toobaditworks

Yeah they lost me on that one. Just as credible as the flat earth.

AssaultMonkey

Building 7 wasn't hit. The theory is the fire spread underground somehow and weakened 7. Then, 7 was evacuated because someone saw it was unstable. And then there was a controlled demolition on it? It's all fucky.

toobaditworks

Oh didn't get that far. Thanks.

Tb0n3

you realize that pressure can also melt metal, right? But really, source on molten steel.

iamrage

If Trump were to become the new president, would he be able to throw the old government members of 2001 into prison?

cmor88

He'd commit suicide before he got very far. Its going to take more than one man to bring down the government.

GIF-lLL-S0NG

Indeed. there is no statue of limitations on corruption, treason, conspiracy to murder, or murder.

iamrage

Hope everyone votes Trump in America then, because Hillary is most definitely not a good choice. However, I have a strong feeling something very fishy is going to happen with those electronic voting machines you guys have.

SJWsRuinedIt

Funny how nobody trusts a CIA agent until they corroborate their story...

Sciency

I feel its a bit different when a retired agent nearing the end of his life comes out with something like this, but you have a fair point. People definitely like to cherry-pick their sources.

BreesusLovesYou

As long as we're discussing legitimacy of sources I doubt a reputable CIA officer goes to an unheard of website that also publishes stories about big foot and UFO abductions and claims to have an exclusive interview with a senior leader of the Illuminati.

Sciency

Unless I misread the post, this site just wrote an article with a youtube link. The video is 40 minutes of interview with some sources and video for reference, and I didn't catch any business/network affiliation in it.

It should be noted though that this interview was published to youtube in september of 2013, and the cameras used look like they could have been used to record that actual 9/11 attack. So all this is somewhat dated, but (imo) quality info for consideration.

I'm still unclear on when this affidavit was sworn in though, that might be more recent.

Tb0n3

You can swear and promise all you like. It doesn't change the facts. Jet fuel can't melt steel beams, but you don't have to melt steel to weaken it significantly.

GIF-lLL-S0NG

if you were right, the tops would have fallen and the lower 3/4s would not collapse because their steel was still at full strength.. the steel beams on the 10,20,30,40,50,60,70 floors were all at ambient room temperatures.

SaneGoatiSwear

this guy gets it. like chopping the top 1/5 of a tree off with a single very fast axe chop would not cause vaporization of the bottom 1/3 of the tree, and cause the top 1/5 to perfectly descend at freefall speeds pulverising perfectly the entire tree below it.

lol. some people just don't reality.

cheers, gif-ill.

SaneGoatiSwear

yeah but if the planes hit the sides of the buildings (which video evidence and thousands of witness statements confirm), then the beams closer would have failed quicker, causing a toppling, not a perfect freefall-speed pancaking, which the core of the buildings were designed specifically to never let happen.

edit: by planes i mean the drone replacement 767s into the two towers,

Tb0n3

The buildings were built around a central core. Maybe the damage to the central core allowed them to be compromised in the middle. But I don't know, and neither do you as we are not structural engineers.

SaneGoatiSwear

look after all this time if you've just accepted the official story and moved on that's your choice, i'm not here to rip you from it. if you want to know more, architects and engineers for 9/11 truth is a good place to start.

SaneGoatiSwear

hahaha! bro, thousands of them have signed off on a statement saying the official nist report's cause is a physical impossibility without the best-placed thermitic charges in the history of controlled demolitions. i'm paraphrasing, but that's the gist.

the planes hit the sides of the building - taking 7g+ turns right before impact, both, to hit the sides. they specifically did not hit the central columns.

it doesn't account for the vaporization of dozens of floors, the missing dozens of feet of rubble afterwards, the perfect freefall descent into own footprint... molten steel/concrete, microspheres and thermitic residue found in all wtc dust samples...

Tb0n3

Oh shit. You found aluminum after a plane crash? AMAZING!

SaneGoatiSwear

kek. thermitic residue. really easy to confuse with aluminuminuminuminum.

Tb0n3

Seeing as thermite is fucking aluminum and iron oxide, yeah, it's pretty fucking retarded.

SaneGoatiSwear

just like diamond is the same thing as graphite.

RumpRangerRick

So I guess all that video footage of the planes hitting the towers were special effects ?!

toobaditworks

It doesn't say planes didn't crash into the buildings. It says planes didn't cause the buildings to fall.

With reports from the Kremlin this week that President Putin is ready to release satellite images proving that the Twin Towers were destroyed by “controlled demolition” rather than by the force of two planes

And if this is true I wish they would just release it and not just talk about releasing it.

YodaDankfish

Seriously they should just release them. Maybe they're using the threat of releasing them for leverage in other deals?

Rosenkavalier

9/11 -- The New Pearl Harbor - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DOnAn_PX6M

This documentary is incredibly thorough, presenting arguments and questions from both sides.

Operation Northwoods http://www.smeggys.co.uk/operation_northwoods.php pages 12-14 deal with aircraft specifically

Firefighter talking about Building 7 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQrpLp-X0ws