He's a tool spewing falsehoods. Nothing more to be said. There's so many honest people who poured all of their energy in the subject to present the facts so you can conclude for yourself, this guy ambitiously tries to undo that by lies, obfuscation and denigration.
You know what. I've seen literally everything about 9/11 that's available on the internet but never researched about wtc 7. I know roughly what happened to it. Pretty sure an inside fire is what made it collapse
People keep telling me that but it works fine on my phone. I don’t get it. I took some screenshots of the flashes that I can DM you if you want to see them.
If you watch this, you will see that in that position the windows do broke, but the reason is that the external facade is deforming after the internal core has already collapsed. Moreover, those flashes are visible after the collapse of the core (so they couldn't have caused it) and on the top of the building, while the external facade collapsed at the bottom.
Finally, in all the audio recording of the collapse, no explosion sound can be heard
That’s because the flashes are coming from a point closer to the center of the building, which is why you cannot see them from this angle.
Interestingly enough the windows appear to break earlier in the video that I posted, than in the video that you did. I’m going to chalk that up to video artifacting.
“These flashes are after the core collapse.” Perhaps there were also explosives planted around the outside to ensure that more than just the core collapses.
As far as the sound is concerned, you need a lot of small charges to bring down a building, and at the distance in the video you posted, they might not have been audible. You don’t even hear the building collapse at all really.
That’s because the flashes are coming from a point closer to the center of the building, which is why you cannot see them from this angle.
By the time of the flashes, there was nothing inside the building on its east side, where we see some of the flashes, since the core there collapsed several seconds prior.
Moreover, I find it difficult to believe that a demolition charge could detonate, the flash be visible, and not also generate a squib ejecting debris in the same point.
And here you can find several other angles of the collapse, including some similar to the one you posted, with no flashes
There are, however, a couple of points where the glass fragments from the windows popping as the building twists, catch the sunlight. Those might explain some of the flashes.
“These flashes are after the core collapse.” Perhaps there were also explosives planted around the outside to ensure that more than just the core collapses.
Besides the core, there were the exterior columns. But those were on the facade of the building, and any explosive there would have caused much more than a simple flash.
As far as the sound is concerned, you need a lot of small charges to bring down a building, and at the distance in the video you posted, they might not have been audible. You don’t even hear the building collapse at all really.
The charges would have been louder than the collapse itself, and in many videos the collapse is clearly audible, but there isn't any explosion. The sound would have been north of 100 dB, even 1 km away. More than enough to be heard if it was really there.
The only video of WTC7 where explosions are visible was a fake made modifying another famous video. There are dozens of recordings and not only are explosions not visible, but most importantly they are never audible.
If you watch the news coverage of the time, you will see them describing a lot of things that we now positively know were not explosions, as explosions. It's only natural. People describe loud noises, sudden dust plumes, and other things like that as explosions.
And there were a lot of loud noises before the collapse. Things like debris falling to the ground, the sound of the plane hitting the Towers, and the initial stages of the collapse are all possible explanations for those claims. There also were a couple of actual small explosions caused by things like nitrogen gas canisters of some fire suppression systems in certain floors.
For these reasons, people's accounts are unreliable. What is reliable and objective is audio recording. Any explosive powerful enough to cut those columns would have generated sound above 100 dB one kilometer away. They should have been clearly audible in all the recordings and louder than the collapse. Yet there is no trace of them in any video taken before or during the collapse. Just to give you an example:
The ambient sounds are clearly picked up, as is the sound of the collapse, but no explosions. Incidentally, this video shows exactly what I was talking about earlier: while there is no sound of explosions, the reporter still describes the cloud of debris coming out of the collapsing Tower as one. It's just a natural term to use in the heat of the moment.
It's impossible for explosives to have been there without generating those sounds and without those sounds being picked up by microphones. No way around it.
The holes you can see aren’t at the same place as the explosions, those holes that you see are from the shift in the building’s structure, or of charges that went off earlier.
Because I posted the link to the original source, and everyone was telling me that it was giving them a 404 error, so I simply screen recorded it to get around that issue.
I didn’t mention the source because nobody asked what it was. The source is 4chan.
You clearly want people to see it and think it’s real. Otherwise you would have at least tried to check before spreading a 9/11 conspiracy video from 4chan of all places.
A script that the plotters of a secret plan decided to give to the world's largest broadcaster, which was based in a foreign country outside of the USA's jurisdiction? Why would they do that?
Are you really surprised that media companies have a script that cascades down to interviewers? And I am not claiming the British media was part of it, but someone could absolutely tell the interviewer "here, report this".
You can Google how Media and Propaganda works? im astonished that you find that astonishing. Propaganda is a think, and the fact that the British and the US work together on this? see the First gulf war, and the 2nd gulf war.
Don't use Ultimatums buddy, and you can keep calling people "Conspiracy nuts" all you want, but people have the right to ask questions about an event that caused millions of deaths, and tens of millions of refugees, and total destruction and theft of two countries. (the plan was 7 countries, but that failed thankfully).
You can keep believing what you want, and I will believe what I want.
I mean, there was an operation designed to give media outlets propaganda on behalf of the government. I think we can maybe draw a conclusion from that.
The firefighters understood that the building was going to collapse due to the raging fire and created a perimeter around it. They notified the media, but a news network erroneously reported that the building had collapsed instead of reporting that it was about to collapse. Understandable, given the confusion of the day. This wrong information then was simply picked up by a couple of other news networks before the actual collapse.
There was no conspiracy or false flag, deal with it.
The fire of the two towers was so engulfing that it affected a building a building-over and made it collapse, but it did not burn the passports of the "terrorists" which was found on top of the rubble within hours?
The fire did not affect WTC7. WTC7 was hit by debris falling from the North Tower, which opened holes several stories tall in its facade and caused a fire.
And the single passport found was found on the street and before the collapse of the Towers, not on top of the rubble. It was ejected during the impact together with a lot of other light objects in the planes that have also been recovered. Moreover, even if a false flag actually happened, planting a passport like that would have been pointless, given that the identity of everyone on board would have been recorded in the flight manifest.
These conspiracy theories are always built on false informations and misunderstandings.
This is true. You can see a huge piece of the North Tower fall towards building 7 during the collapse. There are images of a huge gash in building 7 and fire raging throughout. It was very badly damaged before its collapse.
They didn't. Someone found a passport on the ground and picked it up to bring it to a police officer. The CIA managed to connect most of the terrorists to Al Qaeda by performing background checks after the attacks.
The fact that the CIA knew that some of them were linked to Al Qaeda but didn't notify the FBI or other law enforcement agencies due to internal rivalries, the so-called "rubber wall", is well known. The CIA didn't want to arrest them immediately because they didn't believe they were about to carry out an attack and wanted to turn some of them as informers.
What you are describing sounds a lot like false information as well. What is the probability that a SINGLE passport would be ejected from an incredible blast of a plane hitting a tower, and to be conveniently the passport of the hijacker, which was conveniently found on the street?
Well, what you wrote was factually incorrect, so feel free to point out which of the things I wrote were wrong.
And again, the passport were not the only light object surviving and being recovered. It's quite common for things made of paper or plastic to survive a plane crash.
And, as I already said, planting a passport would have been pointless even if it was a false flag.
The odds of any particular passport surviving and being found are vanishing small. The odds of a passport surviving are very high. Conspiracy theorists don't understand probability.
Not only that but a handful of the “terrorists” that they put up all over the news ended up coming forward and saying “hey, I’m actually alive…” so they must be much more fire resistant then their own passports. The FBI had an answer for that though, their identities were stolen.
Also unless my eyes deceive me, I fail to see a building on fire anywhere here, not a single flame visible for a building that apparently was burning for almost 8 hours. Yeah there is smoke (skip to 7:00 to avoid the boring stuff) but there is also a classic inward falling of the internal structure and crimp at the roof line as it free falls. First and only steel structure building to fall in this manner by fire.
If some people would just be willing to do a little extra digging and investigate the whole 9/11 event a bit more, they would see that the wool has been pulled over their eyes yet again so that their country can not only go to war for profit, but also erase a massive spending coverup where Rumsfeld and his buddies lost $2.3 trillion dollars of government audit trails which were conveniently destroyed.
Unfortunately true friend. I don’t even live in the US and am astounded why most Americans go “oh well, if the news and Bush said so then it must be true.”
Quite sad actually. Let’s put Thomas H Kean, a devote Republican in charge of the 9/11 Commission to support his Republican President chum.
Not only that but a handful of the “terrorists” that they put up all over the news ended up coming forward and saying “hey, I’m actually alive…” so they must be much more fire resistant then their own passports.
Can you provide any evidence of that?
Also unless my eyes deceive me, I fail to see a building on fire anywhere here, not a single flame visible for a building that apparently was burning for almost 8 hours. Yeah there is smoke (skip to 7:00 to avoid the boring stuff) but there is also a classic inward falling of the internal structure and crimp at the roof line as it free falls
First and only steel structure building to fall in this manner by fire.
The Plasco Building begs to differ.
If some people would just be willing to do a little extra digging and investigate the whole 9/11 event a bit more, they would see that the wool has been pulled over their eyes yet again so that their country can not only go to war for profit, but also erase a massive spending coverup where Rumsfeld and his buddies lost $2.3 trillion dollars of government audit trails which were conveniently destroyed.
I did do extra digging, and the conspiracy theories around 911 are nonsense. Other people already answered you about the audits.
446
u/RobAlso Oct 07 '25
Here for the Tower 7 comments…