I never believed any of the conspiracy theories about 9/11, but I’ve never heard of the four people who all conveniently died within a year. Sounds like someone was tying up loose ends, and maybe there actually was some sort of conspiracy after all
⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️So so helpful Gerald. Thank you for clarifying the most commonly noted conspiracies with the evidence, science and common sense. Also more importantly framing and asking two unanswered extremely important questions: What help the 19 hijackers “had help is from people inside governments that were supposed to be our allies, and whether our own government has been straight with us about what it knew. Those are different questions. The second one is still open.” It’s time for the USG to be pushed for answers.
Here’s the thing I’ve never understood about the ‘fuel can’t melt beams, they must have blown it up with explosives’ theory
We all saw the planes hit, now if the Government then bought down the towers, that must mean they felt there was some action they could take, some war or response, that they could launch when the towers came down that would not have been politically available to them just from the planes hitting, but this is absurd to anyone who lived through it, the moment we saw that 2nd plane hit the tower anything that was feasible after the towers fell, Iraq, Afghanistan, Patriot Act whatever, was equally feasible the moment we watched that plane hit live
Second question needs more info about why WTC 7 came down. The WTC7 was unusual before anything happened to it. It was built over a Con Ed substation, which forced the designers to carry the upper structure on transfer trusses and use unusually long floor spans on the east side. Less redundancy than a conventional frame.
The North Tower's collapse tore a roughly ten-story gash in its south face and started fires.
The water mains were broken. Nobody fought that fire. It burned for seven hours while the FDNY set a collapse zone and told anyone who asked that the building was coming down.
And the mechanism wasn't the steel getting weak — it was the steel getting longer. Heated beams expand. On Floor 13 an expanding beam pushed a girder off its seat at Column 79, floors cascaded down to Floor 5, and that left a critical column unsupported over nine stories. It buckled. The interior failed before anything moved on the outside, which is why the facade came down looking uniform.
NIST said plainly it was the first known case of fire alone bringing down a tall building. Unprecedented is the finding, but not a hole in it.
two emailed questions: 1st one was why no video evidence from the Pentagon of a plane flying into it?
I didn't cover the video/plane/Pentagon in this guide. But, here is the answer: The tapes exist and most have been released. The Pentagon's own gate cameras came out in 2006 through FOIA, then the Citgo and Doubletree recordings.
Here's why none of them are any good.
Those were fixed cameras in 2001, recording at roughly one frame per second. A gas station camera watches the pumps. A hotel camera watches the entrance. The Pentagon's two were parking gate barriers pointed at cars. None of them were aimed at the sky.
Flight 77 was doing about 530 mph, about 780 feet per second. It crossed any camera's field of view in a fraction of a second. At one frame per second, the shutter almost certainly lands on empty sky.
We all carry 4K cameras now and assume 2001 worked the same way. It didn't.
And run the theory backwards. If someone could stage an airliner strike on the Pentagon, producing convincing video would be the easy part — and the most useful thing they could possibly have. The one thing a plot would want most is the thing that doesn't exist.
I don’t call myself a Truther. I have no alternate theories about what happened that day. But the official story has plot holes big enough to fly a plane through. So call me DEEPLY SKEPTICAL about the government’s narrative. I don’t have to be a biologist to define a woman, nor do I have to be a structural engineer to smell something fishy in the collapse of Building Seven. Then there’s Bush’s reaction to the news in that classroom, and the pre-collapse explosions heard by so many first responders. I could go on but won’t.
I never believed any of the conspiracy theories about 9/11, but I’ve never heard of the four people who all conveniently died within a year. Sounds like someone was tying up loose ends, and maybe there actually was some sort of conspiracy after all
⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️So so helpful Gerald. Thank you for clarifying the most commonly noted conspiracies with the evidence, science and common sense. Also more importantly framing and asking two unanswered extremely important questions: What help the 19 hijackers “had help is from people inside governments that were supposed to be our allies, and whether our own government has been straight with us about what it knew. Those are different questions. The second one is still open.” It’s time for the USG to be pushed for answers.
Here’s the thing I’ve never understood about the ‘fuel can’t melt beams, they must have blown it up with explosives’ theory
We all saw the planes hit, now if the Government then bought down the towers, that must mean they felt there was some action they could take, some war or response, that they could launch when the towers came down that would not have been politically available to them just from the planes hitting, but this is absurd to anyone who lived through it, the moment we saw that 2nd plane hit the tower anything that was feasible after the towers fell, Iraq, Afghanistan, Patriot Act whatever, was equally feasible the moment we watched that plane hit live
It’s just a stupid theory
Thankyou.
Mainly for going through it all again.
Second question needs more info about why WTC 7 came down. The WTC7 was unusual before anything happened to it. It was built over a Con Ed substation, which forced the designers to carry the upper structure on transfer trusses and use unusually long floor spans on the east side. Less redundancy than a conventional frame.
The North Tower's collapse tore a roughly ten-story gash in its south face and started fires.
The water mains were broken. Nobody fought that fire. It burned for seven hours while the FDNY set a collapse zone and told anyone who asked that the building was coming down.
And the mechanism wasn't the steel getting weak — it was the steel getting longer. Heated beams expand. On Floor 13 an expanding beam pushed a girder off its seat at Column 79, floors cascaded down to Floor 5, and that left a critical column unsupported over nine stories. It buckled. The interior failed before anything moved on the outside, which is why the facade came down looking uniform.
NIST said plainly it was the first known case of fire alone bringing down a tall building. Unprecedented is the finding, but not a hole in it.
two emailed questions: 1st one was why no video evidence from the Pentagon of a plane flying into it?
I didn't cover the video/plane/Pentagon in this guide. But, here is the answer: The tapes exist and most have been released. The Pentagon's own gate cameras came out in 2006 through FOIA, then the Citgo and Doubletree recordings.
Here's why none of them are any good.
Those were fixed cameras in 2001, recording at roughly one frame per second. A gas station camera watches the pumps. A hotel camera watches the entrance. The Pentagon's two were parking gate barriers pointed at cars. None of them were aimed at the sky.
Flight 77 was doing about 530 mph, about 780 feet per second. It crossed any camera's field of view in a fraction of a second. At one frame per second, the shutter almost certainly lands on empty sky.
We all carry 4K cameras now and assume 2001 worked the same way. It didn't.
And run the theory backwards. If someone could stage an airliner strike on the Pentagon, producing convincing video would be the easy part — and the most useful thing they could possibly have. The one thing a plot would want most is the thing that doesn't exist.
I don’t call myself a Truther. I have no alternate theories about what happened that day. But the official story has plot holes big enough to fly a plane through. So call me DEEPLY SKEPTICAL about the government’s narrative. I don’t have to be a biologist to define a woman, nor do I have to be a structural engineer to smell something fishy in the collapse of Building Seven. Then there’s Bush’s reaction to the news in that classroom, and the pre-collapse explosions heard by so many first responders. I could go on but won’t.