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.


Comment viewing options

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

"Could or did more people

"Could or did more people then the highjackers know about the attack? Sure that is possible. Has it been uncovered or proven? - No!!! Is there any proof that the buildings fell from anything other than great forces and fires? - No!!!"

- You may honestly conclude as you do, which is fine, but your statement that there is no proof (which I read as "compelling evidence")that the buildings fell from anything other than great forces and fires - is certainly not so after watching the videos linked above. Whether they are conclusive may be debatable, in my opinion. Whether they present strong evidence in support of their thesis is not debatable - they most certainly do, and even by the most stringent standards of evidence.

"Why can't you crazy, parnoid types exit the Liberty movement and leave us level-headed people as the base representaion of future, Paul-type candidates."

You don't write very level-headed. Frankly I would fear for the movement if those left to represent it could write no more "level-headed" than you have done here.

you are a douche. You and

you are a douche. You and those like like you are the reason why this nation is in the mess it is because your simple minded way of life lets the jackasses who run the world get away with what they do.
Pull your head out of the sand FNG.

sharkhearted's picture

The greatest conspiracy of all...

Is the official account from the US Government.

So if anyone is believing a conspiracy, it is you.

You can go ahead and keep your head in the sand and be a good little obedient sheep.

For the rest of us...well, there is something called a moral obligation to the American people and especially to the families of all the victims of this horrific crime which remains unsolved...to get to the bottom of this.

Norfolk, VA

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

Yes you are right

We should never believe what we see. We should only believe what we are told. We should never think and reason for ourselves. We didn't see what we think we saw. We should not speak the truth if it is inconvenient. We should just shut up, fall in line and don't rock the sinking boat. A fuel fire melts structural steel. Concrete and steel spontaneously pulverize. High rise buildings collapse from fire all the time. Our elections are fair and honest. Government is our friend. War is peace. Iran has a nuclear weapon. Iraq was in on 9/11. FRNs are real money. The cattle cars are taking you to a better place. Social security is voluntary. The income tax rate will only be 1%. The Southern states started the civil war. We didn't know the Japanese were going to bomb Pearl Harbor. It would have taken to many collaborators for 9/11 to be an inside job. Etc, etc, etc...

You are right. We should just shut up and believe and do what we are told. Thanks for your excellent advice.

Go to 0.50, in Dr. Paul's words


Good reasoning from the Dr.

"One resists the invasion of armies; one does not resist the invasion of ideas" Victor Hugo

Uh OH - this is catching on - graffiti on I 91

Driving on i-91 today I saw not one but TWO separate graffiti tags for 9/11 truth. One had a website the other referenced WTC7.

The one referencing WTC7 is pretty big and on an overpass - pretty ballsy work. Good job if that was someone on here.

Now I wonder how quick that will be covered - hehe.

9/11: Explosive Evidence - Experts Speak Out, CPTV

Amazing, this was on public television. It had high ratings:


"One resists the invasion of armies; one does not resist the invasion of ideas" Victor Hugo

Only a complete

idiot would still believe that the planes took down those buildings. There is no possible way that building 7 collapsed due to fire and I don't know anyone who has seen it fall who thinks otherwise. But for some reason there are still those who think that the twin towers just magically fell straight down pulverizing everything including the heavy structural steel center. The fact is that if for some wild reason the floors did collapse down on top of each other there would still be a huge center "column" remaining. At least somewhat but there was nothing.

Steel does not pulverize when it collapses! Period. And it does not melt from an open fuel fire! Period.

fireant's picture

Something to think about anothernobody...

Every single video or report of the fires in building 7 show the north side of the building, the side away from North Tower collapse. If you'll study some of the videos, you will also note the north side was up-wind that day.
In other words, most of the "pro demolition" reporting we have seen, repeats the "due to fire" causation, and claim they were small office fires due to the pictures of the north side. The fires, however, will be heaviest on the down-wind side of the building (wind creates the direction a fire moves).
But none of those reports mention the south side, the side which took the brunt of falling tons of steel, and where the fire was most likely concentrated.
An inquisitive mind would want to see the condition of the south side, and it is a weakness in the experts' (Cage, etc) arguments to dismiss south side damage and fires.
Unfortunately, and due to the heavy smoke and debris, there are not good photos of the south side prior to collapse. There are some clues, however. The below video, taken from a helicopter, allows for a few brief glimpses of the south face amongst all the smoke. It suggests the fires were very heavy indeed, and appears to corroborate eyewitness firefighter statements that a huge, cavernous chunk was carved out of the south face.
It is also important to note the building actually twisted a few degrees as an initial motion (after the penthouse collapse).
None of this proves anything one way or the other, but it would tend to make those who believe other than you less than an idiot for doing so.
Helicopter shot: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_WJgFc4wIaQ&feature=related
Firefighter statements: http://scotthorton.org/stress/2006/09/17/last-word-on-buildi...

Undo what Wilson did

Something to think about fireant.....

Got a great video for ya.

Watch "This is an Orange".

Because: Some animals are more equal than other animals. -Animal Farm-

What the? > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6MTIwY3_-ks

fireant's picture

So, you are saying it is a good thing for controlled demolition

proponents to ignore the south side damage to 7WTC? Other than that, I fail to see a point.

Undo what Wilson did

No steel high rise building in history has

ever collapsed due to office fires.
No matter how sever the fires were, the free fall of this building defies the laws of physics.

fireant's picture

If you would read my posts, you'd see I'm not making that claim.

I'm showing that there was heavy structural damage to the building as a result of 1WTC collapse.
Nevertheless, you may want to watch this short clip:

Undo what Wilson did

The 2 things can't be seperated.

Yes, there was serious structural damage, no doubt, but no structural damage causes a building to free-fall into it's own foot print. The outer ring of the pentagon is how buildings with structural damage fall....slowly, twisting, bending, buckling.
Closer buildings were hit with rubble had bigger, longer fires, and not one of them fall into their own basements...only the 3 buildings owned by Larry Silverstin. Hhmmm!
As for the video, chances are that that is in ether a developing or 3rd world country, where the building standards would be much lower than the US.

fireant's picture

Structural damage is precisely what causes buildings to fall.

The only issue is what type of structural damage, and how it was caused. Different types of damage and different structures cannot be likened in order to make sweeping statements, and all of your examples are very different from one another. 7WTC was uniquely situated to receive undercutting damage, where all the others received most of there damage directly on top. Just look at a map and study the debris distribution. None of the other buildings were undercut as was 7.

Undo what Wilson did

If building 7 was so badly undercut,

it stands to reason that it would sag or topple in the direction it was gouged.

fireant's picture

Here Jill Booth:

This video shows the leaning at the :45 mark: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AsJQKpnkZ10&feature=related

And from another angle: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FlyFlDSscRQ&feature=rellist&p...

You can see the twisting at :20 (there are better videos of this but can't locate them now): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rawrAdoccDk&feature=related

Listen to reporter starting at 2:00 through 2:17: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tWMWnNAlrbc&feature=relmfu

Undo what Wilson did

fireant's picture

It did.

Watch several different videos, and you will note it's first motion was to twist (after penthouse failure), and it fell towards the south, not directly into it's own footprint.

Undo what Wilson did

How did the Penthouse fail 1st

if it was one of the bottom corners that was undercut?
Anyway, all of this is moot. the collapse of all 3 buildings defies the laws of physics. The worlds foremost authority on controlled demolition watched the footage of WT7...and said it was controlled demolition. I believe him.

fireant's picture

Based on eyewitness firefighters, it was much worse than one

undercut corner. They described a gaping hole 20 stories or so high and a third of the width of the building wide. Video of North Tower collapse suggests a pretty heavy hit near the center, top to bottom, and sideways. It may be moot to you, but just get the facts right.
Ps: The demolition expert was not aware of this south face damage when offering his opinion, if you are referring to the one I'm familiar with.

Undo what Wilson did

NIST in the building 7 final report

stated that building damage from falling debris played no significant role in the building 7 collapse.

fireant's picture

Again, I'm not drawing conclusions here as to how 7 collapsed.

I'm merely putting evidence forward that strongly suggests significant damage to the building, evidence that has been mostly ignored by all the pro controlled demo videos we are all familiar with. I have no idea if NIST considered this evidence or not.

Undo what Wilson did




LOL oh I'd love to see the citing on this one. Feel free anytime.

My favorite fallback, when confronted with physical evidence, is to restate that it just "defies the laws of physics." It's awesome to use this especially when the actual laws of physics are used as evidence.

Eric Hoffer

BS on you again fireant. Show

BS on you again fireant. Show the videos you reference. The building went straight down at pretty much free-fall speed.

"It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere".

It's hard not to be a menace to society when half the population is happy on their knees. - unknown

fireant's picture

I find your posts to be rude, so I will not converse with you.

Do your own research.

Undo what Wilson did

Big hat, no cattle? Just

Big hat, no cattle? Just because you say something doesn't make it true. If you make a statement, why can't you support it with facts?

"It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere".

It's hard not to be a menace to society when half the population is happy on their knees. - unknown

Ah yes! The Wind! That's what I was missing in my thoughts!

I was missing the "wind factor" when trying to put this puzzle together!
It was the "wind" that blew the NORAD response fighter jets away from the area!
THAT, is why they never showed up!

" In Thee O Lord do I put my trust " ~ Psalm 31:1~

Hey fireant

I looked at the video and the interview and I still see nothing that explains the free fall collapse of building 7 as it did except controlled demolition. Below I have five links. The first two are of high rise fires much worse than building 7 that do not result in complete collapse. The third is a comparison between other high rise fires and WTC 7. The fourth is someone trying to debunk the debunkers and the fifth is someone debunking the official story. So I think I am being fair here. Now let's look at them.






Ok, so can you still try and tell me that fire of any sort caused the complete vertical collapse of WTC 7?

fireant's picture

More firefighter statements about WTC7 damage:

"Hayden: Yeah. There was enough there and we were marking off. There were a lot of damaged apparatus there that were covered. We tried to get searches in those areas. By now, this is going on into the afternoon, and we were concerned about additional collapse, not only of the Marriott, because there was a good portion of the Marriott still standing, but also we were pretty sure that 7 World Trade Center would collapse. Early on, we saw a bulge in the southwest corner between floors 10 and 13, and

    we had put a transit on that and we were pretty sure she was going to collapse. You actually could see there was a visible bulge, it ran up about three floors

. It came down about 5 o’clock in the afternoon, but by about 2 o’clock in the afternoon we realized this thing was going to collapse."
(emphasis added)
Blog link: http://scotthorton.org/stress/2006/09/17/last-word-on-buildi...

And this:
"They told us to get out of there because they were
worried about 7 World Trade Center, which is right behind it,
coming down. We were up on the upper floors of the Verizon
building looking at it.

    You could just see the whole bottom
    corner of the building was gone

. We could look right out over
to where the Trade Centers were because we were that high up.
Looking over the smaller buildings. I just remember it was
tremendous, tremendous fires going on."
(emphasis added)

Undo what Wilson did