"Curt claims that he feared for his life after the Bush administration targeted him for questioning the official 9/11 narrative.
No one has explained why or how Building Seven collapsed to this day.
They are the only high-rise buildings in the world that have come down from airplanes hitting them.
The buildings were designed to withstand such a hit.
Firefighters heard explosions inside the buildings and spoke about it on tape but many have been ostracized and feared for their lives for saying so.
We need the truth about this and so many other major events in our history.
"I think 9/11 is going to be the biggest scandal in the history of America. Once people realize they can talk and not be afraid of being killed...
You had three buildings collapse in on themselves. Implode. A lot of people, many credible noncrazy people have said, that was controlled demolition. Was it?
There is no way those two buildings could have collapsed into what they were there."
The official explanation is that debris from one of the towers (or possibly debris from the jet crash; I'm not sure which) hit bldg7 and started the fires there. The fires were just on one corner of the building so there is no way that bldg could have collapsed the way it did.
Zero planes, CGI, Lie Witness Testimony, Over the top "box cutter" hero on flip phone stories...oh, and controlled demolition, in addition to possibly thermite plasma or a mininuke in the fire suppression system.
I wasn't sure of the whole "Overton window" thing, so I checked wikipedia (shoot me if you must :) ), and I found this interesting:
The political commentator Joshua Treviño has postulated that the six degrees of acceptance of public ideas are roughly:[8]
unthinkable
radical
acceptable
sensible
popular
policy
So we certainly, as a population, were at the unthinkable stage for a couple decades, and then moved to the radical stage. We may be approaching the acceptable stage, if not sensible, and as such, actual investigations involving non-corrupt investigators may be coming soon.
I am not a Jew basher, but I am a Mossad basher. That said, I think the photos that were out in the Q days that showed the art students supposedly there to just build a temporary balcony on 100th(?) floor yet had wall to wall boxes of blasting caps needs to be explored and explained. And why was there a picture taken a few miles away with what appeared to be the same group dancing as the building was collapsing on itself? And what about the elevator repair company that did not exist before or after they got the contract to "service and renovate" all the elevators in both towers. Who were they? Who do you think, since the aforementioned "art students" were Israeli we know, and Mossad I believe, the only logical choice is more spooks.
2 questions and I will close. 1) Have you ever met any real art students and would you trust them to tinker with the structural integrity of your high rise and the safety of those below?
2) Is it common practice to have a no name company with no track history to "service and renovate" the elevators in the most prime buildings in NYC?
WE ARE GETTING THERE FRENS, WWG1WGA!!!
Dont forget lucky larry silverstein skipped out on work that day and was able to get not one but two insurance claims for billions of dollars after the attack.
True, true. Then there was the guy (owner?) Who was on a 2 way radio in building 11?, that was not hit by a plane yet still fell, who was heard saying "Pull It" which is a term to start implosion.
South Tower always looked in danger of collapse, even if only partial, from that catastrophic corner damage. North and 7, not so much. Regardless, we all now know it was ordered. We now know we're dealing with DEMONS that shut down the entire world for a non-existent 'pandemic'.
The Towers did withstand the aircraft impact. They did not withstand the effects of the fire, which brought the structural margins of the columns to zero and resulted in near-simultaneous column failure at that floor and each succeeding floor. I have explained this many times before.
People hearing "explosions" may be grossly mistaken. The air compression from the falling upper stack resulted in blowouts of the windows on the subsequent floors beneath. (Is a balloon popping or a tire blowout the sound of an explosion? Think of scale.) The sound of columns failing in shear can be exceedingly loud.
The timing of the collapse of the North and South towers correlate with how tall the stack above the collision floor was. The taller the stack, the shorter the interval. This is consistent with physical theory, not with a "controlled demolition."
One persistent myth is the belief that jet fuel can melt steel beams. However, this claim is not supported by scientific evidence. Steel melts at a temperature of 2,750 degrees Fahrenheit, while jet fuel burn at temperatures ranging from 800 to 1,500 degrees Fahrenheit.
Steel signify weakens at approx 1000 deg F… but I believe it was a controlled demo…there were people working in the non public spaces for weeks/months prior to this event.
You are consistently wrong on this point. The adiabatic flame temperature of kerosene (jet fuel) is 3801 F. You can look it up. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adiabatic_flame_temperature How do you think we melt iron in the first place? Foundries use coke (a form of purified coal) that burns at 3,957 F, not far from jet fuel.
But the towers fell straight into their footprints. I don't know how a localized fire in a building can cause all 4 corners to collapse simultaneously. And what about those slanted cut lines on the steel beams that were exposed in the aftermath? I heard that is the way demolition explosives are made to destroy them.
If you can find my response to daedalus001, I explain the collapse process in detail.
A column can fail in either of two ways: in buckling or in shear. In buckling, it would need enough room and plasticity to bend. If there is no freedom to bend or it is too rigid to bend, then it will fail in shear. It turns out that when a column fails in compressive shear, the break is always at 45 degrees. It turns out that is the angle at which the combined force and the bearing area result in the highest shear value. I have no idea whether demolition explosives are configured this way. I suspect it wouldn't matter. If the column is weakened, that is how it would shear anyway.
Buildings that collapse don't atomize the concrete and don't reduce down to a fraction of their original height. If you compare the truck loads of debris hauled away with what they used to build the towers with, there's no explanation for the vast difference in what was removed during the collapse. They collapse to about 1/3rd of their original height, not to the 6 floor height of what was remaining. Along with the reports of explosions in the basement while the towers were still standing. Who do you work for? CIA or Mossad?
When they go down like a stack of pancakes, they create a lot of dust from the fracturing concrete. I've seen this in a video from the conflict in the Middle East. A bomb or missile hit adjacent to the foundation of a multi-story building, and the building collapsed like a concertina. There is no way that mass was added in the collapse and you probably have a mistaken idea about how much was used to build the Towers. Constructed, they weighed 1.5 million tons (including 200,000 tons of steel and 425,000 cubic yards of concrete). Rubble is not a solid mass and will therefore be less dense than the original materials of construction, therefore bulking a larger volume for removal.
"Reports of explosions" are meaningless, as many violent sounds can be mistaken for explosions. What people hear is the shock wave overpressure, and pneumatic compression can create that as well as an explosion. A burst truck tire can sound very impressive. Guns make a similar report.
Your insults just demonstrate that you have no independent foundation for an explanation. I have Occam's Razor on my side.
Melting steel beams from a fire (assuming it would be possible) would never allow a building to collapse into it's own footprint. It would instead compromise a section of the structure and if collapse occurred it certainly would not be uniform.
Watch architect Richard Gage's presentation on 9/11 which is illuminating in many ways, including information about the detection of nano-thermite in the rubble.
You don't understand how a structure responds to catastrophic structural failure. It's not necessary to assume melted steel beams. The mass of the building is supported by an array of columns. They have some failure limit load against which is applied a safety factor. Here comes the airplane smash, which probably compromises at least a few beams. And then along comes a chimney fire as the jet fuel is burned in what amounts to a furnace with an upcoming draft and a chimney outlet. The columns get hotter...and weaker. Their strength goes down and down, to 90%, 70%, 50%, 30% and at some point the entire array of columns is precariously AT the limit load. What happens next? The weakest column fails in compressive shear (producing the 45-degree cuts). Then what happens? The loads are redistributed among the remaining columns. How fast does this take? The speed of sound in iron is about 4000 feet per second and hotter is faster, so if we consider a range of 100 feet, the loads are redistributed in 25 milliseconds (or less). Then what? Since the total load hasn't changed and the previous configuration failed, the configuration with the failed column will also fail, and the next weakest column will fail. Loads are again redistributed in 25 milliseconds (or less). It may not take a radius of 100 feet for the next column to fail. If there are a total of 100 columns, the entire lot will fail within 2.5 seconds (or less). Then what happens? In 2.5 seconds, the mass of the overburden will not have tilted significantly (inertial confinement, high angular inertia), but it will now fall at the acceleration of gravity for about 15-20 feet (whatever the distance between floors would be) and will build up a level of momentum that will greatly increase the loading on the columns of the next floor down. And the process repeats. Each collapsed floor adds to the mass. All the way down.
As for "nano-thermite," I don't give that any credibility at all, ever since I first heard it, years ago. If you go back to the fire environment, with flame temperatures near 3,800 F, the aluminum fuselage of the 767 is bound to melt (at a temperature of 1,220 F). (I've seen photos of the wreckage of aircraft that burned after impact. Conspicuous outpours of once-molten aluminum.) Liquid aluminum, like liquid water, will evaporate below its boiling point (non-zero vapor pressure). Aluminum vapor is an excellent fuel (it is the major constituent of solid rocket propellant used in space launch vehicles) and it produces aluminum oxide ash: "Evidence of 'nano-thermite'." This combustion occurs in the neighborhood of 6,000-7,000 F. Molten iron? No surprise. The thermite process is only the combustion of aluminum for the purpose of melting iron. So, the allegation that thermite was involved comes from someone with no idea of the combustion environment. (One of my background specialties is jet and rocket engine combustion chemistry.)
By the way, I have NOT read any official reports on the Twin Towers collapse. This is intentional, because I don't want to give anyone the satisfaction of accusing me of repeating "the narrative." I actually do not know what "the narrative" is, but I would be gratified if it backed me up.
With regard to the Twin Towers, they effectively assume the non-existence of many tons of aluminum in the form of the airplane fuselage and wings, subject to melting, evaporation, leading to combustion or condensation. Nano-scale spheres of aluminum would be expected to condense from aluminum vapor. And iron is known to oxidize at environmental temperatures, let alone combustion temperatures (e.g., as the fuel in "orange" sparkler fireworks). It's all the same chemistry.
It only took a few months to set the charges as has been documented by the timeline of the various floors that were sealed off for what I think were described as electrical renovations for weeks at a time. Also there were some security companies that were hired/fired during that time frame that were linked to Israel, IIRC.
Building 7 is where they went a bridge too far. Greedy fucks.
Had they left Building 7 alone, do you think they would have gotten away with it?
There was still the mossad e team and dancing israelis but it would have had more plausible deniability
There was reports of significant gold stored in 7…which disappeared.
no, there is still a metric shit ton of evidence that something else besides plane crashes occurred to the buildings that day.
Did they get away with it ?
That's not what I asked.
Was implied and my answer is no. But your answer is ?
Then say that.
Don't obfuscate.
Eschew surplusage.
Still avoiding the answer . Whine about how others respond then use Pedantic non answer . "obfuscate." "Eschew surplusage."
Accusing others of what you do. How liberal of you.
Did they get away with it ?
That's not what I asked.
It was a landing gear too far.
"Curt claims that he feared for his life after the Bush administration targeted him for questioning the official 9/11 narrative.
No one has explained why or how Building Seven collapsed to this day.
They are the only high-rise buildings in the world that have come down from airplanes hitting them.
The buildings were designed to withstand such a hit.
Firefighters heard explosions inside the buildings and spoke about it on tape but many have been ostracized and feared for their lives for saying so.
We need the truth about this and so many other major events in our history.
"I think 9/11 is going to be the biggest scandal in the history of America. Once people realize they can talk and not be afraid of being killed...
You had three buildings collapse in on themselves. Implode. A lot of people, many credible noncrazy people have said, that was controlled demolition. Was it? There is no way those two buildings could have collapsed into what they were there."
https://video.twimg.com/amplify_video/1911856375300333568/vid/avc1/1280x720/Jia5LErIC_HjwdKg.mp4
2 planes. 3 buildings.
How does that work?
The official explanation is that debris from one of the towers (or possibly debris from the jet crash; I'm not sure which) hit bldg7 and started the fires there. The fires were just on one corner of the building so there is no way that bldg could have collapsed the way it did.
"Pull it"
What building was CIA NY in ?
Zero planes, CGI, Lie Witness Testimony, Over the top "box cutter" hero on flip phone stories...oh, and controlled demolition, in addition to possibly thermite plasma or a mininuke in the fire suppression system.
Common core…
Kek
One of my 4am rabbit holes
https://jamesperloff.net/911-and-beyond/
9/11 is what started me down the rabbit hole in 2009 and haven't looked back since.
The fact that this is now entering the Overton window is SUCH an indicator of what's happening make no mistake.
This is what Israel is being saved for last for IMO
I wasn't sure of the whole "Overton window" thing, so I checked wikipedia (shoot me if you must :) ), and I found this interesting:
The political commentator Joshua Treviño has postulated that the six degrees of acceptance of public ideas are roughly:[8]
unthinkable radical acceptable sensible popular policy
So we certainly, as a population, were at the unthinkable stage for a couple decades, and then moved to the radical stage. We may be approaching the acceptable stage, if not sensible, and as such, actual investigations involving non-corrupt investigators may be coming soon.
100% that's exactly what appears to be happening.
And tbh I thought 911 was still a ways out, incredibly heartened by Curt and these recent interviews.
It's going to give others the confidence to come forward too, could start a snowball
Good Lord. All you have to do is watch the videos and believe what you actually see. Sheesh. Those buildings were obviously expertly demolished.
This👆👆👆
I am not a Jew basher, but I am a Mossad basher. That said, I think the photos that were out in the Q days that showed the art students supposedly there to just build a temporary balcony on 100th(?) floor yet had wall to wall boxes of blasting caps needs to be explored and explained. And why was there a picture taken a few miles away with what appeared to be the same group dancing as the building was collapsing on itself? And what about the elevator repair company that did not exist before or after they got the contract to "service and renovate" all the elevators in both towers. Who were they? Who do you think, since the aforementioned "art students" were Israeli we know, and Mossad I believe, the only logical choice is more spooks. 2 questions and I will close. 1) Have you ever met any real art students and would you trust them to tinker with the structural integrity of your high rise and the safety of those below? 2) Is it common practice to have a no name company with no track history to "service and renovate" the elevators in the most prime buildings in NYC? WE ARE GETTING THERE FRENS, WWG1WGA!!!
Dont forget lucky larry silverstein skipped out on work that day and was able to get not one but two insurance claims for billions of dollars after the attack.
True, true. Then there was the guy (owner?) Who was on a 2 way radio in building 11?, that was not hit by a plane yet still fell, who was heard saying "Pull It" which is a term to start implosion.
That was the same guy, lucky larry
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p34XrI2Fm6I
South Tower always looked in danger of collapse, even if only partial, from that catastrophic corner damage. North and 7, not so much. Regardless, we all now know it was ordered. We now know we're dealing with DEMONS that shut down the entire world for a non-existent 'pandemic'.
I’m sorry but anyone with 9/16 of a brain can see controlled demolition written all over the place…
The Towers did withstand the aircraft impact. They did not withstand the effects of the fire, which brought the structural margins of the columns to zero and resulted in near-simultaneous column failure at that floor and each succeeding floor. I have explained this many times before.
People hearing "explosions" may be grossly mistaken. The air compression from the falling upper stack resulted in blowouts of the windows on the subsequent floors beneath. (Is a balloon popping or a tire blowout the sound of an explosion? Think of scale.) The sound of columns failing in shear can be exceedingly loud.
The timing of the collapse of the North and South towers correlate with how tall the stack above the collision floor was. The taller the stack, the shorter the interval. This is consistent with physical theory, not with a "controlled demolition."
One persistent myth is the belief that jet fuel can melt steel beams. However, this claim is not supported by scientific evidence. Steel melts at a temperature of 2,750 degrees Fahrenheit, while jet fuel burn at temperatures ranging from 800 to 1,500 degrees Fahrenheit.
Steel signify weakens at approx 1000 deg F… but I believe it was a controlled demo…there were people working in the non public spaces for weeks/months prior to this event.
You are consistently wrong on this point. The adiabatic flame temperature of kerosene (jet fuel) is 3801 F. You can look it up. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adiabatic_flame_temperature How do you think we melt iron in the first place? Foundries use coke (a form of purified coal) that burns at 3,957 F, not far from jet fuel.
And it is not necessary to melt steel, when structural steel loses 70% of its strength at a temperature of 1,112 F (sloping downward at higher temperatures). https://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/metal-temperature-strength-d_1353.html
The only persistent "myth" in this case is what you are believing in. Especially under the further myth that it is scientific.
But the towers fell straight into their footprints. I don't know how a localized fire in a building can cause all 4 corners to collapse simultaneously. And what about those slanted cut lines on the steel beams that were exposed in the aftermath? I heard that is the way demolition explosives are made to destroy them.
Also the thermite that was found.
If you can find my response to daedalus001, I explain the collapse process in detail.
A column can fail in either of two ways: in buckling or in shear. In buckling, it would need enough room and plasticity to bend. If there is no freedom to bend or it is too rigid to bend, then it will fail in shear. It turns out that when a column fails in compressive shear, the break is always at 45 degrees. It turns out that is the angle at which the combined force and the bearing area result in the highest shear value. I have no idea whether demolition explosives are configured this way. I suspect it wouldn't matter. If the column is weakened, that is how it would shear anyway.
Buildings that collapse don't atomize the concrete and don't reduce down to a fraction of their original height. If you compare the truck loads of debris hauled away with what they used to build the towers with, there's no explanation for the vast difference in what was removed during the collapse. They collapse to about 1/3rd of their original height, not to the 6 floor height of what was remaining. Along with the reports of explosions in the basement while the towers were still standing. Who do you work for? CIA or Mossad?
When they go down like a stack of pancakes, they create a lot of dust from the fracturing concrete. I've seen this in a video from the conflict in the Middle East. A bomb or missile hit adjacent to the foundation of a multi-story building, and the building collapsed like a concertina. There is no way that mass was added in the collapse and you probably have a mistaken idea about how much was used to build the Towers. Constructed, they weighed 1.5 million tons (including 200,000 tons of steel and 425,000 cubic yards of concrete). Rubble is not a solid mass and will therefore be less dense than the original materials of construction, therefore bulking a larger volume for removal.
"Reports of explosions" are meaningless, as many violent sounds can be mistaken for explosions. What people hear is the shock wave overpressure, and pneumatic compression can create that as well as an explosion. A burst truck tire can sound very impressive. Guns make a similar report.
Your insults just demonstrate that you have no independent foundation for an explanation. I have Occam's Razor on my side.
Melting steel beams from a fire (assuming it would be possible) would never allow a building to collapse into it's own footprint. It would instead compromise a section of the structure and if collapse occurred it certainly would not be uniform.
Watch architect Richard Gage's presentation on 9/11 which is illuminating in many ways, including information about the detection of nano-thermite in the rubble.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wml_NCZ7ROg
You don't understand how a structure responds to catastrophic structural failure. It's not necessary to assume melted steel beams. The mass of the building is supported by an array of columns. They have some failure limit load against which is applied a safety factor. Here comes the airplane smash, which probably compromises at least a few beams. And then along comes a chimney fire as the jet fuel is burned in what amounts to a furnace with an upcoming draft and a chimney outlet. The columns get hotter...and weaker. Their strength goes down and down, to 90%, 70%, 50%, 30% and at some point the entire array of columns is precariously AT the limit load. What happens next? The weakest column fails in compressive shear (producing the 45-degree cuts). Then what happens? The loads are redistributed among the remaining columns. How fast does this take? The speed of sound in iron is about 4000 feet per second and hotter is faster, so if we consider a range of 100 feet, the loads are redistributed in 25 milliseconds (or less). Then what? Since the total load hasn't changed and the previous configuration failed, the configuration with the failed column will also fail, and the next weakest column will fail. Loads are again redistributed in 25 milliseconds (or less). It may not take a radius of 100 feet for the next column to fail. If there are a total of 100 columns, the entire lot will fail within 2.5 seconds (or less). Then what happens? In 2.5 seconds, the mass of the overburden will not have tilted significantly (inertial confinement, high angular inertia), but it will now fall at the acceleration of gravity for about 15-20 feet (whatever the distance between floors would be) and will build up a level of momentum that will greatly increase the loading on the columns of the next floor down. And the process repeats. Each collapsed floor adds to the mass. All the way down.
As for "nano-thermite," I don't give that any credibility at all, ever since I first heard it, years ago. If you go back to the fire environment, with flame temperatures near 3,800 F, the aluminum fuselage of the 767 is bound to melt (at a temperature of 1,220 F). (I've seen photos of the wreckage of aircraft that burned after impact. Conspicuous outpours of once-molten aluminum.) Liquid aluminum, like liquid water, will evaporate below its boiling point (non-zero vapor pressure). Aluminum vapor is an excellent fuel (it is the major constituent of solid rocket propellant used in space launch vehicles) and it produces aluminum oxide ash: "Evidence of 'nano-thermite'." This combustion occurs in the neighborhood of 6,000-7,000 F. Molten iron? No surprise. The thermite process is only the combustion of aluminum for the purpose of melting iron. So, the allegation that thermite was involved comes from someone with no idea of the combustion environment. (One of my background specialties is jet and rocket engine combustion chemistry.)
By the way, I have NOT read any official reports on the Twin Towers collapse. This is intentional, because I don't want to give anyone the satisfaction of accusing me of repeating "the narrative." I actually do not know what "the narrative" is, but I would be gratified if it backed me up.
There's plenty of evidence of nano-thermite or some other non-fuel related fuckery.
For example, watch from this point - https://youtu.be/wml_NCZ7ROg?si=dfnzCvchVjdzDpk_&t=2036
With regard to the Twin Towers, they effectively assume the non-existence of many tons of aluminum in the form of the airplane fuselage and wings, subject to melting, evaporation, leading to combustion or condensation. Nano-scale spheres of aluminum would be expected to condense from aluminum vapor. And iron is known to oxidize at environmental temperatures, let alone combustion temperatures (e.g., as the fuel in "orange" sparkler fireworks). It's all the same chemistry.
<[] <<<
I feel this mans fucking anger
The reporter who was at the Pentagon and said a plane didn’t hit it, something else did.
On witness veteran said it sounded like a missile.
It was…Israeli “art students” worked overtime the preceding weekend on their “art.”
"Was this controlled demolition?" Do you have to ask?
https://ifunny.co/picture/this-is-a-photo-of-the-floor-on-the-twin-N6ELsYXYA
I thought it was saying the drip drip of this information is the controlled demolition, but yeah they probably installed charges for years, too.
It only took a few months to set the charges as has been documented by the timeline of the various floors that were sealed off for what I think were described as electrical renovations for weeks at a time. Also there were some security companies that were hired/fired during that time frame that were linked to Israel, IIRC.