Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

There was a problem loading this video. This could be due to a temporary network issue or the video might be unavailable.

One of the best proofs, that 9/11 wasn't a structural failure (collapse), or a controlled demolition, using any thermal or kinetic mechanisms, are the 16 survivors in stairwell B of the North Tower. 16 Survivors (“9/11 surfer” included) - 110 stories, equal to 10 Titanic’s in weight, stacked on... show more

9/11 Revisited

63,181 subscribers

1,281,584 views • 1 year ago •via X (Twitter)

News & Politics Science & Technology

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

11 Comments

Micah D. Feltrenor1 year ago

The very center of the building at the bottom was the only area that DEW did not reach.

9/11 Revisited1 year ago

@DiscoverTruth77 South Tower was levelled, something went wrong with the North Tower.

The Liberation Project1 year ago

𝐓𝐎𝐏 𝟏𝟎 𝐖𝐎𝐑𝐒𝐓 𝐒𝐂𝐎𝐓𝐔𝐒 𝐑𝐔𝐋𝐈𝐍𝐆𝐒 𝘊𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘥𝘰𝘸𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘵𝘰𝘱 𝘵𝘦𝘯 𝘸𝘰𝘳𝘴𝘵 𝘚𝘶𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘮𝘦 𝘊𝘰𝘶𝘳𝘵 𝘳𝘶𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘨𝘴 𝘴𝘪𝘯𝘤𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘦𝘳𝘷𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘵𝘢𝘬𝘦𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘳 𝘧𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘺𝘦𝘢𝘳𝘴 𝘢𝘨𝘰. ★ NEW ARTICLE ⬇️

Jubbenscarty2601 year ago

They sank Titanic too!

9/11 Revisited1 year ago

@jubbenscarty260 you mean the Olympic?

BBG, Esq.1 year ago

What’s this 9/11 surfer 🏄

9/11 Revisited1 year ago

@bmetz131 "9/11 Surfer" - Pasquale Buzzelli, on Surviving the Disintegration of the North Twin Tower.

minnu penssiia1 year ago

they did not have charges in that area .They needed to leave some sort of debris too and. Why is it called GROUND ZERO and who said it first ..

FerociousLionsOrg1 year ago

What year were you born. Iq test

9/11 Revisited1 year ago

@Ferocious_Lions You asking me? I was 23 on 9/11 and you?

Kevin O'Shaughnessy1 year ago

American Ground by William Langewiesche You could do with reading it.

Related Videos

The Miracle of Stairway B (2006) 16 Survivors (“9/11 surfer” included) - 110 stories, equal to 10 Titanic’s in weight, stacked on top of one another. The survivors heard no loud explosions, no flashes of bright light, no molten steel raining on them, they did not go blind or deaf due to light flashes or explosions, they weren’t hit by falling debris. POOF the building is gone into a HUGE DUST cloud.

The Miracle of Stairway B (2006) 16 Survivors (“9/11 surfer” included) - 110 stories, equal to 10 Titanic’s in weight, stacked on top of one another. The survivors heard no loud explosions, no flashes of bright light, no molten steel raining on them, they did not go blind or deaf due to light flashes or explosions, they weren’t hit by falling debris. POOF the building is gone into a HUGE DUST cloud.

9/11 Revisited

23,879 views • 11 months ago

You don't hear much about the 16 survivors in stairwell B of the North Tower on 9/11. Why not? Because their survival does not fit the collapse OR conventional controlled demolition narrative being sold to you...

You don't hear much about the 16 survivors in stairwell B of the North Tower on 9/11. Why not? Because their survival does not fit the collapse OR conventional controlled demolition narrative being sold to you...

9/11 Revisited

10,519 views • 3 months ago

In the days after 9/11 people were brainwashed into following the government approved narrative. Your perception was managed! This is NOT a structural collapse or a controlled demolition using kinetic or thermal mechanisms. It was a disintegration, on a molecular level. New physics.

In the days after 9/11 people were brainwashed into following the government approved narrative. Your perception was managed! This is NOT a structural collapse or a controlled demolition using kinetic or thermal mechanisms. It was a disintegration, on a molecular level. New physics.

9/11 Revisited

23,544 views • 8 months ago

[RG911Team] They let the cat out of the bag. The FDNY Chief just admitted what really happens to steel skyscrapers when columns fail. And in doing so, he exposed the 9/11 narrative as an outright lie. Under no circumstances can a local column failure cause the complete collapse of a steel-framed, fire-resistant skyscraper. This could not happen to the Pfizer building in Manhattan a few days ago, and it could not happen to WTC Building 7 in Manhattan on September 11, 2001. A local failure causes local collapse, not global collapse, because the network of steel columns throughout the building prevents the failure from propagating to other structurally sound parts of the building. In other words, steel skyscrapers are not houses of cards. So, when NIST claimed that the failure of one column in Building 7 caused a cascade of failures that brought down the entire building on 9/11, they are violating the laws of physics. They know this. But for them, maintaining scientific integrity is not as important as covering up the truth. Great find by 911WarRoom

[RG911Team] They let the cat out of the bag. The FDNY Chief just admitted what really happens to steel skyscrapers when columns fail. And in doing so, he exposed the 9/11 narrative as an outright lie. Under no circumstances can a local column failure cause the complete collapse of a steel-framed, fire-resistant skyscraper. This could not happen to the Pfizer building in Manhattan a few days ago, and it could not happen to WTC Building 7 in Manhattan on September 11, 2001. A local failure causes local collapse, not global collapse, because the network of steel columns throughout the building prevents the failure from propagating to other structurally sound parts of the building. In other words, steel skyscrapers are not houses of cards. So, when NIST claimed that the failure of one column in Building 7 caused a cascade of failures that brought down the entire building on 9/11, they are violating the laws of physics. They know this. But for them, maintaining scientific integrity is not as important as covering up the truth. Great find by 911WarRoom

Richard Gage, AIA, Architect

153,084 views • 1 month ago

[RG911Team] Watch the Manhattan skyscraper completely collapse. No, not the Pfizer building at 235 E 42nd st. WTC Building 7, a 47-story steel-framed NYC tower - on 9/11. Most have never heard of it. That’s because a free-fall collapse only occurs in controlled demolition.

[RG911Team] Watch the Manhattan skyscraper completely collapse. No, not the Pfizer building at 235 E 42nd st. WTC Building 7, a 47-story steel-framed NYC tower - on 9/11. Most have never heard of it. That’s because a free-fall collapse only occurs in controlled demolition.

Richard Gage, AIA, Architect

43,253 views • 1 month ago

Controlled Demolition? BBC Pre-Knowledge? Ron Johnson Says It’s Time to Reopen 9/11 It took over two decades—but someone in D.C. is finally asking the right questions. Senator Ron Johnson is calling for a full investigation into everything we weren’t allowed to question: “Why did they just get rid of all the debris from 9/11? Totally contrary to any type of firefighting investigation.” “Why suppress reports? Why discredit witnesses who heard explosions?” He’s doing what no one else in Congress dares to do: - Reexamining Building 7: “That sure looks like controlled demolition to me.” - Calling out NIST: “They won’t release their own calculations.” - Exposing media collusion: “The BBC reported Building 7 collapsed—before it actually did.” They’ve weaponized the “conspiracy theory” label for decades. Johnson isn’t afraid of it.

Controlled Demolition? BBC Pre-Knowledge? Ron Johnson Says It’s Time to Reopen 9/11 It took over two decades—but someone in D.C. is finally asking the right questions. Senator Ron Johnson is calling for a full investigation into everything we weren’t allowed to question: “Why did they just get rid of all the debris from 9/11? Totally contrary to any type of firefighting investigation.” “Why suppress reports? Why discredit witnesses who heard explosions?” He’s doing what no one else in Congress dares to do: - Reexamining Building 7: “That sure looks like controlled demolition to me.” - Calling out NIST: “They won’t release their own calculations.” - Exposing media collusion: “The BBC reported Building 7 collapsed—before it actually did.” They’ve weaponized the “conspiracy theory” label for decades. Johnson isn’t afraid of it.

The Vigilant Fox 🦊

54,866 views • 1 year ago

*** Test Your 9/11 Knowledge: The Explosive Evidence at the 3 WTC Towers The 50 Questions NIST Should Have Asked 20 Years Ago! WTC Building 7 Free-fall 1. How is it possible that 47-story Building 7 fell suddenly, symmetrically in free-fall acceleration, without any resistance from any of its 81 columns? 2. Why did NIST deny its free-fall for 7 years, only to be proven wrong and be forced to officially admit that it did collapse in free-fall? Symmetry 3. How, if Building 7 was damaged asymmetrically in the north-east corner on floor twelve, as per the NIST report, could it fall symmetrically downward? Shouldn’t the building have tilted toward its damaged side – and not fall straight down through the path of what was the greatest resistance? Fires 4. How could a few, small, and scattered ordinary office fires have brought this Type-1 fire-protected steel-frame skyscraper down, when several dozen examples of much hotter, much larger, and longer-lasting fires have never in history brought down such a building? 5. How could normal office fires take out all the columns in the building sequentially floor by floor, in 7 seconds? 6. Why did NIST claim that the fires were still burning, up until the time of the collapse, when the photos show that they were burnt out more than an hour before the collapse? 7. Why aren’t all the firefighters concerned, in the wake of the NIST report during the last 24 years, that such ordinary fightable fires can now bring skyscrapers down on top of them, and on top of the public who are told to “defend in place” in the building (and not obstruct access by firefighters)? 8. Why are many of these same firefighters calling for a new investigation of the NIST report itself? Controlled Demolition 9. Since the collapse of Building 7 looks exactly like a controlled demolition, why did NIST avoid any serious consideration of this hypothesis? 10. How could a 40,000-ton moment-resisting and X-braced structural steel frame collapse like a house of cards in 7 seconds, with most of its columns and beams severed – one from another? 11. Why does WTC 7 have all of the key features of typical controlled demolition, and none of the features of collapse by fire? Explosions 12. Why didn’t NIST include in its report on WTC 7 the half-dozen witnesses of explosions prior to its collapse, and even claim that there were no witnesses? 13. What could have caused an elevator cab to be “blown 30 feet out of its hoistway,” as Deputy Director of NY-Office of Emergency Management, Richard Rotanz, reported at Noon, when the building didn’t collapse for another 5 hours. 14. What caused Barry Jennings and Michael Hess to be injured by explosions and subsequently trapped in the building before either Twin Tower collapsed? Foreknowledge 15. Why did Fire Chief Nick Visconti declare, “We’re moving the command post over this way, that building’s coming down!”? 16. How could Fire Chief Hayden’s engineer declare, upon being asked, “how long until the building comes down?” – then accurately state, “In its current state you have about 5 hours,” when no steel-frame fire-protected high-rise had ever come down due to fire alone? 17. Why did construction workers, while walking away from Building 7 and upon hearing an explosion from the building, look straight into the CNN camera saying, “You hear that? Keep your eye on that building. That thing’s coming down. The building is about to blow up, flame and debris coming down”? 18. Why did former Air Force medic Kevin McPadden hear a “3-2-1” countdown on the radio, and subsequently hear explosions before Building 7 collapsed? 19. How could the BBC have announced, live on TV, the collapse of WTC 7 20 minutes before it collapsed? 20. Why did CNN announce, 7 hours early, the 10:45 AM collapse of a 50-story building (obviously referring to Building 7)? Expert Statements 21. Why have more than 3,600 Architects & Engineers signed onto the petition at demanding a new 9/11 WTC investigation? 22. Why are dozens of structural engineers making statements such as: “A localized failure in a steel-framed building like WTC 7 cannot cause a catastrophic collapse like a house of cards, without a simultaneous and patterned loss of several of its columns at key locations within the building”? 23. Why did the top European controlled demolition expert declare: “That is controlled demolition. It’s been imploded. It’s a hired job. A team of experts did this? 24. Why did top forensic structural engineer, Prof. Leroy Hulsey from the University of Alaska, following a 4-year study of WTC 7, declare: “The collapse of WTC 7 was a global failure involving the near-simultaneous failure of all columns in the building and not a progressive collapse, as claimed by NIST. Extreme Heat Molten Metal 25. What does it mean that FEMA, in its 2002 Report, including a metallurgical examination of the WTC 7 steel, revealed “a phenomenon never before observed in building fires….a liquid eutectic mixture containing primarily iron, oxygen, and sulfur formed during this hot corrosion attack on the steel...” Why did NIST eliminate this metallurgical report from their final report? 26. Did Fire Protection Engineer Jonathan Barnett know, when he said, “steel members in the debris pile that appear to have been partly evaporated,” that it takes 4,000°F to evaporate steel? And that jet fuel and office fires don’t even rise to a third of that temperature? 27. Why is there bright yellow molten steel or iron pouring out of the crab claw excavators in the WTC pit? And out of the South Tower just minutes before its collapse. 28. Why did the first responders in the pit report, “you get down in the pile, and you see molten steel – flowing down the channel rails, like lava from a volcano”? Did they know that it takes 3,000°F to melt steel, and that office fires and jet fuel can only achieve half of this temperature? 29. What can explain the well-documented 3,000°F temperatures that are well-documented in the WTC Twin Towers collapse aftermath? Why is there evidence of ignited thermite found by so many first responders in the WTC pile? Previously Molten Iron Microspheres 30. What does it mean that the US Geological Survey and RJ Lee Group independently documented billions of previously molten iron-rich microspheres in ALL of the WTC dust samples? Where would the required 3,000°F come from? Could the ignited thermite have created those molten iron microspheres? 31. Why is bright yellow molten steel or iron pouring out of the South Tower just minutes prior to its collapse? 32. What explains the 2009 peer-reviewed findings from the Niels Harrit research team of dual-layered red-gray chips of nano-thermite in all the independently-collected dust samples they analyzed? Why do they ignite at the same temperature as military grade “super-thermite”? Why do they produce molten iron-rich microspheres when ignited? 33. What does it mean that Harrit’s international research team found that the “red layer of the red/gray chips in all of their WTC dust samples is active unreacted thermitic material, incorporating nanotechnology, and is a highly energetic pyrotechnic or explosive material”? The Twin Towers Official Explanation 34. How can the official explanation of the Twin Towers’ collapse be true (that an intact top section drove down the rest of the building after weakening of some of the structural steel in the impact zone) when this top section had already been destroyed in the first 3 seconds of the collapse (telescoping in on itself) and so was not even available to drive anything down to the ground? NIST claims that the top part of the building drove the rest of the building down to the ground. Why then do none of the photos or videos show such a top part driving anything down? And why didn’t that top “pile driver” drive down the 800-foot-tall group of columns standing for 6 seconds after the overall collapse? 35. Why did Zdenek Bazant, in his calculations for his controversial paper submitted to the Journal of Engineering Mechanics on 9/13/01( only two days after 9/11) use twice the actual mass of the upper section of the North Tower above the impact floors and only one third of the actual column strength of the larger building section beneath it in his support for NIST collapse theory? a. Why is this paper still today the key theoretical basis of NIST’s column failure theory? 36. Why does the destruction of the towers look more like a volcanic eruption (than a straight-down gravitational collapse) with upward and outward arching streamers, a geometry of fireworks, freely flying solid molten objects trailing thick white smoke clouds? Witnesses of Explosions 37. Why are there 156 First Responder witnesses of explosions – seeing, hearing, and feeling explosions – many of them BEFORE the towers ever came down? 38. Why did NIST claim that there were “no witnesses of explosions” when there were as many as 200 publicly recorded testimonies – many before the collapse? What could explain Fire Chief Frank Cruthers’ testimony that, “… an explosion… appeared at the very top, simultaneously from all four sides, materials shot out horizontally. And then there seemed to be a momentary delay, before you could see the beginning of the collapse”? 39. Why did 36 reporters on the day of 9/11 report the WTC destruction as an explosion-based event, most of them actual witnesses of explosions? a. Why did the mainstream national media change the story the next day from explosion-based collapses to “fire-induced collapses”? 40. Why did the FBI, NYPD, and FDNY on the day of 9/11 all state that they suspected that explosives were used to bring down the towers, but change their story in the following week to fire-induced collapse? Seismic Evidence 41. Why did the Richter Scale recordings from Lamont Doherty Earth Observatory document significant seismic events for both towers, more than a dozen seconds before the planes hit either tower – corroborating the explosive testimony of William Rodriguez and others of massive explosions in the basement prior to the plane hitting the buildings? 42. Why did the seismic evidence from Lamont Doherty Earth Observatory document significant seismic events, in the North Tower, 5 seconds before the heaviest debris from each tower struck the ground? And in the South Tower, 7 seconds before any debris struck the ground? Wouldn’t this seismic evidence corroborate the testimony of the first responders that saw, heard, and/or felt explosions before the towers fell? 43. Why did at least 3 of the tripod-mounted cameras (two on the ground and one on the rooftop) “shake” 3 to 10 seconds before each of the towers fell? Would the camera evidence corroborate the seismic evidence and the first responder's explosive testimony? Explosive Evidence 44. Since the damage from the planes and fires was so asymmetrical, why was the destruction itself so precisely symmetrical – all the way down each face of each tower? Why do the videos show precise rows of individual explosions progressing down the towers – floor by floor? 45. Why do we see in the videos isolated pin-point explosive ejections occurring 20, 40, and even 60 stories down below the downward-traveling zone of destruction in each tower? Descent Profile and Speed 46. Why did the top sections of each tower descend suddenly, smoothly, down with no stoppage or “jolt” upon impact with the cold, hard, intact steel columns below the floors of the plane impacts? 47. How was it possible that the top section of each Tower descended without slowing at all, but instead accelerated, as if 80,000 tons of steel beneath wasn’t even there? What happened to the steel? Lateral Ejection of Steel 48. Why do we see in the videos the lateral ejection out of both of the Towers of hundreds of freely flying structural steel sections each weighing 4 to 8 tons, at 80mph, landing up to 600 feet in every direction, impaling all of the surrounding skyscrapers? Why are they trailing thick white smoke clouds when steel is not flammable in office fires, or under jet fuel conditions? Could this be due to the other byproduct of thermite – aluminum oxide ash? 49. Since FEMA officially documented a 1200-foot diameter zone of flying, fallen, and impaled structural steel beyond the footprints of both Towers, how could that steel, which comprised 1/3 of the weight of the falling section of each building, have still been available to crush the lower part as NIST claimed? Missing Floors 50. Since there were 110 concrete floors, each an acre in size, and since they were not stacked up in pile of “pancakes” at the bottom, and since a third of the WTC dust in the 3” thick blanket across Lower Manhattan from river to river is powdered concrete, then how could the concrete floors (also 1/3 of the weight of each Tower) be available to crush the building below? 51. What extreme-high temperature could have reduced 90,000 tons of concrete in each Tower back to its original aggregate, sand, and cement powder? Demolition Access 52. How could the perpetrators have gained access to the Towers to plant high energy explosives and incendiaries? Could a massive fireproofing upgrade project in the months and years prior to 9/11 have provided access to the underside of the floor systems to apply sprayed-on nano-thermite? Is it a coincidence that the WTC fireproofing upgrades occurred mostly on the floors that were hit by the planes on 9/11? Could the largest elevator modernization in the world in the 9 months prior to 9/11 have provided access to the core columns and beams? Is it just a coincidence that Ace Elevator employees were pulled out of the Towers on 9/11 for “union meeting”? Destruction of Evidence 53. Why was 99% of the WTC structural steel crime scene evidence loaded onto barges starting just 2 weeks after 9/11 and shipped to China for recycling before structural engineers and metallurgists could get their hands on it to do a proper forensic investigation? We encougage you to ask these questions of your elected representatives and the media. We address most of these questions in our presentations and podcast and radio interviews. So get is in front of them! Who do you know that might interview RichardGage911 about the explosive destruction of the 3 World Trade Center Skyscrapers on 9/11?

Richard Gage, AIA, Architect

44,559 views • 1 year ago

Another peculiarity of 9/11, especially the rubble. What first responders noted was the lack of artifacts. No doors, phones, computers or even doorknobs. There should have been thousands of them. But what did they find? Stuffed animals, pictures, plastic ID cards... If there was thermal mechanisms in play, they would have been burnt and the ID cards would be melted. To survive 9/11, you had to be a piece of paper.

Another peculiarity of 9/11, especially the rubble. What first responders noted was the lack of artifacts. No doors, phones, computers or even doorknobs. There should have been thousands of them. But what did they find? Stuffed animals, pictures, plastic ID cards... If there was thermal mechanisms in play, they would have been burnt and the ID cards would be melted. To survive 9/11, you had to be a piece of paper.

9/11 Revisited

54,142 views • 1 year ago

[RG911Team] 24 years later, this mysterious 9/11 phenomenon is still unexplained - both by DEW theorists and defenders of the official story. Why were the clouds of debris on 9/11 so hot that some survivors were burned by them? Fires only burned on several floors of each tower, so where was the heat coming from? Judy Wood’s theory claims the destruction of the buildings was a cold event - which is clearly not true. But we do know there was an exotic substance found by scientists in all the 9/11 dust samples that is generated by extreme heat: molten iron, a byproduct of thermite reactions. Learn more in next post ⬇️

[RG911Team] 24 years later, this mysterious 9/11 phenomenon is still unexplained - both by DEW theorists and defenders of the official story. Why were the clouds of debris on 9/11 so hot that some survivors were burned by them? Fires only burned on several floors of each tower, so where was the heat coming from? Judy Wood’s theory claims the destruction of the buildings was a cold event - which is clearly not true. But we do know there was an exotic substance found by scientists in all the 9/11 dust samples that is generated by extreme heat: molten iron, a byproduct of thermite reactions. Learn more in next post ⬇️

Richard Gage, AIA, Architect

25,529 views • 10 months ago

🚨 Tim Dillon on the anomolies surrounding 9/11 "You have to just dance around with logic. Technically a plane could fly at that rate of speed very low to the ground for a long time and not clip any light poles or not clip anything and have nobody really see it. And then go into the Pentagon and then go through four solid walls of steel and then punch out a little hole. Whatever at building seven, actually there were fires in building seven that were burning all day because of debris from the other falling buildings and whatever there's something weird about it. All of the Epstein files around 9/11 are blacked out now, of course, I don't know what happened on nine 11. Nobody knows what happened on 9/11."

🚨 Tim Dillon on the anomolies surrounding 9/11 "You have to just dance around with logic. Technically a plane could fly at that rate of speed very low to the ground for a long time and not clip any light poles or not clip anything and have nobody really see it. And then go into the Pentagon and then go through four solid walls of steel and then punch out a little hole. Whatever at building seven, actually there were fires in building seven that were burning all day because of debris from the other falling buildings and whatever there's something weird about it. All of the Epstein files around 9/11 are blacked out now, of course, I don't know what happened on nine 11. Nobody knows what happened on 9/11."

Red Panda Koala

221,360 views • 5 months ago

Abby Phillip: “Here's the main issue. Is it legal… if there are survivors clinging to whatever, is it legal to then strike them again?” Batya Ungar-Sargon: “The question is not actually that… No, Abby. Is the whole thing hangs on whether the boat is still a military target or not?” “Because if it was a military target, there were people on it when they hit it the first time.” Abby Phillip: “The issue when it comes to the legality of the second strike, not the first one strike… It's what happens to survivors.” Batya Ungar-Sargon: “No, it's not, Abby. That's wrong... The question is not the existence of the survivors. It's whether the boat is still a legitimate military target.”

Abby Phillip: “Here's the main issue. Is it legal… if there are survivors clinging to whatever, is it legal to then strike them again?” Batya Ungar-Sargon: “The question is not actually that… No, Abby. Is the whole thing hangs on whether the boat is still a military target or not?” “Because if it was a military target, there were people on it when they hit it the first time.” Abby Phillip: “The issue when it comes to the legality of the second strike, not the first one strike… It's what happens to survivors.” Batya Ungar-Sargon: “No, it's not, Abby. That's wrong... The question is not the existence of the survivors. It's whether the boat is still a legitimate military target.”

RedWave Press

115,833 views • 8 months ago

[RG911Team] We forced the government to tell a small truth about 9/11 that exposes it all. A steel skyscraper cannot collapse at free-fall without controlled demolition. Initially, NIST claimed WTC Building 7 did not collapse at free fall acceleration on 9/11 in the draft of their investigative report into the building’s collapse. Then we showed them the based physics proving that it came down at free fall (meaning the speed increased as fast as a bowling ball being dropped off the side of the building) - for over 2 seconds, or at least 100 feet of its fall. In response, NIST updated their report to admit free fall occurred. But they refused to acknowledge what this means. It means that WTC7 was brought down by the synchronized removal of every core column in the building. And this can only be done through controlled demolition. See the explosive analysis of physics instructor David Chandler below ⬇️

[RG911Team] We forced the government to tell a small truth about 9/11 that exposes it all. A steel skyscraper cannot collapse at free-fall without controlled demolition. Initially, NIST claimed WTC Building 7 did not collapse at free fall acceleration on 9/11 in the draft of their investigative report into the building’s collapse. Then we showed them the based physics proving that it came down at free fall (meaning the speed increased as fast as a bowling ball being dropped off the side of the building) - for over 2 seconds, or at least 100 feet of its fall. In response, NIST updated their report to admit free fall occurred. But they refused to acknowledge what this means. It means that WTC7 was brought down by the synchronized removal of every core column in the building. And this can only be done through controlled demolition. See the explosive analysis of physics instructor David Chandler below ⬇️

Richard Gage, AIA, Architect

15,517 views • 21 days ago

Lawyer for Epstein survivors: I'm not sure if it's intentional or it's incompetence, but what is very clear is that the DOJ has disregarded the wellbeing of the survivors. One of my clients was named 538 times in the latest release. It is unacceptable. And the whole reason they're claiming that they were almost a month and a half late to reveal these documents is they needed to redact.

Lawyer for Epstein survivors: I'm not sure if it's intentional or it's incompetence, but what is very clear is that the DOJ has disregarded the wellbeing of the survivors. One of my clients was named 538 times in the latest release. It is unacceptable. And the whole reason they're claiming that they were almost a month and a half late to reveal these documents is they needed to redact.

FactPost

51,178 views • 6 months ago

King of the Dogs is back for the Round of 32! Choose the lowest seed to advance today for a chance to split $2,000,000 in bonus bets on @dksportsbook. Will you go with the lone 12-seed? An 11 or 10-seed?! One of the four 9-seeds!? Or closer to chalk with 5 or 6-seed? #DKpartner

King of the Dogs is back for the Round of 32! Choose the lowest seed to advance today for a chance to split $2,000,000 in bonus bets on @dksportsbook. Will you go with the lone 12-seed? An 11 or 10-seed?! One of the four 9-seeds!? Or closer to chalk with 5 or 6-seed? #DKpartner

Jeff D. Lowe

29,493 views • 4 months ago

Tucker Carlson exposes there are 2 independent reports of 9/11 that have been hidden from us They prove 2 things - It was impossible for Building 7 to come down from the office fire - Particles were taken from the World Trade Center collapse, testing proved they were explosives The Twin Towers on September 11th were not brought down by planes, they were brought down by explosives “Why did Building 7 collapse after just seven hours of burning? In a way that no steel frame building anywhere in the world has ever collapsed? Professor Leroy Hulsey of the University of Alaska at Fairbanks conducted an independent study whose findings were released in 2020. Professor Hulsey found that office fires of the kind in Building 7 and 9/11 could not have produced sufficient thermal expansion to cause the crucial girder to fail. It's impossible, he found. One group of scientists did collect and test four samples of dust debris collected by a Manhattan resident about 10 minutes after the collapse of the second World Trade Center tower. In those samples, the scientists found distinctive red-gray chips full of highly energetic and thermic material. In other words, they found traces of explosive compounds.”

Tucker Carlson exposes there are 2 independent reports of 9/11 that have been hidden from us They prove 2 things - It was impossible for Building 7 to come down from the office fire - Particles were taken from the World Trade Center collapse, testing proved they were explosives The Twin Towers on September 11th were not brought down by planes, they were brought down by explosives “Why did Building 7 collapse after just seven hours of burning? In a way that no steel frame building anywhere in the world has ever collapsed? Professor Leroy Hulsey of the University of Alaska at Fairbanks conducted an independent study whose findings were released in 2020. Professor Hulsey found that office fires of the kind in Building 7 and 9/11 could not have produced sufficient thermal expansion to cause the crucial girder to fail. It's impossible, he found. One group of scientists did collect and test four samples of dust debris collected by a Manhattan resident about 10 minutes after the collapse of the second World Trade Center tower. In those samples, the scientists found distinctive red-gray chips full of highly energetic and thermic material. In other words, they found traces of explosive compounds.”

Wall Street Apes

772,813 views • 10 months ago

Cenk Uygur claims that the official story of the WTC collapse on 9/11 is "very controversial" and WTC7 "didn't burn down": "Building 7 is a mystery that is nearly impossible. Like, the idea that the towers could collapse themselves, North and South, after they got hit, that the steel could burn so much that they could collapse, is a very controversial idea within engineering circles, right. But a building across the street, with other buildings in-between, no, it's a steel--didn't burn down, no way."

Cenk Uygur claims that the official story of the WTC collapse on 9/11 is "very controversial" and WTC7 "didn't burn down": "Building 7 is a mystery that is nearly impossible. Like, the idea that the towers could collapse themselves, North and South, after they got hit, that the steel could burn so much that they could collapse, is a very controversial idea within engineering circles, right. But a building across the street, with other buildings in-between, no, it's a steel--didn't burn down, no way."

Post-Left Watch (postleftwatch.bsky.social)

27,076 views • 11 months ago