135 Comments
User's avatar
Jackie Wilson's avatar

Do you loons never get tired? And here I thought Substack was safe from you.

Expand full comment
Billy Andrew's avatar

Depends where you go to source your mountain of ‘evidence’, I guess.

Expand full comment
Con Dassos's avatar

Hi Deano, all the people in those buildings who could not escape did die; not by natural causes, not unintentionally, they were MURDERED. Please observe the data, read Judy Wood's book and/or watch her online presentations and consider; reviewing your opinion.

The murderer (s) are still at large!

Expand full comment
Scare Crow's avatar

Assuming the DEW theory is correct, why would the government demonstrate it in such a public manner, yet at the same time vociferously deny it's existence? Would it be just to give notice to the relatively few people in the world, especially in certain countries thought to be "enemies" of the US, that have the ability to recognize the technology for what it is? In which case, wouldn't it make more sense to keep this new, weaponized technology secret?

Was there some compelling reason to use this technology to destroy the towers?

I read, some years ago, that the exterior aluminum cladding was gradually detaching and would in the forseeable future have posed a danger of falling off the sides of the towers, and that it would have been financially prohibitive to dismantle the towers piecemeal, and that this was the reason for opting for the violent destruction of the towers, but I don't know whether that claim is valid.

Or maybe there was some other compelling reason to use this technology, if it exists, to bring down the towers, despite the apparently strong desire to keep the technology secret.

In other words, why demostrate the technology while at the same time trying to keep its existence secret? This seems to be a logical fallacy.

ps- I'm just now starting to read Judy Wood's book.

pps- It also occurs to me that if the practically free, practically unlimited energy of Cold Fusion is a reality, the push toward electrifying everything and getting rid of gasoline engines actually makes some sense.

Expand full comment
Scare Crow's avatar

The documentary 'Heavy Watergate', mentioned at 2:28:30, can currently be watched for free on TubiTV, here: https://tubitv.com/tv-shows/478751/s01-e06-heavy-watergate-the-war-against-cold-fusion

Expand full comment
TranceBass's avatar

Blg 7 looks like standard demo. The towers.. not so much

Expand full comment
ann watson's avatar

why was it smoking for the whole day before it fell ?

Expand full comment
John's avatar

Bullshit effort using classic strawman tactics to confuse and distract attention from the overwhelming evidence of controlled demolition.

Multiple eyewitnesses reported explosions:

https://rumble.com/v1z3eei-156-eyewitnesses-mention-exposions-on-911.html

Multiple eyewitnesses reported molten steel 'like in a foundry' still hot at ground zero months afterwards during the clean up:

https://www.bitchute.com/video/RgvnnvyTRVIR

Controlled Demolition = Preplanning = Inside Job

(with outside help, Israel's fingerprints are all over it, such as the dual Israel/US citizen who bought & insured the WTC, the dual Israel/US citizens responsible for foreign policy under Bush, the dual Israel/US citizens responsible for the NIST report, the Mossad agents arrested on 911, who later confessed they were there 'to document the event', the Israeli 'Art Students' who occupied top floors of the WTC prior to 911).

Expand full comment
Floyd Reynolds's avatar

What kind of a “controlled demolition” event can cause fluctuations in the earth’s magnetic field?

Expand full comment
Con Dassos's avatar

John, what you are understandably relating is exactly what one of the current many narratives that has been in place for the last twenty years, but I would ask you to reconsider what you have been told, just for a moment, because:

1. Controlled demolition is not possible because the effort, time needed to install explosives would be transparent--- it wasn't. FACT. Seismic data confirm a lack of disruption on the ground. FACT. Time measured for TT1 & 2 to be destroyed inconsistent with a demolition, consistent with fall in a vacuum .FACT.

2. The amount of debris on that day after the destruction of TT 1, 2, 3, 4 ,5, 7 and 7 is tiny compared to the masses of TT1 & 2 estimated at 500,000 tons each. FACT.

3. Multiple witnesses say... in a court of law this is called hearsay which is not evidentiary proof. Their statements are exclusively their interpretation of what they saw... only. OPINION, NOT FACT.

4. Presenting Israel and/or Mossad is another one of many narratives going around for twenty years. Why so many different narratives. So please consider why you should believe this to be true when the destruction of the towers still remains so controversial even today. FACT.

*** You really need to now WHAT happened FIRST.

Although Dr Judy Wood clearly demolishes the narratives currently in play, she also offers a real description of what did happen which no one in power in our society is willing to voice and discuss openly. Now that's an issue on its own isn't it! FACT.

Expand full comment
Deano's avatar

They had power shut down at the towers months before the hoax. The never did that prior. Ever. Secondly coincidentally they did “fireproof improvements” at the exact same floors that were “hit” Not saying that it did happen that way but they had time under cover to do it. I think Judy is correct. I also don't believe anyone died that day. I've done my research and that is very plausible. Just saying.

Expand full comment
Kenneth J Hinnenkamp's avatar

Building 7 was an example of classic controlled demolition. So obviously teams were able to access that building to prepare it for collapse. And WTC 1&2 were not hit by aircraft as we were led to believe. So we were lied to from the start about the entire event.

Perfectly symmetrical collapse cannot be caused by asymmetrical damage. I intuitively knew this the day it happened. So the event was obviously planned, and not by a bunch of rag tag Muslim "terrorists." If not them, then who was responsible?

"Multiple witnesses say." When hearsay is more convincing than the official narrative, an intelligent person must give it credence when trying to connect the dots. In fact some of the videos have sounds of explosives going off, just as some of the claims made by bystanders and fire fighters.

Those who don't want us to know the truth about 9/11 control the media, and the FBI for that matter. They do nothing but try to confuse us and hide any facts about their sacred "truths." Think the Holocaust as a prime example. There is no forensic evidence proving the Holocaust ever happened. But school children are taught that the Holocaust is a fact, despite the abundant evidence to the contrary.

Another dot to connect is who benefits? Cui Beno? The neocons produced the Project For A New American Century. Their plan was laid out prior to the actual "Pearl Harbor" event. A reference to another false flag from the past. The wars in the Middle East were planned long before 9/11 by the neocons. 9/11 was "the trigger" event.

Since a thorough investigation was never "officially" performed to obtain the facts, we are likely never going to know all the precise details of the event. NIST was merely a coverup. David Icke was trying to do an investigation as a thorough journalist would be expected to do. He was blocked by the FBI. Christopher Bollyn wrote a book titled Solving 9/11. His book and David Icke's The Trigger do a good job of connecting the dots. Some will label the authors "conspiracy theorists" rather than taking on the evidence presented in their books. This has the effect of convincing people to discard their "testimonies" as irrelevant without bothering to explore what they say. TPTB use this tactic effectively to silence critics. It works well against a thoroughly brainwashed public.

If we insist on knowing the details about what happened on 9/11, exactly what caused the event will likely go unsolved. TPTB don't want the factual details to come to light, do they? They have the power of the media to confuse the public. So connecting dots is likely all the interested critical thinkers have to go on.

Expand full comment
Con Dassos's avatar

Kenneth, you say "Building 7 was an example of classic controlled demolition. So obviously teams were able to access that building to prepare it for collapse." Please show us the evidence of this preparation eg: video, cables, explosives, workmen... I CAN'T FIND ANY.

Then you mention: "And WTC 1&2 were not hit by aircraft as we were led to believe. So we were lied to from the start about the entire event." Of course we were lied to from the start,, but that information avoids the question of what caused the TT to be destroyed.

Then "so the event was obviously planned... If not them, then who was responsible" is like giving an answer to question without asking the question FIRST. The question is WHAT happened.

"There is no forensic evidence proving the Holocaust ever happened" is incorrect. Just visit Haus der Wannsee in Berlin and look at the black and white photo albums of the victims. That IS evidence.

And I agree, Cui Bono, the wars in the Middle East were planned long before 9/11 by the neocons. 9/11 was "the trigger" event , are all avenues of enquiry but bypass the issue WHAT happened FIRST.

Finally, "So connecting dots is likely all the interested critical thinkers have to go on." This is inconsistent with what Dr Judy Woods has outlined in her book Where Did The Towers Go.

We must not for a moment stop questioning this issue. Maybe not in our lifetime, but in they future the truth will be revealed. Keep up your strength!!

Expand full comment
Kenneth J Hinnenkamp's avatar

"Please show us the evidence of this preparation eg: video, cables, explosives, workmen... I CAN'T FIND ANY."

Seriously, if this prevents you from thinking critically, what can I say?

You can lead a man to evidence, but you can't make him think.

Any controlled demolition expert can tell how building 7 came down from the video evidence. They don't need the names and addresses and family histories of the teams that did the work. How many controlled demolitions has Dr. Judy Woods performed?

Here are two testimonies from demolition experts for you.

https://youtu.be/u5IgqJXyLbg?si=sv6yfvSzzR6vallj

https://rumble.com/v5eju9o-dutch-demolition-expert-building-no7-was-taken-down-by-controlled-demolitio.html

Expand full comment
Con Dassos's avatar

I appreciate your trust in the expertise and opinion of the demolition experts, but the problem is that you have already labelled it a demolition as opposed to asking a qualified scientist in mechanical engineering or research expertise in experimental stress analysis, structural mechanics, deformation analysis, materials characterization and materials engineering science what their findings are in the destruction of the WTC buildings (all seven of them). Ask Dr Judy Wood. It was not a demolition, this is not proferred by me, just Dr Judy Wood's research in her book.

Expand full comment
Kenneth J Hinnenkamp's avatar

If Dr. Wood does not think WTC 7 was classic controlled demolition, perhaps she has no clue about what controlled demolition actually is. How many has she done? Any?

The two experts I posted have been involved in multiple controlled demolitions. Wood would be humbled if she ever got into an open debate over the available evidence of building 7 with these two.

WTC 1&2 collapses did not look like what happened to building 7. There is lots of speculation about what caused those two disasters. No conclusions that I am aware of. Except the total BS story that NIST gave us. Dr. Wood agrees with me here.

We can ascertain that the destruction of 1&2 was not accidental. And the terrorists flying planes into the buildings story is not credible. I never bought that story, but I didn't suspect that the authorities were deliberately lying to us till later. If they were lying, who were they trying to protect? The answer to that question is more important than how it was done IMO. If we insist on knowing how, we mayl never get to the bottom of it and the perpetrators will go free all the way to their graves.

David Icke and Christopher Bollyn make good cases for who was responsible. Their suspected perpetrators have never been investigated.

Dr. Wood's conclusion is that the events of that day were not as we were told. On this point we agree.

She also said the story of the destruction defied the laws of physics. I also intuitively came to that conclusion the same day it happened. So we agree on that too.

She has a PHD. I trusted my intuition.

Those that put forward alternate theories to the "official narrative" are treated unkindly to say the least. They are denied access like David Icke was.

They don't come forward if they fear they will be fired from their jobs, or theatened in some way. So it takes someone of courage to discern and divulge the truth.

Expand full comment
R!CKYRANTS's avatar

Tell us you didn't listen without telling us you didn't listen.

Steel doesn't stay melted for months after a traditional controlled demo. You should have paid attention to the podcast and not parroted controlled opposition talking points.

Expand full comment
Redskelton's avatar

When we finger out that our heads have been butt-stuffed in a foray of falsehoods-it will be too late to notice the cataclysmic crisis of our time.

Doomsday is a predictable function of time.

Expand full comment
Sarah's avatar

excellent \. thank you. we need to pray.

Expand full comment
Brad's avatar

Fascinating post on this revisit to the 9/11/2001 event! Also, 1st I heard of the1951 State Inventions Secrets Act...but of course! However this was done the results would be the same, the Patriot Act, multiple NDAAs, Declaration of Emergency (still in effect) and the enacting of the Continuity of Government Act on the morning of 9/11/2001 with its state secret clauses suspending the US Constitution in whole or parts (?) that even Congress could not pry this information loose from the executive branch (Bush or Obama) and the 'Seven in five war." No doubt financial gain from this mass murder event is also in the mix. Looking more like the A&E For 9/11 Truth is a "Graduated truth farm" site put into place as a resting place for the inquisitive. "Cold Fusion" has been the Holy Grail humans have been searching for since we discovered fire!

I met Hutchinson once and visited his New Westminster apartment which was crammed full of obsolete equipment he had gathered from mainly the Cdn Navy which he said he leased as set props for sci-fi filming. He never mentioned his experimenting, which were disclosed as, strictly levitation experimentations. in media a few years after our meeting. Our conversation flowed more towards his close friendship connections with William Shatner. My impression was that he was highly intelligent but with an eccentricity that often comes with this scientific type of high intelligence. Thinking of Newton's obsession with Alchemy, to Tesla. to Hutchinson.

Looking through the comments here it seems those with interest in keeping all this quite and hidden have siced their dogs of doubt on this valuable posting.

Expand full comment
Mark O'Leary's avatar

Occam's Razor says the simplest explanation is the most likely one. And the simplest explanation--vastly simpler than the conspiracy nonsense--is that he was WRONG. It's not like they could test the towers by hitting them with actual planes.

Expand full comment
Kenneth J Hinnenkamp's avatar

Perfectly symmetrical collapse cannot be caused by asymmetrical damage. This is as simple as it gets. That is the easy part.

We know that planes hitting the buildings could not have caused the resulting collapse we saw on TV. I knew this intuitively the day it happened. What I didn't know is a proper investigation would never be performed. That woke me up to the fact that there were powers that wanted to obfuscate the truth.

Proving what did cause the collapse is the more difficult part. Especially when powerful entities controlling the media and the justice department don't want the truth to be known.

The books Solving 9/11 by Christopher Bollyn and The Trigger by David Icke are the closest we will come to what happened and who was responsible for 9/11.

Expand full comment
Mark O'Leary's avatar

“Proving what did cause the collapse is the more difficult part.”

Then why would you believe anything without proof?

Expand full comment
Kenneth J Hinnenkamp's avatar

I am a rational observer that thinks critically. My observation aligns with that from this expert. https://rumble.com/v5eju9o-dutch-demolition-expert-building-no7-was-taken-down-by-controlled-demolitio.html

Also this expert. https://youtu.be/u5IgqJXyLbg?si=sv6yfvSzzR6vallj

It is not me that needs proof of what caused WTC 1&2 to collapse. They were rigged to collapse, this is obvious to any rational, thinking human being with an IQ above K9 level. Those who "believe" what they saw on the TV that day are the ones that need proof to change their minds. Which camp are you in? Are you a rational thinking person, or someone who believes what they see on TV?

Proof is likely never going to materialize as long as those who don't want you to know the truth have the power to prevent it from coming out. Think power of the media.

Expand full comment
R!CKYRANTS's avatar

Occam's Razor doesn't say be a lazy researcher, Mark.

Expand full comment
9/11 Revisionist's avatar

Did you even bother to listen to the discussion?

Expand full comment
Sarah's avatar

some of us have and still believe this to be a government (mind control) psyop... not outt character when you view these gov pundits as ACTORS.

Expand full comment
9/11 Revisionist's avatar

September 11, 2001 - An Essential Guide (2024)

Sept 11, 2001 has been and still is a 23 year long PSYOP.

Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/september-11-2001-an-essential-guide

Expand full comment
mtman2's avatar

Evidently that hurricane was many 100's of miles off NYC coast and turning East, or would've been reported..!?

Expand full comment
9/11 Revisionist's avatar

Here is a little more background on Erin.

Hurricanes and September 11, 2001?

What do hurricanes have to do with the 9/11 attacks?

Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/hurricanes-and-september-11-2001

Expand full comment
mtman2's avatar

I watched the entire bldg of TWC's before they were hit of the film of the entire construction as it was going up with the Architect explaining its unique design compared to normal construction;

The entire structures were totally different, For there was NEVER any inner I-Beam built up frame structures like ALL other skyscrappers PERIOD only = the only vertical supports were the outer I-Beam 4 walls:

LAST TIME = floor supports were only hanger rods with *no building block I-Beam supports floor by floor = NO inner frame work(I watched it being built on video of the actual construction and KNOW what I am saying by seeing it built = one can go see it for yourself NOT regurgitate BS concocted story's without knowing 1st what's what:

This IS WHY the floors pancaked PERIOD with the outside walls breaking off peeled like a banana ALL THE WAY DOWN:

*ie = no regular inner structure I-beam floor by floor framework could fall like that AND the ONLY Beams in the rubble are the outside walls OR would be piled up way higher in the middle = THEY ARE NOT THERE AND NEVER WERE:

☆Understand this = those two bldgs are the only ONES "EVER" built this way ANYWHERE-> with NO INNER I-Beams, and the elevators verticals are not connected across by I-Beams either = they were ONLY vertical columns in themselves within the bldg to hold them vertical IS why they partially withstood the collapse:

Intelligent minds will learn of what I'm saying is in fact and these full truths easily personally learned by those who ONLYwant the truth...!

Expand full comment
Kenneth J Hinnenkamp's avatar

Perfectly symmetrical collapse cannot be caused by asymmetrical damage. Ask any controlled demolitions expert. The pancake theory is utter nonsense. Planes hitting the sides of the buildings did not cause the symmetrical collapse, in spite of what we saw on TV.

If building 7 was done by classic controlled demolition on 9/11, what are the chances that WTC 1&2 were also controlled demolition of some kind?

Critical thinkers do not defend the lies of 9/11.

https://rumble.com/v5eju9o-dutch-demolition-expert-building-no7-was-taken-down-by-controlled-demolitio.html

Expand full comment
9/11 Revisionist's avatar

LOL - Why did Lucky Larry build the new Building 7 on exactly the same way as the towers?

Talking about how the towers were built. If someone wants to do their due diligence and go watch how they were built, here is a few videos on the construction.

1. https://rumble.com/v2eay11-wtc-new-york-twin-towers-construction.html

2. https://rumble.com/v2eb0m3-building-the-world-trade-center.html

3. https://rumble.com/v2eb8f7-original-wtc-design-features-history-channel-2002.html

Then to help you wrap your head around how the buildings disintegrated, WITHOUT pancaking, read these articles.

Myanmar Provides a 9/11 Lesson for Critical Thinkers

Showing you just how easily people are duped, who don't know any better

Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/myanmar-provides-a-911-lesson-for

A Collapse / Demolition Thought Experiment

Put on your thinking caps students

Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/a-911-thought-experiment

Controlled Demolition Expert Speaks Out!

What we saw on 9/11 was not due to jet fuel, bombs, thermite or nukes

Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/controlled-demolition-expert-speaks

Expand full comment
Tom's avatar

hahahhhaah you're funny mr. pancake!

Expand full comment
Marianne  Agnello's avatar

disappointed that the videos were not proper video but single slides

Expand full comment
9/11 Revisionist's avatar

If you want to watch a proper documentary, I have many I can suggest you watch.

9/11 Movie Nights

Revisit 9/11 with "9/11 Revisionist" and watch some of the best documentaries

Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/911-movie-nights

Expand full comment
Sarah's avatar

Your drive to stay this course, despite allllllll the dissenters, is Valiant. Thank you for staying true to your values!!

Expand full comment
Nugz's avatar

People and experts can say whatever they want. The dead give away is WTC7. There was NO REASON for it to fall how and when it did. I believe something didn’t go as planned, the timing was off. The falling of both towers was supposed to coverup wtc7’s falling, but it didn’t. Something stinks, and it doesn’t take an expert to smell it.

Expand full comment
9/11 Revisionist's avatar

Here is some reading for you to do, as it seems the discussion went over your head;

Building 7 didn't go down due to fires or controlled demolition.

Truth seekers have been bamboozled by the "trusted experts" for nearly 2 decades.

Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/the-operation-reason-building-7-didnt

WHAT exactly happened to ALL 7 buildings with a WTC prefix on Sept 11, 2001?

The following points need to be made regarding what exactly happened to the buildings and the observable evidence at ground zero, that the “9/11 truth movement” never touch on…

Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/what-exactly-happened-to-all-7-buildings

9/11 Truth Suppression Timeline

"The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves." - Vladimir Lenin

Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/911-truth-suppression-timeline

Expand full comment
R!CKYRANTS's avatar

Your theory doesn't make sense. The entire World Trade Center complex was destroyed. There are numbers between 1, 2 and 7.

Expand full comment
R!CKYRANTS's avatar

Good thing this podcast doesn't feature an "expert" but a very good researcher, right?

Expand full comment
Nugz's avatar

Fck off dork.

Expand full comment
R!CKYRANTS's avatar

Op.

Expand full comment
9/11 Revisionist's avatar

For more detail on Building 7, give this article a read.

Building 7 didn't go down due to fires or controlled demolition.

Truth seekers have been bamboozled by the "trusted experts" for nearly 2 decades.

Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/the-operation-reason-building-7-didnt

Expand full comment
Nugz's avatar

I will NEVER believe you.

Expand full comment
9/11 Revisionist's avatar

Can you count past 3?

WHAT exactly happened to ALL 7 buildings with a WTC prefix on Sept 11, 2001?

The following points need to be made regarding what exactly happened to the buildings and the observable evidence at ground zero, that the “9/11 truth movement” never touch on…

Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/what-exactly-happened-to-all-7-buildings

Expand full comment
mtman2's avatar

Minora Yamasaki was the Architect of the Twin Towers:

And NO = iron smelting was done with wood fires for thousands of yr;

And no Dimwitted well paid Dolt could honestly say what the weight of a fully loaded fully fueled 767 at 600mph hitting the WTC’s would result in = total BS;

Moreover there was NO inner supporting vertical framework in those two bldgs(unique design never used before),

ONLY the 4 outside walls structurally kept those bldgs vertical;

Once compromised the only support for each floor was horizontal steel rods attached at each end in the oppossing support walls and with high heat fatigue with weight to collapse from everything above to then pancake down floor by floor WHICH IS WHAT OCCURRED and easily seen once understood given it’s structure…!

Expand full comment
9/11 Revisionist's avatar

The Fantasy Flights on 9/11

One of the biggest hurdles for 9/11 truth seekers and normies

Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/the-fantasy-flights-on-911

The Suspension of Newtonian Physics on 9/11

A Plane conversation with Dr Morgan Reynolds & 9/11 Revisionist

Article & Interview: https://911revision.substack.com/p/the-suspension-of-newtonian-physics

Expand full comment
R!CKYRANTS's avatar

Nonsense. Planes don't fly 600-700mph at that altitude, especially not controlled by amateurs.

These buildings had inner support. You can look up at contruction photos. Even if there was no support in the middle and it got struck by something that caused a collapse, it wouldn't pancake down. In reality, there was no pancaking at all. There was a lack of debris. You didn't see stacks of floors at Ground Zero. Ground tremors were too weak to be a building collapsing into lower Manhattan, which would have flooded FiDi had the entire WTC complex actually done that.

I don't know who you've been listening to, but I can tell you they've ignored physics.

Expand full comment
Scare Crow's avatar

There are many pictures taken during the building of the towers that clearly show the inner cores which, incidentally, supported the many elevators and associated machinery (besides having been THE MAIN STRUCTURAL SUPPORTS of the buildings).

Expand full comment
mtman2's avatar

There’s NO I-Beam inner construct PERIOD as ALL other skyscappers are built:

I saw the original bldg in the film 60minutes long on the History channel in the 90’s showing it all going up being so DESCRIBED by the Japanese Architect whom designed it as to why it went up so fast when built = because there’s NO inner I-Beams in the rubble which would’ve been piled 13.5 story’s high in the center once collapsed which didn’t happen there for there were none:

Nor do the separate free standing easily removable elevator structures hold up the floors and in fact added extreme weight:

ONLY horizontal steel rods attached to the outer walls held each floor up(one could feel the floors sway) once heated up those anchored rods released and pull away and subsequent floors below could in no way hold the above weights:

They had ZERO vertical strength beyond each floor holding itself up and once started is why it pancaked straight down:

As well the outer I-Beam supporting walls were “bolted in sections” as they rapidly were built up in construction and once under the collapse the inner pressure pushed those steel beams outward easily shearing those bolts and those beams as seen- broke outward as the pressure of the floors coming down forced them outward, peeling out all the way to or close to the ground floor as seen bent outward;

Plaster board, concrete, glass and stone will all powder if pressure is enuff and certainly was so there = hit a cement block with a hammer & it shatters in pieces is why it’s never wise to use them to hold a car up to get under, I know a fellow sadly killed doing that by his race car…!

Any normal built I-Beam floor by floor bldg could never collapse like WTC’s, unless using floor by floor demolition explosives timed in sequence and is easily seen on video,

As far as DEW in use back 25yrs ago is far fetched and none were witnessed seen in a million photo’s or video’s tho have been said to be seen in recent fires…?

Expand full comment
mtman2's avatar

I watched the entire bldg of TWC's before they were hit of the film of the entire construction as it was going up with the Architect explaining its unique design compared to normal construction;

The entire structures were totally different, For there was NEVER any inner I-Beam built up frame structures like ALL other skyscrappers PERIOD only = the only vertical supports were the outer I-Beam 4 walls:

LAST TIME = floor supports were only hanger rods with *no building block I-Beam supports floor by floor = NO inner frame work(I watched it being built on video of the actual construction and KNOW what I am saying by seeing it built = one can go see it for yourself NOT regurgitate BS concocted story's without knowing 1st what's what:

This IS WHY the floors pancaked PERIOD with the outside walls breaking off peeled like a banana ALL THE WAY DOWN:

*ie = no regular inner structure I-beam floor by floor framework could fall like that AND the ONLY Beams in the rubble are the outside walls OR would be piled up way higher in the middle = THEY ARE NOT THERE AND NEVER WERE:

☆Understand this = those two bldgs are the only ONES "EVER" built this way ANYWHERE-> with NO INNER I-Beams, and the elevators verticals are not connected across by I-Beams either = they were ONLY vertical columns in themselves within the bldg to hold them vertical IS why they partially withstood the collapse:

Intelligent minds will learn of what I'm saying is in fact and these full truths easily personally learned by those who ONLYwant the truth...!

Expand full comment
9/11 Revisionist's avatar

Why did Lucky Larry build the new Building 7 on exactly the same way as the towers?

Talking about how the towers were built. If someone wants to do their due diligence and go watch how they were built, here is a few videos on the construction.

1. https://rumble.com/v2eay11-wtc-new-york-twin-towers-construction.html

2. https://rumble.com/v2eb0m3-building-the-world-trade-center.html

3. https://rumble.com/v2eb8f7-original-wtc-design-features-history-channel-2002.html

Then to help you wrap your head around how the buildings disintegrated, WITHOUT pancaking, read these articles.

Myanmar Provides a 9/11 Lesson for Critical Thinkers

Showing you just how easily people are duped, who don't know any better

Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/myanmar-provides-a-911-lesson-for

A Collapse / Demolition Thought Experiment

Put on your thinking caps students

Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/a-911-thought-experiment

Controlled Demolition Expert Speaks Out!

What we saw on 9/11 was not due to jet fuel, bombs, thermite or nukes

Article: https://911revision.substack.com/p/controlled-demolition-expert-speaks

Expand full comment
mtman2's avatar

As gone into here for hours there were NO explosions and built as they were, the inner weight has nothing to hold it back once it starts but straight down for there were no I-Beam in inner construction to stop it, just like Domino's...!

IF such a metal fatiguing weapon could existed shooting from space(invisible beam) 25yrs ago to weaken = it's start would still do as explained with nothing to stop it once started...!

Expand full comment
R!CKYRANTS's avatar

Hutchinson did it in a lab. It started and stopped. It had nothing to do with space. Why are regurgitating "space lasers" propaganda from controlled shills?

Expand full comment
9/11 Revisionist's avatar

I highly recommend you watch the following presentation;

Dr Wood 2012 presentation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aWNzq9OWGmY

Read the 2007 whistle-blower court filings against NIST's 23 contractors for science fraud contained in the 10 000 page NIST Report;

Link: https://www.drjudywood.com/wp/court-case-qui-tam/

Lastly, study this book.

Where did the towers go? https://www.wheredidthetowersgo.com/

Condemnation, without investigation, is the height of ignorance - Albert Einstein.

Expand full comment
mtman2's avatar

Thousands of I-Beams were not used in the consruction to save multiple "$10's of millions;

Minus those I-Beams the rubble was just what was there = floor holding rods & floor materials, wallboard & various furniture;

OR as fkgured out center rubble would be a 13.5 story's high pile...!

Expand full comment