103 votes

The Smoking Gun. WTC7 taken down by CONTROLLED demolition. WTC1 and WTC2 as well. What are we to make of this?

Controlled demolition.

In case you have not seen the new documentary, where now thousands of structural engineers, architects, chemical engineers, and physicists are going on record that IT IS NOT PHYSICALLY POSSIBLE that those three buildings could have been brought down by office fires, or by even high-impact 767 crashes in regards to WTC1 and WTC2. (You can watch that documentary when you have time here:)


All...I repeat all...of the three buildings brought down that day...comprising the worst structural "failures" in world history...were done by CONTROLLED DEMOLITION.

Incontrovertible. Irrefutable.

And extremely high-tech, high energy military grade explosives which are able to melt steel in a flash, were used.

This is now, without question.

We have solved the what. Now we turn to the how...and then the WHO.

But the government's official accounts, the FEMA and the NIST reports, are so ridden with fraud, gross negligence, and pseudoscience, that those reports...are CRIME SCENES in and of themselves.

We need to start prosecuting right there and then work our way up...but I digress...

3000 innocent citizens and first responders have died! Who will speak for them?? Who will bring them justice??

And hundreds of thousands of family members and friends to the victims who carry the pain with them to this day...deserve a right to know what happened... rather than being insulted by these incompetent, taxpayer-funded government-sponsored cover-ups to the scene of the worst mass murder in American history.

WTC7 was demolished differently than the Twin Towers: All or most of its basement supports were severed at once....as evidenced by the free fall, or fall at the speed of gravity with no resistance, of the first 108 feet.

In other words, 108 feet, you know, 8 to 10 stories of the building of the lower floors, just ceased to exist in an instant.

Where did they go? Did those floors slip into a parallel universe?

Or were they blown to smithereens?

Certainly the truth...wherever it may lie...is not the, fake, forced, fraudulent model reconstruction that NIST (MIST?) tried to shove down the throats of the American taxpayer, $22 Million Dollars later!

As to the destruction of the WTC1 and WTC2 towers...two of the STRONGEST vertical structures on Earth...the entire buildings were laden with nano-thermite, with complete destruction set to begin just below the airplane impact zones, and timed to look like a "normal" gravitational collapse.

It was a brilliant execution.

[Except there is no such thing as a "normal gravitational collapse." Asymmetrical damage (the jet impacts)...can not lead to a symmetrical global collapse. Physically impossible.]

You heard the first collective shaped charge "ka-POW" of the south tower floors being blown apart just below the jet impact area, then the explosions of the other successive floors were timed and were increasingly masked by the continuous roar of the massive demolition wave which gained velocity and amplitude as it plummeted to Earth.

Very clever.

But, eyes don't deceive...and ears don't....thanks to the advent of cameras and cell phone cameras.

Complete gravitational collapse on super-highrises from office fires no matter how hot?

Doesn't happen.

Has never happened in the nearly 100 years of high-rise history.

Will never happen in the future, as long as the Laws of Physics apply....which they will forever.

Unless thermite is involved.

Which may explain the molten iron in a sheer 'waterfall' of molten metal off of the south tower as its upper 30 floor block begins to deform and rotate down, but a block no more, its angular momentum of all that incredible mass, suddenly neutralizing into dust...as the "collapse" accelerates in earnest, traveling down the former path of MOST resistance (the core) that in seconds has become--by being blown to bits--the NEW path of LEAST resistance.

Hmmm. 30 stories pulverized into powder in two seconds. Very strange.

The path of MOST resistance...becoming the path of LEAST resistance. Very strange.

Molten iron. Very strange.

What possibly could turn most of the mass of 350 vertical feet of an acre-sized building, into wisps, in a few seconds? Or melt its steel columns in the same??

Must be something...of course NOT mentioned in the taxpayer funded NIST and FEMA and 9/11 Commission Reports.

Here is the smoking gun to how the controlled demolition was set up...innocuously...with unrecognizable boxes of military-grade super-thermite sol-gel shaped charges, placed in the core areas hidden from the office tenants, against the bare columns in and around the elevator banks.

Super-thermite melts steel with incredible temperature and exrtreme levels of energy.. and pulverizes the concrete and the non-steel contents in mid-air, as Towers 1 and 2 come down.

Literally all of the floor concrete, gypsum wallboard, and FF&E, including elevators and HVAC equipment... for 110 stories of each building, an enormous weight, was pulverized to a toxic powder as fine as talcum, in mid air in seconds...and it spread out like a volcanic pyroclastic flow, over lower Manhattan...while the melted and distorted steel frames, collapse in a heap below.

Watch another the 18 minute presentation here.


Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
fireant's picture

Why won't you just answer? Why so angry?

I offer a specific starting point in fact, and you won't even address it.
And no, I will not leave this forum. You offered it for public discussion and I am participating.

Undo what Wilson did

Post For Crazies - Please Join In!


fireant's picture

I agree with the others oaebcr.

You contribute nothing but agitation with that comment. I'm trying to tone my bombast as well, and just deal with the facts. It has to be addressed, just mocking their "official story" doesn't help with learning at all. Down vote.

Undo what Wilson did

What a shame

It's a shame you have to dive into the ad-hominem attack oaebcr.

So instead of posting

So instead of posting INFORMATION rebuking our FACTS you make a childish asnine statement about peope being crazy for giving PROOF about the topic of discussion. And the world is flat my friend.

Kevin Ryan former UL/NIST employee on unscientific report on 911

Review of 'A New Standard For Deception: The NIST WTC Report' http://911research.wtc7.net/reviews/kevin_ryan/newstandard.html


In an information-packed presentation of 58 minutes Kevin Ryan delivers a damning indictment of the official investigations of the total collapses of the Twin Towers and Building 7. Ryan's solid scholarship and application of the scientific method stands in stark contrast to the official investigations, whose dishonesty and corrupt anti-scientific methods Ryan exposes in abundance. Ryan explains details of the investigation by the National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST) not acknowledged by the Institute, such as its failure to experimentally verify the floor pancake theory, forcing it to invent a new theory about the Towers' collapse. Ryan notes commonalities in the WTC investigations by NIST and FEMA, and the investigation of the 1995 Oklahoma City Building, such as a high degree of overlap in the leaders of the respective investigations. Ryan unquestionably qualifies as a whistleblower. Having been promoted to the top manager of Underwriter's Laboratories water testing division, Ryan was dismissed on November of 2004 after an e-mail from him to Dr Frank Gayle of NIST questioning the collapse of the twin towers became public.

fireant's picture

No doubt the NIST Report is full of errors. That, however does

not mean Ryan is being truthful. He is not. He is convinced the buildings were demoed and contorts his arguments to fit his story. That is not the mark of science, but a mark of demagoguery.
He propagates the false comparison of "no buildings ever collapsing due to fire". First of all, the statement is false on it's face. There have been many collapses of steel framed buildings due to fire alone. He also cites Windsor Tower in Madrid as an example, but he omits critical facts which make his analogy fail. A major portion of the tower DID collapse. It was the portion which was raw steel and not yet encased in concrete. Why would Ryan omit this crucial fact?
Secondly, the "No steel skyscraper has ever collapsed due to fire" canard is just that; a canard. It purposefully discounts any damage caused by the airplanes. Why would an objective "scientist" resort to such trickery?
Ryan, Gage, and Jones are also parties to numerous other lies. Here are some:
-Small office fires in building 7
-Insignificant damage to 7 from 1 collapse
-7 fell straight down
Those are just some of the outright lies, and they are adding up.
They also conveniently leave out vital information left and right. A scientist would already have scoured the debris fields and found physical structural evidence of demolition in order to offer nail in the coffin proof. They haven't. Do you know why? It isn't there. All the evidence says the buildings came apart at their connections. True architects and engineers would already have explained to you the "mystery" of the leaning tops (a major clue). Why haven't they? It doesn't support their theory.
They also fail to point out the oven effect of the tops, likely a major factor which again, does not support their theory.
They failed to point out the twisting motion of 7 as it began to fall. An architect just sort of missed that? It just so happens to be another major clue which does not support their theory.
Sorry Tuskeegee, relying on Ryan for facts is unreliable, and that's being kind.

Undo what Wilson did

sharkhearted's picture

Your ENTIRE post here is complete B*U*L*L*S*H*I*T*

Utterly worthless, mindless, nonsense.

Norfolk, VA

Time to INVESTIGATE the investigators of 9/11. PROSECUTE the prosecutors. EXPOSE the cover-up.

fireant's picture

Anything specific?

Or just the whole thing in general?

Undo what Wilson did

Stop hiding your head in the sand..even former NIST employee

Wednesday, October 03, 2007
NIST Whistleblower
A former NIST employee made the following statements regarding NIST's politicization, corruption and lack of interest in sticking to science (these emails were forwarded to me by a prominent 9/11 truth activist; I simply edited them to remove names so as to protect the anonymity of the whistleblower):

Communication dated October 1, 2007:

"NBS/NIST had become fully hijacked from the scientific into the political realm well before he became involved. That hijacking happened in the mid-90's, and has only grown stronger to the present. Prior to that time, the Director of NBS/NIST was appointed via the political process (Presidential nomination, Congressional confirmation), but with the firm understanding in the scientific community that the job was essentially a non-political one, as the leader of the government's premiere scientific research institution. Directors were carefully selected from a field of well-known senior scientists with management skills, typically from within the NBS staff, after gaining much credibility in their fields. Once appointed, Directors tended to stay on for several years, through different administrations in an essentially career mode, usually until they retired. That all changed under the Clinton administration.

I saw it happen. After retirement from the Army, in 1983 I joined then-NBS as a scientist on the staff. After 3 years, I decided to move on (engineering on the Star Wars project). Becoming sick of that charade in 1989, I succumbed to my former boss' entreaties and returned to now-NIST in a supervisory scientist position at the top civil service grade. I retired from there in 2001, and worked as a part-time contractor for them until last year. So I've had a chance to observe some of the higher-level NIST goings-on up close and personal for some time, and was personally involved in some of its politicization.

I don't know whether the NBS Director, Dr. John Lyons, was forced into retirement by the Clinton administration; I just remember the abruptness of the change after only 3 years on his job. He was replaced by a relatively unknown and also quite young scientist from DARPA. What I remember about her is her lack of credibility in representing NIST in scientific circles, her choice of senior staff with little regard for their scientific standing, and her keen emphasis on political sensitivities. She departed after a long four years, and the Director's office (and hence the whole Institute) has been in turmoil ever since. Four of her six successors to the present time have been "Acting", meaning in a practical sense that they may well not have had the personal credibility and scientific standing to survive the scrutiny of the confirmation process.

About the time of this major reduction in stature of the Director's office, some other major shifts took place at NIST, the echoes of which may have direct relevance to [9/11 truth]. Prior to that time, we were focused on scientific research and standards development that tended to be independent of what other government agencies were doing. All of a sudden, the senior levels of NIST were flooded with what I perhaps over-harshly termed "political commisars", whose job was principally to deal with what may be called "the political sensitivities" of our work and also making sure it supported big industry.

That support became an overtly-stated major mission for us. We lost a major share of our direct research funding, and from then on have been largely dependent upon receiving funds from other government agencies (the majority from Depts of Defense and Energy) for research and standards-making to support their own work. This "other agency" work amounted to about 40% of our total budget in my last several years there. In essence, we lost our scientific independence, and became little more than "hired guns".

When I first heard of [9/11 truth] and how the NIST "scientists" involved in 911 seemed to act in very un-scientific ways, it was not at all surprising to me. By 2001, everyone in NIST leadership had been trained to pay close heed to political pressures. There was no chance that NIST people "investigating" the 911 situation could have been acting in the true spirit of scientific independence, nor could they have operated at all without careful consideration of political impact. Everything that came from the hired guns was by then routinely filtered through the front office, and assessed for political implications before release.

Sorry this blurb became overly long, but I did want to make sure that an "insider's view" got onto the record."

Email dated October 2, 2007:

"A little more general insight into what I referred to as the NIST politicization, some of which may be of interest to you. In addition to the NIST "front office" looking closely over our shoulders, we had three major external oversight groups keeping close track of our little part of NIST, which admittedly dealt at times with some sensitive issues regarding technological security.

One was NSA (no surprises there!), another was the HQ staff of the Department of Commerce, which scrutinized our work very closely and frequently wouldn't permit us to release papers or give talks without changes to conform to their way of looking at things. A third was a bit of a surprise to some -- the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) had a policy person specifically delegated to provide oversight on our work. Just as a reminder, the OMB is an arm of the Executive Office of the President.

One more tidbit - a gentleman named William A Jeffrey served as NIST Director from July 2005 until last month. Interestingly, Dr. Jeffrey's previous assignment was in the EOP's Office of Science and Technology Policy! Talk about high-level oversight!! So one can be certain that on so hot a topic as yours, Dr. Jeffrey (and his previous political handlers in the WH - if they still were "previous") would be very personally involved at every step.

I don't know what more I can add that might be relevant, as I have been once-removed from NIST for the past 6 years as a contractor via [a defense company]. However, I do have some good NIST friends who are rather highly placed, so if you have any other questions re NIST, I might be able to ferret out an answer. Would be worth a shot anyway."

fireant's picture

Here's a little poser for you Tuskeegee.

Why would proponents of controlled demolition rail so strongly against the NIST report, then rely on that same report when it comes to the temperatures in the buildings being low? I'm not saying either is right or wrong, but wouldn't the temp portion of the report be called into question if the rest of it was bogus?

Undo what Wilson did

sharkhearted's picture

Every time you open your mouth you use logical fallacy

You spout out a logical fallacy.

So the errors of the NIST report then suddenly disprove the whole thing??

That's ridiculous--and bogus--reasoning.

Quit spamming my forum with your illusions of logic. Go create your own forum. There you can make-up all the stuff you want and pontificate to your hearts delight.

There is a reason all of your comments get duly downvoted.

It is because your arguments are full of S*H*I*T.

Unless you can clean your act up and start honest questions and give honest answers, you are not welcome here.

Norfolk, VA

Time to INVESTIGATE the investigators of 9/11. PROSECUTE the prosecutors. EXPOSE the cover-up.

fireant's picture

I will post here as long as you continue to post falsehoods,

or until Mr. Nystrom tells me I am not welcome. This is a public forum.
Any forum with Ron Paul's name on it deserves accuracy of fact; especially on an issue so many people use to formulate world views.
You have still addressed not one fact I have presented. Not one.

Undo what Wilson did

sharkhearted's picture

Thats because you have presented NO facts.

Where are your facts??

Where, buried in all of your spam, are any facts?

Norfolk, VA

Time to INVESTIGATE the investigators of 9/11. PROSECUTE the prosecutors. EXPOSE the cover-up.

fireant's picture

Oh please


Undo what Wilson did

fireant's picture

Mistake. Posted in wrong place


Undo what Wilson did

Tesla, Keshe, Hutchinson and Woods

Bibi Netanyhus recent demonstration speech at the UN showed a cartoon picture of a bomb, that just does not seem to square with 21 century technology, its so 1940s. Many countries including N. Korea have atomic bombs, it would seem any sovereign country wishing to have one does. Could it be there is another technology that has been suppressed that both the US and Israel don't want released? Is there any evidence that such a technology does exist?
Maybe Keshe is a snake oil salesman, or just maybe he has stumbled over something else. Both Judy Wood and Keshe refer to Tesla, is it possible the Hutchinson effect is real? http://www.thehutchisoneffect.com/
If information was released regarding this technology, who would it hurt or benefit? What would happen if this information was released? Maybe the price of oil would crash, what would that do to the petrodollar, or the 911 investigation?

Unfortunately we will never

Unfortunately we will never know where the 2.3 Trillion dollars went, because any records were in the 3 buildings that were destroyed.


The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire. - Heinlein

I'm pretty sure the records of the "missing" 2.3 trillion

dollars were kept in Bldg 7. Bldg 7 was the store house for records for ENRON case, CIA files, NYC records. Mayor Giuliani had an office on the 23rd floor which was totally independent from the rest of the building: had its own water system for fires, etc., it was a "bunker". Destroying records was reason enough to blow the bldg.
For exact information my favorite 9/11 site is 911docs.net. You can watch free movie length documentaries, lectures, interviews. There's 10,000 hours of information there for your perusal.

Thanks For This

I just watched the whole documentary. I am a mechanical engineer. Just like many others, I watched the second plane hit the tower live on TV and never questioned the official version. I was aware of the collapse of the third tower that was not hit, but never gave it much thought until now. I foolishly assumed that the people questioning the cause of the collapses were half-baked conspiracy theorists. This has really changed my mind about what happened. How many people have seen this video? Has this been widely distributed?
Also, what is the rest of the story? What about the 20 hijackers? Were they all part of the plot or just pawns? I know that one supposedly missed his flight that day, has he ever spoken out? Also, was Bin Laden ultimitely responsible for this? Assuming this was all staged, who staged it and why?
Furthermore- The collapse of 1 and 2 was dramatic and deadly enough. Why was WTC7 even taken out? It did not add additional drama to the overall story. Since it was a much smaller building, and was not hit by a plane, why do you think it was chosen for collapse? What did the collapse of the third tower add to the mission of the day? I don't get why anybody would target this building, do you? - this speaks to motive- important in crime investigations.

As to why they brought 7 down

One theory is that the plane that crashed in Shanksville was intended to crash into it. When that plane was brought down they had a building prewired with explosives that was still standing, so what else to do but pull it and blame it on a couple of fires.

Jim Rogers

Let Larry Silverstein himself explain


Now, if you have trouble choking back Larry's story that he was worried about lives, here is a little more insight for you:

OK, and here is the answer you probably will still just refuse to consider: Evil men have conspired to pillage the earth. They control our governments, schools, churches, media, and elections, and they USE the tragic history of the Jewish people to keep anyone from questioning their motives. Now go vote for your favorite dual-citizen - it is your "civic duty!" (Because "none dare call it treason," as the man said decades ago.)

To hate Jews because they are Jewish is racist, to hate Jews because they practice Judaism is bigotry, to hate Israel's government for being corrupt is realistic.

Love or fear? Choose again with every breath.

the least conspiratorial possibility

THey say the CIA or something had lots of offices. THis may mean the building was wired to blow for those reasons. So when 911 happened they decided to pull the building because they had offices with no security in them. They kept it covert because of methods.

That is one possibility

that should be investigated. For the good of humanity, the truth needs to be made public.

fireant's picture

Here's something for you guys to mull over. You too Dawn.

I'm tired. Ya'll been wearing me out. Thanks for all the discussion.
How many of you are aware the core of the towers were not completely severed at the time of collapse? Did you know that? How many of the columns were severed is unknowable unless they are in the sample pile, but it is discernible that some were still intact.
I'm curious. How many of you knew that? It is not out of the question that all of them were still intact.
What's the truth? Haven't you all been assuming the tops were completely separate units because they were detonated? Be honest. That's what I subconsciously assumed myself for a long time. The seed was planted by Gage and Jones. I believed them. Think about this. Does this help confirm the detonation theory? Why haven't Gage and Jones brought this to your attention? They are professionals, aren't they? Or did an architect just miss it?
I have to rest. I will try to answer all posts later.
A big hand to Ira for humor

Undo what Wilson did

I have always been of the opinion that Towers 1 and 2

did not have the center core totally blown out at the moment of the collapse, because those two bldgs exploded from the top down, although there is video and much testimony that proves explosions blew out some colums in the basement, but not enough to bring down the buildings. Much footage was taken with firemen in the bldgs AFTER explosions in the basement. No, it is obvious simply by looking at video that Towers 1 & 2 started top down.
Anyway what's the point - it has always been obvious that 1&2 went down differently than Bldg 7.
Bldg 7 is totally different. First there was pyroclastic smoke at ground level indicating charges already taking out some columns, then at the very top center a crease downward indicating a center column taken out but not necessarily at the bottom of the building, could have been near the top; then both sides move inward toward center a bit again proving the center area was gone, all this within one or two seconds. Finally the entire Bldg 7 moves downward as though it were on an elevator being sent below ground level intact - there is only one way to do that on Planet Earth: all base columns, core and perimeter, were simultaneously cut with thermite/thermate charges. We know they were not explosives because the bldg remained together, but its move downward in one piece is indicative of entire base cut simultaneously. Squibs ascending the bldg as it was coming down is evidence that columns were still being cut above base level during free fall.
I viewed a hundred sites. My favorite: 911docs.net


"How many of you are aware the core of the towers were not completely severed at the time of collapse?"

How do you know this??

Sorry i don't know who Gage is and Jones has proven him self uncreditably because of the cold fusion thing?? Right??

fireant's picture

Because of the manner in which the tops moved.

They both were in motion toppling to the side, yet both stopped their tilting motion and collapsed straight down. The only way that could have happened is because they were still attached to the lower tower. If they were completely severed, they would have continued the tilt and toppled to the ground and the remainder of the towers likely would not have collapsed.

Undo what Wilson did

Hey fireant

Did you know I work in the maintenance dept as an electronic electrician for a local ac manufacturing corp. Do you also know that arguing with a maintenance guy is like wrestling with a pig in mud. After a while you realize the pig is enjoying it!!!