PART 5: How Skyscrapers Are Really Imploded
"...all in all, the official version of the failure of WTC 7 does not stand up to even the most elementary scrutiny. Yet with breathtaking chutzpah, NIST and the defenders of its theory continue to ask us all, paraphrasing a Chico Marx line in the movie Duck Soup, "Who are you going to believe, me or your own lying eyes?"
How would you answer?"
Read more >> http://bit.ly/NISTfraud6
Saturday, May 16th, the American Institute of Architects will hold a vote on Resolution 15-6 in Atlanta.
The American Institute of Architects (AIA) Finalized Resolution 15-6: To cause the AIA to adopt a Position Statement in support of a new investigation into the complete collapse of 7 World Trade Center on September 11, 2001.
"Thousands of members of the architecture and engineering professions, including 55 sponsors of this resolution, believe the NIST investigation did not adhere to the principles of the scientific method and as a result the conclusions of the NIST investigation are fatally flawed."
May 2, 2015 - Telephone Interview - Transcribed May 15, 2015
February 6, 2015 • Page Views: 22,654+
"This is one of those very interesting scenarios when the elephant in the room basically started going to the bathroom and no one could any longer ignore its presence, but, people kept ignoring it. It seems to be a combination of mental illness and basic fear that is causing this intentional mass ignorance of one of the most blaring and significant issues of our time. And remember, this isn't about claiming to know exactly what happened on 9/11, it is about everyone agreeing that we need a new investigation immediately and a significant amount of material needs to be declassified.
Look at this situation, the FORMER TECHNICAL DIRECTOR OF THE NSA AT THE TIME OF 9/11 IS ASKING FOR A NEW INVESTIGATION AND THE WHOLE WORLD IS IGNORING IT EXCEPT FOR A HANDFUL OF FEARLESS ALTERNATIVE MEDIA OUTLETS. A figure of his stature and position cannot be ignored. He's possibly the most credible NSA whistleblower on the planet, and he's not even wanted for detainment by the US government. Even they respect him!
"Hey Anderson (CNN) . . . what about the real story? How come buildings only fall at free fall on 9/11?"
Latest High-Rise Fire Reveals More Public Skepticism of Official 9/11 Story
By Robert McGee
A high-rise building catches fire in a major city.
All occupants are evacuated safely. Fire crews arrive and begin dousing the blaze.
Fanned by high winds, the flames spread over some 15 floors above and below the 50th floor, where the fire started from an unknown cause. Shattered glass and debris from the exterior of the building fall in fireballs to the ground.
In just over two hours, firefighters extinguish the fire, and . . . yes, the steel-framed structure remains intact.
. . .Be VERY afraid.
A short video I made utilising some of the same footage I used in my previous video about the Larry Silverstein "Controlled Demolition" quote (from the missing episode of History's Business). I also used some footage from AE9/11 Truth's 'Experts Speak Out' video and Massimo Mazzucco's film, 'September 11 - The New Pearl Harbor'. Just sharing it with everyone here. If you like it, please share it with others.
This short video combines footage of the "collapse" of WTC 7 (as well as WTC 7 eyewitness statements, news reports, etc) together with Mechanical Engineer Tony Szamboti talking about WTC 7 and his recollection of hearing Larry Silverstein say - during a 2004 episode of 'History's Business' on the History Channel - that, quote: "Building 7 was a controlled demolition".
This is not to be confused with Larry Silverstein's controversial 2002, PBS "Pull it" quote. This is something else altogether.
Tony also speaks briefly about his unsuccessful attempts to get hold of a copy of this episode of History's Business.
Please distribute this video widely (share links, make copies etc,) to bring attention to the issue of this elusive History Channel episode, and to the controlled demolition of WTC 7.
Larry Silverstein Said WTC 7 Was a Controlled Demolition? (NOT the "Pull it" quote)
Dr. Niels Harrit is professor of chemistry at the University of Copenhagen and is one of the key authors of the WTC nano-thermite paper. In this episode of 9/11Free Fall he lays out the evidence in that paper and also discusses a lawsuit he's filed in response to ridiculous attacks on him in the press. He also offers insight into the assault on intellectual freedom that arose in society as a result of the 9/11 cover-up.
We've just passed the 13th anniversary of 9/11 and now, more than ever, individuals on all sides of the 9/11 spectrum are demanding to know more about what really happened on that day. On one side you have the co-chairs of the 9/11 commission report, Lee Hamilton and Thomas Kean, who have called for the 28 classified pages of the 9/11 commission report to be released in the public eye. As more and more congressmen and senators read those pages for themselves, a growing coalition on the right and left is forming behind a bill that would declassify them for all to see. On the other side of the 9/11 spectrum you have Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth (AE911 Truth) making unprecedented ground in their cause. AE911 Truth is a major force behind the High Rise Safety Initiative, which has collected tens of thousands of signatures from New Yorkers and is currently fighting and appealing various legal battles to ensure a ballot measure will be put to the voters that would require the NYC Department of Buildings to investigate the causes of high-rise building collapses in New York City, starting with World Trade Center 7. AE911 Truth has also put up a video billboard in Times Square this month showing millions of New Yorkers the 6.7 second collapse of WTC 7 and challenging them to "Rethink 911".
But for the 9/11 truth movement, one of the most exciting events is a new documentary called Anatomy of a Great Deception. It has been getting great reviews from the 9/11 truth community and Richard Gage, founder of AE911 Truth, is calling it "the best chance in years to push the 9/11 debate into the mainstream". So what is so revolutionary about this movie? Does it have new information or new evidence? No, the hype around this documentary is not because of the evidence it presents, but the way it presents it. It's not overloaded with ten thousand questions and puzzle pieces of evidence concerning the various reasons to doubt the official story. Instead, it's a personal story, a story of how one man stumbled upon an innocent question that lead him to another question, and then to another, until months later he was on the brink of personal disaster. David Hooper is a successful businessman and entrepreneur; and in this very personal film he relates how his research destroyed his world view and almost ruined his most precious relationships with his wife, family and friends.
As Hooper describes the genesis of this film, "to preserve my sanity and save my marriage, I began assembling footage to visually relay what I had found for my wife, my sister, and a couple of dear friends. This footage turned into the documentary The Anatomy of a Great Deception." Hooper's amateur documentary succeeded to convince his family where other documentaries failed. As word of mouth spread, Hooper decided to raise money to take his film to the next level and professionally release it so that others in the 9/11 truth community could share it with the people in their lives.
Several years ago, for various reasons, I decided that I would not promote 9/11 truth in the same way that I unashamedly promote libertarianism and Austrian economics. Yet, I can't honestly describe how I've come to be the person I am today and carry the beliefs that I do without going back to 9/11. More specifically, not 9/11, but WTC 7. Like Hooper, that building shattered my world view and set me on a course of investigation that would completely transform my belief system. So in the same spirit that Hooper took when telling his story, I will tell mine. My purpose is not to try to convince anyone to accept my beliefs, I've given up on that long ago. I merely hope this will help others understand my journey.
Lee Hamilton -- Vice Chairman of the 9/11 Commission -- admits that the debate about what destroyed WTC 7 on 9/11 still continues when he's asked about it on C-SPAN's Washington Journal on September 12th, 2014.
"Truthers commemorate 9/11 with Times Square ad showing WTC 7 imploding on infinite loop"
A group calling itself Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth is commemorating the thirteenth anniversary of the attacks on the World Trade Center by displaying a massive digital advertisement in Times Square that purports to show World Trade Center 7 (WTC 7) falling in a controlled demolition.
“WTC 7 came down in a classic controlled demolition,” the advertisement claims. “The government says fire brought it down, but anyone who watches the video can see otherwise.” Behind those words, video of WTC 7 falling repeats on a loop.
The digital advertisement is 15 seconds long, and will be displayed on 45-foot by 45-foot screens that will be visible, the group claims, to almost 100,000 people daily — including employees of The New York Times.
As the anchorman for CBS News, Dan Rather was part of numerous breaking stories on the day of 9/11 and its immediate aftermath. Several of these reports have disturbing implications regarding the nature of the attacks and the perpetrators. Here are some prime examples:
"Amazing, incredible... pick your word. For the 3rd time today.... it's reminiscent of the those pictures we've all seen too much on television before where a building was deliberately destroyed by well-placed dynamite to knock it down." Dan called it like he saw it. There are now 2,300 architects and engineers who agree: www.ae911truth.org
9/11 Free Fall 8/28/14: William Binney– Former NSA Technical Director
William Binney is a former highly placed intelligence official with the United States National Security Agency (NSA) who, after more than 30 years of service, resigned in 2001 and became a whistleblower exposing the NSA’s unconstitutional programs. He is also a recent signatory of AE911Truth’s petition calling for a new investigation into the destruction of the Twin Towers and WTC 7 on 9/11. In this interview he talks about why he signed the petition, the NSA’s spying program, and offers some words of advice to the 9/11 Truth movement on how to pursue justice through official channels.
Today is Day 5 of the High-Rise Safety Initiative's Matching Gift Fundraiser.
I just contributed $500 because I believe the High-Rise Safety Initiative represents our best opportunity yet to obtain a real investigation into the events that took my son's life.
Please join me by contributing what you can. Every dollar you give will be matched by two generous donors, doubling the value of your contribution.
Visit HighRiseSafetyNYC.org to learn more and make your contribution. A little bit goes a long way when we are in this together.
My name is Bob McIlvaine. My son, Bobby, was murdered on 9/11 along with nearly 3,000 other innocent people.
I am writing you today as a member of NYC CAN to ask for your support of the High-Rise Safety Initiative - a ballot initiative we are sponsoring that will require the City of New York to launch a new investigation into the destruction of WTC 7.
To put this measure on the ballot, we need to gather 110,000 signatures, and to fund our petition drive we must raise $250,000 by June 1st.
This strategy is not guaranteed to succeed, but it is promising, and one we must try.
Our petition drive can only go forward if 3,000 people come together to support the campaign. Over 400 people have donated so far.
Will you help us reach 3,000? Please go to HighRiseSafetyNYC.org to contribute.
We are counting on you.
Did you know 2013 was a breakthrough year in our efforts to hold NIST accountable?
For years we have known that Building 7 came down in free-fall and that the NIST report failed to explain why. We knew that NIST’s collapse model looked nothing like the actual collapse, and that NIST’s “probable collapse sequence” was anything but probable.
But in 2013, NIST’s explanation went from highly improbable to absolutely impossible, thanks to the discovery that NIST deliberately omitted critical structural features from its model – features that make the supposed collapse initiation impossible. With this new discovery, we have the evidence to prove definitively that Building 7 could not have collapsed as NIST says it did.