EpiPendemic

I have basically come to to the conclusion the twin towers were shitty buildings and made of shitty cheap materials or whatever.. now this makes me think maybe the twin towers were a cover up for building 7 and the pentagon attack. I don't really honestly believe this but I don't honsestly believe the 911 commission report at least the part I did read, its was boring af. There is no harm in exploring theories thanks for sharing but this has me back on the fence, every time I am about to let it go another video or perspective emerges.

Rellik88

That looked just like a controlled demolition.

TwitterBannedIt

The thing that gets me about building 7, is that no one denies it was controlled, in fact, the official 'narrative' dictates that it must be.

We got the video of Silverstein, he says "pull it", and they "pulled it".

Deconstruct the above, this is official narrative.

If, someone pulled it, then it was by definition, controlled demolition, but this is not the grand revelation at all. It's tiny.

Consider what must take place to create a "pull", all sorts of specialists have to wander about the property, wire up specific parts of structure and analyze the building. There's a lot of work involved, and a lot of people. This means 1 of 2 things took place:

1 - a crew of highly paid, well trained, demolitions specialists were dropped AT GROUND ZERO, with buildings tumbling from the sky and fires raging, to wire up a doomed structure under fire and brimstone. Not only this, but they did so efficiently and quickly, without being noticed.

2 - The building was already wired up to blow.

Which seems more likely?