reSee.it - Related Video Feed

According to Speaker 1, the intelligence agencies hid the fact that Bin Laden was in Iran, not Afghanistan or Pakistan, to justify military action in the Middle East. This manipulation started under Clinton and continued under Bush Jr. Speaker 1 claims that intelligence agencies have tentacles around the world and don't answer to anyone, which is a problem for Trump. Speaker 1 alleges that they were targeted after questioning 9/11, resulting in an FBI raid on their daughter's house weeks before an election, which they believe was politically motivated to remove them from office. No charges were ever filed against the daughter, and boxes taken were returned unopened months later. Speaker 1 claims that the person who ran the campaign against them was managed by the staff director of Sandy Berger's company. Speaker 1 asserts that some individuals within intelligence agencies are making money from conflicts and vows to expose them.

The speaker claims a confiscated FBI video from 9/11 has surfaced, proving a scud missile, not a plane, hit the target. They allege that for twenty years, communities have suspected a missile strike, but witnesses were silenced, and the FBI concealed the video evidence. The speaker asserts the video clearly shows a scud missile, not a plane, and accuses a "deep steak cabal" of orchestrating the event and promoting a false narrative in the 9/11 report, which stated the plane disintegrated. They believe the missile targeted a specific marking, which was ignored, and that the public bought into the lie.

The speaker discusses various controversies surrounding the 9/11 attacks. They mention how the 9/11 Commission answered questions from the public but failed to address those from the victims' families. They also highlight the destruction of important data by organizations like the DIA and SEC, and the secrecy surrounding investigations by the NIST and FBI. The speaker questions the credibility of a supposed informant and criticizes the media for presenting a one-sided narrative. They warn that anyone doubting the official story will be labeled a conspiracy theorist. The transcript ends abruptly, leaving some points unresolved.

"In the morning of 09/11/2001, 19 men armed with box cutters directed by a man on dialysis in a cave fortress halfway around the world using a satellite phone and a laptop directed the most sophisticated penetration of the most heavily defended airspace in the world." "Osama bin Laden." "NIST has classified the data that they used for their model of WTC seven's collapse." "This man never existed nor is anything he had to say worthy of your attention." "They dumped his body in the ocean before telling anyone about it." "The rescue of Jessica Lynch." "This is the story of nine eleven brought to you by the media which told you the hard truths about"

A recently discovered video allegedly shows that the object that hit the World Trade Center on 9/11 was not a plane, but a Scud missile. The video was confiscated by the FBI, who concealed this information. The speaker accuses the government of being part of a cabal and claims that this video is the final piece of evidence contradicting the official 9/11 report. They mention a Swedish satellite that detected a different target, suggesting a cover-up. The speaker expresses frustration and accuses others of believing the lie.

The speaker believes Trump is in danger and claims two of his friends died of fast-moving cancer, possibly induced by the agency, a method he alleges is used overseas. He says one friend was threatened by someone connected to the CIA for helping him. He asserts that in 1997, he focused on asymmetric threats, including drones, cyberattacks, EMP, and cognitive warfare, but now intelligence agencies feign ignorance about cognitive warfare, calling it Havana Syndrome. He calls for a presidential commission on 9/11 to hold people accountable and declassify government actions, starting with the Kennedy assassination. He claims to have information, including firefighter tapes and architect/engineer testimonies, ready for a new investigation. He alleges that two 9/11 hijackers were CIA employees and that intelligence was intentionally blocked from reaching the Justice Department. He also claims the 9/11 Commission report is "garbage." He says Qaddafi wanted to unite Africa economically and base it on the gold standard, which led to his assassination. He believes 9/11 was not just the work of hijackers and that the US could have stopped it, referencing Louis Freeh's claims of an incomplete investigation. He says the 9/11 Commission wouldn't let him testify because they knew what he would say: "we caused this."

The first participant asks the second to identify who did each major event. For MLK Jr., the second participant says, “That was a CI operation because they considered him a dangerous communist. And but the FBI was bugging the, in churches where he was giving some of his speeches in churches. They were bugging the podiums and following him around. He was a top target, for elimination.” For JFK, the second participant states, “I think that was a CI hit. They they may have employed some mafia connections to carry it out because that was their mafia assassination program.” Concerning LBJ, the first participant notes, “LBJ was very involved in all that in Dallas. So,” and the second participant adds, “he an evil man.” The first participant affirms, “He was an evil man.” Turning to Pearl Harbor, the second participant claims, “They knew the attack was coming was coming. They knew where it was gonna happen in Pearl Harbor and when. And they they told no one, and they let it happen on purpose. That that's from the commander of the Pacific Fleet. I would say that's a pretty pretty credible witness.” He continues, “So, yeah, that that was a false admitted that. They admitted they had the and they heard it was gonna happen. And, you how know, else were you gonna get Americans to be on the side of this war that had nothing to do with us?” This leads to the discussion of 9/11. The second participant says, “My opinion. As a criminal investigator, as a former CI officer, nine eleven was not the act of a bunch of poorly flight trained terrorists that executed an unbelievably meticulous, piloting of those aircraft, even even pilots. There's there's pilots for nine eleven truth now, and they say, we could not have done that. Not possible.” He adds, “And then we go to the passport issue, and we go to the Tower 7, which was a controlled demolition.” The second participant further asserts, “You talk to any structural engineer, and and and I I have. And the fact I think George w Bush blacked out. I think it was 40 pages of the 09/11 report dealing with Saudi Arabia. So what wait a minute. This report was supposed to be for the American people on what happened, and you blacked all these pages out? What in the world?” He continues, “I do not think that it was a bunch of un poorly trained or untrained terrorists that did it. I think there was another source behind it. I think it was intentional, and I'm going just from a a criminal invest investigative perspective just looking at the evidence, what evidence we have, that that was an intentional act, And it would fall right into the MO that you and I are talking about.” He concludes that the event was “Horrible” and emphasizes that “the shadow government deep state or especially the CIA. It does not matter. Their pawns on their chessboard, they don't care that three thousand people were horribly killed that day, but it achieved the aim of gutting the US constitution, bringing in the horrific Patriot Act Mhmm. Giving the CIA unthinkable authority for secret prison prisons and torture beyond waterboarding and and secret renditions and all of that, the FBI, the ability to to, spy on Americans came out of the Patriot Act. So it was the perfect national security state, energizer that the Patriot Act was, and 70 of the congressmen and senators that read the Patriot Act didn't even read it. They just signed off on it without even reading the bill.”

The central question is, 'was there foreknowledge?' The speaker notes 'there were huge bets put in the public financial markets against shorting the airlines involved in nine eleven and the banks and the buildings that were collapsed.' The FBI 'found out who made those trades and has hidden the names for twenty four years.' He argues the investigation should be real: 'The first one by Philip Zellico was fake, and he was basically just a cutout for Condie Rice, the former National Security Advisor.' He advocates 'a new commission, a real one,' because 'America was changed completely by that day.' He calls for action: 'we're gonna actually chain ourselves to the gates of the FBI until you tell us this.' He says it's 'the most second most important thing that happened' after 'killing president Kennedy,' noting a cover-up and possible foreign involvement, though not conclusive.

Speaker 0 (anonymous whistleblower): Government seems to be involved. They’re definitely some kind of nonhuman sentience. We’ve recovered the vehicles and have physical proof. I was partially cleared into those activities and had access to the data, reading intelligence reports resulting from those programs. Speaker 1: And with your own eyes you’ve seen it. So when people say this is kooky, there’s nothing to back it up… Speaker 2 (NASA): NASA is open and transparent with our data. Do you believe what Mister David Crush said, or is he lying? Whatever he said, where’s the evidence? Speaker 1: What do you say? Speaker 0: Members of this administration are very aware of this reality; the current president is very knowledgeable on this subject, and I trust his leadership. I think he’s assembled a cabinet, and I believe if Trump wants to be the greatest president and the most consequential leader in world history, he certainly has the knowledge, the capabilities, and understanding of some of these sensitive government transparency issues. Speaker 3: I have access and have spoken to people about it. I’ve had meetings with very smart, solid people who believe there is something out there. It makes sense there could be, but I’ve never been convinced, despite that. It’s not my thing. Speaker 1: So you think, one, he knows, and two, he’s open to transparency on UAPs? He’s very well informed on this issue. Leave it at that. I don’t want to get ahead of what the president might want to reveal. There’s been a role to cover this up through administrations. Speaker 0: I was physically threatened even before I sent in my intelligence community inspector general report under the previous administration. I had to seek legal protection because I was fearful professionally and personally. Speaker 1: And when you mention recovering pilots or remains nonhuman, that’s something you saw in the intelligence with your eyes? Speaker 0: Yes. There were pictures. It’s uncomfortable to discuss because it’s outside a normal worldview to understand there is a biological sentience that piloted these crafts and does not necessarily look 100% like us. Speaker 1: Were there pictures? Speaker 0: There were. Speaker 1: When I said from another planet or outer space, you said you don’t know where they’re from. Is it interdimensional? What are we talking about? Speaker 0: I’ve talked to a lot of graybeards about the origin. I leave an open mind. There is an extraterrestrial hypothesis, and they could be coming from elsewhere off Earth, but I didn’t see that data. I’m not conversant in the high-confidence theories the US government had. I’m not aware of any remains the department has of extraterrestrial beings or technology. Speaker 1: Do other governments know? Do they have programs? Speaker 0: They have their own programs. Two and a half years ago we’ve been in an arms race with peer competitors—Russia and China—and they have their own programs. I viewed a body of intelligence that discussed adversarial programs. Speaker 1: We’ve recovered things—bodies and physical remains. Was there a sense of their motive or whether it’s peaceful or not? We’ve seen a mixed bag of motives. Speaker 0: Activity and motive vary; the reasons for visiting are not fully understood. Could it be because we have interesting genetic material on Earth and we’re a Jurassic Park tourist attraction? There could be a myriad of reasons. Speaker 1: For other people coming forward, what do you say about intimidation? There are reports of harassment. There’s hope. Congress values whistleblower information now, and there’s appetite to do the right thing. There are things happening behind the scenes that the administration may discuss when ready. Speaker 1: We’ll follow every element. It’s fascinating. Speaker 0: Thanks for having me. Speaker 4: Sean Hannity here. Subscribe to Fox News YouTube pay.

The discussion centers on allegations that the nine/eleven commission has been obstructed in its ability to access full information from the White House, particularly regarding what the President knew and when he knew it about the September 11 attacks. The first speaker asserts that President Bush personally nixed the commission’s access to crucial documents in the White House, especially the presidential daily briefs. According to this speaker, these briefs “basically tell[ the] commission and the American people what the President knew and when he knew it in regard to the potential attack on nineeleven and the attack itself and the follow-up.” The claim is that the White House has “personally nixed that information coming to nineeleven,” meaning all members of the commission would not see the real, sensitive documents. The speaker characterizes the White House’s actions as a cover-up and describes it as slow-walking the process from the beginning, implying deliberate obstruction. The second speaker describes the commission as an independent body intended to examine why and how the 9/11 attacks occurred, what the President and the government knew, and when they knew it. When asked why the White House would not permit access to the documents, this speaker characterizes the White House as resisting greater scrutiny: “They don't want any more eyeballs to see their documents than they could possibly get away with. It's a scam. It's absolutely disgusting.” This speaker’s framing suggests an intentional effort by the White House to limit oversight and information flow. The third speaker adds a critical evaluation of the commission’s setup, stating that “the commission in many ways was set up to fail because we had, not enough money. We didn't have enough time.” This indicates a belief that structural constraints undermined the commission’s effectiveness and its ability to fulfill its independent mandate. Across the statements, the overarching claim is that there was deliberate resistance by the White House to provide the commission with full access to key documents, notably the presidential daily briefs, thereby impeding the commission’s ability to comprehensively determine what the government knew about the threats prior to and following the attacks. The speakers collectively portray a pattern of obstruction, cover-up, and insufficient resources that hampered the commission’s work.

"President Bush personally has nixed the effort of the nineeleven commission to get all the documents in the White House, especially the presidential daily briefs, which basically tell the commission and the American people what the President knew and when he knew it in regard to the potential attack on nineeleven and the attack itself in the follow-up." "He has personally nixed that information coming to nineeleven." "The truth of matter is the White House has played cover up and has slow walked this this game from the beginning." "It's a scam. It's absolutely disgusting." "We're an independent commission for an independent operational look at why nine eleven happened, what happened there, when the what the president and the government knew, and when they knew it." "We think the commission in many ways was set up to fail because we had, not enough money. We didn't have enough time."

The speaker claims that the witnesses who had a tape showing a Scud missile were silenced and the FBI concealed this information. They believe that the 9/11 report was a lie and that the Swedish satellite footage showing a market target was ignored. The speaker expresses frustration and calls for truth to prevail.

Speaker argues that all theories about 9/11 hinge on foreknowledge. "huge bets put in the public financial markets against shorting the airlines involved in nine eleven and the banks and the buildings that were collapsed." The "FBI found out who made those trades and has hidden the names for twenty four years." They sought a real investigation, noting "the first one by Philip Zellico was fake, and he was basically just a cutout for Condie Rice, the former National Security Advisor." He advocates action: "we're gonna actually chain ourselves to the gates of the FBI until you tell us this." He calls 9/11 "the second most important thing that happened, in my opinion, in American history first was killing president Kennedy." He adds, "there may have been foreign involvement, very likely foreign involvement in that. I can't say conclusively, but I think that's true." "America was changed completely by that day."

Speaker 0 admits to never believing that the CIA killed Kennedy. Speaker 1 claims to have read the entire JFK file, including the secret information and the 7 pages of the 911 report. Speaker 0 warns against sharing what they have seen, as they could be bribed. Speaker 1 mentions being bribed in Texas. Speaker 0 introduces themselves as Cash and mentions JFK and UFOs.

The speaker discusses the efforts to hide information from Congress and the public, suggesting that it is driven by power, corruption, and money. They highlight the Pentagon's failed audits and unaccounted assets, questioning why they are rewarded with more funding. The speaker suggests that defense contractors and multinational corporations have control over politicians through various means. They also discuss the government's knowledge of intelligent life and unidentified crafts, criticizing their lies and lack of transparency. The speaker mentions the possibility of hidden programs and expresses mistrust in the government. Overall, they emphasize the need for truthful information and the public's skepticism towards the government.

The speaker, Ted Gunderson, is a retired FBI agent with an extensive career. He claims to have handled various assignments, including counter espionage and counterterrorism. He believes there were cover-ups in cases like the Oklahoma City bombing and the assassinations of Jack Kennedy and Bobby Kennedy. Gunderson also questions the official narrative of the 9/11 attacks, stating that the government had advanced knowledge. He suggests that the World Trade Center towers were imploded and raises suspicions about government involvement. Additionally, he discusses his involvement in investigating satanic cults, child trafficking, and international child kidnapping rings, claiming that the FBI has ignored his evidence.

On September 11, 2001, 19 hijackers carried out attacks in the U.S. The official narrative blames Osama bin Laden, but many inconsistencies and cover-ups exist. The 9/11 Commission failed to address key questions, and government agencies destroyed evidence. The media pushes the official story and discredits any skepticism. The truth remains obscured, and dissent is discouraged. This message is sponsored by various government agencies and the mainstream media.

The speaker claims that a year before 9/11, they identified every Al Qaeda cell, including the New York cell, but the Able Danger team was stopped from sharing this information with the FBI three times. They assert that former FBI Director Louie Free stated this information could have prevented 9/11. They also allege that after criticizing the agency, the Pentagon's inspector general, John Crane, filed a whistleblower paper claiming he was told to lie to Congress. The speaker calls the 9/11 Commission a "cover-up," led by Philip Zelikow, who was allegedly handpicked by Condoleezza Rice. They claim Zelikow shut down Tony Schaeffer's office and tried to destroy his career after Schaeffer met with him in Afghanistan and had information about 9/11 in advance. The speaker states that the government bought and destroyed all copies of Schaeffer's book, "Dark Heart," because it named Zelikow. They also claim that the intelligence they received as vice chairman of a committee was not solid, and they formed a network of intelligence agency insiders who fed them raw data. They allege that intelligence agencies manipulate the media and play games with Congress. The speaker believes that some individuals within these agencies have become wealthy through their positions. They claim that after speaking out, the FBI raided their daughter's house, leading to their electoral defeat. They felt responsible for 9/11 because they knew it could have been prevented.

Checklist for summary approach: - Identify the central thesis and each major supporting claim presented. - Retain the core facts, assertions, and conclusions verbatim as they appear, avoiding interpretation. - Emphasize unique or surprising elements (e.g., specific alleged identifiers, dates, documents, and individuals linked to the claims). - Exclude repetitive passages, filler, and off-topic tangents; compress dialogues into concise narrative statements. - Translate none (English transcript) and avoid adding evaluative judgments about truth or falsity. - Keep the total word count within the 805–1007 word range. The video presents a broad, interconnected set of claims asserting that the official 9/11 narrative is a conspiracy orchestrated largely by Israeli intelligence and allied actors, with far-reaching consequences for U.S. policy and global affairs. It weaves together allegations about Osama bin Laden, Mossad, high-level politicians, media, and geopolitical design to argue that 9/11 was used to justify wars, reshape the Middle East, and advance a “Greater Israel” project. Key claims about Osama bin Laden and the 9/11 narrative - The official narrative of nine/eleven is described as a conspiracy theory. Vice President Dick Cheney is cited as admitting in 2006 that there was no evidence linking Osama bin Laden to 9/11, and that “nobody has evidence to support the official narrative.” - The speakers insist that Osama bin Laden’s involvement was never proven; they deny having evidence tying him to the attacks and critique a 2001 video in which Osama purportedly accepts responsibility, arguing visual discrepancies (nose shape, weight, jewelry, and the sign­ing hand) suggest fabrication. - The FBI’s Osama bin Laden “most wanted” poster allegedly contains no reference to September 11 charges, and Rex Toome of the muckraker group claims there is no hard evidence linking Bin Laden to the attacks. A federal judge is later described as approving the dismissal of all criminal charges against Bin Laden. Iscursion into the 9/11 event and alleged foreknowledge - The program claims Mossad warned the U.S. about a major attack before 9/11, citing an officer and reports of Mossad representatives in the U.S. prior to the event. - It recounts the arrest of five Israelis in New Jersey who were filming and celebrating the first tower’s destruction; they allegedly worked for Mossad-front Urban Moving Systems, and some workers were identified as Mossad agents. The group’s activity is described as part of an intelligence-gathering operation, with later confirmation by CIA and FBI figures that some of the men had Mossad ties. - The narrative asserts that Israelis had advanced knowledge and provided specific warnings; it cites Benjamin Netanyahu’s pre- and post-9/11 statements, as well as quotes that militant Islam would bring down the World Trade Center, and claims Netanyahu and Trump authored works predicting or discussing such attacks long before 9/11. - It alleges that the anthrax letters connected to the 9/11 aftermath involved Israeli operatives, including four Israelis living next to the man connected with the Florida letters, and that the letters contained anti-Israel death-language, while the FBI later attributed the letters to an American scientist with pro-Israel affiliations. Political figures, neoconservatism, and the drive to war - The program argues that Netanyahu and various neoconservatives (as named in the discussion) planned and advocated for a broader U.S. war agenda as early as the late 1990s, including regime change in Iraq and broader Middle East interventions, with explicit ties made to the Project for the New American Century and its 1998 “Bombing Iraq isn’t enough” framing. - It features claims about dual loyalty and Jewish influence, asserting that many leading policymakers and pundits involved in U.S. foreign policy are Jewish and that this shaped policy toward Israel’s benefits, including the claim that Israel influenced or controlled aspects of U.S. policy toward Iraq and Iran. - The “Greater Israel” concept is linked to the Oded Yinon plan, Herzl’s writings, and the idea of reorganizing the region by breaking up Arab states, with oil interests cited as a motivation. Genie's Energy and a network including Rothschild family ties are invoked to claim Israeli ownership or control of oil resources in Iraq, Syria, and the Golan Heights, framing these as strategic outcomes of the 9/11 era. - Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump are described as deeply connected to Jewish finance and Israeli influence, with Jared Kushner’s role as a peace broker framed within a broader context of empire-building for Israeli interests. Oil, geopolitics, and the aftermath of regime change - The narrative asserts that post-9/11 interventions aimed to destabilize Iraq and Syria to access oil and realign regional power, portraying sanctions, occupation, and regime-change policy as instruments serving Israeli strategic aims. - It ties Kurdish independence movements and oil deals to Israeli and Western interests, alleging long-standing ties between Netanyahu and Kurdish leaders, with Kurdish autonomy seen as a strategic jab at Arab states. - The program describes Iran as a major target for destabilization, arguing that Israel seeks to partition Syria and Iraq into smaller, pro-Israel states, and presents discussions about a balkanized Middle East as strategic policy. Other claims and incidents linked to the broader thesis - The USS Liberty attack of 1967 is presented as a confirmed Israeli attack against an American ship, with survivors alleging intentional action, cover-up, and political complicity. - The Patriot Act is connected to Mossad through individuals connected to the act’s authorship and implementation, with claims about dual loyalties within U.S. security apparatuses and adjacent networks. - The program asserts that mainstream media and major financial backers (including Adelson and Rothschilds) have funded political figures who advance Israeli interests, and that American policy toward gun control and censorship efforts is influenced by these dynamics. - A closing emphasis recaps the asserted pattern: 9/11 as a false flag to justify wars, the rise of a Greater Israel project, and the ongoing manipulation of U.S. foreign policy by a network of Israeli political and economic power brokers, with Trump’s administration continuing these aims. The documentary concludes by urging viewers to share the information and become more active in challenging what it characterizes as a coordinated, pro-Israel manipulation of Western policy. It repeatedly circles back to the central claim: nine/eleven was a Mossad operation designed to destabilize the Middle East, empower Israeli geopolitical aims, and reshape global power structures through war and regime change.

Speaker 1 discusses his involvement in 9/11-related inquiries after receiving concerns from families. He emphasizes the role of whistleblowers who fear disclosure of anonymity, noting that while his office is good at protecting identities, not every congressional office is. He credits investigative reporters for bringing information forward and explains that his involvement began when nine/eleven families approached him with a heavily redacted FBI report on Saudi involvement, asking for it to be unredacted. He mentions that Richard Blumenthal is the chairman of PSI in the last Congress and that the inquiry extended to topics like the PGA Tour’s deal with Live Golf and Saudi Arabia, but that those are private matters not to be intruded upon. He says, however, that due to the redacted FBI document about Saudi involvement, he started gathering information and is currently in a position to review it, with an invitation to the audience to share information, though with the expectation that information will be debunked by his staff. He notes his own background from Oshkosh, Wisconsin, and that he initially accepted the prevailing narrative about 9/11 but began receiving information from sources that challenged it, leading him to pursue a more open investigation. He stresses that his staff’s primary goal is to obtain information and debunk it, to poke holes in the claims, and that he does not want to avoid discussing the topic. He acknowledges there are many legitimate questions that he is willing to ask, starting with World Trade Center 7, a building he had not heard of before. He asks why it is so difficult to discuss these topics and why legitimate questions seem to be quashed, suggesting there is something unexplained that has not been disclosed. He mentions public reception, including hostile comments online, and notes that many Americans had never heard of World Trade Center 7. Speaker 1 describes the scene surrounding WTC7, including a BBC reporter on air describing its collapse while the building still appears to be standing behind her. He points to a video that appears to show a single perspective of the event and references a later interview with a controlled demolition expert who asserted it was controlled demolition, though this assertion predates the event. He emphasizes that the building collapsed on September 11, and there are unanswered questions. He recounts Graham McQueen’s investigation before his death, who compiled approximately 150 documented recordings from first responders and reporters on the morning of 9/11 who said they heard explosions. He states that the 9/11 Commission and NIST did not discuss these explosions. He mentions Barry Jennings, who was in Building 7, who had to evacuate, but could not gather because the stairwell between the 6th and 8th floors had been blown out.

Former Congressman Kurt Weldon discusses his views on 9/11, claiming the official narrative is a "cover-up." He says that prior to 9/11, he advocated for a fusion center to share intelligence, but the CIA resisted. Weldon states that the Able Danger team identified Al Qaeda cells, including the New York cell, before 9/11, but were blocked from sharing this with the FBI. He claims former FBI Director Louie Free said this information could have prevented 9/11. Weldon alleges that Philip Zelikow, head of the 9/11 Commission, was part of the cover-up and that the US government hid the fact that they could have prevented 9/11. He says that after 9/11, he learned Bin Laden was in Iran, not Afghanistan, and that multiple sources confirmed this. Weldon believes the Bush administration hid this because they wanted justification to invade Afghanistan and Iraq. Weldon recounts how the FBI raided his daughter's house in 2006, which he believes was politically motivated to remove him from Congress. He also claims that two 9/11 hijackers were working for the CIA. Weldon says the 9/11 Commission refused to let him testify. He believes Building 7's collapse was a controlled demolition and that firefighters heard explosions at the World Trade Center. He calls for a new presidential commission to investigate 9/11.

Speaker 0: Alleging not simply a cover up by the US government, but by the entire American media. It's totally implausible. Like, we would report that if that were true. Building 7 was not hit by an airplane. Speaker 3: That's seen Building 7 collapse, the Sallon Brothers building? No. I wanna show you that right now. Speaker 4: Now here, we're gonna show you a videotape of the collapse itself. Describe that feeling. Now we go to videotape the collapse of this building. It's amazing. Amazing. Speaker 3: I t's reminiscent of those pictures we've all seen too much on television before when a building was deliberately store destroyed by well placed dynamite to knock it down. No plane hit that building. Speaker 6: Well, it starts with Building 7. Yes. Where you look at that and it just yeah. I mean, this this is really weird. You know, it it does come down just like a, you know, building demolition type of project. When you start putting together at what temperature steel melts. They had molten steel in the twin towers, and I'm not sure we had a number seven. Speaker 0: I never questioned anything about nine eleven, and I actively attacked people who did. I'm ashamed of that, but that's a fact. Speaker 6: And, of course, the Overton window is is is is about this is what you can discuss without threat or without, you know, risk. And but you gotta go beyond that. Speaker 0: What began to make me wonder, I have no idea what happened in 09/11, but it's very clear that there's a lot of lying around it, was the collapse of Building 7. Speaker 0: because I was part of the cover up, and I feel guilty about it. That's why. And I'm trying to atone for my previous sense. That's the real reason. Speaker 0: I did it on tape more than once because my feeling was, well, you know, like, that's divisive or whatever. I was a child and an idiot.

Former Congressman Kurt Weldon discusses his views on 9/11, claiming the official report is a "cover-up." He says that prior to 9/11, he advocated for a fusion center for intelligence, but the CIA resisted. Weldon claims the Able Danger team identified Al Qaeda cells, including the New York cell, before 9/11, but the FBI blocked them from sharing this information. He says former FBI Director Louie Free believed this information could have prevented 9/11. Weldon alleges that after 9/11, he learned Bin Laden was in Iran, not Afghanistan, and that the Bush administration hid this fact. He says elements within the U.S. government worked to conceal their ability to prevent 9/11. Weldon states that Philip Zelikow, head of the 9/11 Commission, was part of the cover-up. He recounts how the FBI raided his daughter's house, which he believes was politically motivated to derail his career after he began questioning the official 9/11 narrative. Weldon also discusses Building 7, stating it looked like a controlled demolition. He mentions a firefighter who reported being on the 78th floor of one of the towers and said they could handle the fires shortly before the building collapsed. He calls for a new presidential commission to investigate 9/11.

It seems odd that many people in the bureaucracy with salaries of a few hundred thousand dollars somehow accrue tens of millions of dollars in net worth while in their positions. We're curious where this wealth comes from. Maybe they're good at investing, and we should seek their advice. But mysteriously, they get wealthy, and we don't know why. The reality is that they're likely getting wealthy at the taxpayer's expense, and that's the honest truth.