reSee.it - 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."

Professor Jones believes explosives, not fire, brought down the Twin Towers and Building 7. He found explosive residue in the dust, not mentioned in the official report. The residue is a mix of iron oxide and aluminum, burning hotter than jet fuel. This suggests controlled demolition was used in all three buildings.

USGS found iron microspheres in World Trade Center dust, unexplained. Microspheres contain iron, aluminum, sulfur, trace of manganese, less than a tenth of an inch in diameter, spherical, found in all dust blown out during collapse. Heat source needed to melt iron to form spheres must be very hot, like thermite reaction at 4500 degrees Fahrenheit. Finding thermite residue in dust suggests it was used before collapse, not after. Microspheres and melted steel beams indicate thermite involvement in melting steel beams. Translation: Iron microspheres found in World Trade Center dust are unexplained. They contain various elements and are spherical, found in all dust blown out during the collapse. A very hot heat source, like a thermite reaction, is needed to melt the iron. The presence of thermite residue suggests it was used before the collapse, not after. The microspheres and melted steel beams indicate thermite was involved in melting the steel beams.

The twin towers had a perimeter of steel panels hoisted up and bolted into place. Each panel had three box columns about 14 inches square cross connected by spandrel plates. After the plane hit, the fires were burning out and cooling down. But then, about seven minutes before its final destruction, almost an hour after the plane hit, molten metal was seen coming out of the Northeast corner near the Eightieth Floor. The red yellow metal poured from the tower along with a shower of sparks and looked like steel in a foundry. There were many eyewitnesses that described molten steel. Molten steel running down the channel rails. NASA took photos indicating very high temperatures days after the event. The media told us the intense fire more than the impact caused the towers to 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.

The description begins with the ring being, in effect, a one turn, shorted secondary. A smaller ring will react even more violently. Here is another ring. This one made of a material we say is non conductive. And it is completely unaffected. Here is another example. Several thousand watts of power were involved in that spark. If we replace the spark gap with a copper coil, The same power now flows through the coil. It's invisible, has no effect on many substances, but it can generate a lot of heat. Wood, paper, things that we think of as being quite inflammable are not affected at all. However, a piece of steel wool bursts into flame instantly. Did you ever fry an egg on a cold stove? It's no trick at all if you have the right equipment. This is a cold hotly. And because it's cold, you can make it out of wood if you like. Just be sure that there's a coil of wire inside and that you connect that coil to a high voltage alternating curve source. The rest is easy. As long as we're being different, we'll use motor oil instead of Crisco. The egg fries very quickly, but the stove remains perfectly cold. And back if you wish to keep it handy, you can fry your egg on the morning newspaper. With a gadget like this, you can get up in the morning, sit on the stove, read the morning newspaper, and fry the eggs in your lap. Another example of the fact that physical forces can be quite selective

This building is about to be destroyed in what is called a controlled demolition. The initial charges are spaced about one second apart, and you can see that each section begins falling separately. Successful demolitions require that all structural support columns collapse at virtually the same time. If they don't or if something else goes wrong, the result will look something like this. This is World Trade Center 7 just before it collapsed on 09/11/2001. It had not been hit by an aircraft. It had been damaged by falling debris and fire. Yet the Federal Emergency Management Agency reported that the collapse was due primarily to fire. As at July 2007, there is no final report on the collapse of World Trade Center 7, but the National Institute of Standards and Technology still rules out a controlled demolition.

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.

This is an orange. This is called visual identification based on experience. This building is about to be destroyed in what is called a controlled demolition. Here is another example of a controlled demolition. The initial charges are spaced about one second apart, and you can see that each section begins falling separately. Successful demolitions require that all structural support columns collapse at virtually the same time. If they don't or if something else goes wrong, the result will look something like this. This is World Trade Center 7 just before it collapsed collapsed on 09/11/2001. It had not been hit by an aircraft. It had been damaged by falling debris and fire.

The speakers discuss the difficulty of considering alternative explanations to a prevailing narrative about a terrorist attack. They suggest that, in any ultimate scenario or alternative explanation, people are reluctant to contemplate other possibilities, and this reluctance blocks further inquiry. The conversation shifts to the idea that if the mainstream account isn’t correct—if it weren’t the crazy Islamic terrorists who had this plot that brought down the buildings—then what did happen? Speaker 0 notes that they would want to talk to experts such as structural engineers, architects, and firefighters, who “know what they're talking about.” However, these professionals do not believe the narrative at all. They reportedly lay out convincing evidence for why the narrative should not be believed, proposing explosives as an alternative explanation. The claimed evidence cited includes “explosions,” specifically “thermite, military grade, nanoparticle thermite,” and various forms of evidence such as “unexploded fragments of it” and references to “thermite and iron globules.” The discussion then turns to the question of who would have placed explosives in the buildings. Speaker 0 highlights that “nobody literally, virtually no one wants to go down that path.” The suggested question—“who would have placed explosives in those buildings?”—is described as unthinkable. The speakers acknowledge that the unthinkability functions as a defense that prevents people from asking the questions that they consider “so pressing.” The exchange ends with Speaker 0 restating the idea that the question of explosives remains a controversial or avoided line of inquiry.

We found jumper cables and pulverized cast aluminum in the vehicle. It's puzzling how the grass fire didn't come from this direction, as nothing here is burned. The construction remains half-burned, including the standing lasers, which suggests the use of direct energy weapons. Even the wood fence below is intact. It seems like a testing site for Project Blue Beam.

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 discusses the discovery of pools of molten metal in the rubble of the World Trade Center buildings after the 9/11 attacks. They mention that the molten steel was found weeks later during the removal process, including underneath World Trade Center 7. The speaker questions the lack of mention of this evidence in official reports and suggests that thermite, a substance that can cut through steel, may have been involved. Thermite produces molten iron and aluminum oxide as byproducts.

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.

We have the video tapes. The firefighters report reporting molten metal like a slurry or a steel mill or a volcano. Those are quotes, giant pools. What about the pictures of them dragging oxygen hoses all over the steaming supposed hot metal? If it were that hot, you wouldn't dare do that, would you? Well, you have the infrared photos of the molten metal. Well, again, what what melted the metal? Was it heat? During the cleanup, nobody reported seeing melted steel in these core columns. So we don't know when and where the they were actually destroyed. There are about 10,000 file cabinets that are missing. There's about 20,000 floor trusses and two twenty acres of metal decking that's missing. The question is, where did it go? Within seconds, the fiery concoction eats through the bonnet, spraying molten thermite into the engine beneath.

The materials examined were advanced, seemingly extraterrestrial, and capable of disintegrating into dust within minutes to prevent reverse engineering. Under microscopic analysis, they displayed small particles that communicated with each other. These intelligent materials could reconfigure themselves and blend into their environment. The NGO studied broken samples, which attempted to reassemble when separated. In one experiment, a sample placed on a hot surface cooled its surroundings and lost mass when weighed afterward. These materials exhibited computational functionality, indicating they were significantly more advanced than current human technology, potentially by hundreds of years.

Unreacted thermitic material, in the shape of tiny red/gray chips, was found. The reaction produces molten iron, indicating a thermitic reaction that can destroy steel structures. This is a modern version of thermite, called nanothermite, produced through a bottom-up procedure at the atom scale, a process used in nanotechnology.

Thermite devices purportedly exist for building demolitions and can be found via Google search. Thermite cutting charges are quieter than RDX explosives, using thermal heating to melt steel. Infrared overflights detected 1,400-degree Fahrenheit hotspots at ground zero for a week. Thermite could explain why fires at ground zero couldn't be extinguished, as they burned deep within the pile in oxygen-starved environments. Thermite contains its own oxygen within the metallic oxide, allowing the incendiary reaction to occur even underwater.

The speaker claims that the outer columns of the World Trade Center buildings were designed like a fishnet with substantial inner core columns, over-engineered to withstand loads. They state that no steel frame building had ever collapsed before or since 9/11. The speaker contrasts the progressive collapse of the Twin Towers with the uniform collapse of building 7, arguing that for a building to collapse uniformly, all load-bearing columns would have to fail simultaneously, which fire cannot do. They suggest the collapse resembled controlled demolition. The speaker mentions the discovery of "fermetic material," an explosive incendiary, in the dust samples. They also point to elevator renovations prior to the attack, and the elevator company's alleged refusal to assist on the day of the attack. The speaker felt threatened when trying to get a new investigation. They cite suppressed testimonies from firefighters regarding explosions in the building.

The conversation centers on a controversial, conspiratorial claim that Charlie Kirk’s death was not caused by a rifle shot but by an exploding lavalier microphone containing a shaped charge, a military-style operation allegedly planned and executed with broad involvement and cover-up elements. Key points and assertions heard in the exchange: - The speakers reject the official narrative of a lone shooter, Tyler Robinson, and insist Charlie Kirk was killed by an exploding microphone rather than a 30-06 rifle shot. They describe the supposed weapon as a Rode lavalier microphone whose battery and circuit board were propelled by an internal shaped charge, causing a neck wound and brain damage. - They argue that evidence at the scene—shrapnel, the microphone’s shattered front, a battery and circuit board ejecting from the wound, and a distinctive neck injury pattern—cannot be reconciled with a rifle entry wound. They claim blood on the scene came from Charlie Kirk’s brain, not from the heart or circulatory system, and that the blood’s appearance and pooling indicate immediate brain trauma rather than post-injury bleeding. - There is repeated emphasis on the “shirt deformation,” necklace snapping, and the presence of gas/plume around the collar as indications of a gas-expulsion event consistent with a high-energy explosion near the microphone, not a ballistic impact. - John Bray (Speaker 1) provides technical demonstrations and plans to reproduce the neck wound and shirt deformation via simulations and physical reconstructions. He discusses mapping movement with AI to show that the most intense movement centers around the microphone, and he argues that only a high-energy explosive could generate the observed energy transfer and rapid tissue response. - Bray describes reconstructing the microphone internals in CAD, evaluating the possibility of a shaped charge, and reconfiguring the microphone case to fit a charge without compromising microphone function. He mentions needing access to high-energy explosives and discusses potential sources, such as oil-and-gas fracture practices that employ shaped charges. - The discussion includes descriptions of how the battery and circuit board allegedly exited the neck wound, and how the neck wound’s rectangular shape and delayed bleeding could be explained by a blunt-force impact from a blast, with the battery briefly plugging the wound before exiting. - Bray asserts that the presence of shrapnel from the microphone in the SUV and on clothing, plus the trajectory of a magnetic clasp across the body, supports a single-source energy event around the microphone rather than a rifle shot. He claims the trajectory and timing make rifle-based explanations untenable. - The host and Bray discuss the roles of various people connected to Turning Point USA and alleged participants in a larger conspiracy. They mention Fort Huachuca and UVU as places linked to pre-event planning, and reference meetings and conversations involving high-profile figures and politicians. - There is extensive talk about the public reception and challenges to their theory, including the difficulty of reproducing the exact trauma and wound dynamics, and the claim that mainstream or official narratives suppress or ignore the “truth” they see in the evidence. - Bray mentions ongoing work to replicate the neck wound within about 30 days and notes that reproducing the full explosive event is more complex, requiring careful selection and sourcing of appropriate high-energy materials. He emphasizes that even without replicating the exact explosion, reproducing the neck wound and shirt movement would be strong evidence against the rifle narrative. - The discussion veers into related political and media insinuations, including references to Epstein, the “pedophile cabal,” and Trump as an FBI informant, which are used to reinforce a sense of systemic conspiracy and media distrust. They propose public-facing dissemination of their findings and invite support, including promoting Bray’s work and related self-sufficiency projects. - Toward the end, the speakers discuss the possibility that Tyler Robinson may have been recruited or used as a patsy, with Bray suggesting he might have been promised online notoriety or other incentives, while insisting that Robinson is not the sole killer and that the microphone theory better accounts for the observed evidence. Overall, the transcript presents a tightly woven narrative that disputes the official account of Charlie Kirk’s death, contending that a high-energy explosive integrated into a microphone caused the fatal injury and that the visible physical effects—shirt movement, neck wound, collar gas, shrapnel, and blood patterns—are inconsistent with a gunshot wound. It foregrounds technical schematics, CAD reconstructions, and AI-based motion analysis as the basis for proving the claim, while describing a broader, conspiratorial project to expose a supposed government-orchestrated cover-up.

According to speakers, deep within the wreckage of the World Trade Center, they observed what appeared to be molten lava or molten steel. One speaker described it as bright orange and moving like a volcano eruption. Another speaker stated they saw pockets of molten steel while searching for bodies and witnessed molten steel running down channel rails, resembling a foundry. Beams were reportedly melted due to intense fires, with molten steel being dug out. Molten metal was also said to have dripped down the sides of a wall from Building 6. These molten areas allegedly remained hot for days.

We discovered unreacted thermitic material in tiny red-gray chips that can produce molten iron, indicating a thermitic reaction capable of destroying steel structures. Testing these chips in a calorimeter would reveal their energy output. The rapid energy release from the chips closely resembles known nanothermite produced by a military lab, but with a higher energy release. This suggests the chips are highly energetic and potentially explosive.

In the dust, unreacted thermitic material was found in the shape of tiny red-grey chips. In the reaction, these chips produce molten iron, which is the prime indication of a thermitic reaction, and such a reaction can be used to destroy steel structures. A modern version of thermite was identified, described as nanothermite, which is produced not by simply mixing two powders but is built from the atom scale up, a “bottom up procedure” akin to nanotechnology. The ingredients are much smaller, causing the materials to react faster and ignite more easily. The primary elements in the red material are aluminum, iron oxide, silicon, and carbon. The iron oxide appears in fasted grains approximately 100 nanometers across, and the aluminum appears in thin platelets about 40 nanometers thick. This is described in their paper in the Open Chemical Physics Journal published in April 2009. They note that so far none of these papers have been refuted in the scientific literature, and they claim these papers stand as an indictment of the official story of nine eleven. Speaker 2 adds that they also examined paint that had come off the WTC steel, using SEM and a compositional analysis, and found that it was not similar to the red-grey chip or to the red layer of the red-grey chips. They assert that this cannot be paint, because paint does not have these exotic properties. Speaker 1 concludes that this material is of military use and that it really shouldn’t be there.

There were claims of molten steel at Ground Zero, but no eyewitnesses or evidence support this. However, some firefighters reported seeing molten metal underground and steel coming out red during cleanup. One firefighter found a river of steel flowing from a block of concrete at the B1 level.

In the video, the speakers discuss the discovery of unreacted thermitic material in the form of small red-gray chips. They explain that this material can be used to destroy steel structures, as it produces molten iron when ignited. Speaker 2 suggests testing the energy output of these chips in a calorimeter, as they believe they are highly energetic. Speaker 1 mentions that their experiments showed a rapid release of energy, resulting in a narrow spike on the machine. They compare this spike to the energy released by known nanothermite, finding that the red-gray chips had a higher energy output.