37 votes

24 irrefutable facts about 9/11

THE HARD FACTS ABOUT 9/11 - Published on Dec 11, 2012


All sources can be found at:


Comment viewing options

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

It wasn't I who tried to pigeonhole the debate into two factions

You are the one who applied the label "de-bunker". So don't try the indignation game with me. All I do is present facts which are ignored. How can one find truth by ignoring facts?
I repeat. Thousands of employees of a wide variety of agencies would have to have committed felonies and falsified hundreds of reports in order for any of these theories to have merit. That's what most people know but you reject. It is far more preposterous than planes knocking down buildings.
There very well may be a rogue element within our intelligence community, and they very well may have planned 911. I don't doubt it. But the more complicated you make their deeds, the less likely it is true; and the theories promoted of CD and missiles would require a conspiracy of preposterous proportions.
And, you have no hard evidence of Mossad involvement, but you do have documented evidence of Saudi involvement. Why do you ignore this evidence?

Undo what Wilson did


Your name is well chosen. You are the ant carrying the weight of 9/11 on you intent on building your nest of facts. That is not derogatory, and I appreciate that, believe me. However, excuse the brevity but I believe the question of “Why do you ignore the evidence?” is best put to NIST who was negligent in its findings. (by the 9/11 commission’s own admission of same). We both need answers, and we need a new investigation. We need them to release all the videos and we need objective analyses. Sorry if you felt I labeled you, but truthers have received their fair share of derision by anti-truthers so I feel we’re even on that score. I will continue to make my own conclusions based on professional testimony and you can continue to accumulate facts and hopefully we can meet on some common ground even if ant hills of facts may be mercilessly leveled by the winds of time.Peace.

fireant's picture

I've never read the NIST report, I don't know what they ignore.

I have looked at what AE puts out, and the amount of facts they ignore is astounding.

Undo what Wilson did

Not nearly as astounding as what YOU ignore.

I just posted to you further below a video where first responders were talking about the explosions when wtc7 collapsed and you come back with some nonsense suggesting that the explosions could've been airplane parts falling down an elevator shaft or batteries or tires.

Good grief.


fireant's picture

Are you aware the preponderance of FDNY reports have no

reports of explosions? It is utterly overwhelming, the number of people who did not hear explosions. If there were explosive sounds associated with the demolition of Building 7 or the Towers, EVERYONE would have heard them. There would be no mistake.

Undo what Wilson did

Go figure


Since plenty of people, including firefighters and first responders, have talked about distinct sounds of explosions, and even a countdown leading up to big explosion and collapse, and you can hear for yourself that explosion where the firefighters are on the phone and a firefighter comes up saying "seven's exploding", and Jennings and Hess were trapped because of an explosion, why would the FDNY reports not address the explosions?

Kinda leaves one scratching their head, doesn't it? ;)

then you don't even know what reason NIST gave?


fireant's picture

I don't really care what NIST reported.

I have repeated over and over, I decided to look for myself with an unbiased eye once I learned AE911Truth was being deceptive, and omitted vital evidence. I did believe them for a time, though with a few nagging doubts which I brushed aside. Obviously, in the course of studying, I have read much of what others report NIST reported. So I am somewhat aware of their take. I have read the FEMA BPS.
My emphasis has been studying all video of the collapses, and let what occurred speak. I have viewed hours and hours of raw video of debris, and studied hundreds of photographs, as well as read FDNY and NYPD accounts, listened to hours of recordings from NORAD and FAA. I can't tell you how many reports I've read on aviation, rust, heat, and on and on. Every bit of all this evidence confirms the planes hit the buildings and the buildings came down as a result.
The key is understanding how the Towers fell, and understanding design is essential to understanding that.
One must then watch the collapses with the mind set of determining how they collapsed. Hear this. If one is looking at the collapse trying to find evidence of demolition, ones mind will not allow seeing evidence which contradicts that theory. I openly accuse AE911Truth of exactly that. They have omitted vital evidence repeatedly. They have never taken the first, most crucial step of a legitimate investigation, which is to corroborate the given story. The way you find wrongdoing is NOT to look for wrongdoing. You CORROBORATE the story you have been told. When the story does not add up, you have found wrongdoing. AE starts with the assumption the "story" is impossible. That is plain reckless, and unbecoming of a group of professionals. It's downright shameful, and it has caused them to omit vital evidence.
Looking with unbiased eyes, it is painfully obvious the Towers collapsed due to the airplane strikes. And all the substantiating evidence says the same thing. So far, the evidence has not shown wrongdoing. It all adds up. I can't help it. It's what the evidence says. I let it speak. That much of the story is corroborated. Time to move on.
Back to the NIST report, I have been trying to get the 7 portion. I just can't download...dunno. But I really don't care, other than seeing source data on certain witnesses. I have not fully concluded about 7WTC. I understand we do not know how the east core initiated. Neither of us do. You can't prove it was cut, and I can't prove it was natural. I do know the perimeter columns were not cut.I know the preponderance of known evidence supports natural, but I will not be convinced until I can see further down in the debris pile, which I am working on.
Glad you asked?

Undo what Wilson did

Good explanation of how you

Good explanation of how you go about obtaining truth, which, I think, is how truth is obtained. So, thank for your explanation, one rooted in self awareness that beams fairness.

As for your reply to me below, my comment wasn't about minutia on this issue, 9/11. Rather, my comment was about spending time on minutia because engaging minutia often narrows sight for the big picture. My comment concerned philosophy instead of 9/11, a subject involving physics, wherein I think things physical of all size must be taken in account in pursuit of comprehension.

So, after reading your statements about the members of AE911Truth and assuming your statements are true, I agree the members' omission of information and how they went about obtaining truth -- that they started with a premise and built their argument around it -- is wrong to do. But I do say my research into 9/11 is little and I haven't examined 9/11, but I do believe there's more to 9/11 than the government's story.

School's fine. Just don't let it get in the way of thinking. -Me

Study nature, not books. -Walton F. Dutton

my bad friend. at least you are looking into it..

I am coming to learn that it is not those who oppose me who are my enemy.
this is difficult for me to learn but I am trying..
I do not pretend to know what the truth is...but I do know that what I was told is either... whatever it was, it is not correct.

fireant's picture

I hope you will agree then, that while having a sense of

disbelief is both healthy and logical, making specific accusations based on said belief without conclusive proof is a reckless exercise of ones right to speak. peace

Undo what Wilson did

Jefferson's picture


points are solid and eloquently put.

When one obsesses on a particular piece of minutia, and doesn't lay the many puzzle pieces out on the floor to step back and look at them, they miss the overall picture.

Most people do not have a psychopathic mind so it is hard for them to even conceive of such a plan. (not that you need one)

The US took out 90,000 Japanese civilians in one bombing run. That was BEFORE Hiroshima and Nagasaki. 3000 of our own is small potatoes, compared to what the PNAC/Zio agenda needed. Coincidentally, roughly 3000 were sacrificed at Pearl Harbor to get us into WWII. The historical precedent (as you mentioned) is also a valuable piece of this puzzle.

I couldn't have articulated it much better than you have.

Well said, Jefferson.

When one obsesses on a particular piece of minutia, and doesn't lay the many puzzle pieces out on the floor to step back and look at them, they miss the overall picture.

fireant's picture

That's actually hilarious.

Laying the many pieces of the puzzle on the floor? The people who promote controlled demolition, including the "professional" architects and engineers IGNORE more evidence than they acknowledge. They threw most of the puzzle pieces away.

Undo what Wilson did

False flags

became a new concept for me following 9/11 once I accepted the deaths of 3,000 innocent people was a tragic loss purposefully orchestrated by mad men with self-serving geopolitical agendas. Your Pearl Harbor observation is very on point with the precedent factor; I appreciate its widening the historical scope where the overall discussion needs to focus along with the gritty 9/11 details. Thanks for sharing that.

Staring at Minutia Loses Picture -- Yes!

When one obsesses on a particular piece of minutia, and doesn't lay the many puzzle pieces out on the floor to step back and look at them, they miss the overall picture.

I can't overstate how often I feel your statement applies to several DPers on some issues, gold and silver as currency one of them.

So concerted are beliefs of most DPers on the use of a measurement tool in transaction used by a human or humans yesteryear that they believe it follows, it must be so, to use those metals and minerals today or tomorrow will be fine because, they purport, the people who've created the chaos mankind is in couldn't be involved in gold and silver mining/acquisition, transportation, distribution and selling. No, the people who've designed the chaos, considering the control and influence they have which took a long time to obtain and that I assume any reasonable RPer knows to be worldwide and aimed at penetrating the mind, just couldn't be doing anything with those metals and minerals, as if they have powers, powers that repel the architects of chaos. Or, hey, maybe the bad guys forgot about gold and silver.

From my perspective, your comment -- effort spent on minutia, therefore no sight for their formations, the pieces and, next, the picture -- rings loud, clear and true. Oh, how dispiriting it is to read the majority of gold-silver comments on the DP.

School's fine. Just don't let it get in the way of thinking. -Me

Study nature, not books. -Walton F. Dutton

fireant's picture

You mean minutia like...

Structural evidence confirming structural failure.
Extensive fires in building 7.
Multiple reports of a gaping hole in 7.
Multiple reports 7 was in danger of falling.
Evidence of a slash in 7's south face, top to bottom.
Reports of distortions in the Towers after the airplane strikes.
Reports of fires on many floors far below impact in the towers.
Evidence of 7 rotating as an initial move.
Half of 7 falling north, the other half falling south.
A very complicated truss system on the lower 7 floors of 7.
No sounds or observations of demo charges at the time of collapse.
Witnesses in stairwell B testifying to the noise of pancaking floors.
Photographs of pancaked floors under the South Tower.
Thousands of first responders who did not notice signs of CD.
Is this the sort of minutia you refer to? It must be, because it is just a small part of the evidence which is ignored.

Undo what Wilson did

First responders talking about the explosions...


About 1:34 you can hear a huge explosion as the firefighters are on the phone and another firefighter runs up and says "seven's exploding".

About 5:27 and to the end the first responders describe the explosions.

Not sure why you keep ignoring these evidences and accounts that have already been posted numerous times.

fireant's picture

None of those reports corrosponded with time of collapse.

I've never ignored those reports.
There were many reports of explosions that day, and there are many possible sources of those sounds.
But that is all there is. Sounds, and sounds not in time with any of the building failures.
Here's a short list of things which could have made explosive sounds:
Auto gas tanks.
Auto tires and batteries.
Power transformers.
Air compressor tanks.
Elevators and airplane parts falling 100 floors down elevator shafts.
Because none of the reports coincided with any of the building collapses, it is impossible to then assume the buildings were blown up.
Have you ever been in a traumatic type situation involving many people? Reports of all kinds are circulated. They have to be corroborated, and that is the difficulty with any explosions being associated with the buildings coming down. All the structural evidence shows structural failure. Other than some mangled cars, there is no evidence of anything else being blown up.
Additionally, the number of firefighters who did not report explosions is overwhelming.

Undo what Wilson did

Huh? The first responders toward the end of the video...

...are describing the explosions at the time of the wtc7 collapse.

There were no airplane parts falling down its elevator shaft, and the explosion heard when the firefighters were on the phone was certainly not an elevator falling or a tire or battery exploding.

You obviously didn't watch the whole video.

The last first responder on the vid even describes a countdown right before the explosion and collapse.

Also, Barry Jennings account of the explosion that drove him from the sixth floor back to the eighth floor was PRIOR to the collapse of the twin towers...which means the debris damage to wtc7 from the collapse of the twin towers hadn't even happened yet.

fireant's picture

Trust me Jiminy Cricket, I've watched it.

I'm aware of that explosion being recorded. I'm aware of the reported "countdown". I'm aware of Barry Jennings. It doesn't change the fact that if building 7 were demoed with some type of explosive, everyone would have heard it. For all we know, the countdown was some of the guys standing around, listening to it creak, and timing it's fall.
Jennings timeline has to be incorrect. It is totally understandable for him to have it mixed up. All evidence suggests this the case. Jennings described being blown back and up. Careful with your fact. What Jennings did not report, and this is key, is explosive shrapnel. If he were that close to an explosion, he would not only have reported shit zinging past his head like bullets, he probably would have been hit. The evidence strongly suggests what he experienced was the slab of 1WTC slicing through the building. Other than all that, a bomb going off 5 or 6 hours prior to collapse is not at all consistent with taking the building down with explosives. I don't know what was recorded on that one video, nor the time or location. There is no evidence I know of to associate it with the collapse of 7, and again, if it were, everyone would have heard it.

Undo what Wilson did

Jennings was very clear and stated more than once...

...that the twin towers were still standing.

That means wtc1 was not slicing through wtc7 yet.

Also, when you question consistency regarding bombs going off prior to collapse, tell that to William Rodriguez. He reported explosions in lower level BEFORE the plane even hit the tower. Coincidentally, he states that he testified before the 9/11 commission and his testimony doesn't appear in the final report. Imagine that.

Wouldn't be the first time someone got their timing off with explosions.

And when you keep saying "everyone would have heard it", realize that since there were plenty of people who reported hearing explosions, just because some are choosing to ignore that doesn't make it disappear.

fireant's picture

Plenty, as in what relative to the number of people and cameras

within earshot? Hardly measurable. There's really only that one recorded, and we don't know location or time.
The injuries from the basement and lobby were all burn. There were no injuries reported which are consistent with explosives. And actually there was one noise recorded and timed which sounded like an explosion, but was timed perfectly with a heavy object falling through the elevator shaft after impact. It can't be proven of course, just more circumstantial evidence. And we do know 3 shafts in each Tower went all the way (I'm not positive on this, but I think I read somewhere all elevator pulleys were at the top, so all the shafts then would be open). So you can't say airplane parts and or debris did not fall to the basement. It could have, and in the case of Tower 1, likely it did due to the direct hit on the core.
And in the case of Rodriguez, again, no evidence of an explosion. No shrapnel wounds. No reports of shrapnel. All we have is something that sounded to him like an explosion. That's it. Tower 1 Lobby shows no evidence of an explosion. The damage there is clearly torque damage. And of course, explosions prior to the plane in the basement had zero to do with the manner in which the buildings fell. It doesn't add up.
We can argue about Jennings all night. I don't have time now, but there are other inconsistencies with his various testimony which suggests his timing is off. And in his testimony to the 911 Commission, he made no mention of bombs, according to the handwritten notes taken during his testimony, for whatever that's worth. It just doesn't add up. With all the firefighters, police, and feds, in the vicinity, don't you think someone would have heard a bomb go off in 7 large enough to make it look like King Kong had stepped through the lobby? (Jennings' description). But I will give you. A bomb went off in the morning before the Towers fell. It would be a stretch to make that fit with controlled demolition.

Undo what Wilson did

Fireant, these are not the only reports of explosions.

Countless videos have been posted of accounts of them and you know that.

Nice that you're conceding that a bomb went off before the towers fell, but I gotta wonder what you think caused all those dead bodies and the destruction as described in the lobby of wtc7 if it wasn't bombs/explosions.

When there were reports of bombs and numerous accounts of serious explosions by the eyewitnesses, many of which were compared to the likes of demolition, it certainly increases the likelihood that the buildings did not come down as a result jet fuel and fires.

With all the evidences and accounts of explosions, the squibs, the active thermitic material that was found in the dust, even the penthouse collapse in 7 and the way the buildings came down, demolition is not a stretch at all.

Regarding your explanation of the countdown in your previous comment, it completely ignores the rest of what that first responder described. And the things in your list you posted in response to the three things I mentioned from that wtc7 explosion video do not come close to explaining what is heard and described.

Auto tires and batteries? Airplane parts falling down the elevator shaft? ...of a building that was not even hit by a plane?

That's just silliness and again makes me question your sincerity. :(

fireant's picture

There is no corroboration. That's my whole point Jiminy.

There is an abundance of structural evidence, and it all shows structural failure. If the buildings were demoed, the evidence would be abundant in the debris pile. It's a "law of physics". That's why I searched the debris piles. It ain't there my friend.
And I will try to clarify my point about the timing. Regardless of all the reports about explosions, if explosions were causing the squibs in the Towers, or if what Gage refers to as "explosive force", or if the pulverization was due to explosions, everyone in Manhattan would have heard the explosions, even over the roar of the collapse. There were no explosions in the Towers at the time of collapse. Fact. Not to mention it would be impossible to have explosions of that magnitude occur and the cores remain standing as they did.
The same is true for 7. If explosive charges were used, ALL the people standing around would have heard distinct and very loud reports.
There simply is no correlation between reported explosions and the buildings falling. I can't explain what the reported explosions were, and neither can you. We do not know. And to dismiss the possibility that some of the reports of explosions were gas tanks, transformers, batteries, air compressors, or debris falling down elevator shafts is intellectually dishonest. Some of those reports could have been from those sources. Not saying they were, because we do not know.
Regarding the squibs. None of those squibs initiated at max velocity, making it impossible for them to be associated with explosions. Explosions, by their very nature, initiate at max velocity. Additionally, where the squibs were observed, there is nothing to blow up. The core is 60 feet away. There simply were no explosions going off as the Towers and 7 fell.

Undo what Wilson did

I'm intellectually dishonest for not accepting TIRES & BATTERIES

... or AIRPLANE PARTS falling down the elevator shaft (of a building that wasn't even hit by a plane) as alternate explanations for the huge explosions heard and/or described that I pointed out to you from the wtc7 explosion video?

When you deliberately keep trying to downplay the evidences/accounts of explosions, even those specifically dealing with the collapse, and when you offer up outrageous alternate explanations for the explosions that obviously don't match what I had posted to you from that wtc7 explosion video, I think you may have it backward about who is being intellectually dishonest.

fireant's picture

We are not communicating.

I'll try one more time, then I'm done.
I am not diminishing any of the reports of explosions. I am aware they exist. I can show you other video of explosive sounds going off after the towers collapsed. I did not try to associate the explosions you describe with cars, etc. I said some of the many reports could have been cars, compressors, transformers,etc. Don't twist my meaning. Considering the number of burnt vehicles including firetrucks with compressed bottles in them, it would be foolish to think there were not explosions. People around the corner or down the block hear them and have no clue what they are. Chaotic situations produce conflicting witness testimony. Ask any policeman who has investigated accidents about that one. You have to weigh the entirety of evidence. This is the point. The overwhelming preponderance of evidence suggests the collapse of the Towers and 7 were due to damage and fire. The overwhelming preponderance of firefighter reports contain no reports of explosives, but do contain many reports of predictions the building (7) was going to collapse. Here is a short list of evidence one must consider prior to making any conclusion:
-Fires in 7 were extensive and at times during the day intense in some areas of the building. Fact.
-Inspectors heard the building creaking and shifting, predicting it's collapse. Fact.
-Multiple Fire Chiefs, inspectors, firemen, and others reported the building leaning and bulging, predicting it would collapse. Fact.
-Multiple fire dept. personnel reported a gaping hole in 7 south face. Fact.
-Building 7 suffered extensive damage from the collapse of 1WTC. It created a gash from top to bottom on the south side eliminating the spandrel band which tied the building together, as well as undercut several of the perimeter columns on the south side. Fact.
-Relative to the number of firefighters, police, onlookers, etc, all waiting for the building to fall, who did not report explosions associated with the collapse of 7, it is impossible to conclude the few reports of explosions at that time as associated with it's collapse, other than the sound of falling floors in the building.
-All available structural evidence indicates structural failure. Fact.
-The debris field and collapse video show the collapse was not symmetrical, rather the building split apart, the east quadrant falling north, and the west quadrant falling south. Fact.
-Collapse video shows the building shifting east (rotating imo) as an initial move of the collapse of the perimeter walls, which proves the perimeter walls were not severed, rather, they folded or buckled. Fact.
-Shaped charges depend on speed of explosion, which produces a very sharp, high frequency, and very loud, distinguished report. No explosions of that nature were reported, and everyone in the area would have heard them if they were used to bring 7 down. Fact.
In light of all this evidence and much more, it is difficult to conclude that the building was detonated based on the relative few reports of explosions.
That's it Jiminy Cricket. I can't make my point any clearer. Take it or leave it. Peace.

Undo what Wilson did

I'm not the one twisting things here.

I had posted the video of the wtc7 explosions and pointed out a couple time frames, one where a massive explosion can be heard and the other where two first responders describe huge explosions with regard to the collapse, one of them even describing a countdown leading up to that.

You came back with a list of alternate explanations for the explosions that was absurd given what I had posted.

You also said none of those reports corresponded with the time of the collapse, which is not true since the last time frame I pointed you to with the two first responders dealt with EXACTLY that.

So when you said you watched the video, either that wasn't true or you didn't pay attention. Unless you were being intentionally deceptive, those are the only two other options I can think of for your strange responses to that post of mine.

At any rate, and for what it's worth, I'm not disputing that there were fires, even extensive ones. But just because wtc7 was predicted to come down doesn't mean its damage was due strictly to twin towers debris and fire, especially given the suspicious explosions (including, but not limited to, explosion BEFORE the debris from the twin towers even hit it and the other explosions while Jennings and Hess were trapped, and of course the massive explosions reported at collapse).

That these explosions were omitted from formal reports raises even more suspicion in my book.

Also, I don't even know what to say when you keep using this contradictory ~but everyone in the area would've heard them~ argument regarding the serious explosions, when you do know that plenty of people DID hear them and you even acknowledge that. So I guess you're right. We're not communicating. Peace

Can't see the forrest for the trees.

Many of the truther debunkers seem to argue with each element individually, as if that would explain it all.

The part of my brain that understands physics well enough to catch a 50 M.P.H. fast ball told me that something wasn’t quite right that day, though I ignored it for years.

The method of building destruction is important; a combination to bring about the most realistic and believable image that could be managed, IMO.

But, the overall picture makes the method of destruction irrelevant. It really doesn’t matter if it was thermite, Nano-thermite, regular bombs, gravity and fire, or even elves with bad attitudes.

It wasn’t what we are led to believe.
Like you, I had that visceral reaction. It’s quite painful, and one reason people shy away from the truth, even subconsciously.

Just open the box and see

It's elementary

Good point on deciphering the ‘elements.’ If the same amount of energy was used to decipher the good vs. bad public elements in DC sifting through their ulterior motives and MOs, the underlying truth of what’s really going on might see the light of day.
At least we have not recoiled in fear of the truth while others as you say sadly cocoon themselves which doesn’t accomplish anything.