Compares the destruction of the World Trade Center buildings (North and South Towers and Building 7) with controlled demolitions. Uses voice-overs of Peter Jennings and Richard Gage of "Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth."

I encourage people to watch 9/11: Blueprint for Truth on YouTube. It is a two hour scientific presentation by Richard Gage, founder of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth. It is impossible to provide evidence beyond a reasonable doubt in a three minute video like mine, and I don't claim to do so. I merely draw a comparison and ask people to engage in discussion about it. If you want more evidence for controlled demolition, I would watch this:

9/11: Blueprint for Truth

{jwplayer}&file=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ptvvbaR0-U&type=youtube&title="9/11: Controlled Demolition Comparison"&image=http://www.911tap.org/images/site/evidence/videos/videos-by-others/controlled-demolition/img/controlled-demolition-comparison-poster-img.jpg{/jwplayer}

Marvin P. Bush, the president's younger brother, was a principal in a company called Securacom that provided security for the World Trade Center, United Airlines, and Dulles International Airport. The company was backed by KuwAm, a Kuwaiti-American investment firm on whose board Marvin Bush also served.

According to its present CEO, Barry McDaniel, the company had an ongoing contract to handle security at the World Trade Center "up to the day the buildings fell down."

The company lists as government clients "the U.S. Army, U.S. Navy, U.S Air force, and the Department of Justice," in projects that "often require state-of-the-art security solutions for classified or high-risk government sites."

Stratesec (Securacom) differs from other security companies which separate the function of consultant from that of service provider. The company defines itself as a "single-source" provider of "end-to-end" security services, including everything from diagnosis of existing systems to hiring subcontractors to installing video and electronic equipment. It also provides armored vehicles and security guards.

The Dulles Internation contract is another matter. Dulles is regarded as "absolutely a sensitive airport," according to security consultant Wayne Black, head of a Florida-based security firm, due to its location, size, and the number of international carriers it serves.

Black has not heard of Stratesec, but responds that for one company to handle security for both airports and airlines is somewhat unusual. It is also delicate for a security firm serving international facilities to be so interlinked with a foreign-owned company: "Somebody knew somebody," he suggested, or the contract would have been more closely scrutinized.

Heightened WTC Security Alert Had Just Been Lifted

The World Trade Center was destroyed just days after a heightened security alert was lifted at the landmark 110-story towers, security personnel said yesterday [September 11]. Daria Coard, 37, a guard at Tower One, said the security detail had been working 12-hour shifts for the past two weeks because of numerous phone threats. But on Thursday [September 6], bomb-sniffing dogs were abruptly removed. [NY NewsDay]

Pre-9/11 World Trade Center Power-Down

On the weekend of 9/8, 9/9 there was a 'power down' condition in WTC tower 2, the south tower. This power down condition meant there was no electrical supply for approx 36 hrs from floor 50 up... "Of course without power there were no security cameras, no security locks on doors and many, many 'engineers' coming in and out of the tower."

Marvin Bush was in New York on 9/11

{jwplayer}&file=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w-0Ms7mId34&type=youtube&title="9/11 CONSPIRACY: A CONTROLLED DEMOLITION DESTROYED THE WTC!!"&image=http://www.911tap.org/images/site/evidence/videos/videos-by-others/controlled-demolition/img/controlled-demolition-comparison-poster-img.jpg{/jwplayer}

We present this video for to augment your perspective of what happened on September 11, 2001 at the World Trade Center Complex. This video is available to the public on YouTube, but if anyone is aware of copyright restrictions on the use of this video please let us know through the Contact Us form.

We think this video is well done and would like to know the contact information of the authors of this video so that we can properly represent their interests on this site.

We suggest that you watch this video in its entirety.

The Nation Institute of Standards and Technology asserted, in their final report on the collapse of the World Trade Center Buildings, that what caused the upper section to begin collapsing was when the floor trusses began sagging and pulled the perimeter columns inward. But this video clearly shows the antenna at the top of the World Trade Center North Tower, which sat on top of of the core columns, moved downward several feet before the rest of the top of the building began moving downward. This suggests that the core columns were cut first and since all the trusses were connected to the core columns they would have been pulled inward as the core began moving downward in advance of the general collapse of the top section of the building.

{jwplayer}&file=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SiEVzlIfSXk&type=youtube&title="2012 New Evidence of 9/11 being an Inside Job Controlled Demolition"&image=http://www.911tap.org/images/site/evidence/videos/videos-by-others/controlled-demolition/img/911-conspiracy-a-controlled-demolition-poster-img.jpg{/jwplayer}

The Toronto Hearings were held at Ryerson University in Toronto, Canada, during the 10th anniversary weekend of 9/11.

September 11, 2011 marks the 10th anniversary of the events in New York and Washington that have played a dramatic role in modern history. These events have provided a pretext for a War on Terror that has replaced the Cold War as a global conflict framework within which military invasions and occupations have taken place, as well as violations of international law and human rights and a widespread assault on the civil rights crucial to democracies. Global military spending, which began a rapid downswing after the end of the Cold War, has, with the help of the official account of the 9/11 attacks, risen to Cold War levels and continues to rise. The focus on military solutions to complex human problems has sidetracked humanity at the very moment when international cooperation is most required to address genuine challenges that humanity faces.

In the meantime, the credibility of the official reports on the 9/11 attacks (by the 9/11 Commission, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the National Institute of Standards and Technology, the Federal Bureau of Investigation and other government or government-appointed agencies) has been questioned by millions of citizens in the United States and abroad, including victim family members, expert witnesses and international legal experts.

The International Center for 9/11 Studies has therefore decided to sponsor four days of International Hearings in the city of Toronto, Canada on the 10th anniversary of the events of September 11, 2001. During these Hearings, which will be broadcasted via the Internet, various expert witnesses will present the best available evidence into the case, discovered in the ten years since the 9/11 events occurred.

For more information please visit:

http://torontohearings.org/
http://rememberbuilding7.org/10/
http://www.ic911studies.org/
http://www.journalof911studies.com/
http://www.ae911truth.org/
http://911speakout.org/
http://911research.wtc7.net/
http://www.911timeline.net/

The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) maintained in its August 2008 Final Draft Report, and the associated technical briefing, that WTC Building 7 took 40% longer to collapse than if it had been in free-fall.

NIST Project Leader Shyam Sunder explained that WTC 7 could not have come down in free-fall, because there was resistance to the fall provided by the steel structure underneath. But a determined high school physics teacher in central California, David Chandler, demonstrated that NIST was using fraudulently manipulated data to try to show a slower rate of collapse.

David Chandler - "There is ample evidence, from both witnesses and recordings, of explosions associated with the destruction of World Trade Center Building 7 (WTC 7). NIST sidestepped investigating explosions and explosives by setting up an artificially high threshold of interest.

They swept aside any testimony or recordings of explosions that would not register 130-140 dB one kilometer away. They established this criterion using RDX (one of the loudest explosives) in a scenario that produced a far higher sound level than other possible uses of explosives to bring down the building. Then they turned around and used sound level as the sole criterion for deciding whether the use of explosives was a credible hypothesis. By this maneuver, they sidestepped investigating testimony of explosives or possible evidence of explosive residues. This is just one more instance of fraudulent behavior on the part of the NIST investigation of the World Trade Center disaster."

WTC Building 7 in Free-fall

NIST, when confronted publicly with evidence produced by Chandler, finally admitted in its November 2008 Final Report that WTC 7 fell for 2.25 seconds in free-fall, but they brushed off this newly acknowledged fact as being "consistent with the results of the global collapse analysis," despite Sunder's earlier statement. Thus, the NIST simulation and analysis represented a mufti-million-dollar effort to avoid explaining what really happened.

Physics teacher David Chandler uses simple scientific software to understand and show the free-fall demolition of WTC7, WTC 7, Building 7.

Published on Feb 16, 2013

In its draft report, released in August 2008, NIST attempted to cover up evidence that WTC7 fell at free fall, but the cover-up was transparent. In its final report, released in November 2008, NIST finally acknowledged free fall, but couched it in a bizarre framework that continues to deny its clear significance. This video displays the brazenness of the NIST WTC7 cover-up.

[The WTC7 series has elicited a number of questions from people unclear on the details of how I did the measurements, compared to how NIST did them and how the representatives of NIST described their measurements. I have therefore created a WTC7 Measurement FAQ page: http://www.911speakout.org/WTC7-Measu...

I will also use this FAQ as a place of reference

for other questions that arise as well.]

Please watch the following video evidence and draw you own conclusions.