In case you happened to be among the small handful of Americans that didn't watch this year's Super Bowl, you missed a pretty shocking interruption of the post-game coverage by an activist for 9/11 truth. The first video is the clip of what happened. The second is an interview with him afterward, in which he admits that he got past all security without even buying a ticket to the most "secure" sporting event in history.
We are going to present a compilation here of material regarding the collapse of World Trade Center Building #7 on September 11, 2001.
Many have argued that the World Trade Center disaster was actually the result of a controlled demolition project planned well in advance by parties unknown. Much of the focus on the disaster that day has been centered on Towers 1 and 2, which were struck by aircraft. It has also been argued by many, that the damage from the aircraft and ensuing fires would not have been sufficient to cause a symmetrical collapse at nearly free-fall speed. There is compelling evidence to support the idea that the planes could not have brought down the towers, but perhaps the most compelling is that WTC7 was never struck by a plane at all, and yet that building too also collapsed in a way that seems to defy any explanation other than a controlled demolition.
But let's start by looking at the official explanation first. Could fire be the reason that Building 7 collapsed, as we have been told by government officials? It seems rather unlikely, considering that it has never happened before, or since. Yet on 9/11, we are told that three steel buildings were brought down primarily by fire. And again, one of those buildings was not even hit by a plane loaded with fuel.
This is a picture of the fires still burning in WTC7 in the late afternoon of September 11.
Here are some examples, of burning skyscrapers from around the world, that did not collapse, despite the fact that they suffered fires that burned longer, and engulfed more square footage of the structure.
In 1975, World Trade Center Tower 1 also burned on several floors, for several hours, with no modernized fire suppression system or fire-proofing material in place, but did not collapse.
Of course, these towering infernos were not struck by aircraft and were not struck by the debris of the Twin Towers as they collapsed. So let's have a look now at what sort of damage a building can suffer and still remain standing.
This is an image of debris which struck and damaged WTC 7.
For comparison now, here is a picture of the Deutsche Bank building which suffered extensive damage on 9/11. A fire in 2007 claimed the lives of two FDNY firefighters. Nearly a decade later, a $100-million deconstruction project was completed and the building was no more.
The following two images show the damage done to WTC Building #3 on 9/11, and the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City after it was bombed in 1995. Despite the devastation, what remained of the buildings still did not collapse, and had to be brought down later.
Relatively small fires, comparatively far less structural damage than others, yet WTC7 still fell, uniformly, into a nice neat pile.
Even when buildings do happen to collapse, perhaps after an earthquake, they do not implode. Here are some images of what happens when critical supports in a building fail.
Even when specialists spend months planning and spend weeks placing huge amounts of explosives all throughout a building, it is still a difficult task to bring down a building in it's own footprint. There are no guarantees, as these videos show. Demolitions gone wrong, click here, here, and here to see them.
Larry Silverstein, the owner of the WTC complex first explained the collapse of Building 7 saying he gave the order to "pull it." This is a term often used in demolitions, meaning to pull down the building.
Strangely, given the subsequent information you will read here in a moment which has been kown for years, Secretary of State John Kerry also explained the destruction as a controlled demolition rather than an unexpected collapse.
There is a very serious problem with that explanation though. Fire departments are not trained or equipped for demolitions operations. Fire trucks do not carry explosives, firefighters do not knock down buildings. Even for the world's leading specialists a demolition of that scale is not something that could be done in a matter of hours in a damaged and burning skyscraper. The only explanation could be that the explosives were set, before 9/11.
Silverstein later tried to revise the meaning of his statement, saying that he meant "pull it" as in to pull the rescue effort, and to pull out the firefighters in the building. The only problem with that, is that there were no firefighters in the building according to FEMA, because there was no water available to carry out interior firefighting operations. This video clip corroborates that. That clip also alludes to previous knowledge of impending collapse.
How did anyone know the building was going to collapse before it actually did? Why wasn't it predicted that other, more badly damaged buildings were going to fall, even though they never did? What were the telltale signs that Building 7 was going to collapse?
CRAIG BARTMER NYPD: "I walked around it (Building 7). I saw a hole. I didn't see a hole bad enough to knock a building down, though. Yeah there was definitely fire in the building, but I didn't hear any... I didn't hear any creaking, or... I didn't hear any indication that it was going to come down. And all of a sudden the radios exploded and everyone started screaming 'get away, get away, get away from it!'... It was at that moment... I looked up, and it was nothing I would ever imagine seeing in my life. The thing started pealing in on itself... Somebody grabbed my shoulder and I started running, and the shit's hitting the ground behind me, and the whole time you're hearing "boom, boom, boom, boom, boom." I think I know an explosion when I hear it... Yeah it had some damage to it, but nothing like what they're saying... Nothing to account for what we saw..."
Why did the BBC report that the building had collapsed, 20 minutes before it actually did?
In this video clip, you will hear someone declare that the building ia about to "blow up" as you hear what sounds like explosives going off in the background. Odd choice of words. Blow up. And who told them it was going to blow up?
Perhaps the sounds of bombs going off was a clue, but bombs had been going off all day. Something that was completely overlooked by the media and has never been explained.
But perhaps the most chilling account of bombs in WTC 7 comes from Barry Jennings, Deputy Director of the Emergency Services Department for the New York City Housing Authority. That fateful morning he raced to the Office of Emergency Management located in WTC7, to find it eerily empty, except for New York City's corporate counsel Michael Hess. An explosion trapped the two inside the building. Keep in mind that what he talks about here in the following interview happened before either of the Twin Towers fell, and therefore before the collapses had done any damage to Building 7.
(Videos of Barry Jennings' statements and interviews are routinely scrubbed from the internet. Unfortunately, this has happened again, as one of the most complete videos of his account has been removed, as you can see. For a less complete version, see this video here on YouTube.)
Unfortunately, Barry Jennings will never be able to testify on record about what he saw that day. He died, for unknown reasons, just days before the NIST report on 9/11 was released in 2008. One of the film makers who interviewed Jennings for the film Loose Change hired an investigator to find out more about Jennings' mysterious death. All that he found was Jennings' home empty, and up for sale. He then returned the money to the man who hired him, and told the filmmaker to never contact him again. This only added to the mystery. A commenter at a website claimed to be Jennings' son, and claimed his father had died of leukemia, but the identity of the commenter has never been verified.
Hess publicly corroborated important elements of Jennings' account.
This video examines the collapse of WTC7 and some elements of the NIST report.
If that video was a little too technical for you, don't worry. Most of us are not engineers. There are plenty of real experts out there though, thousands of them, who disagree with the government's findings. This video summarizes the details of the WTC 7 collapse in terms we can all understand.
This is pretty weird. I remember someone folding a $20 at the bar one night and showing me this, but I have never seen the whole sequence before. Really makes you wonder why they never changed the design of the $1.
I don't really believe this, but it is creepy just the same. If it is true, what an ultimate "screw you America, ha ha ha! You are stupid sheeple!"
And of course, it's not like some man from a cave simply infiltrated the White House. It would have been a well orchestrated joke by high power insiders and occultists, often referred to as the Illuminati.
It certainly wasn't about half of the alleged hijackers named by the US government just days after the attack.
In the years that followed, more poor quality video and audio recordings were cited as further "proof" that Osama bin Laden was America's number-one enemy. All of that culminated in a spectacular raid, that probably never happened.
As the story of the raid quickly unraveled, the Pentagon basically told Americans to shut up about it, and the alleged heroes of the raid were conveniently wiped out.
Which also seems to be a recurring theme when it comes to so many people with any connection to 9/11, who have information outside of the government-perpetuated myth.
While many of these deaths might be considered coincidence, no matter how incredible, and while other information might be considered a misinterpretation, there are cold-hard facts which prove that we have been lied to about 9/11. That the official version of what happened, is a more unbelievable myth than the many other myths which have been proselytized by conspiracy theorists. But we don't need conspiracy theory here either. We will never know who is responsible for 9/11, and which conspiracy might be right or wrong, until we first accept the fact that our own government has lied to us, blatantly, and repeatedly, for whatever reason. We will never see the truth until we can objectively examine the facts put forth, not by conspiracy wackos or paid government agents, but instead by independent experts who have no reason to lie. So let us listen to what the real experts have to say.
This is the trailer for the full length documentary linked below:
If you don't have two hours and fifteen minutes to dedicate to learning the truth about what happened on 9/11, perhaps a 15-minute mini-documentary will leave you with important questions.
And finally, maybe we should really ask ourselves, why we reject the facts presented by real science. Why is it easier to just accept the government version of events? Do you, or someone you love, a friend, even a co-worker continually deny the truth, no matter what proof is put forth? You, or they, may actually need psychological help.
Stumbled across this old post from my buddy Jack that he posted years ago on a conspiracy forum. Bizarre stuff:
I have had some really strange synchronicities in
the past two days surrounding “What’s the Frequency Kenneth?” I can’t
get it out of my head,
so I looked into it a bit. Now I feel like my brains are scrambled.
Here are some oddities I have noticed as I started digging. First stop,
YouTube. The video itself is filled with all sorts of strobe effects. I
shouldn’t have to tell any serious CT about strobes.
The song is based on a bizarre event which took place on October 4,
1986. Anchorman Dan Rather was approached by two men, while he walked
down Park
Avenue at abou 11 p.m. One of the men attacked him from behind and began beating him, shouting in demand, “Kenneth! What’s
the frequency Kenneth?!!!”
Now let’s skip back to the previous month. Rather had signed off his
newscasts for a week somewhat enigmatically, with the single word
“courage.” That same week in September, Arab extremists had threatened to “become familiar with your skyscrapers and
extend the terror campaign to the United States.” Coincidentally enough, the topic of Dan Rather’s last piece was the 9/11
attacks, and he signed off his final broadcast with that word “courage.”
Anything odd related to Dan Rather specifically linked to the date of September 11? Well, yes there is actually. On September
11, 1987, the year after the “Kenneth” attack, Dan Rather up and
walked off the set leaving the networks scrambling to fill the slot.
There was a full six minutes of dead air. A huge no no for television.
A few months later, Rather publicly assailed then Vice-President, and
frontrunner for the Republican nomination, George H.W. Bush over the
Iran-Contra
scandal during a live on-air interview. It turned out to be a pivotal
point in both of their careers. Rather’s ratings began a steady decline
from
that point on, while many believe this was a pivotal point in Bush’s
successful run for President. The animosity between the anchorman and
the Bush
family was permanent. Neither President Bush has ever granted Dan Rather
another interview.
Dan Rather was also intimately involved with news surrounding
Afghanistan, when it was the Soviets who were invading. The following
article has some
insights there. Obviously I don’t have to point out the connections with
9/11, Afghanistan, and the Bush’s.
Back to the main topic. On the last day of August 1994, the day before September,
a man named William Tager murdered NBC
stagehand Campbell Montgomery outside of the “Today” show studio. The
motivations for the murder take several tracks, but supposedly the
murderer
believed that the media had him under surveillance and were beaming
hostile messages to him. In 1997 a writer for the NY Daily News claimed
to have
solved the mysterious attack on Dan Rather, saying that it had been
William Tager, demanding to “know the frequency,” all those years
earlier. Dan
Rather positively identified the man from a picture.
But apparently there is much more to the story. Read the following…
This article really blew my mind when I found it, because I had a
synchronicity yesterday in relation to the downright bizarre movie “12
Monkeys.”
So, now we have Tager supposedly arriving in New York City on September 1, 1986 from a parallel universe in the twenty-third
century. (Born 2265. Half of 22 is 11.) One day shy of eight years later, on the last day before the month of
September, Tager commits murder. Twenty two days later (11 x 2) R.E.M. releases the single “What’s the
Frequency Kenneth”
Then there is a completely different explanation for the attack on Dan
Rather that is full of its own synchronicities. Notice the word “world”
in
here, I think it’s toward the end. And remember that Dan Rather used to
sign off saying, “…and that’s part of your world tonight."
Now we have the death of Dan Rather’s career over the documents relating
to Bush Jr. and his service in the National Guard. I don’t have to
rehash
that whole scandal, but it seems pretty clear that Rather was set up
with phony documents, that were probably actually telling the truth. The
Bush’s
decided to finally crucify him. Rather broke the story, on September 8, 2004. On September 19, 2007,
Rather filed a lawsuit against CBS. The following article spins him into the land of “bizarre conspiracy” and irrelevance.
The New Jersey police officer responsible for capturing five Israelis who filmed and celebrated while the World Trade Center towers burned has broken his silence, agreeing to a Sept. 16 exclusive interview with AMERICAN FREE PRESS.
I don't necessarily buy into the theory that Israel was behind 9/11, but I don't rule out the possibility either. Here is a little background in the story...
This feed has moved and will be deleted soon. Please update your
subscription now.
-
The publisher is using a new address for their RSS feed. Please update your
feed reader to use this new URL:
*http://www.alternet.org/home/feed*
The Hemp Industry / Staying Positive
-
Air Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2020
Doug Fine discussed the many amazing properties of hemp. Followed by Eldon
Taylor on staying positive in the COVID-19 era.
The Alzheimer’s Drug that Might Unlock Your Dreams
-
As excited as I get about the potentiality of psychedelic drugs, I get far
more amped about pushing the boundaries of dreams as I’m not sure there are
an...
DOJ Stumbles at Hearing on Detaining Immigrants
-
Criticizing an attorney for the government for arguing issues he never
raised in briefing, the First Circuit seemed likely at a hearing Wednesday
to u...
Mom Has Stacked Dinner Party Roster
-
GOLDEN, CO—Their eyes widening in amazement as the 43-year-old rattled off
the names of heavy hitter after heavy hitter, impressed members of the
Dreesh...