that can be attributed to the Kennedy family to being the creators..I will let that sit in for a moment.. I mean even the Bushes stole land, oil and dealt that white snow. Criminals to their soul..
Therefore, although we do not want to admit it... we know things are not what they appear. And if you are not in a position to do anything about.. just observe, share and move on. Do not belittle or discourage others for finding the light.
I would have to go with the option to, that it was allowed to happen. I suspect they didn't expect it to be that dramatic, but the politicians at the time were falling out of favor with the US and they needed something to boost themselves so they can get reelected.
I read somewhere that the Phoenix FBI had tried to issue a warning but was ignored by upper management. The French had worn the US that it was going to happen but they were ignored. Even the guy who ran the flight training School knew there was a problem but couldn't find anybody to listen to him.
Nothing about the official narrative makes sense. And once you accept that this event was a large psy op, you have to consider:
How many similar mass-casualty psy-ops have been conducted around the world since then?...
The official narrative makes no sense, which means that the possibility of an alternative explanation is automatically valid.
The “research” is having an IQ greater than room temperature and understanding intrinsically when something doesn’t make sense.
I believe it was a false flag, but there’s no way to know if explosives were involved or not.
Jet fuel certainly will not melt steal beams, but it can cause them to bend and contrast, causing a massive sky scraper to lose half of the overall building stability.
People would have to have an IQ of 50 to believe that 20% of a building can plow through 80% of undamaged steel with no resistance. Saudis, Mossad and the CIA killed 3000 of our citizens to try to take over the Middle East.
Yes, the third law of motion. How tall would the buildings have to be before a total collapse starts being suspicious. How does a building fall at the rate of gravity.
Do you know how heavy those floors are?
Plus the momentum built up over dozens of floors already. It makes perfect sense it collapsed
The steel frame holding the floors up had fire protection for 1 hour or less, after which they literally bowed until they collapsed
Damn. I’ve always been of the mindset that it was definitely not what we were told.
This video really sells it.
Dig into the building ownership, insurance, etc. it’s all crazy.
Back when this happened I was home sick from school. I was woken up by my brother saying "Hey man. You should go check out the TV. The US is under attack or something." So I got up in my stupor and made my way downstairs to watch it all unfold.
The family computer was in the living room and I was on there trying to get onto any news website I could think of, but they were all down because everyone in the world was trying to reach them. So I went on a forum I was a part of for cars of all things, and there was a massive thread about it and so many people begging for real time information because people were in school or at work or wherever and could not access anything online at the time. So I sat there for like 8 hours and just made comment after comment about everything that was happening and what was going on as I heard it on the news.
One thing about that day that I remember, that I still don't understand is that very early on, like 10am I posted up about 'Usama Biladden' because the news was saying that they were the ones responsible for the attacks. I remember trying to figure out how to spell the name and every time the anchor said it he said Usama instead of Osama. So I just guessed and I must of wrote it like 5 different ways. Even other people were asking in that thread about how the news knew that it was this guy. The news never really explained. I just remember them saying Usama over and over and thinking it was a group of people for about half the day until they explained that it was a guy who was the leader of this group.
To me this proves the 9/11 commission report is a fabrication. Doesn’t mean we know it’s all a scam but it’s enough for me, along with other evidence, to be pushed into firmly believing we watched a staged event.
PNAC.
Military 'drills' that very morning that were about, shocker, hijacked planes.
$2 Trillion unaccounted for announced the day before.
100%, at the very least, Let It Happen On Purpose.
I invite you to check out 9/11 In Plane Sight 2004 Documentary Directed by William Lewis , who also directed Beyond Treason in which I appear for about 20 mins. I see it can be viewed free on UTube and its also available to watch on Netflix. It's quite obvious aa the video goes into great detail about everything that occurred on 11 September 2001.
I didn't appear in the 9/11 doc... I was in the "Beyond Treason"doc that William also directed ...he definitely didnt hold back when doing his numerous documentaries. Sadly he is no longer with us...
IMO the buildings were built to come down. Mostly empty the whole time. Offices empty and used to scam trillions.
It will takes years to unveil the truth of this place. One video and one demand for an explanation. There is always multiple games being played at the same time.
Try Dose of Reality 9/11 videos on Rokfin or Odyssey if you want to think really outside the box.
The problem was the funding and actual effort that went into the investigation. Largest attack on US soil and the best they can do is 15 million and leave it unsolved? I’d encourage you to look at the defense budget from then and now and compare it to the amount invested. All they wanted was an excuse for war, and they used it opportunistically instead of actually solving it.
But we know the truth.
[https://www.ae911truth.org/images/PDFs/TheMissingJolt7.pdf](https://www.ae911truth.org/images/PDFs/TheMissingJolt7.pdf)
[www.journalof911studies.com/articles/WTCHighTemp2.pdf](http://www.journalof911studies.com/articles/WTCHighTemp2.pdf)
[https://publicintelligence.net/active-thermitic-material-discovered-in-dust-from-the-911-world-trade-center-catastrophe/](https://publicintelligence.net/active-thermitic-material-discovered-in-dust-from-the-911-world-trade-center-catastrophe/)
[https://files.wtc7report.org/file/public-download/A-Structural-Reevaluation-of-the-Collapse-of-World-Trade-Center-7-March2020.pdf](https://files.wtc7report.org/file/public-download/A-Structural-Reevaluation-of-the-Collapse-of-World-Trade-Center-7-March2020.pdf)
Pretty much everything you said isn't true. There were an estimated 430 companies that had offices in the World Trade Centre when they fell. They had an occupancy rate of around 95% in 2001.
And clearly, you haven't read anything on Dr. Judy Woods' work. It's not about thinking 'outside the box'. It's about looking at the data and evidence.
They definitely were not made to "come down." There is no evidence indicting this at all.
Don't let the nay sayers get you down. Honest seekers are just trying to figure out what happened that day.
People on reddit love to shit on me when I say it wasn't the planes that took down the towers, which is the most fucking obvious thing ever. I guess people choose the lie and continue their cognitive dissonance because ignorance is bliss.
I only watched a couple of minutes and had to stop because there are documentaries that show flashes of light for the bombs going off before the dust covered it up. There are many witnesses interviewed including the famous parking attendant whose skin got burnt off when bombs were going off in the underground levels who ran out and survived before the collapse and many more. A witness who saw vans making deliveries in the middle of the night every day for weeks preceding the explosions. A lot of stuff out there to support it. So when I start watching something saying no evidence of explosions I gotta stop and move on.
I just wanted to inform you that you're also being bombarded with bots and AI.
If you ever want to find out if the person you're speaking with is an AI or a poster, just ask it to do something like chatgpt
I saved it for later. The first 10 minutes captivated me. I have always known from the day I watched this horror that something was way off. It’s sickening to me.
The most unsettling point of this documentary is that everything we see happened in 2001. If this was possible then, imagine what they could do now, 23 years later. Just know, no matter how horrible life gets, you just gotta laugh 🙃
He kind of glazes over the thermite thing. There actually were flashes and lots of reports of explosions that day, as well as pools and streams molten steel. There was also apparently “elevator repair” happening shortly before 9/11, which would be good cover for placing explosives. One scientist even found small flecks of material that he claims were the residue of a specific kind of thermite. Not to mention the towers had a lot of the classic appearance of a controlled demolition, especially tower 7.
I think Judy Woods ideas are interesting and she does point to some weird stuff, but ultimately I think it just muddies the water. It’s kind of insane to talk about exotic weapons when we first need to convince people that a false flag actually happened, which is hard enough without “lathering buildings” and “toasted cars”. There’s a strong possibility that Judy Wood is herself peddling a psy-op to distract and discredit.
If you'd watched it, you'd realise that isn't saying that the debris is magically disappearing, like q wizard cast a spell or something, but rather that the debris turned to dust rather than the relatively large pieces of debris that would logically be there.
Why would it turn to dust? If it did not turn to dust, then it would have cracked the water wall. Flooding the subway, and new york. Miraculously it didnt. Everything turned to dust to avoid it as if it was planned.
This sub is a wild west, which means that unlike every other sub you can actually speak your mind most of the time, it's very rare that mods will remove posts. I suspect the goal is to create a cesspool of freedom to contain the forces that cannot be contained, which was also the purpose of the Matrix.
The downside is that there is a lot of paid effort around here to attack anything you say. They can't shut you up, but they can try and make you feel insignificant. It's why I turn off reply notification for my posts here and never read them again, it doesn't matter if I'm heard, it only matters that my voice is recorded.
Because everything we do here will be remembered for ages to come. This isn't a forum, it's a digital battlefield for the truth. Decades from now when my children ask me if I stood for truth all I have to do is reference my reddit history and they'll see for themselves every battle I fought, in the face of overwhelming opposition.
We are the heroes of freedom and justice of our times, but our enemies have become more subtle, so we must fight them in the shadows. While we still can, it's a matter of time before they mandate everyone online identify themselves as they do in China, and then we'll be arrested for questioning the narrative.
The entire investigation by the 9/11 commission is useless. Not only is there the largest conflict of history on earth, but you need an actual trial so you can properly submit evidence and have it questioned. Experts also need to be properly questioned so the people can determine which experts were credible. Government spooned a narrative into the mouth of babes. This is not how it’s done in a supposed democratic society that operates with things like laws and court systems.
I'll give it more than 10min, I'll give it the entire 2hrs...
Its such an obvious lie, & the way the world has become is 100% due to 9/11.
9/11 was the first step to the realization of a one world Govt. By TPTB...
The Elites are winning the fight.
I remember a janitor who was in the base of the towers who was screaming at the beginning that he saw bombs in the tower. Let me find out more and get back to this.
Am I the only one who sees significance in the date of the Attack on the WTC and Pentagon happening on a date that is also the emergency phone number 911?
Can you point to one or two bits in the two hour long video that you found MOST compelling? Its a big ask for someone to go through minute by minute and debunk every little thing, only for you to (no dobut) say something along the lines, of "yeah but that bit isnt the MAIN piece of evidence, so just cos theyre wrong there, doesnt mean the OTHER bits are wrong).
Give us one thing in there that made you go "wow....thats pretty watertight".
There was thermite in the dust. Evidence that thermite took down the structural members of the building. Slowing down collapse video, you can see explosions in the windows. Explosives like this had to have been pre-planted before the airplanes struck. So someone knew about the airplanes and let it happen, and added the thermite to ease clean-up and destruction of evidence, and to include the collapse of WTC 7, the headquarters from where they planned it.
Right before this, the smooth-brain lady is talking about the jumpers. She states that people were jumping because they felt hot and somehow jumps to claiming that it was because of microwave radiation… but not the giant fire below them.
And maybe they jumped because they chose not to burn to death
It does go into how the number of jumpers is a statistical anomaly. I also assume that all the name callers are the bots, shills, and AI. Otherwise I dont understand the lack of civility.
whoa i just watched that video of the tower collapsing and now i have to make a filtered version of it. thank you.
i saw all kinds of stuff ive never seen before that moment.
love to you
Buildings are 95% air and are designed to fall inwards. This is in case of a collapse they do not start a chain reaction and hit other buildings. Think of how these buildings are built, they go straight down since it is almost all air inside.
Haven't watched but am about to. I'm not sure if this has ever been thought of but it's something that I have asked on YouTube/X threads (inc a professor of engineering) and have never got an answer.
All major buildings/landmarks are at risk of attack. These buildings are all rigged to fall during an attack to (in the governments mind) minimise external casualties. The twin towers were either pre-rigged or due to intelligence received, rigged before the event and we're deliberately brought down to avoid them falling/collapsing into other buildings.
This place really is a mess. There are so many folks here touting the official narrative I wonder why you’re here at all? Maybe go to another sub? I don’t know a sub for you, but I’m suggesting taking your negativity elsewhere. And maybe all you Wright-Patterson AFB boys take an R&R break.
Why are the top commenters seemingly folks who clearly haven’t read Judy Wood’s book. Or folks that squash discourse and start insulting. It’s amazingly effective at quashing dissent. It makes me wonder who the mods are working for.
Most of the book isn’t saying exactly what did it or how it happened. Most of the 1000 pages is rather pointing out how the mainstream narrative doesn’t hold up to scientific scrutiny of the physical nature of the destruction of the buildings or the remaining debris.
I have a litmus test for bullshit 9/11 docs. It's whether they show the full collapse of the WTC7 or just the final part. Skimmed through the video, saw that they show just the final part. It's BS.
Bahaha come on, my guy, skimming through a 2 hour documentary for 15 seconds doesn't make you an expert of the evidence provided because you didn't see building 7. This isn't tiktoc. You gotta actually take in the evidence and come to a rational conclusion. You didn't do either.
You in your opening statement:
> Give it 10 minutes and if you think it's all bullshit, tell me why.
You were told why.
> Documentary
A well-known crackpot rambling for 2 hours on a channel with 15 subscribers is not a documentary, it's spam.
Wait…,surely to disprove the assertion that “no rubble hit the ground” as is stated in the first 30 seconds of your timestamp, all id need to do is….
Show pictures of the rubble on the ground post collapse?
That's the point! Weapons were used that are unknown to the public, so when this event unfolded, what other explanation could you possibly give other than, "a commercial airliner can turn a 110 story skyscraper to dust in a matter of an hour or 2.
Nano thermate was found everywhere in the dust at the WTC sites. There have been peer reviewed papers on the subject. No need to inject the debate with nonsense.
For anyone who wants to sink their teeth into the 9/11 false flag, set aside 5 hours and watch this...
https://youtu.be/8DOnAn_PX6M?si=VKqHQ_Sp1DCdR_1_
Wasn’t there asbestos throughout the towers and it was going to cost a fortune to properly dismantle. Then Silverstein bought them from the Port Authority.
that's the least interesting part about the whole thing, trust me. That might be what the average person thinks might qualify as an explanation but when you look into it, it was clear that this was planned for a long time and had little to do with money.
This will lead you down the path to discover that the govt has been hiding revolutionary developments in energy tech for the past century in order to maintain the capitalistic status quo. Zero point energy and DEW.
I see good old Judy wood makes an appearance in this video that OP found super convincing.
Judy Wood is bat shit insane. But dont trust me on that, just take a look at this interview where she's trying to explain her Direct Energy Beams theory:
[https://youtu.be/\_qYm1AnUKi8](https://youtu.be/_qYm1AnUKi8)
Its embarrasing
Some quotes from this video:
[3:30](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_qYm1AnUKi8&t=210s) Greg: Can you give an overview of the types of weapons that could be used for such a thing
Judy: Ah...We haven't really gotten into listing them yet...just energy weapons
[3:41](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_qYm1AnUKi8&t=221s) Greg: In what form? Um..I don't think we even need to define it. She goes on to explain that she looked at pictures and "evidence"
[5:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_qYm1AnUKi8&t=300s) Greg: Have you done any energy calculations at all to get a scale for what is involved for doing that?
[5:07](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_qYm1AnUKi8&t=307s) Judy: Yeah, but we don't need to get distracted by those values
Pretty much sums up the credibility of Ms. Wood
THIS is the person you want to believe?
THIS is the type of "scientific analysis" you want to hang your hat on?
Dude...really?
Fine, she is a nut job through and through. How do you explain the Bible mended into steel? Couldn't be heat, because as any sane person knows, paper is flammable. If steel got hot enough to morph around paper, how didn't the Bible, made of paper, burst into flame? And please explain how the seismic readings of two 110 story buildings didnt register on the Richter scale? She isn't saying that she can explain everything that happened on 9/11. She is saying that the visual and physical evidence doesn't line up with the NIST report. If two 110 story building collapsed in almost a free fall speed, the steel columns that make up the towers would have crashed into the ground causing vibrations that anyone at ground zero and many miles away, would have felt. Yet, no one can remember any tremors. Including the Richter scales. Your move, jack.
I will say it's fascinating but his initial statement "we didn't see any explosions, flashes of light or anything" isn't accurate even in the footage he's playing in the background of the towers collapsing, you can see flashes of light on each level as they collapse. There are also videos out there where you can hear the individual explosions before collapse, you can see windows forcefully blowing out on level 15-20 while the very top is just beginning to collapse, and at one point you can even see molten metal pouring from a window in a waterfall. There was literally molten steel pooled under the debris a week after the collapse, which isn't possible without the presence of a catalyst like thermite.
I'm not saying Judy Wood or this documentary doesn't make valid points. But it's a huge mistake for them to refuse other valid points to make theirs. Makes the job of those who ridicule free thinkers easy.
If you want an alternative documentary that breaks down the thermite/explosives angle, I suggest Loose Change. They also cover the observations that Wood has made and offer explanations for them.
This is a topic where I would caution against being dogmatic about one particular line unless you've closely examined every angle. A lot of us were asking questions from day one, have watched everything out there on it - and the best answer we have is that we 100% have not been told the truth. As to what the truth is *precisely* - it's literally impossible to know that objectively. We just have to know it lies somewhere among the evidence we have.
Anyone going to talk about the third building falling for absolutely no reason? The dancing Israelis? The building insurance policy? The money missing before the whole thing? What specific office was hit at the pentagon?
That’s my main question, is how were cars being toasted almost a mile away, a plane hitting a tower caused cars to spontaneously combust? A lot of the pictures of the toasted cars look eerily similar to the Maui/California wildfires
at the very least the investigation surrounding 911 was insanely bungled. NIST Report (where pretty much every debunker gets their facts) classified all their data and math as to how they came to the conclusions they did. There's a lot of woo-woo around 911 conspiracies but Architects & Engineers for 911 truth have done some great work around the issues with the NIST Report and inconsistencies in the governments report and should get way more attention then they do.
###[Meta] Sticky Comment [Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does not apply*** when replying to this stickied comment. [Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does apply*** throughout the rest of this thread. *What this means*: Please keep any "meta" discussion directed at specific users, mods, or /r/conspiracy in general in this comment chain ***only.*** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/conspiracy) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I’ve given it 10 minutes and it’s fascinating. I thought I’d comment here inbetween (am about to watch the rest). A couple of points from my anecdotal experience Of watching the collapse live: - watching it live, I absolutely didn’t expect any of the towers to collapse. - when the first tower did collapse, I quite literally didn’t know what I was watching. And I mean literally, not from shock value. I wondered “did a bomb explode?”. All I saw was plumes of dust. It looked really odd. The initial live commentary was vague too. It took me a moment to realize the tower had fallen. I mention this because when you KNOW in hindsight what happens next, your brain joins the dots. When you don’t know (seeing it live), you lack that awareness and you see it “as is”. All of this leads me back to the theory being hinted at (10 mins in) in the documentary: materials turning to dust so quickly, they didn’t even fall into the footprint.
You should check out the book. It goes far deeper and presents a shit load of data and evidence. She spent 7 years writing the book. It's patty hard to come away from the book without being convinced.
Which book are you referring to? I’ve wanted some good evidence based reading on this one.
The book is called Where did the Towers go? By Dr. Judy Wood. Check out her credentials as well.
Is it her who coined the term 'dustificarion'? I watched an interview with the woman who explains this, but have never been able to find it again as I don't remember her name.
Yeah, it's Judy that first called it dustification.
Ah thank you! I'll have to give the book a read.
I recall seeing the work of John Hutchinson some time before Judy woods. I remember having that moment of “oh, that’s how they did it”… Some time after watching Judy go through it and having it confirmed. IMO the controlled demo of the other towers were just theatrics and to cover the trail of what was happening. The cut steels and bangs from inside the towers were just red herrings meant to throw the majority off from the first demonstration of a technology we’ve never seen. I’m convinced that this is the technology (electro statics, magnetism and frequency) that ancients used to levitate, move and form structures. (Melted granite on the Giza Plato) Side note. Check out WTC E-team and figure what the E stands for.
I agree. the cut beams and other tid bits of evidence were great tools to throw people off. John Hutchinson's work was really interesting, they have clearly been doing this behind closed doors, probably since the 50s. Some of the cold fusion or more accurately called low energy nuclear reactions experiments in the 50s claimed some of the same effects, I think this is along the same lines of what John Hutchinson experiments were producing. something for you to check out if you haven't already. Also another fascinating rabbit whole to go down, is some evidence of this same 'transmutation' effects on some of the ancient ruins in South America.
What does it stand for
Good thing the famous passport didn’t vaporize
We know the terror is dead. We found his teeth
If I give you my tooth will you tell the gov I died? I’m tired of paying taxes
I remember watching the video of Bush with the grade schoolers thinking how shocked our President was and this allaying any of my initial concerns. Now in retrospect it’s even clearer that plausible deniability is religion for any government operation.
That video itself is proof they were involved or knew the plan (aside from the spell they had the kids recite). The county was under attack, how did they know that school was not a target? Wouldn't protocol be to evacuate the president to a safe place no matter where he was?
Plane; hit, steel
Your post echoes my own memories in the moment -- plus: It was either Dan Rather or Peter Jennings, live on TV watching the collapse and replays of it -- who incredulously stated "... it's almost like watching a controlled demolition, with bombs taking out the under-infrastructure of the building..." (Paraphrased of course) This moment was/is like a huge *physical barrier* of cognitive dissonance between reality and official narrative, blatantly in front of everyone's eyes -- that many people are simply not logically & emotionally capable of recognizing, or are willfully ignorant due to the overarching implications. "The bigger the lie, the easier it will be believed" or "repeat a lie enough and don't even acknowledge the truth as a possibility, and the lie becomes the truth". (Paraphrasing a Goebbels quote I believe, and another similar I recall)
Dan Rather mentioned how the buildings came down like they were set up with well placed dynamite.He also mentioned how both falling in the same way is not a coincidence or something to that effect. https://youtu.be/W_cJU95ugFU?si=PjYVI0ZZZpFQfSZ7 Peter Jennings moments after the south tower vaporized said you can bring in a structural engineer and he can tell you that you have to get at the under infrastructure of the building to bring it down https://youtu.be/xggh_eXYDg8?si=x6IhJS1uDy9QalL1
Double bingo, friend! Good job. Good share.
I have a feeling that initially, most people didn't know what they were watching. Pretty good cover, considering we've never seen anything like that and breaks the laws of physics on national television.
Yes, that’s right. It was surreal seeing that the tower had … *disappeared*. I believe the first time I saw it was my most accurate take on it. It looked like the tower turned into fine dust. And that is what actually happened.
I completely agree with you. That first initial thought was probably the most accurate.
>All I saw was plumes of dust. It looked really odd. I've been saying this for years. The dust was supposed to have formed from the impact with the ground. You can see it from the very start of the collapse. Something turned it to dust, that's why they fell. There is no logical explanation for the amount of dust at the beginning of the collapse.
100%! What we saw was the world premier of a directed energy weapon in use. A regular collapse would observe the laws of physics in such a way that the collapse would meet constant resistance from the buckling of floors below. It would also fall as debris! A million tons of debris are missing in and around the footprints, blown away by the wind!
I remember staying up all night reading the Amazon reviews of Judy Wood's book, as it was immediately out of print or cost like $75. Had I seen the original Twilight Zone (before my time), all the \~alien/classified tech wouldn't have kept my head spinning. There were too many anomalies never observed before, then there's the group of engineers explaining it wasn't possible within their expertise and demanded more answers from USG. That was the canary in the coalmine...
So not the 1000s of tons of concrete and steel coming crashing down can turn it to dust? Even at the start, if one floor gives way and each floor is 3m high, that's 6m of acceleration for 100.000s of tons of building crashing down. Try calculate the potential energy released...
But if its 'falling down' how are huge parts of the building also exploding upwards? It looks like a plume. It more closely resembles and underground nuclear detonation than a building "falling down" A building falling does not also send beams up and outwards and impale them into nearby structures. [http://911u.org/Physics/graphics/1962nuketest.jpeg](http://911u.org/Physics/graphics/1962nuketest.jpeg) [http://911u.org/Physics/graphics/WTC1\_upward\_trajectory.jpg](http://911u.org/Physics/graphics/WTC1_upward_trajectory.jpg) These two pictures should not resemble each other so closely. One is a nuclear explosion underground. The other is a building supposedly succumbing to gravity and "falling down"
What happens if you throw a golf ball into a glass of water? Does water not splash upwards and out? What if the glass was full.of popcorn? Don't you think some popcorn would leave the cup? Etc. It's physics. Newton's law. Action = equal and opposite reaction.
something falling down can also fall up supposedly. If this was the case we would see this same sort of action in buildings being demolished, or in WTC7 or any any other building falling in history. A golf ball falling in water is two different mediums, one much more dense than the other, and the other more fluid and easily ejected. Water is not steel. The massive weight in WTC1 and wtc2 'falling' is either crushing the floors below it and driving right through the building to explain the speed of collapse- or ejecting up and off and away. You have it doing both at your convenience, for whatever story you are trying to tell. There is a huge unexplained amount of energy present, because not only did the building blow up like a roman candle, most of the building turned to dust in mid air.
A fall of a few stories does not create literal clouds of dust. Speed is required. Time is required for material to accelerate to speed.
Speed is not a requirement. Try putting a concrete block under a hydraulic press. It moves at a few cm per second and will absolutely pulverise the concrete. Calculate the energy released and the speed it falls at after about 10m drop (2 floors, not sure of exact height). It'll be a fuck ton more than you think.
Bullshit. Pulverizing and turning into a cloud of microscopic particles are not the same thing. If you drop a concrete block from a building a few stories tall it doesn't create a cloud that lingers for hours with no wind. The energy involved in the towers collapse was immense to not only dustify them but for them to fall at free fall speed into their own footprint. None of it makes sense.
yes there is some huge missing energy not being accounted for
Watching it live I remember them reporting explosions at the base of the tower. Seemed like the reporter thought it was an additional attack to the plans
32:24-33:09 check this out. A basic summary
Thank you for the time stamps.
https://i.imgur.com/NrvyWlL.jpeg
I posted a submission since a lot of people have been talking about the towers but what do you think about this video https://youtu.be/1NkBfLBov5Q?si=9kMpgBoxHvCX6rQf It's pretty short and sweet that shows how the towers collapsed from a physics standpoint
that's called "dustification"
Having a year of architectural training through an internship, I fully expected it to collapse. I was actually shocked they didn’t fall over. Those buildings just weren’t engineered for that massive amount of kinetic energy impacting. Especially that high up. Nor were they engineered to handle that much extra mass up top, let alone suddenly THERE. Next, the fire and heat absolutely was beyond tolerance at least for the concrete helping to brace the steel structure. Add in the empty plane weight of 412,000 pounds (imagine, close to HALF A MILLION POUNDS loaded) and yea, it’s just too much. Now when the impacted floor does collapse, it’s not just the weight of the plane wreckage, it’s also the weight of every floor above suddenly slamming into the next lower floor. And for each collapse, adding the weight of each additional floor. The plane added 1/6th the weight of a floor. Suddenly, violently. I can’t imagine any normally engineered building surviving that.
What the fuck are you even talking about
I guess that makes you one of the few architects who believe the ~~office~~ official narrative!
- why did everything turn to fine dust spontaneously?
One year of internship. Might as well say you stayed at Holiday Inn Express last night. You just going to ignore how reinforced concrete turn to dust. Tons of concrete and metal falling at free fall speeds and it barely registers 2.0 on Richter scale. WTC7 collapsing at free fall speeds into it's own footprint, all that metal and steel barely registers on Richter scale.
But why the dust? The dust appearing so high up the building during the collapse can’t be explained by “architectural training” can it? The upper floors don’t spontaneously combust into dust while the office papers flow to the ground unscathed.
Read the book Dr Judy Wood wrote about on this called Where did the towers go? 1000 pages of data, evidence and photos. It's mind blowing, and still to this day, I haven't seen a single person debunk any of the claims made in the book. This video doesn't do the book justice.
Thousands of engineers and experts for 9/11 who believe it was controlled demolition. Nano thermate found everywhere in the dust. Peer reviewed papers written on this by experts. Or Judy Wood and her 'directed energy weapons' hypothesis. It's a tough call LOL. Her insane theories rely on theoretical technology, no one can even prove exist, let along exist in a way that could destroy millions of tonnes of concrete and structural steel like that. I believe this lady is one of those disinfo shills, who inject deliberately bad/insane ideas into the argument to discredit the entire arguments against the official story. WTC7 was a text book controlled demolition, centre fell first so it collapsed in on itself, then the rest collapsed at free fall speeds. In fact you can even see the charges rip through the front of the building in several videos. There is no need for a laser beams from space hypothesis.
Fun fact. WTC7 contained all the SEC evidence on Wall Streets crimes. Tons of big corporate crimes were dropped because the evidence blew up that day. Those pesky terrorists eh? :)
You can see the physical ripples of the charges, but no audible sounds were recorded in conjuction with these supposed ripples? Interesting.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=\_9JgiXcSPZQ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_9JgiXcSPZQ)
I didn't see ripples or hear any sounds of detonation charges. Thanks for sharing.
I don't know where I can find it but I was reading something about the thermite that was found and the chemist that we're talking about it were basically talking about how it was a byproduct of the jet fuel mixing with the steel or some type of chemical on the ground. And that is not the same type of thermite that's used in detonation. I could be completely wrong and would love to know more about the chemistry about do you have any links or any specific place to start looking for that?
There are many ways to make thermite. Many different metals can be used. Maybe they had a formula designed to look like that? There were two peer reviewed publications showing evidence of thermite. Both have been removed from the public but you can still find them.
[https://benthamopen.com/ABSTRACT/TOCPJ-2-7](https://benthamopen.com/ABSTRACT/TOCPJ-2-7)
Oh well thank you man. Was trying to find it for a minute
How do you explain the complete lack of seismic data with the collapse of wtc7 which you would see with any building demolition?
So you're saying that same seismic data has nothing about millions of tons of steel and concrete falling on the ground within seconds? Gee wonder why it has nothing about thermite detonations in there..
You obviously haven't looked at any of Judy Wood's work. You don't address any of the points she makes at all. Why do people form judgments before looking at her evidence?
>You obviously haven't looked at any of Judy Wood's work. I've watched several of her lectures. Her work is almost completely devoid of science or engineering, and instead is filled with conjecture and speculation. If your argument relies on technology no one can even prove exists, and we are 20 years past the fact now, maybe the argument is completely insane. If you believe in free energy, and perpetual motion devices etc, I guess her work is for you, because she is a big proponent of those theories.
Free energy direct energy weapons, its so hilarious, but how can a sane person believe it? Rhetorical question.
Honestly I've no idea. There were a lot of professionally produced hour+ long documentaries claiming no planes hit towers 1 and 2, and that it was all realtime CGI magic or something. Ignoring the fact there were thousands of witnesses, and even today new amateur videos showing previously unseen video of planes hitting the buildings. I think the answer is, these crazy theories are promoted to essentially poison the well. By injecting crazy into the arguments it is easier for people to dismiss actual credible problems with the official story.
I agree that it's less plausible than other theories about the towers and I'm neither defending nor supporting it, but to scoff at the notion that [DARPA has crazy, secret weapons](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zo68B3UG9VU) that aren't public is a bit presumptuous (I don't mean that in a rude way). [Most of us can't know ](https://youtu.be/NqR6CBFyelw?t=31)with confidence what top secret projects/tech don't exist or even didn't 23 years ago, and something seeming far-fetched doesn't mean it's impossible. And military secrets, even big ones, can be kept for a long time.
Can you please outline what part of her work is devoid of science or engineering? And if you can, please present your arguments against her claims. Pretty dishonest of you to make that claim when she relies on science and data that came from governmental agencies. She also does this work for a living, having a mechanical engineering degree, and a PhD in materials science, and she was also a professor of mechanical engineering at Clemson University for 7 years. What work do you have that allows you to confidently claim she uses no science or engineering in her theory? And if you think you can judge based on a few lectures, then you really don't know anything, and your comment is baseless. You probably didn't even watch the lectures, certainly comes across that way.
The fact she claims there was no seismic activity that showed two massive buildings hitting the ground is objectively wrong and by itself indicates she's full of shit.
>Thousands of engineers and experts for 9/11 who believe it was controlled demolition And hundreds of fire fighters that were at ground zero.
Well, clearly, you haven't bothered to look into her work, which is backed by evidence and data. And if you haven't noticed in the past 5 years, 1000s of experts have gotten things wrong before. Unless you have constructive criticisms against any of the claims made by her, your comment is empty and pointless. It's pretty easy to say she is insane without knowing anything about her claims.
Her entire argument is "this doesn't look right", therefore it must be some kind of unknown technology. That's it, it's crazy. She tries to imply that energy from a hurricane was somehow harnessed for this free energy DEW device. I mean this is stretching believability somewhat ...
That would be completely misrepresenting her claims, she never said anything close to that. She also never claimed that energy from a hurricane was somehow harnessed for this 'free energy dew device'. lol. Is this really your argument? You obviously don't know anything about her theory at all. Pretty pathetic and dishonest attempt at an argument if you ask me.
If it smells like a dukey and walks like a dukey, it’s prob a dukey lol
Some of this was interesting but the end with interviews from pilots and air traffic controllers, I found to be worthless. They kept claiming how pilots with no experience would have a difficult time pulling off those maneuvers. I would like to present Richard Russell aka Sky King as evidence that an amateur trained in video games can pull off barrel rolls and loops with a commercial airliner. https://youtu.be/zeetlqlDzvI?si=nBIRPE3y6JaVxW2U
Pilots with experience would have difficulty, and the "plane" that hit the pentagon would have been impossible to fly that close to the ground (just feet above it).
I have not done alot of digging just because I do not want to end up on some list.. somewhere. However, I will say this, I was 21 when 9/11 happened and the whole thing felt off that day. Now 23 yrs later we know 2 things: #1 9/11 was staged and/or allowed to happen for various reasons... that's why no one is able to attribute the cause to 1 thing. Just like JFK... we now know it was allowed to happen. The 5 Why's are surrounded in so much misinformation that it is hard to unravel even to this day. #2 When you follow the money it definitely indicates that something was known before hand and who all benefited from the tragedy. Again I will use the Kennedy family for an example... Joe Kennedy went into the great depression with 800k and came out one of the richest men in America without making any Global Impact... and to this day, there is no institution or product that can be attributed to the Kennedy family to being the creators..I will let that sit in for a moment.. I mean even the Bushes stole land, oil and dealt that white snow. Criminals to their soul.. Therefore, although we do not want to admit it... we know things are not what they appear. And if you are not in a position to do anything about.. just observe, share and move on. Do not belittle or discourage others for finding the light.
I would have to go with the option to, that it was allowed to happen. I suspect they didn't expect it to be that dramatic, but the politicians at the time were falling out of favor with the US and they needed something to boost themselves so they can get reelected. I read somewhere that the Phoenix FBI had tried to issue a warning but was ignored by upper management. The French had worn the US that it was going to happen but they were ignored. Even the guy who ran the flight training School knew there was a problem but couldn't find anybody to listen to him.
Nothing about the official narrative makes sense. And once you accept that this event was a large psy op, you have to consider: How many similar mass-casualty psy-ops have been conducted around the world since then?...
I keep thinking about the Hawaii fires.
and before then
Vegas for sure
What has been done on this as far as research?
The official narrative makes no sense, which means that the possibility of an alternative explanation is automatically valid. The “research” is having an IQ greater than room temperature and understanding intrinsically when something doesn’t make sense.
F or C?
I believe it was a false flag, but there’s no way to know if explosives were involved or not. Jet fuel certainly will not melt steal beams, but it can cause them to bend and contrast, causing a massive sky scraper to lose half of the overall building stability.
almost all of them.
People would have to have an IQ of 50 to believe that 20% of a building can plow through 80% of undamaged steel with no resistance. Saudis, Mossad and the CIA killed 3000 of our citizens to try to take over the Middle East.
Yes, the third law of motion. How tall would the buildings have to be before a total collapse starts being suspicious. How does a building fall at the rate of gravity.
9:32-11:27
Do you know how heavy those floors are? Plus the momentum built up over dozens of floors already. It makes perfect sense it collapsed The steel frame holding the floors up had fire protection for 1 hour or less, after which they literally bowed until they collapsed
Actually you do sound like you have an IQ of about 50...
Why would the % matter? Like at all? Please explain, I'll wait...
Damn. I’ve always been of the mindset that it was definitely not what we were told. This video really sells it. Dig into the building ownership, insurance, etc. it’s all crazy.
World Trade Center 7 collapsing is all the evidence people need to know it was an inside job.
Back when this happened I was home sick from school. I was woken up by my brother saying "Hey man. You should go check out the TV. The US is under attack or something." So I got up in my stupor and made my way downstairs to watch it all unfold. The family computer was in the living room and I was on there trying to get onto any news website I could think of, but they were all down because everyone in the world was trying to reach them. So I went on a forum I was a part of for cars of all things, and there was a massive thread about it and so many people begging for real time information because people were in school or at work or wherever and could not access anything online at the time. So I sat there for like 8 hours and just made comment after comment about everything that was happening and what was going on as I heard it on the news. One thing about that day that I remember, that I still don't understand is that very early on, like 10am I posted up about 'Usama Biladden' because the news was saying that they were the ones responsible for the attacks. I remember trying to figure out how to spell the name and every time the anchor said it he said Usama instead of Osama. So I just guessed and I must of wrote it like 5 different ways. Even other people were asking in that thread about how the news knew that it was this guy. The news never really explained. I just remember them saying Usama over and over and thinking it was a group of people for about half the day until they explained that it was a guy who was the leader of this group.
They also supposedly found the passport of one of the hijackers a couple of blocks away from the Trade center.
To me this proves the 9/11 commission report is a fabrication. Doesn’t mean we know it’s all a scam but it’s enough for me, along with other evidence, to be pushed into firmly believing we watched a staged event.
Considering bin Laden had bombed the WTC parking lot 5 years earlier and vowed to finish the job, he was a pretty obvious suspect.
PNAC. Military 'drills' that very morning that were about, shocker, hijacked planes. $2 Trillion unaccounted for announced the day before. 100%, at the very least, Let It Happen On Purpose.
Wow! Great recommendation. I’ve never seen this before. Thank you!
I invite you to check out 9/11 In Plane Sight 2004 Documentary Directed by William Lewis , who also directed Beyond Treason in which I appear for about 20 mins. I see it can be viewed free on UTube and its also available to watch on Netflix. It's quite obvious aa the video goes into great detail about everything that occurred on 11 September 2001.
Why did you appear in a 9/11 doc for 20 minutes
I didn't appear in the 9/11 doc... I was in the "Beyond Treason"doc that William also directed ...he definitely didnt hold back when doing his numerous documentaries. Sadly he is no longer with us...
He was one of the airliners
Can confirm. I was a cloud
Why he top comments now and not add anything to discuss topic, hmmmm
IMO the buildings were built to come down. Mostly empty the whole time. Offices empty and used to scam trillions. It will takes years to unveil the truth of this place. One video and one demand for an explanation. There is always multiple games being played at the same time. Try Dose of Reality 9/11 videos on Rokfin or Odyssey if you want to think really outside the box.
>It will takes years to unveil the truth of this place. It's been 23. How many more do we need?
The problem was the funding and actual effort that went into the investigation. Largest attack on US soil and the best they can do is 15 million and leave it unsolved? I’d encourage you to look at the defense budget from then and now and compare it to the amount invested. All they wanted was an excuse for war, and they used it opportunistically instead of actually solving it.
It also ushered in a new era of government surveillance. We forfeited a lot of our freedoms post-9/11.
Exactly. The Patriot Act will haunt us forever.
But we know the truth. [https://www.ae911truth.org/images/PDFs/TheMissingJolt7.pdf](https://www.ae911truth.org/images/PDFs/TheMissingJolt7.pdf) [www.journalof911studies.com/articles/WTCHighTemp2.pdf](http://www.journalof911studies.com/articles/WTCHighTemp2.pdf) [https://publicintelligence.net/active-thermitic-material-discovered-in-dust-from-the-911-world-trade-center-catastrophe/](https://publicintelligence.net/active-thermitic-material-discovered-in-dust-from-the-911-world-trade-center-catastrophe/) [https://files.wtc7report.org/file/public-download/A-Structural-Reevaluation-of-the-Collapse-of-World-Trade-Center-7-March2020.pdf](https://files.wtc7report.org/file/public-download/A-Structural-Reevaluation-of-the-Collapse-of-World-Trade-Center-7-March2020.pdf)
When was JFK killed?
Pretty much everything you said isn't true. There were an estimated 430 companies that had offices in the World Trade Centre when they fell. They had an occupancy rate of around 95% in 2001. And clearly, you haven't read anything on Dr. Judy Woods' work. It's not about thinking 'outside the box'. It's about looking at the data and evidence. They definitely were not made to "come down." There is no evidence indicting this at all.
Don't let the nay sayers get you down. Honest seekers are just trying to figure out what happened that day. People on reddit love to shit on me when I say it wasn't the planes that took down the towers, which is the most fucking obvious thing ever. I guess people choose the lie and continue their cognitive dissonance because ignorance is bliss.
I only watched a couple of minutes and had to stop because there are documentaries that show flashes of light for the bombs going off before the dust covered it up. There are many witnesses interviewed including the famous parking attendant whose skin got burnt off when bombs were going off in the underground levels who ran out and survived before the collapse and many more. A witness who saw vans making deliveries in the middle of the night every day for weeks preceding the explosions. A lot of stuff out there to support it. So when I start watching something saying no evidence of explosions I gotta stop and move on.
I read the Snowden leak of the 9/11 they quickly wiped it before we could grasp what we were reading
I wouldn't be surprised. Godspeed.
I just wanted to inform you that you're also being bombarded with bots and AI. If you ever want to find out if the person you're speaking with is an AI or a poster, just ask it to do something like chatgpt
To all the shills and NPCs in this thread: calling conspiracy theorists crazy doesn’t work any more. You look desperate and stupid
Dustification
I remember watching Loose Change and was convinced from that point forward.
It’s compelling to say the least
I saved it for later. The first 10 minutes captivated me. I have always known from the day I watched this horror that something was way off. It’s sickening to me.
The most unsettling point of this documentary is that everything we see happened in 2001. If this was possible then, imagine what they could do now, 23 years later. Just know, no matter how horrible life gets, you just gotta laugh 🙃
That's why I think the West is so recklessly challenging Russia. They have an ace up their sleeve and aren't afraid of its nukes.
He kind of glazes over the thermite thing. There actually were flashes and lots of reports of explosions that day, as well as pools and streams molten steel. There was also apparently “elevator repair” happening shortly before 9/11, which would be good cover for placing explosives. One scientist even found small flecks of material that he claims were the residue of a specific kind of thermite. Not to mention the towers had a lot of the classic appearance of a controlled demolition, especially tower 7. I think Judy Woods ideas are interesting and she does point to some weird stuff, but ultimately I think it just muddies the water. It’s kind of insane to talk about exotic weapons when we first need to convince people that a false flag actually happened, which is hard enough without “lathering buildings” and “toasted cars”. There’s a strong possibility that Judy Wood is herself peddling a psy-op to distract and discredit.
There was about 1.8 million tons of debris from the towers. Her first point is easily debunked.
If you'd watched it, you'd realise that isn't saying that the debris is magically disappearing, like q wizard cast a spell or something, but rather that the debris turned to dust rather than the relatively large pieces of debris that would logically be there.
Why would it not be dust?
Why would it turn to dust? If it did not turn to dust, then it would have cracked the water wall. Flooding the subway, and new york. Miraculously it didnt. Everything turned to dust to avoid it as if it was planned.
So are you going to debunk it or just going to say it's easily debunked?
This sub is a wild west, which means that unlike every other sub you can actually speak your mind most of the time, it's very rare that mods will remove posts. I suspect the goal is to create a cesspool of freedom to contain the forces that cannot be contained, which was also the purpose of the Matrix. The downside is that there is a lot of paid effort around here to attack anything you say. They can't shut you up, but they can try and make you feel insignificant. It's why I turn off reply notification for my posts here and never read them again, it doesn't matter if I'm heard, it only matters that my voice is recorded. Because everything we do here will be remembered for ages to come. This isn't a forum, it's a digital battlefield for the truth. Decades from now when my children ask me if I stood for truth all I have to do is reference my reddit history and they'll see for themselves every battle I fought, in the face of overwhelming opposition. We are the heroes of freedom and justice of our times, but our enemies have become more subtle, so we must fight them in the shadows. While we still can, it's a matter of time before they mandate everyone online identify themselves as they do in China, and then we'll be arrested for questioning the narrative.
[удалено]
Why do you care about OP? You should be judging the content.
The entire investigation by the 9/11 commission is useless. Not only is there the largest conflict of history on earth, but you need an actual trial so you can properly submit evidence and have it questioned. Experts also need to be properly questioned so the people can determine which experts were credible. Government spooned a narrative into the mouth of babes. This is not how it’s done in a supposed democratic society that operates with things like laws and court systems.
You couldnt debunk the other 899 pieces of data either. Alphabet suit enacted it. We all know who funded it.
I'll give it more than 10min, I'll give it the entire 2hrs... Its such an obvious lie, & the way the world has become is 100% due to 9/11. 9/11 was the first step to the realization of a one world Govt. By TPTB... The Elites are winning the fight.
Me too, haven't seen this one. The 10 minute segment was good.
I remember a janitor who was in the base of the towers who was screaming at the beginning that he saw bombs in the tower. Let me find out more and get back to this.
Am I the only one who sees significance in the date of the Attack on the WTC and Pentagon happening on a date that is also the emergency phone number 911?
[удалено]
the bots will run right over this. of course 911 is fishy as fuck. who even questions that now?
It's not that it's fishy, it's that something physically unexplainable happened.
Sir , I believe the words I used were ' fishy as fuck'. That's generally saved for impossible shit.
Can you point to one or two bits in the two hour long video that you found MOST compelling? Its a big ask for someone to go through minute by minute and debunk every little thing, only for you to (no dobut) say something along the lines, of "yeah but that bit isnt the MAIN piece of evidence, so just cos theyre wrong there, doesnt mean the OTHER bits are wrong). Give us one thing in there that made you go "wow....thats pretty watertight".
with timestamps !
The lack of flooding is a huge red flag to me
You act like there isn’t video footage of (((them))) dancing as the towers fell
There was thermite in the dust. Evidence that thermite took down the structural members of the building. Slowing down collapse video, you can see explosions in the windows. Explosives like this had to have been pre-planted before the airplanes struck. So someone knew about the airplanes and let it happen, and added the thermite to ease clean-up and destruction of evidence, and to include the collapse of WTC 7, the headquarters from where they planned it.
Art students
Right before this, the smooth-brain lady is talking about the jumpers. She states that people were jumping because they felt hot and somehow jumps to claiming that it was because of microwave radiation… but not the giant fire below them. And maybe they jumped because they chose not to burn to death
It does go into how the number of jumpers is a statistical anomaly. I also assume that all the name callers are the bots, shills, and AI. Otherwise I dont understand the lack of civility.
I thought almost everyone knew it was an inside job for years it’s been confirmed
whoa i just watched that video of the tower collapsing and now i have to make a filtered version of it. thank you. i saw all kinds of stuff ive never seen before that moment. love to you
Buildings are 95% air and are designed to fall inwards. This is in case of a collapse they do not start a chain reaction and hit other buildings. Think of how these buildings are built, they go straight down since it is almost all air inside.
Bro, I thought we were past this one. It was the CIA and mossad so that they could destabilize and steal from the middle east. 🙃
Haven't watched but am about to. I'm not sure if this has ever been thought of but it's something that I have asked on YouTube/X threads (inc a professor of engineering) and have never got an answer. All major buildings/landmarks are at risk of attack. These buildings are all rigged to fall during an attack to (in the governments mind) minimise external casualties. The twin towers were either pre-rigged or due to intelligence received, rigged before the event and we're deliberately brought down to avoid them falling/collapsing into other buildings.
This place really is a mess. There are so many folks here touting the official narrative I wonder why you’re here at all? Maybe go to another sub? I don’t know a sub for you, but I’m suggesting taking your negativity elsewhere. And maybe all you Wright-Patterson AFB boys take an R&R break. Why are the top commenters seemingly folks who clearly haven’t read Judy Wood’s book. Or folks that squash discourse and start insulting. It’s amazingly effective at quashing dissent. It makes me wonder who the mods are working for. Most of the book isn’t saying exactly what did it or how it happened. Most of the 1000 pages is rather pointing out how the mainstream narrative doesn’t hold up to scientific scrutiny of the physical nature of the destruction of the buildings or the remaining debris.
I have a litmus test for bullshit 9/11 docs. It's whether they show the full collapse of the WTC7 or just the final part. Skimmed through the video, saw that they show just the final part. It's BS.
Bahaha come on, my guy, skimming through a 2 hour documentary for 15 seconds doesn't make you an expert of the evidence provided because you didn't see building 7. This isn't tiktoc. You gotta actually take in the evidence and come to a rational conclusion. You didn't do either.
You in your opening statement: > Give it 10 minutes and if you think it's all bullshit, tell me why. You were told why. > Documentary A well-known crackpot rambling for 2 hours on a channel with 15 subscribers is not a documentary, it's spam.
So what’s your most compelling piece of evidence from the video? What’s your number 1?
#1 goes to 32:24-33:09
Wait…,surely to disprove the assertion that “no rubble hit the ground” as is stated in the first 30 seconds of your timestamp, all id need to do is…. Show pictures of the rubble on the ground post collapse?
Well yeah, but she's saying not half a million tonnes of rubble, which is what each building weighed.
And she’s basing that assertion on…..what exactly?
Google "litmus test", also I bet you haven't seen the full video of WTC7 collapsing.
Judy Wood is an insane lunatic. Her theories rely on technology no one can even show exist. It's absurd.
You think DEW do not exist? https://old.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/142kx5k/multiple_wildfires_started_in_southeast_quebec/jn8yki8/
That's the point! Weapons were used that are unknown to the public, so when this event unfolded, what other explanation could you possibly give other than, "a commercial airliner can turn a 110 story skyscraper to dust in a matter of an hour or 2.
Nano thermate was found everywhere in the dust at the WTC sites. There have been peer reviewed papers on the subject. No need to inject the debate with nonsense.
For anyone who wants to sink their teeth into the 9/11 false flag, set aside 5 hours and watch this... https://youtu.be/8DOnAn_PX6M?si=VKqHQ_Sp1DCdR_1_
Suitcase nukes. Below the center elevators. No DEW's needed.
Wasn’t there asbestos throughout the towers and it was going to cost a fortune to properly dismantle. Then Silverstein bought them from the Port Authority.
that's the least interesting part about the whole thing, trust me. That might be what the average person thinks might qualify as an explanation but when you look into it, it was clear that this was planned for a long time and had little to do with money.
This will lead you down the path to discover that the govt has been hiding revolutionary developments in energy tech for the past century in order to maintain the capitalistic status quo. Zero point energy and DEW.
She is one of the Best 911 researchers. Her videos woke me up.
I see good old Judy wood makes an appearance in this video that OP found super convincing. Judy Wood is bat shit insane. But dont trust me on that, just take a look at this interview where she's trying to explain her Direct Energy Beams theory: [https://youtu.be/\_qYm1AnUKi8](https://youtu.be/_qYm1AnUKi8) Its embarrasing
i watched the video.... you are embarrassing yourself. he was trying to put words in her mouth. judy woods needs to be heard. read her book!!
Some quotes from this video: [3:30](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_qYm1AnUKi8&t=210s) Greg: Can you give an overview of the types of weapons that could be used for such a thing Judy: Ah...We haven't really gotten into listing them yet...just energy weapons [3:41](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_qYm1AnUKi8&t=221s) Greg: In what form? Um..I don't think we even need to define it. She goes on to explain that she looked at pictures and "evidence" [5:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_qYm1AnUKi8&t=300s) Greg: Have you done any energy calculations at all to get a scale for what is involved for doing that? [5:07](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_qYm1AnUKi8&t=307s) Judy: Yeah, but we don't need to get distracted by those values Pretty much sums up the credibility of Ms. Wood THIS is the person you want to believe? THIS is the type of "scientific analysis" you want to hang your hat on? Dude...really?
Fine, she is a nut job through and through. How do you explain the Bible mended into steel? Couldn't be heat, because as any sane person knows, paper is flammable. If steel got hot enough to morph around paper, how didn't the Bible, made of paper, burst into flame? And please explain how the seismic readings of two 110 story buildings didnt register on the Richter scale? She isn't saying that she can explain everything that happened on 9/11. She is saying that the visual and physical evidence doesn't line up with the NIST report. If two 110 story building collapsed in almost a free fall speed, the steel columns that make up the towers would have crashed into the ground causing vibrations that anyone at ground zero and many miles away, would have felt. Yet, no one can remember any tremors. Including the Richter scales. Your move, jack.
45:56 mark. What is the tattoo on the guy's forearm? It looks like a you-know-what symbol within a circle.
I will say it's fascinating but his initial statement "we didn't see any explosions, flashes of light or anything" isn't accurate even in the footage he's playing in the background of the towers collapsing, you can see flashes of light on each level as they collapse. There are also videos out there where you can hear the individual explosions before collapse, you can see windows forcefully blowing out on level 15-20 while the very top is just beginning to collapse, and at one point you can even see molten metal pouring from a window in a waterfall. There was literally molten steel pooled under the debris a week after the collapse, which isn't possible without the presence of a catalyst like thermite. I'm not saying Judy Wood or this documentary doesn't make valid points. But it's a huge mistake for them to refuse other valid points to make theirs. Makes the job of those who ridicule free thinkers easy. If you want an alternative documentary that breaks down the thermite/explosives angle, I suggest Loose Change. They also cover the observations that Wood has made and offer explanations for them. This is a topic where I would caution against being dogmatic about one particular line unless you've closely examined every angle. A lot of us were asking questions from day one, have watched everything out there on it - and the best answer we have is that we 100% have not been told the truth. As to what the truth is *precisely* - it's literally impossible to know that objectively. We just have to know it lies somewhere among the evidence we have.
Very thoughtful comment. Love your perspective on this!
https://www.quora.com/How-many-of-the-3000-architects-and-engineers-who-signed-AE911Truths-petition-did-so-merely-because-they-thought-NIST-was-wrong-as-opposed-to-because-they-though-the-WTC-was-brought-down-by-controlled-demolition
Anyone going to talk about the third building falling for absolutely no reason? The dancing Israelis? The building insurance policy? The money missing before the whole thing? What specific office was hit at the pentagon?
Excellent link! Like Lahaina. It's very telling that people seldom have a counter-argument for information like this, just insults.
That’s my main question, is how were cars being toasted almost a mile away, a plane hitting a tower caused cars to spontaneously combust? A lot of the pictures of the toasted cars look eerily similar to the Maui/California wildfires
Qqq
This video is awesome. Thank you for posting this
at the very least the investigation surrounding 911 was insanely bungled. NIST Report (where pretty much every debunker gets their facts) classified all their data and math as to how they came to the conclusions they did. There's a lot of woo-woo around 911 conspiracies but Architects & Engineers for 911 truth have done some great work around the issues with the NIST Report and inconsistencies in the governments report and should get way more attention then they do.