The catastrophic events of 9/11 served several purposes for the top criminal elements in society — the perpetrators seized resources while their legislative accomplices imposed burdensome restrictions on the citizens to make them more submissive and silent, and the event provided what was termed by the writers of PNAC one year before 9/11, as a “catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor.”
And they did this in order to create "a healthy wave of national indignation (think "Operation Northwoods") that would justify an invasion into Afganistan, which has resulted in a lengthy, expensive, deadly and needless war – All with the support of the now scared American people.
How much have corporate cronies made in the Middle east since 9/11??? Just FOLLOW the MONEY!!
I know some people would rather read the article instead of watch the video, however, you'll WANT to see this simple experiment that conclusively demonstrates, not only what DIDN'T happen, but what actually DID happen. It's very clear: Nature and physics don't lie....men, however, DO; especially men with a MONEY MOTIVE!
As yet another anniversary passes a few people out there will be celebrating 9/11. Yes. I said celebrating. Who are they and why would they be celebrating? They’re sick-in-the-head psychopaths and they’re celebrating because they made and are still making boatloads of money as they capitalize on the flat-out stupidity of the American people. And you don’t have to be a structural engineer or have a Harvard law degree to articulate the plain truth of what happened that day.
In this article/video, I'm just going to deal with a couple very obvious Cold hard facts:
Two primary theories were promoted to explain the collapse of the World Trade Center towers:
The pancake theory collapse and the Pile Driver collapse.
Both rely on gravity to be the driving force for the two motions. In other words, the force and motions were down, then out. The weight of the buildings, what said, overwhelmed the structure below, crushing supporting columns out, resulting in the acceleration of the entire structure as it collapsed all the way to the ground.
The pancake theory, where gravity drives both the down then out motions was promoted by FEMA and the American Society of Civil Engineers. PBS showed us a computer model demonstrating how the floors would continually fall down. But is that right? The creator of the physicsandreason YouTube channel (go over and give that guy some love as his work is unparalleled in the 9/11 research community) tested this using cement planks and a solid block of steel that weighed 20 lbs. He simulated the maximum allowable deflection for each floor of the world trade center. He found that the minimum number of planks needed to meet building code deflection criteria would be 4 cement planks for that particular design load. He built a tall support structure so he could test the pancake theory hopefully confirming the PBS model. Dropping the steel weight on the floors that first met WTC code deflection yielded a very different result. So he reduced the planks which didn’t meet deflection criteria and still the block decelerated and eventually stopped. Dropping the steel weight on realistic supports ALWAYS resulted in a deceleration and not an acceleration like we were lead to believe. So the pancake collapse that we were told by the American Society of Civil Engineers, FEMA and the Media was dead wrong.
If a pancake collapse were even possible (which is clearly demonstrated in the video that it's NOT), this is what such a collapse would have yielded when all the material reached it's final resting point. We would have 110 floors stacked on top of one another AND we would have seen the INCREDIBLY strong HAT TRUSS resting on the very TOP!!
This is what the hat truss would have looked like as it came to rest on top of the pile...but it wasn't there because it was blown apart.
The pile driver theory explains that the upper, lighter part of the structure crushed the larger, stronger lower part, all the way down to the ground and then the smaller section crushed itself back up. This is another down, then out theory. But is this possible? Using the same cement planks he made some small floors that could be used over and over. He then built a steel guide section so to keep the floors in place all the way down as supposedly happened on 9/11. He used weak plastic pizza cover supports as his columns. Dropping about 15% of the floor system on the lower structure always demonstrated a deceleration. He even removed the upper plastic supports to make the falling floor more dense. But it still didn’t match the observed motion and never experienced the crush down crush up result predicted by the pile driver equations.
You can see here that both the pile driver and pancake theories don't hold up. As the top portion begins to fall it is disintegrating while the lower part is not even moving. The "mass" that is supposed to be applying the downward force is being BLOWN appart!
So he made an unrealistic model where the supports were turned sideways and even weaker. The deflection was excessive, and just like the 9/11 commission, this structure was set up to fail. Finally it looked like he was starting to get the motions observed. But when you slow the action down you can still see that the upper floors always decelerate. The bottom portion of the tower had columns that were thicker and stronger on the bottom portion of the building. But in order to give benefit to the pile driver theory he developed much weaker walls with paper and match sticks. But it still didn’t yield the pile driver effect. Instead of accelerating down like towers one and two, the upper floors in the model decelerated and stopped even on the weakest of supports.
But does anyone really think the lighter top portion of this building could accelerate down through all this strong, cold hard steel by gravity alone? You know it would decelerate as it continued to hit the lower floors which, according to the laws of physics, were pushing up as an equal and opposite reaction. But since the towers were burning he set his replica on fire and here were the results. Still decelaration.
No practical experiment has ever demonstrated the down and out motions observed using the pancake or piledriver theories. But what if the official story on the sequence of force were wrong? What if, instead of DOWN then OUT, the sequence was OUT than DOWN? It was time to try something else.
Placing a firecracker in side the paper wall, this experiment shows that, even though the load above exceeded the deflection criteria, it was still able to support all the floors. In each test, the horizontal motion was first, followed by the downward motions. Out then down. Out then down. But this test required more explosives for this controlled demolition. Placing the firecrackers in each floor and connecting them by a long fuse inside the structure to each one, he stacked the structure upwards leaving the fuse accessible. The test was completed by stacking all the floors each with a firecracker within it’s walls connected by a long fuse, he lit it and ran. Check out the results. Do they look familiar? The collapse wasn’t perfect, but it looked like it was starting to replicate what happened with the twin towers. The only problem is that lighting fuses is very difficult to time. But remote controlled wireless detonators could have easily replicated the motions observed in all three buildings on 9/11
Fire fighters testimony
We can clearly see which experiment demonstrates what actually happened that day.. As soon as the walls are blown and removed, the top accelerates down with no resistance below to reduce the velocity. The top cannot continue the downward motion until the walls blow. So, a rather than the down, then out narrative offered by crafty government officials and their mainstream media accomplices, natural law teaches us that the sequence of the motion was out, then down. Out, then down. The walls were first blown out and acceleration could resume
There are only two differences between the collapse of the actual towers and this experiment. At the end of the experiment, when the motion stopped the end result yielded a high pile of stacked floors, one on top of the other at ground level. On 9/11 there were no floors at ground level. There were no core columns. In fact the pile left by a quarter mile tall building wasn’t even a single story tall.
This means that the explosives that were used that day to bring down all three buildings, WTC 1, 2 and 7, were powerful enough to reduce each floor to powder which blanketed Manhattan and turn steel beams into molten metal. My question to you is: After seeing this video, are you comfortable parroting the claim that a couple of aluminum cans with several thousands of gallons of fuel, striking a couple buildings with massive steel columns over 700 feet in the air, could reduce two quarter mile tall buildings and a 47 story steel framed office building which wasn’t even hit by an airplane, into small piles of soot and ash is a logical explanation for a reasoning mind?
And, of course, not discussion of 9/11 is complete without a specific mention, or at least footage, of the mysterious "collapse" (actually DEMOLITION) of World Trade 7
I'm Brian, the owner and creator of the YouTube Channel HighImpactFlix and the HighImpactFlix Facebook page. My aim is to create useful, relevant, exciting and engaging content that will inform and IMPACT those who take the time to view it. Bottom line: I strive to make it worth your while to check out my videos!
Thanks for watching/reading. If you enjoyed this or, if it impacted you in any positive way, consider sharing and commenting. And, if you want, Upvote and