File: 9-11 judy wood 1.webm (3.81 MB, 640x360)

3.81 MB WEBM

>>5666383
more judy plz

File: Jetfuel.webm (1.83 MB, 526x278)

1.83 MB WEBM

>>5666383

>>5666383
>>5666392
>>5666395
people like her should be an heroed.

File: Chinese skyscraper in fla(...).webm (2.51 MB, 854x480)

2.51 MB WEBM

>>5666619
hopefully you know thats bullshit

File: Scenes from London highri(...).webm (2.25 MB, 854x480)

2.25 MB WEBM

>>5666619

File: 1599515198708.gif (1.61 MB, 1035x828)

1.61 MB GIF

>>5666383
Judy Wood was a last-ditch psyop to divert people away from Dmitry Khalazov's subterranean nuclear demolition explanation picrel while still explaining why tf the buildings turned into mostly dust
https://odysee.com/@911thology:7/911_nuclear_demolition_WTC_new-2021-Eng_Part-01:9

- subterranean nuclear demolition
- no planes
- cruise missile hit the Pentagon
That's what happened.

File: 9-11-new-footage-1.webm (4.7 MB, 1920x1080)

4.7 MB WEBM

Here's a video that was released this year of a Japanese man who filmed both towers collapsing uninterrupted
would be curious what he got for the 'second plane' hitting

full quality unclipped version: https://files.catbox.moe/o69ttf.mp4

File: 9-11-new-footage-2.webm (4.33 MB, 1920x1080)

4.33 MB WEBM

pt2

>>5666385
but what about the amateur videos that show the whole thing?

File: 911insidertrading.webm (5.79 MB, 640x360)

5.79 MB WEBM

>>5668389
if a live video can be manipulated to to look like a plane hit a tower they can do it to one on a recording

File: 911 tower 7.webm (856 KB, 1280x720)

856 KB WEBM

anyone remember which flight hit WTC7?

>>5668106
>subterranean nuclear demolition
wtf does this shit means

>>5668389
But what about you showing it? I guess you don't have a penis. Don't worry I am such you love trannies and faggos

>>5667196
Hopefully you know the name of the boots you lick

>>5669862
a riddle for you to answer your question:

I speak without a voice, and hear without ears.
I can walk on air, yet I leave no trace.
I can touch everything, but I hold nothing.
Who am I?

File: 911 inner column.webm (3.96 MB, 785x589)

3.96 MB WEBM

>>5669858
> Don't worry I am such you love trannies and faggos
might wanna lay off the sauce it rots your liver and you'll die early

File: 911 are we safe.webm (2.29 MB, 1440x1080)

2.29 MB WEBM

>>5668106
>>5669834
>subterranean nuclear demolition
its word salad
apparently he doesn't understand how bombs/explosions work
the part where shit files in every direction after the 'boom'

These guys have made some videos, I can't be arsed to make webms of them right now.
https://www.ae911truth.org/

File: 911 Underground nuclear t(...).webm (5.92 MB, 628x480)

5.92 MB WEBM

>>5669834
>>5670081
Are you two retarded? I posted an animation and everything
>word salad
For fuck's sake, I guess you are

File: seismic-events.webm (545 KB, 1920x1080)

545 KB WEBM

>>5670217
you're trying to sell us on believing that underground detonations have been so accurately honed it can somehow take out ONLY the center columns of a 110 story steel reinforced building without any type of outward explosion?
that the controlled subterranean nuclear demolition is so accurate it detonated to right below the top of the building without going any further to cause the top of the building the collapse into itself
am I understanding you correctly?

File: 911 CLEAR bomb going off (...).webm (5.45 MB, 472x314)

5.45 MB WEBM

>>5670244
Nobody made that strawman argument but you
Again, reference the original gif
>>5668106
The primary charge is under the building, in the subbasement. Secondary charges join the central elevator shafts into a continuous "chimney" before the primary charge from the subbasement detonates, guiding the primary charge up the length of the building, pulverizing the steel into dust while the solid upper section falls through it
The excellent documentary explains it well: https://odysee.com/@911thology:7/911_nuclear_demolition_WTC_new-2021-Eng_Part-01:9

File: 911 CLEAR bomb going off (...).webm (5.38 MB, 472x314)

5.38 MB WEBM

>>5670341

File: Firefighter-in-stair-well.webm (2.66 MB, 1920x1080)

2.66 MB WEBM

>>5670341
>>5670343
you cant even explain your own theory/gif
do you understand anything about it other than
>trust me bro
what other information do you have besides a single gif and testimonials about what people are speculating the situation to be?

File: Obligatory.webm (4.22 MB, 1458x828)

4.22 MB WEBM

>>5666383
>can we get a 9-11 thread going?

File: 911 CBS WTC nuclear demol(...).webm (5.56 MB, 708x480)

5.56 MB WEBM

>>5670437
>trust me bro there were firefighters in the stairwell which totally DEBOONKS the nuclear demolition theory
>no you

>>5667197
doesn't look anything like 9/11, must be fake

why do you fucking morons think charges went off under the building? First and foremost before before any other debunking, wouldn't you think people would hear and feel a massive charge going off before the buildings collapsed?

File: 911-no-plane-at-pentagon.webm (1.54 MB, 640x360)

1.54 MB WEBM

>>5670766
how hard is it to understand explosions explode
>but these people said so and i believe them cuz they know all the details at ground zero right after it happened

>>5670974
uh, what clip, lol

File: 911 ground shaking before(...).webm (5.7 MB, 642x480)

5.7 MB WEBM

>>5670880

>wouldn't you think people would hear and feel a massive charge
Funny you should ask vidrel
>they heard and felt a rumble BEFORE the WTC collapse
>thought it was a terrorist collapse on the subway

I bet you've never seen this clip before in your life. Probably nobody here has. Now why do you think that would be?

File: no_plane_was_bomb.webm (2.35 MB, 480x360)

2.35 MB WEBM

>>5670946
>>5670949
nice clips

File: 911 ground shaking before(...).webm (5.45 MB, 642x480)

5.45 MB WEBM

>>5670993
>inb4 but it was just one guy i mean two guys

File: 911 OST guy.webm (5.58 MB, 642x480)

5.58 MB WEBM

>>5670766
>OST guy
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_of_Secure_Transportation
The Office of Secure Transportation (OST) is a highly-specialized law enforcement division of the National Nuclear Security Administration within the United States Department of Energy. The OST's mission is to provide safe and secure transportation of nuclear weapons and components and special nuclear materials and conduct other missions in support of U.S. national security.

I made a clip more focused on this point. Basically proves nuclear demolition

>>5670993
>we heard and felt a rumble
>turned around and noticed the tower was gone
huh yeah that sounds about right. Doesn't sound like an explosion going off, lmao.

File: 1.webm (3.21 MB, 579x434)

3.21 MB WEBM

>>5666383

File: 911 Carbomb exploded Stat(...).webm (5.87 MB, 622x480)

5.87 MB WEBM

one of my favorite

Anyone got those David Lynch clips?

god the entire thread glows like a lighthouse

File: youtube_911.webm (3.27 MB, 960x500)

3.27 MB WEBM

>>5671076
It's really amazing that they still, to this day, work so hard to suppress practically everything regarding this event

>>5666619
Jetfuel can decrease the strength of steel by morethan 90%. Anyway, the thermite is what melted the steel beams.

>>5671030
>>5671031
>>5671032
>>5671033


Fuck

File: dancing_israelis.webm (4.67 MB, 640x361)

4.67 MB WEBM

>>5671163
>jet fuel
You really think you can make any steel structure collapse under its own weight by pouring kerosene on it?

Imagine the possibilities...

>>5668106
You even see in this animation that a shockwave traveling through the tower would cause the smoke coming out of the holes at the outer wall of the tower to gain velocity. You would be able to see this on footage and it wouldn't be so slow that you don't notice it. Comparables to blowing into a smoking pipe or cigarette or hookah whatever.

See this video for example >>5668133 there is absolutely zero change in the smoke coming out from the building when it collapsed only after the top fell down the smoke gained velocity and gushed out from the sides. The concept of a fucking bomb at the bottom of the building is bullshit. I'm not saying it wasn't some conspiracy just that bomb at the bottom would look different to what we see on footage.

>>5671196
well you'd have to light the kerosene

File: 2001-09-11 - FOX News - R(...).webm (4.29 MB, 642x478)

4.29 MB WEBM

>>5671214
So bridges and buildings across the country are in extreme danger
>You thought school shootings were bad -- imagine when kids start dumping kerosene on busy bridges and lighting them to get TikTok views

File: 2001-09-11 - FOX News - R(...).webm (4.96 MB, 642x478)

4.96 MB WEBM

>>5671239
keep an eye on the two literal Men In Black hovering and supervising the scene

>>5668106
>hmmmm underground nuclear device with a radioactive core through the building that hundreds of engineers would have had knowledge of during construction
>or
>a group of Israeli "art students" given access for weeks, pictured with fuse boxes for conventional devices, where the only "art" they made was a platform 2ft outside a window and some pencil drawings
I wonder

>>5671030
>remember it's da aaarms saaaales!
Have to control the narrative. Remember who runs Hollywood

>>5671033
https://x-files.fandom.com/wiki/Pilot_(The_Lone_Gunmen)
Original Airdate: March 4, 2001

File: 911bomb.webm (2.56 MB, 1000x624)

2.56 MB WEBM

>>5671334
It's not either/or, it's both
The israeli art students did the fake airplane "impacts", complete with cutting out the Wile E Coyote shapes with thermite and the pyrotechnics. The actual airplanes were CGI superimposed on the video. So it was just like any other Hollywood scene: part practical effects, part CGI
The primary demolition was thermonuclear, planned by the world-class, world record-holding demolition company, Controlled Demolition Inc. This demolition was, by far, a new world record -- the previous record was 33 (wink wink) stories, held by the same company. Also interesting, the same company worked on the building "cleanup" after the Oklahoma City Bombing
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controlled_Demolition%2C_Inc.#Selected_projects

But it should be obvious that even a group of Mossad terrorists would not have the expertise to pull this off unassisted. They would need a world-class demolition company. Also obvious that the WTC buildings were designed for this thermonuclear demolition from their construction. It's not like some sneaky jews stuck a bomb under the buildings and just let er rip. This was a well-planned operation. The demolition devices were emplaced during the repairs after the 1993 WTC bombing

So yes Mossad, yes Israeli "art students", but also CDI for the nuclear demolition expertise

>>5671668
thinking the planes were CGI is absolute brainrot. Literally
>well i wasn't there and i didn't directly see planes, so that means they didn't exist
levels of logic

>>5671239
>So bridges and buildings across the country are in extreme danger
yes... if people start literally burning bridges that would be terrible... you utter fucking moron lmao

File: the_nose.webm (4.79 MB, 1067x600)

4.79 MB WEBM

>>5671692
>the death star blew up cuz i dun seen it on the movie screen
>>5671694
>burning steel bridges with kerosene
The kind of dumb that only a jew could make

This thread glows, but they're not sending their best

>>5671702
>the planes were not real
>see: Death Star scene from Starwars
yes, they aren't sending their best

I don't give a shit about the conspiracy theories or the deboonking, i'm just here for the raw footage
9/11 was so kino, it's like a disaster movie but irl

File: 1694294960232830.webm (3.92 MB, 640x360)

3.92 MB WEBM

obligatory

any of you have info on the pntagon crash being shady? That it was a recently restored building or some people or important stuff conviniently not being there at the moment
something like that?

>>5668130
oh my gaa

https://youtu.be/-XOK-r80nr8

>>5666620
stfu lucky larry

>>5670066
a massive faggot.

get this, it doesnt matter if the planes were fake, the beams were melted by jet fuel or thermite.
none of these details actually matter, and are well poisonings by glowies.
what DOES matter is that several thousand innocent civilians were killed, this nation's culture was forever changed, and we can't go back, all for the sake of the military industrial complex.

>>5667198
ok, so this video is a bit retarded.
1. the towers were an icon of new york, of course you're going to hold a shot on them.
2. a plane like that, flying that low, you're going to look up at it

>>5669099
except a live video cant be manipulated like that, not in 2001

>>5670217
>this shitty animation proves everything!

>>5670766
>trust me bro, im hyperfixated on one theory that has no legs whatsoever!

>>5672046
Kek.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AiNy0Z5csIs

>>5672625
glow glow glow

>>5672656
of all the fishy things of 9/11, that video hyper focuses on things that dont matter, retard.
call me a glowie all you want, continue to go down rabbit holes set up to waste your time.
the minutia of 9/11 is just that.
you can prove it was an inside job without
>LOOK THEY FOCUSED ON THE TWIN TOWERS FOR NO REASON
>WHY DID THEY LOOK UP TO SEE WHY A PLANE SOUNDED SO LOUD???

>>5669105
It was hit by 3 buses.

The towers were never real
They were holograms all along

>>5672658
Fuck off shill, I am still not trusting glow niggers

>>5672623

>military industrial complex

that's commie talk. It was the Jews, OK? Just like the moon landing, culture wars, and my wife leaving me. All Jews, OK?

File: im-melting-slow-ns.webm (2.85 MB, 1920x1080)

2.85 MB WEBM

>>5666383
>>5670072
anyone have tips on DIY dustifying

>>5672658
Building 7 is a clear planned demo. 100 stories skyscrapers do not fall straight down. And def not in free fall speed.

>>5673081
Building 7 was never real you fucking fed it was always a hologram

All these conspiracies involving fucking ridiculous amounts of prep work and for literally everything to work perfectly and for every single person who was ever involved or present to never say a single thing ever to the point where it's just easier to fly two planes into two buildings and just see what happens

>>5673081
But if you genuinely believed this, that these things were so blatantly fucking obvious it was fraud, why wouldn't they have just y'know, done both?

>Oh hey terrorists flew planes into the twin towers AND they blew it up from underneath

>>Oh hey billy we're gonna blow up building 7 too, we should probably get another plane for that
>Nah it'll be fine, nobody will pay attention to building 7. A belief I have which is literally unfounded and doesn't hold up for even a second of scrutiny but our organisation which apparently has the resources and esoteric influence to fly two planes full of people into two buildings and then demolition them from underneath? Nah we're good

It doesn't make sense

>>5668106
Why does it need to be nuclear? It just feels like it's nuclear because that sounds scarier. Conventional explosives would be easier to get, store and transport and would be just as effective?

File: 911 J.L. Hudsons Departme(...).webm (5.75 MB, 630x480)

5.75 MB WEBM

>>5671668
Here's that world-record demolition, just 33 stories
just to drive the point home that you need a world-class demolition company to bring down WTCs in such a neat and tidy fashion

some notable differences:
- The department store building was made of brick. WTC was steel
- Listen to the demolition method, with dozens of explosive charges. Nothing of the sort for WTC. The demolition method was completely different

File: 911 WTC atomic demolition(...).webm (3.76 MB, 720x374)

3.76 MB WEBM

>>5674757
As noted here >>5674834 and here >>5671668, the world record conventional demolition is 33 stories and made of brick. WTC was 110 and made of steel
So the same technique wouldn't work. For all the Judy Woodsers advocating for DEW, even if you could get it into orbit you'll still need a gigawatt range power source, i.e. nuclear. So why not just directly use a simple, conventional, well-understood thermonuclear demolition device?

>>5671668
this level of CGI wasn't feasible in 2001
not to mention the impossibility of doing one massive unmissable thing in the middle of nyc and showing a different thing on tv and expect to just be able to what, pay off anyone who questions it (everyone)? why would someone even entertain the possibility?
people had video cameras back then, not many people, but some people did. where's the videos of the buildings /not/ being hit by planes? it's again a practical impossibility for even the government to prevent said footage seeing the light of day, we're talking 2001, with people recording videos to tape, not some cloud service they can access, tape people can copy in their home offline

File: Armor-piercing passenger (...).webm (3.9 MB, 374x280)

3.9 MB WEBM

>>5674845
>>5672628
>live CGI wasn't possible in 2001
Of course it was. This was basic chromakey tech, they've been using it in movies since the 1930s and for LIVE weather forecasts since the 1970s
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chroma_key#History

>witnesses and videotapes
There are several vids in this very thread of witnesses saying they were bombs, not planes. Right here >>5670341 >>5670343
And vids of fake actors, very obviously lying about seeing planes hit buildings. Why would these be necessary if the planes were real?
This wasn't real wide-spread back on 9/11 of course, because nobody had an iPhone, no social media, no high-speed internet, every news outlet was controlled, and every govt and bank employee was forced to sign a NDA promising to lie about what they saw "for the good of the country"

>>5672623
>military industrial complex
Sure Moshe

>>5674882
Rabbi Dov Zakheim, comptroller of the Pentagon at the time, was also CEO of SPC Systems, a company that manufactured systems for the remote control of large aircraft.

>>5668106
Are there clips of anyone saying they felt a big rumble or boom before the towers went down? Does he explain why the "bathtub" was essentially intact? How about the seismic readings? You could fake those, but the readings we did grt a still weird as fuck (super smooth sinewaves instead of chaos and spikes). And how about the toasted cars that were miles(?) away in that parking lot? Hell, even the ones nearby wouldn't look like that if the device was solely subterranean.

File: They_Did_It!__Dr._Alan_Sa(...).webm (5.53 MB, 712x480)

5.53 MB WEBM

>>5666383
>>5666386

>>5669862
>I deny the official narrative and its explanation
>"You clearly lick the boots of government glowies and shills"
Lol. You really got him with that one.

File: 911 planes - high-speed a(...).webm (4.19 MB, 720x404)

4.19 MB WEBM

>>5675020
>felt a big rumble
Yes, already posted in this thread
>"bathtub" was essentially intact
bathtub was severely damaged, moved nearly 2 feet, leaking water at 100-200gpm from the Hudson River
https://undergroundinfrastructure.com/magazine/2016/september-2016-vol-71-no-9/rehabilitation/15th-anniversary-of-911-sealing-the-bathtub-no-small-project
>seismic readings
Some confirm, some deny (arguably fake)
>toasted cars found far away
They were blasted by heat, then towed away from the scene. Not a big mystery

>>5666383
Does anyone have the clip that contains a snippet of Jesse Ventura interviewing a guy who apparently worked on the Strategic Defense Initiative (or "Star Wars program") and asked him if it had the ppwer to destroy "say...a building?" And the guy replies "you could destroy a whole city!" A couple days later the guy was found dead.
I found the clip on /gif/ a while back, but I'm having trouble finding it in my folders. This os relevant, because I'm more than certain Jesse was asking about if the devices developed under that program could be candidates for what might have caused what we saw on 9/11.

>>5675040
>Yes, already posted in this thread
Could you link to the post? I haven't gotten through the thread, yet.
>bathtub
Thanks for the link. I'll check it out.
>They were blasted by heat, then towed away from the scene. Not a big mystery
No, that doesn't follow. I'm assuming you're saying they were underground or something near the blast and the hauled away from the towers?
The cars I'm talking about, specifically, we already parked and fully intact before the attack and then toasted after, in the same parking lot.
There are tons of other instances much closer. And multiple testimonies of first responders witnessing many vehicles spontaneously exploding for no visible reason. There's also a bus that "melted" more and more before and after Building 7's collapse (https://files.catbox.moe/g64vwo.png) and many car fires going on during the event (https://files.catbox.moe/146zmz.png). So, I'm not sure how your explanation account for that. Either it doesn't or I'm not really understanding exactly what you're suggesting, on a logistical level.
Just to affirm my non-hostility, I want to thank you for responding with quality sources and in a clear way.

>>5674840
>So the same technique wouldn't work.
Why not? There's nothing intrinsically special about a nuclear blast compared to a conventional blast when it comes to destroying a building.

>So why not just directly use a simple, conventional, well-understood thermonuclear demolition device?
Because a nuclear weapon is anything but simple or conventional. It is well understood to be a massive fucking liability to transport. Also, nuclear stock counts. You're telling me that absolutely nobody who keeps stock of where all the nuclear warheads are located, when they will be at certain locations and for how long and exactly how many exist, noticed anything about 2-3 entire fucking nuclear warheads going missing?

I could excuse yeah okay, somebody doesn't know the exact stock count of how much C4 they have. Nukes? No fucking chance

>>5674882
>. Why would these be necessary if the planes were real?
Why do the planes at all then? Why not just bombs?

Seems like a massive gaping hole your plan of accountability when you're saying planes but there are millions of witnesses who could attest to there being no planes if there were actually no planes. Just use the fucking bombs and blame it on terrorists, what's the fucking difference except one plan is way easier and less retarded?

File: Bush admits that Iraq Had(...).webm (5.93 MB, 316x226)

5.93 MB WEBM

>>5675583
>Why not?
Brick crumbles into powder from stress and conventional explosives. Steel does not.
>But nukes are so hi-tech
They've been around since the 1940s and in use for similar civil engineering projects throughout the Soviet Union since then
>But muh strawman!
Nobody is arguing this but you. Presumably, it is well-known among the authorities ("Pull it!") that nuclear demolition devices (not "warheads") were emplaced beneath the buildings

>>5675584
>But muh millions of witnesses!
Where are they? Because all I see in this thread is fake-news crisis actors saying they saw planes and real witnesses saying there were no planes

>>5675293
>I can't CTRL-F
Give it a shot
>I can't read
Keep at it

File: birthday.webm (4.54 MB, 1920x1080)

4.54 MB WEBM

1 day to 9/11 birthday

File: 1725581694673338.webm (1.56 MB, 1280x720)

1.56 MB WEBM

Happy 9/11 brothers! Death to America!

File: 029834234983.webm (2.96 MB, 712x480)

2.96 MB WEBM

>>5675777
>holy checked!

>>5670066
what's the difference between brown nosing and ass kissing?

>>5668106
But I thought nukes were fake and gay

>>5671000
"OST" in this case means Secret Service Office Support Technician (which is why his shit says secret service not ost). He was in the area and saw some shit going down so grabbed all of the "tactical" gear he had and went to go larp. If you have ever been to a happening irl u will see these types of guys show up.

Here's an article abt the guy:
http://archive.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2004/04/15/secret_service_worker_charged_in_car_thefts/

>>5670823
the final pill
youtu.be/watch?v=ezqGdDbKlj4

File: 1651249923209.webm (3.34 MB, 320x240)

3.34 MB WEBM

>>5671056
I gotchu, homie.

>>5667198
Hmm. Looks like he did visually locate the plane before panning and when he pans to the plane, the plane was already just a few hundred feet from impact. So, it makes sense that he'd pan to the tower, since it wasn't overhead by that point. By, definitely good to check.
What were the firefighters supposed to be there for, anyway?

>>5670343
>3:02-3:03 video glitch
Accounting for sound delay, that happens right around the time of the impact. Seems to be evidence that supports the DEW theory, since it looks like electromagnetic interference.

>>5670824
She did it. She did 9/11.

>>5670343
the people there seem pretty calm there walking like there isn't an ongoing terrorist attack just down the road

You know, I find it fascinating that retards continue to poison the well of genuine investigation into 9/11 and how it looks more like controlled demolition than collapse, with ye old THE PLANES WERE ALL CGI AND EVERYONE WHO SAYS DIFFERENT IS A CRISIS ACTOR CIA JEW SHILL
nice try glowies

>>5671043
That's a new one.
There's also this gem:
>Flight 93 Landed
https://web.archive.org/web/20021109040132/https://wcpo.com/specials/2001/americaattacked/news_local/story14.html
Does anyone have anything about the other target, like the Sears building or something? Any anom know what I'm talking about?

>>5672677
carrying nerve gas

>>5672642
Not a gish gallup. Not a debunk. Only a few sources cited in beginning. Absolute joke of a response. But, I guess it's board culture to pair it up with this webm by now.

>>5672360
It had been recently reinforced with kevlar and other shit and only on that side. I actually learned that from a tour guide at the Pentagon when I visted, so it's not a secret. They also moved the budget analysts' office there not long before (they were the ones looking into the missing $2.3 tril Donald Rumbsfeld mentioned). The Joint Chiefs and etc were on the opposite end, meaning they wouldn't be hurt by the attack.

>>5676446
It most certainly is a Gish gallop. Taken individually, all of those points are easily disputed. However, when delivered rapid fire like they are, the viewer has no ability to consider them individually and has no choice but to view them collectively. In this way, they fool the viewer into believing them when even a cursory attempt to dispute any of them would reveal them to be demonstrably false. You have to remember that there hasn't been a new talking point to this discussion in nearly twenty years. All of these talking points have been disputed before many of their current proponents were even born. The problem is you choose to believe people like Wood, Griffin, and Gage who are only in this only to grift you out of your money.

>>5671702
Debunked by a Truther no less.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5bNomV_8034

>>5675702
>I can't read
>Keep at it
Neither can you, apparently. Or you just didn't care that I was trying to engage respectfully as you seemed to be, previously. Also, you just ignored the obvious problem of cars exploding and toasting that had no proximity at any point to the subterranean blasts you're advocating happened.
I get that you're responding to multiple anons, but this attempt at dismissing my question as some lack of comprehension on my part is erroneous and dumb.

>>5676474
>It most certainly is a Gish gallop
No, it's not. A Gish Gallop is a debate technique and this video is not a debate; it's a comedic meme video meant to highlight the rediculousness and suspiciousness of the "Official Narrative." If it was meant to be a formal presentation of information and to argue anything authoritative, then the "Gish Gallop" criticism might be appropriate, but it's not. This is why:
>In this way, they fool the viewer into believing them when even a cursory attempt to dispute any of them would reveal them to be demonstrably false.
has no real weight. Again, the video linked doesn't debunk anything and relies on "trust me, bro" claims, itself.
>You have to remember that there hasn't been a new talking point to this discussion in nearly twenty years
So, we're at a gridlock, then? Because,
>All of these talking points have been disputed before many of their current proponents were even born.
aside from the hyperbole, the issue is that any "rational" explanations are extremely disputed, as well.
>The problem is you choose to believe people like Wood, Griffin, and Gage who are only in this only to grift you out of your money.
As opposed to...who? Also, big assumption you made, since I don't really believe any single person here, since it's the evidence that's presented that matters. The theories are just suggestions on how to interperet the evidence. At least, that's how I treat it.

>>5674754
Imagine two guys each in charge of doing one of the towers and knowing that one of them needs to fall over on top of 7, but they both think the other guy will take care of it.

File: 1725465433318089.webm (5.48 MB, 640x360)

5.48 MB WEBM

>>5676474
Supposing all the shady bullshit with the aftereffects and the lack of airflight response he said were false. What would it matter? How would it change the obviously bogus physical results of a plane hitting a building or the fact that a third relevant building somehow fell as spoken about in these posts:
>>5670072
>>5676313
>>5667196
All this discussion about the logistics is similarly moot, jewish art students or nuclear bomb, real plane or photo op. Whatever, the core evidence shows in any case that it wasn't the planes that levelled the building and of what little evidence we were allowed to see of the pentagon seems similarly odd.

>>5676492
>A Gish Gallop is a debate technique and this video is not a debate
A Gish gallop can be construed to be any rhetorical attempt in which information is presented in a manner than does not allow the viewer or listener to comprehend or dispute the information presented. This video is an attempt to present information in a way that makes it impossible to determine if the information resented is accurate or not. The fact that this is not a debate is irrelevant.
>has no real weight. Again, the video linked doesn't debunk anything
The video itself is only one of countless similar videos made over the years that dispute attempts to mislead the viewer with false narratives of conspiracy where there is none.
>So, we're at a gridlock, then? Because,
I don't feel we are because as I have pointed out, the is not a single claim made in the Corbett video that has not already been disputed elsewhere years ago. I would direct you to the JREF Forums, or whatever they are called now, for an exhaustive plethora of information that would provide ample evidence to dispute any and all of the individual claims made in the Corbett video.
>aside from the hyperbole, the issue is that any "rational" explanations are extremely disputed, as well.
This is factually incorrect. The only people who still dispute the rational explanations provided have an irrational confirmation bias that clouds their judgement.
>As opposed to...who? Also, big assumption you made, since I don't really believe any single person here, since it's the evidence that's presented that matters.
If I made an inaccurate description of you then I apologize. It still does nothing to dispute the nature of the individuals named, Corbett included. All of these people stand to make financial gain by misleading confused individuals with easy answers to difficult questions.

>>5676504
Planes travelling at speeds in excess of 400 to 500 miles per hour that crashed into buildings whose unorthodox construction meant they were mostly hollow? A plane whose total energy was therefore more than adequate to penetrate said building?

A third building that was hit by the bulk of a falling building and burned uncontrolled for hours? Or are we talking about some other mythical building?

Evidence of plane debris at the Pentagon is abundant. You cannot seriously believe there is no evidence of plane debris at the Pentagon.

>>5676504
As far as AE911Truth is concerned, I would direct you to the videos of Chris Mohr. There is a lot of material here so put some time aside to view these videos and consider their content.
https://www.youtube.com/@chrismohr911/videos

>9/11 schizos are at it again
as an actual, factual 9/11 survivor all I can say is fuck you

>>5666620
>>5672611
nta but I kinda agree. she brings up some interesting mysteries but we all know it was controlled demo, so maybe focus on those responsible, i.e. Zionist Jews in America

>>5672658
"inside job" narrative implies americans did this, when we all know it was a bunch of israeli jews who did this

>>5674749
it's tempting to believe the conventional narrative (Occam's razor, etc) but the more you look the less it makes sense.

>>5666383
I remember watching this on TV. Every classroom had a TV in the corner. She had it on and she was crying. Some of the other kids were as well. My autistic ass was sitting in the back doing pokemon battles with my friends using a link cable. I didn't think it was real, like just some weird movie. Then I got home and it was on every channel.

>>5676581
Based. Fuck Jews. Jews didn't go to the towers for work on 9-11. Looks like they escaped another holohoax

>>5671156
You can find it if you type "The truth in 5 minutes" with the quotation marks ;^)

>>5676424
This was on youtube (clips with music) is it still up? Anyone have the link?

Big Q&A by Dimitri Khalezov (nuclear demolition theory guy) dropped yesterday
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=78aIKWsXO-g

File: 1624985187533.webm (2.43 MB, 640x480)

2.43 MB WEBM

Happy 9/11, /wsg/!

>>5669373
wait a sec is dark knight and die hard trying to tell us something

File: 1700258418339698.webm (5.7 MB, 624x470)

5.7 MB WEBM

>>5666383

Where is dancing jews???

>>5676620
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sqbx37DVOZA

>>5670081
is he o-k?

File: 9889879879.webm (4.31 MB, 250x188)

4.31 MB WEBM

>>5676554

Anyone have the one with earth wind fire - september edit with the sounds of screams and reporters

File: 4cswyc-2521383554.gif (2.85 MB, 360x202)

2.85 MB GIF

>>5677046
>>5677005
>>5676997
>>5676983
>>5676982
>>5676978

>>5676898
>>5676794
>>5676758
>>5676605
>>5676596
>>5676431
>>5674069
>>5671208
>>5671056
>>5671033
>>5671032
>>5671031
>>5671030
>>5670341
>>5670217
can anyone post the one of elliot rodger crashing into the twin towers using a minivan or a car

>>5675702
>Brick crumbles into powder from stress and conventional explosives. Steel does not.
And?
>They've been around since the 1940s and in use for similar civil engineering projects throughout the Soviet Union since then
Conventional explosives have been around for hundreds of years and are infinitely easier to obtain, store, transport and use.
> Presumably, it is well-known among the authorities ("Pull it!") that nuclear demolition devices (not "warheads") were emplaced beneath the buildings
Okay, show me.

> Because all I see in this thread is fake-news crisis actors saying they saw planes and real witnesses saying there were no planes
The millions of people in New York are all fake actors?

>>5676584
No it makes perfect sense

anyone have the video of architects talking about how theybuilt the twin towers to withstand a plane crashing into it?

File: Bushy.webm (2.11 MB, 960x720)

2.11 MB WEBM

i fuckin love war

File: chris chan (3).webm (2.3 MB, 384x288)

2.3 MB WEBM

>>5666383
people over reacted to 9 11 from day one and this was deliberately encouraged by our leaders