The Bottom Line Re: The 9/11 Twin Towers Collapse

[Scepcop]

The Bottom Line Regarding 9/11

In case anyone is still on the fence about 9/11 or refuses to believe that it was an inside job, well here is the CORE CRUX of the matter for you to deal with:

All three towers collapsed at virtual FREE FALL speed. The twin towers came down at 11 seconds and Building 7 came down at 5.5 seconds. This fact can be seen in all the videos of the collapse. But this is not possible unless you destroy the BOTTOM FOUNDATION of the structures first. There's no way around this. The twin towers each weighed 500,000 tons, which is an official fact that can easily be verified on official sites. That's 500,000 tons of RESISTANCE! None of the official government models account for this 500,000 tons of resistance.

Even Peter Jennings and the mainstream media said that bombs had to be used too, on the first day of 9/11, before they were ordered not to say it anymore. On 9/11, Peter Jennings said on ABC TV News: "Anyone who's watched a building being demolished knows that you have to get at the UNDER INFRASTRUCTURE of a building to bring it down". The clip of him saying that can be viewed in any 9/11 truth documentary. Other reporters said that there were bombs in the towers too. One camera mounted on a tripod even showed the ground shaking 15 seconds BEFORE the collapse.

Bottom line: There had to be bombs or some type of destruction device UNDER the towers or at the bottom of it. Yes this means it was an INSIDE JOB. Whether the terrorists were real or not, either way, it had to have been partly an inside job. There's no way around it. NONE whatsoever. This is the ACHILLES HEEL of the official theory and none of the establishment whores have ever been able to explain it away.

And no, the towers were NOT hollow. That's a bald faced lie by Popular Mechanics. AE911Truth.org has obtained the official blueprints of the towers, which you can see on their website, and they clearly prove that they were not hollow. 500,000 tons is NOT hollow or empty air. Sorry. Think about this too: If a skyscraper or large building could be demolished by a few office fires, then the controlled demolition companies -- which take months to set up a controlled demolition to bring down a big building -- would be out of business wouldn't they? Gotcha!

Try this little experiment. Light the top of your table on fire. See if that will make your table collapse at free fall speed. No way. Top fires do not cause a straight down collapse at free fall velocity. You have to destroy the foundation of the table to achieve that. You'd have to cut the legs of the tables first, before it will collapse at free fall. Try turning on a gas stove range. Will the flames cause the range to collapse at free fall? No of course not. Fire at the TOP of a structure isn't going to cause a free fall speed collapse. There's NO WAY it can. Buildings have RESISTANCE and cannot fall like air unless its FOUNDATION is destroyed first. There's no way around this. It's elementary physics and logic and common sense. Very simple.

Checkmate. Game over. The official story LOSES and is DEBUNKED!

For more info, visit Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth at: http://www.ae911truth.org

[ProfWag]

If they fell at free fall speed, Scepcop, then you would not see beams and rubble falling faster than the building itself which you can clearly see for yourself including the ones on your conspiracy sites, . Thus, your free fall theory is wrong. Again. Sigh.

[FatFreddy]

If any viewers don't have the time to watch hours of video on this subject, just watch the summary at the 4:27:49 time mark of this video.

September 11 -- The New Pearl Harbor (FULL)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DOnAn_PX6M


If you do have time to spend a few hours watching video, watch the above one and this one.

9/11: Explosive Evidence -- Experts Speak Out (Full)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=stOQ5Vl9d0k

[FatFreddy]

[ProfWag]