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."

The Second Tower, Tower Number 1, collapsed. Large pieces of the building were falling, and smoke was rising. The side of the building was covered in smoke. Disrupting the financial markets could be worse than letting them open and respond to the situation, so the exchanges may only be closed for one day. Someone may be safe at 40,000 feet at Barksdale Air Force Base in Louisiana. Building 7, a 47-story building approximately 650 feet tall, physically disintegrated. Steel disintegrated into dust, also blowing downward. If a 700-foot tall building tipped over, it would take out a few blocks worth of buildings. There are 500 pages of meticulous evidence.

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.

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.

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 outer structure of the buildings was designed with a robust steel frame, capable of withstanding significant loads. Unlike the Twin Towers, which collapsed from the top down, Building 7 fell uniformly from the bottom, indicating that all load-bearing columns failed simultaneously, which fire alone cannot explain. The collapse occurred near free-fall speed, suggesting controlled demolition. Dust samples contained incendiary materials, and extensive elevator renovations prior to the attacks allowed workers access to the building's core. On the day of the attacks, the elevator company refused to assist, later going out of business. Firefighters reported explosions, but these testimonies were suppressed, preventing a thorough investigation into the events surrounding Building 7.

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 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.

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."

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. But by 05:20PM, most of the fires have been extinguished. Although the building was 47 stories high, it doesn't fall sideways nor collapse unevenly. For this to have happened, all of the building's vertical supports must have given way at almost exactly the same time. Yet the Federal Emergency Management Agency reported that the collapse was due primarily to fire. But what does it look like to you? The National Institute of Standards and Technology still rules out a controlled demolition. So the question is, do you believe what you can see with your own eyes, or do you believe what you are told?

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 towers should have collapsed in a way where the upper and lower sections destroyed each other until all energy was gone. Instead, a small piece caused the entire structure to collapse, which goes against basic physics. Architects and engineers were surprised that this fundamental concept was ignored by NIST, leading society to question the laws of physics.

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 argues against the idea that the top 15 stories crush the 95 below. "Do you see the top 15 stories crushing the 95 stories below? No, you don't." The top block "disintegrates by itself in the first few seconds without even impacting the building below." Then "the building below begins to destroy itself." What you see are "waves of explosions ripping the building apart, pulverizing nearly all the concrete to a fine powder and ejecting the steel up to 600 feet in all directions." The final claim: "The top 15 stories couldn't do that in a pancake and collapse."

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"

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.

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.

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: 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.

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.

The discussion centers on the collapse of World Trade Center Building 7 on 9/11, which was not hit by a plane. A video clip shows the building's collapse, described as reminiscent of a controlled demolition. One speaker recalls news reports announcing the building's collapse before it happened. Another speaker, with a background in fire protection and insurance, states that a 47-story building doesn't typically collapse due to fire. One speaker admits to previously attacking 9/11 conspiracy theorists but now questions the official narrative, particularly regarding Building 7. An Alaskan structural engineering professor's four-year study allegedly debunks the NIST analysis of the collapse. Molten steel was reportedly present in the Twin Towers. The symmetrical nature of Building 7's collapse is questioned, with one speaker suggesting it resembles a controlled demolition. One speaker suggests they broadened the Overton window on the topic because they were part of the cover-up and feel guilty.