TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

"The amount of energy required to melt the girders, the steel in the tower, cannot be gotten to a melt point with the fuel that was in the airplane." "Not possible." "So any melting did not occur as a result of the hit from the airplane." "What are the puffs of smoke coming from? Well, they claim they're from the collapsing floors." "No, no, no. Those puffs of smoke are controlled demolitions." "That's exactly what they are, because that's exactly how they work." "The collapse of the building was caused by controlled demolition." "Building 7, the owner. He is heard on the video. Okay? And he says, pull it. It's pull it." "And they made that decision to pull, and then we watched the building collapse." "And that's when the LINK-seven blew up."

In this video, the speaker discusses the collapse of the North Tower during the 9/11 attacks. They explain that dropping 14 floors in the air would take about 9 or 10 seconds, similar to the actual collapse time. The speaker mentions the presence of numerous steel columns in the building's structure, designed to remain standing. They question how the building could collapse at free fall speed with all the steel in the way. Various individuals interviewed in the video suggest that the collapse appeared planned, comparing it to a controlled demolition. The speaker also mentions the analysis of conservation of energy and momentum, which suggests that the upper block should have stopped instead of falling straight down. They propose that explosives were used to remove the material below and achieve the observed collapse.

The speaker believes it's impossible for a plane alone to penetrate the World Trade Center towers, suggesting bombs exploded simultaneously with the plane impact. The speaker claims the building's unique construction, with steel on the outside, should have made it impenetrable. Another speaker describes seeing the plane impact Building Number 2 and an explosion erupting from the other side almost instantly. The first speaker reiterates the belief that the planes contained more than just fuel and were traveling at high speed, seemingly descending into the building to gain additional momentum. The speaker emphasizes the buildings' robust construction with heavy-caliber steel, asserting the destruction was caused by more than just the planes. The speaker concludes that the country has fundamentally changed.

When the top section of the towers collapsed, we should have observed a mutual destruction between the upper and lower sections until the energy dissipated, bringing the system to rest. It's fundamentally impossible for a small section to crush the entire structure below. This simple concept, astonishingly ignored by NIST, is basic high school physics. Yet, our society is being led to believe that these fundamental laws no longer apply.

The speaker believes it's impossible for a plane alone to penetrate the World Trade Center towers, suggesting bombs exploded simultaneously with the plane impact. The speaker claims the building's unique construction, with steel on the outside, should have made it impenetrable. Another speaker describes seeing the plane impact Building Number 2 and an explosion erupting from the other side almost instantly. The first speaker reiterates the belief that the planes contained more than just fuel and were traveling at high speeds, seemingly descending into the building to gain additional momentum. The speaker emphasizes the buildings' robust steel construction and concludes that the destruction was caused by more than just the planes themselves. The speaker believes the event has fundamentally changed the country.

The speaker claims that the top section of the towers should have mutually destroyed the lower section upon collapse until all energy dissipated. They assert that a small section of the building could not have crushed the entire structure below. The speaker states that architects and engineers were astonished that NIST ignored this concept. Another speaker says this is high school physics, and society is being led to believe that fundamental laws of physics don't apply anymore.

They claimed it was a plane, but the building exploded randomly. It's not a plane; that side just blew up after the first explosion. They don't know what they're saying. How could a plane have caused that? It happened too quickly. The building was fine before, then suddenly it exploded. How did that happen?

Eyewitness: "I live on the 40 Third Floor of a building, which is five blocks from the World Trade Center itself. I witnessed the entire thing from beginning to end." I saw the plane come out of nowhere and ream right into the side of the twin tower, exploding through the other side. I witnessed both towers collapse, one first and then the second. "The upper section, which appeared to be nothing but steel and dust, fell freely in each case." "The fires could not have melted the steel structure." "The melting point of steel is about 1,500 degrees Celsius." "In other words, diffuse hydrocarbon fires cannot produce temperatures high enough to melt steel." "The pancake theory ... has no longer been viable since 02/2004." "Underwriters lab ... signed off a report saying that fire did it. That's fraud." "Towers appeared to have exploded starting at the top and then going all the way down." "The tipping top falsifies the claims by NIST that it was an inevitable collapse."

- "the planes, hit the buildings, and the there was an explosion fire." - "the buildings collapsed due to structural weakening due to the fires." - "Fires in high rises have never brought down steel frame of high rise building at all." - "we have the evidence of the 10 key features of controlled demolition." - "In fact, right is a controlled where you are using or the people who made this happen used demolition." - "There's 40,000 tons of structural steel designed to resist this collapse." - "A football field away from the Twin Towers." - "These have to be easily three of the most highly secure buildings outside the Pentagon."

Building 7's collapse raises questions about the Twin Towers. Architects and engineers find the official story of the towers' collapse questionable. The upper block of the North Tower did not drive the building down as claimed; it disintegrated before any downward motion. Eyewitnesses reported explosions throughout the building, not included in the official report. Structural steel sections were ejected laterally at high speeds, indicating a controlled demolition. Over 22,100 professionals demand a real investigation.

The speakers discuss the collapse of the Twin Towers and question the official explanation given by NIST. They argue that the top sections of the towers should have mutually destroyed each other, but instead, they fell at close to free fall speed, indicating the removal of supporting structures. The speakers suggest that controlled demolition is the only explanation for this acceleration. They emphasize that a building cannot achieve free fall without being blown up, as the energy would be used to crush the structure below. They conclude that the fundamental laws of physics were ignored in the official investigation.

Speaker 1: "Well, it was an architectural defect." He says the World Trade Center was "always known as a very, very strong building" and notes "took a big bomb in the basement"—"the basement is the most vulnerable place"—yet "the building was standing solid, and half of the columns were blown out." He adds, "I happen to think that they had not only a plane, but they had bombs that exploded almost simultaneously because I just can't imagine anything being able to go through that wall." He asserts "this one was built from the outside, which is the strongest structure you can have, and it was almost just like a can of soup." Speaker 2: "within a matter of millisecond, the explosion pops out the other side." Speaker 1: "there were very big planes... going very rapidly" and "to do that kind of destruction is even more than a big plane because you're talking about taking out steel, the heaviest caliber steel that was used on a building." Speaker 3: "A plane doesn't do that." "If he was an insider, he wouldn't have said that." Speaker 5: "it's tremendous power and tremendous heat," "tremendous amounts of fuel that was dumped on the building" and "1,600 degrees temperature"

Speaker 0: Probably the best known builder, particularly of of of great buildings in the city. There's a great deal of question about whether or not the damage and and the ultimate destruction of the buildings was caused by the airplanes, by architectural defect, or possibly by bombs or or aftershocks. Do you have any thoughts on that? Speaker 1: Well, it was an architectural defect. You know, the World Trade Center was always known as a very, very strong building. Don't forget, that took a big bomb in the basement. Now the basement is the most vulnerable place because that's your foundation, and it withstood that. And I got to see that area about three or four days after it took place because one of my structural engineers actually took me for a tour because he did the building. And I said, I can't believe it. The building was standing solid, and half of the columns were blown out. I mean, so this was an unbelievably powerful building. If you know anything about structure, it was one of the first buildings that was built from the outside. The steel, the reason the World Trade Center had such narrow windows is that in between all the windows, you had the steel on the outside. So you had the steel on the outside of the building. That's why when I first looked and you had big heavy I beams. When I first looked at it, I couldn't believe it because there was a hole in the steel. And this is steel that was you remember the the width of the windows in the World Trade Center folks? I think you you know, if you're ever up there, they were quite narrow. And in between was this heavy steel. I said, how could a plane, even a plane, even a seven sixty seven or seven forty seven or whatever it might have been, how could it possibly go through this deal? I happen to think that they had not only a plane, but they had bombs that exploded almost simultaneously because I just can't imagine anything being able to go through that wall. Most buildings are built with the steelers on the inside around the elevator shaft. This one was built from the outside, which is the strongest structure you can have, and it was almost just like a like a can of soup. Speaker 2: You know, Donald, we were looking at pictures all morning long of that plane coming into Building Number 2. And when you see that approach the far side and then all of a sudden, within a matter of millisecond, the explosion pops out the other side. Speaker 1: Right. I just think that there was a plane with more than just fuel. I think, obviously, they were very big planes. They were going very rapidly because I was also watching where the plane seemed to be not only going fast, it seemed to be coming down into the building. So it was getting the speed from going downhill, so to speak. It just seemed to me that to do that kind of destruction is even more than a big plane because you're talking about taking out steel, the heaviest caliber steel that was used on a building. I mean, these buildings were rock solid, And, you know, it's just an amazing it's an amazing thing. Speaker 3: And it's not right to call up and then extrapolate and connect him to 09:11 when he came out on the day of 09:11 and the day after on Fox and on CNN and said, I believe there had to be bombs in those buildings. It was brought down by explosives. A plane doesn't do that. And then described the architecture of Tower 1 and Tower 2. If he was an insider, he wouldn't have said that. Speaker 4: A lot of people ask, how is it possible that, a Boeing plane would be able to destroy the or two planes would be able to destroy the Twin Towers because they were constructed to withstand like a 07/2007 Speaker 5: attack. It's tremendous power and tremendous heat, and people were willing to die. And when they're willing to die and when they're willing to become kamikazes of a sense, there's very little you can do about it. I mean, the the heat and the power actually, it was amazing that the the initial jolts didn't jar the building as much as people would have thought. But the the tremendous amounts of fuel that was dumped on the building and 1,600 degrees temperature, I guess that's probab

The speaker describes the collapse of the World Trade Center and suggests that it was not due to the impact of the planes but rather controlled demolition. They mention seeing the building come down in a series of straight hits and explosions, which they believe indicates the use of pre-engineered and precisely timed explosives. The speaker emphasizes that the only way a building can collapse with such acceleration is through controlled demolition.

The building is not collapsing floor by floor; instead, material is explosively ejected from multiple floors simultaneously. This contradicts the pancake theory, as the explosions occur well below the actual collapse. The explosions create uniform horizontal lines along the building's faces, and debris is ejected outward at high speeds, with heavy girders reaching up to 60 miles per hour. While the destruction appears uniform, the top section of the building is toppling asymmetrically, hidden in smoke. The steady advance of the explosion's leading edge suggests a controlled demolition rather than a natural collapse, as the explosions accelerate down the building's faces ahead of the actual collapse.

Richard Gage questions the collapse of Building 7, stating that fires have never caused the collapse of a skyscraper before. He argues that the fire NIST claimed caused the collapse had actually burned out over an hour before. Despite not being hit by an airplane, the 47-story building collapsed into its own footprint in under 7 seconds. Experts point out that the building descended in freefall for the first 100 feet, indicating no resistance. The symmetry of the collapse is seen as evidence, as all columns needed to be severed simultaneously. The failure at column 79 on level 12 is mentioned, with experts deeming it impossible for a single column failure to cause the entire building to collapse. The collapse is described as a classic implosion.

Speaker 0 describes hearing a series of explosions that sounded like bullet shots, followed by the collapse of the World Trade Center. The speaker states that people began running as the "bombs were gone" and describes watching a few explosions before fleeing as the building came down. Speaker 1 claims that the only way a building can accelerate during a collapse is through pre-engineered, precisely timed, and precisely placed explosives, which they identify as controlled demolition.

What we're looking at is a building just coming straight down, falling right through itself with zero resistance. This building 40,000 tons of structural steel in its structural system and that is intended to keep it from going anywhere. I realized that it's actually coming down at free fall pretty much dead on the acceleration of gravity. Well, NIST, in their final draft, was saying that the building came down 40% longer than free fall time. A free fall time would be an object that has no structural components below it. NIST is telling us that the building below it ceased to exist for the first few seconds of the collapse of the building. The building didn't disappear so the building can fall for 100 feet at free fall speed.

The speaker claims the only high-rise buildings to collapse from airplane impacts were the World Trade Center towers. They cite an architect's report stating the buildings were designed to withstand such impacts. One speaker says the collapses defied physics, stating that the upper sections should have destroyed the lower sections, not crushed them. Another speaker says the collapse of Building 7, which was not hit by a plane, resembled a controlled demolition. A fire battalion chief, Oriole Palmer, reported being on the 78th floor, the floor of impact, and said they had two fires under control one minute before the building collapsed. The speaker alleges a cover-up related to 9/11, claiming the 9/11 Commission was part of it, led by Philip Zelikow, who was allegedly handpicked by Condoleezza Rice. They say Zelikow met with Tony Schaeffer in Afghanistan and then targeted him upon his return to the US. The speaker says they called it a scandal bigger than Watergate.

Speaker 0: Someone ran floor by floor instead of popping out. Then it was like bang bang bang bang bang like bullet shots. Just like 20 straight hits went down. As the bombs were going, people just started running. World Trade Center was coming right down from the corner. The whole building just went, and as the bombs were gone, people just started running. Speaker 1: The only way that a building can accelerate as it collapses is by having pre engineered, precisely timed and precisely placed explosives, in other words control.

Speaker 0 describes witnessing a rapid sequence of explosions and the collapse of the World Trade Center. “Floor by floor instead of popping out. But was it if if they had detonated. Yeah. And then what did take down a building. All of a sudden, it was like bang bang bang bang like bullet shots. I saw from the corner, boom boom boom boom boom boom boom Just like 20 straight hits just went down.” As the bombs were gone, people began running; the witness sat there and watched a few of them explode, then turned around and started running for life because, in the witness’s view, “World Trade Center was coming right down from the corner.” The sounds continued with, “Boom. Boom. Boom. Boom. Boom.” The entire building “just went,” and again, the witness states, “as the bombs were gone, people just started running. And I sat there and watched a few of them explode.” Speaker 1 asserts a technical claim about how a building can collapse rapidly. “Only way that a building can accelerate as it collapses is by having pre engineered, precisely timed, and precisely placed explosives. In other words, controlled demolition.”

An architect with 20 years of experience claims the official explanation for the World Trade Center collapses is false. The official reason is that the planes hit the buildings, causing explosions and fires, leading to structural weakening and collapse. However, fires have never caused a steel-frame high-rise to collapse. The speaker claims the collapses of the Twin Towers and Building 7 exhibit 10 key features of controlled demolition. Building 7 collapsed straight down into its own footprint at free fall speed for the first 100 feet, despite 40,000 tons of structural steel. The speaker compares the collapse to controlled demolitions. The speaker states that 700 architects and engineers are demanding a new investigation. They believe the evidence suggests controlled demolitions. The speaker asserts that almost every architect and engineer who reviews the information agrees, but the implications are dark because it suggests someone besides Al Qaeda was involved, given the high security of the buildings.

The speaker describes a building collapsing floor by floor, likening the sounds to bullet shots or bombs going off in rapid succession. They saw multiple explosions and then ran as the World Trade Center came down. Another speaker claims that the only way a building can accelerate as it collapses is through controlled demolition, involving pre-engineered, precisely timed, and placed explosives.

Speaker 0 asserts that 9/11 is the biggest lie of our lifetime and that he was on-site, believing it may have been a false flag. He states it is obvious to him that Building 7 was a controlled demolition because the building collapses from the bottom down, a uniform collapse requiring all load-bearing columns to fail simultaneously; he contrasts this with the Twin Towers, which he says collapse top-down in a progressive collapse. He notes that the trade centers were designed to withstand jet impacts and, referencing his experience in heavy construction, describes the outer columns as a “fishnet” and the inner core columns as thick steel beams capable of withstanding four to five times the loads. He claims engineers routinely over-design buildings. He mentions that dust samples contained what is called thermitic material, described as an explosive incendiary, and cites documented reports. He alleges extensive elevator renovations in the two to three years prior to 9/11, that many workers had access to the cores of the buildings, and that on the day of the attack the elevator company would not assist in elevator operations and subsequently went out of business. He references sworn firefighter testimonies a couple of years after 9/11 about explosions in the buildings and asserts these were suppressed, as Building 7 was ignored in the 9/11 Commission Report. Regarding Al Qaeda, he contends that Al Qaeda’s role is something he does not think exists, suggesting it is made up. He recalls the FBI’s 2006 statement that there was no concrete evidence linking Osama bin Laden with 9/11 and notes that Osama bin Laden worked for the CIA in Afghanistan, helping fight the Russians, and that the CIA helped orchestrate 9/11, calling it “their plan.”

The buildings turned to dust before reaching the ground, visible in news videos. A plane impact should not cause complete pulverization. The event involved the transformation of vast quantities of materials, including steel and concrete, into a cloud. A 10-story tower disintegrated in ten seconds, which is described as neither a collapse nor an explosion, but a building frothing into powder. Seismic recordings did not reflect the impact of two 500,000-ton buildings. Core columns appeared to simply "faint." Building 7, a 47-story structure, physically disintegrated, including steel. The dust cloud was blowing downward. The speaker questions how a 700-foot-tall building could fall straight down instead of toppling over and asks if there would be a 700 foot hole in the ground.