Poll: More Americans Believe World Trade Center 7 Was Demolished On 9/11 than Believe the Government’s Explanation

What Do You Believe?

Preface:  Americans have learned in the past decade that our government lied to us about:

But do Americans think that the government lied about 9/11?

A new poll shows that they do. At least about World Trade Center Building 7.

We’re not talking about the Twin Towers … although Building 7 was part of the same complex. No planes hit Building 7, no one was killed when Building 7 fell, no wars were launched on the basis of Building 7, and no civil rights were lost because of the destruction of Building 7.

In other words, Building 7 is a “safe topic” we can discuss without heated emotion. And numerous high-level architects and engineers have already debunked the government’s claims.

Following is a press release from ReThink911 and Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth – a group of more than 2,000 architects and engineers – concerning a new poll by YouGov.

How would you answer the poll questions?

On the 12th anniversary of 9/11, a new national survey by the polling firm YouGov reveals that one in two Americans have doubts about the government’s account of 9/11, and after viewing video footage of World Trade Center Building 7’s collapse, 46% suspect that it was caused by a controlled demolition. Building 7, a 47-story skyscraper, collapsed into its own footprint late in the afternoon on 9/11.

The poll was sponsored by ReThink911, a global public awareness campaign launched on September 1. The campaign includes a 54-foot billboard in Times Square and a variety of transit and outdoor advertising in 11 other cities, all posing the question, “Did you know a third tower fell on 9/11?

Among the poll’s findings:

  • 38% of Americans have some doubts about the official account of 9/11, 10% do not believe it at all, and 12% are unsure about it;
  • 46%, nearly one in two, are not aware that a third tower collapsed on 9/11. Of those who are aware of Building 7’s collapse, only 19% know the building’s name;
  • After seeing video footage of Building 7′s collapse:
    • 46% are sure or suspect it was caused by controlled demolition, compared to 28% who are sure or suspect fires caused it, and 27% who don’t know; [in other words, more people think controlled demolition than believe the government’s narrative]
    • By a margin of nearly two to one, 41% support a new investigation of Building 7′s collapse, compared to 21% who oppose it.

30-Second Video Shown to 1,194 Survey Respondents:

“The poll shows quite clearly what we already knew. Most people who see Building 7’s collapse have trouble believing that fires brought it down,” said Richard Gage, a member of the American Institute of Architects and founder of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, the campaign’s major sponsor. “It simply doesn’t look like a natural building collapse, and that’s because all the columns have been removed at once to allow it to come down symmetrically in free-fall. The evidence of controlled demolition is overwhelming. As more and more people learn about Building 7, public demand for a new investigation grows. People want the truth.”

According to the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), normal office fires caused the failure of a single column, starting a chain reaction that brought Building 7 down. More than 2,000 architects and engineers have signed the Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth petition that questions NIST’s explanation of the building’s collapse.

“Even the government’s own computer model disproves its theory. It looks nothing like the actual collapse,” said Tony Szamboti, a mechanical engineer from the Philadelphia area. “Not only that, they refuse to release the data that would allow us to verify their model. In the world of science, this is as bad as it gets. I’m glad most people can look at the collapse and see the obvious.”

The ReThink911 campaign calls for a new investigation into Building 7’s collapse, as well as the destruction of the Twin Towers. The YouGov poll and the ad campaign were financed with more than $225,000 in donations from thousands of supporters.

All figures, unless otherwise stated, are from YouGov Plc. Total sample size was 1194 adults. Fieldwork was undertaken between 27th – 29th August 2013. The survey was carried out online. The figures have been weighted and are representative of all US adults (aged 18+).

This entry was posted in Politics / World News, Science / Technology. Bookmark the permalink.
  • Albury Smith

    Please urge Box Boy* and his “experts” to show you on video with audio how
    explosives or incendiaries secretly cut the 4.91″ flanges, 3.07″ webs, and 215
    sq in cross sections of W14 X 730 columns like the 11 of 24 in WTC 7’s core, and
    the 4 corner columns in each tower’s
    If they ever HAD TO do
    it, this “debate” would be OVER.

    *Box Boy’s ONLY 9/11

    • gozounlimited

      I’m sure Marvin Bush can help you out………. 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, Burns noted, was backed by KuwAm, a Kuwaiti-American investment firm on whose board Marvin Burns also
      served… read more….. http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/911security.html

      • Albury Smith

        Securacom furnished & installed electronic surveillance equipment at the WTC and Marvin Bush WAS a board member of Securacom until June of 2000, i.e. ~15 months before the al Qaeda suicide attacks of 9/11. The PAPD ran WTC security, not contractors.

        Once again, please urge Box Boy* and his “experts” to show you on video with audio how explosives or incendiaries secretly cut the 4.91″ flanges, 3.07″ webs, and 215 sq in cross sections of W14 X 730 columns like the 11 of 24 in WTC 7’s core, and the 4 corner columns in each tower’s core:
        If they ever HAD TO do it, this “debate” would be OVER.
        *Box Boy’s ONLY 9/11 “research”:

        • gozounlimited

          Your stuck….. I’m sorry. Give it some time….

          • Albury Smith

            I’ve been suggesting that for several years. Doesn’t scientific method apply to everyone?

          • Jack

            yes… youve been trolling the internet 24/7 with your gormless pathetic lies for years now..

            and the longer you keep at it.. the more people doubt the official version.. keep it up idiot.. youll soon be the only one left

          • Albury Smith

            What lies?

          • Jack

            @ the gormless shill..

            “What lies?”

            pretending that the official account of 911 is not a lie, is simply another lie.

          • Albury Smith

            The official account of their 9/11 Planes Operation works for these people:



            From OBL’s 1998 (second) fatwa: “The ruling to kill the Americans
            and their allies-civilians and military-is an individual duty for every Muslim
            who can do it in any country in which it is possible to do it, in order to
            liberate the al-Aqsa Mosque and the holy mosque [Mecca] from their grip, and in
            order for their armies to move out of all the lands of Islam, defeated and
            unable to threaten any Muslim. This is in accordance with the words of Almighty
            God, “and fight the pagans all together as they fight you all together,” and
            “fight them until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail
            justice and faith in God [blah, blah, blah…]”

          • Jack

            doesnt matter how many times you post your banal inanities shill boy..



            they just aint working, youre getting lonelier and lonelier… read the title of this article again.. and repeat.. until it sinks in..

            “Poll: More Americans Believe World Trade Center 7 Was Demolished On 9/11 than Believe the Government’s Explanation”

            why? because its the truth, and you cant fight the truth fool..


          • Albury Smith

            Work on this one for a while, doofus:

            Troofers are hilarious.

          • Jack

            freefall acceleration – as acknowledged begrudgingly by nist… work on that chuckles

            what is the opposite to truth? you think lies are funny? hilarious.

          • Albury Smith

            Here’s video of a real C/D:

            Using your cause-divining junk science, tell me just by measuring the acceleration at various stages which floors collapsed because of explosives and which ones solely or almost solely from gravity. Since you’re a top C/D expert, I’m sure you know that explosives aren’t planted on every column on every floor in real explosive demolitions.
            NIST didn’t “begrudgingly” acknowledge the ~2.25 seconds at g for WTC 7’s EXTERIOR; it just isn’t that significant to competent structural engineers, and is fully explained by the framing details and collapse progression.

          • Jack

            dont need you to tell me what a real cd looks like idiot.. the world saw that on 911.. try keep up stupid – your pathetic attempt to steer away from talking about freefall acceleration is noted.. not a fan of the implications are you dumdum..

          • Albury Smith

            You do need me to tell you what a real C/D looks like, idiot. Landmark Tower was one; the WTC hi-rises weren’t. “try keep up stupid.”

          • Albury Smith

            They’re watching you:
            TWO layers of Reynolds Wrap won’t be enough.

    • http://suijurisforum.com/ noone special

      I don’t get you point? Are you saying fire did what explosives and incendiary’s could not?
      Or are you simply saying Gage’s model sucks?

      Do me a favor. Explain away 100ft of freefall.

      • Albury Smith

        WTC 7’s EXTERIOR collapsed at g for ~2.25 seconds. The NIST model and collapse progression clearly show why there was no MEASURABLE resistance from t=1.75 to t=4 seconds. The interior was already collapsing, so g could theoretically have been EXCEEDED for part of that time. Cause divining building collapses by their acceleration is stupid.
        Gage and his model both suck, and I’ve suggested a simple and straightforward way to demonstrate his “theory.”

        • http://suijurisforum.com/ noone special

          Ok almost started buying it till you said G was exceeded. But what mechanism would that happen? You forget about Galileo or something?

          I also know the NIST report has omissions and erroneous elements of crucial data. Those omissions and “errors” are specifically in regard to the structural elements that , according to NIST, where involved in collapse.

          Which brings me to another point.
          Scientific fraud is at EPIDEMIC proportions. The NIST report is a prime example of it.

          The thing about “scientific theories” is that all that needs to be done is to falsify ONE essential fact. Unless it can be shown that the deviation is a special case the theory is wrong.

          9/11 has more “special cases” than any other phenomena known to man.

          • Albury Smith

            The interior framing was connected to the exterior and had already been falling for ~10 seconds before the exterior began collapsing. If you don’t understand how g could’ve been exceeded for part of the time, take a physics course.
            The NIST reports are accepted by the ASCE, NCSEA, SEI, RIBA, AIA, structuremag.org, ENR, Journal of Engineering Mechanics, etc. Box Boy and his clowns are ignored by all of them.

          • http://suijurisforum.com/ noone special

            What you no proposing is impossible if rigidly connected. If not rigidly connected where does the slack come from? I guess the interior was built like an accordion … Also ,There is no observable positive jerk . Try again.

            I don’t care who NIST reports are accepted by. Pleas to authority are a logical fallacy. As are strawmen , pleas to majority and ad hominims. I think you';ve covered them all.

            You could learn something fomr Feynman

          • Albury Smith

            As I suggested before, take a physics course. Real SEs don’t divine the causes of building collapses by their acceleration, and part the ~2.25 seconds at free fall for WTC 7’s EXTERIOR could actually have exceeded g. The W14 X 500 exterior columns were 100% moment connected to spandrel beams, so they could only all stand or all collapse together, and once they buckled in unison at t=1.75 seconds, the falling interior framing could have added to the acceleration.

            I’ve suggested that Box Boy and his “experts” show us on video with audio how W14 X 730 columns are secretly cut with explosives or incendiaries (he can’t make up his mind which imaginary substance it was), so it’s he who could learn something from Feynman.

          • Albury Smith

            I almost started believing you knew at least something about science until you confused “G” with “g.”

          • http://suijurisforum.com/ noone special

            I don’t know what gave you the idea I confused anything. You don’t see any equations do you?

            They only one mentioning the gravitational constant is you.
            You made the ridiculous claim elements of the building exceeded g.
            There is no way for this to happen if the elements are rigidly connected.

            That only leaves a couple scenarios that would be such a sheer fantasy I know you won’t go there,

            The fact is this, elements of the building fell at free fall acceleration for over 100 ft.

            That means 100 ft of the vertical building was missing.

            As far as your assertion that Se’s don’t divine the cause of collapse by their accelertaion, you are 100% correct.

            They go over the physical evidence and do experiments and tests on that evidence.

            You know as well as everyone else that the evidence was disappeared.
            There is plenty of Congressional testimony to this fact. They only verifiable piece of evidence with a secure chain of custody was the appendix C FEMA samples.

            I don’t think you want to go there .
            Unless you really feel like debating how diesel fuel caused a eutectic reaction that caused intergranular melting and corrosion of the WTC steel.

            Maybe NIST can incorporate that in to their computer model too.

          • Albury Smith

            “g” and “G” are two separate constants, genius. There were plenty of SEAoNY, PANYNJ, FEMA BPAT, NSF, etc. structural engineers at the site during the 8 months of cleanup, and Stevie Wonder would’ve seen C/D evidence on the steel. It wouldn’t have been 2 rusty pieces with odd corrosion that no one could figure out; it would’ve been 1000s of explosively-cut columns. There are still plenty of pieces of steel in a hangar at JFK and at NIST’s HQ in Gaithersburg, MD. Chemically testing it for whatever would be a total waste of time. The majority of it was shipped out as it was being removed from the pile because it’s worth ~$100.ton and would cost a fortune to move and store unnecessarily.
            Divining the cause of a building collapse by timing it is just plain stupid. The ~2.25 seconds at g was for WTC 7’s EXTERIOR, which could actually have exceeded free fall, since the interior was already collapsing. Try your cause-divining crap on this real C/D:

            and tell me which floors collapsed because of explosives and which ones solely from gravity.
            Stick to Supersizing™ Happy Meals™ for your customers and leave forensic
            structural engineering to competent and experienced SEs

  • http://suijurisforum.com/ noone special

    Please issue a correction for “no one was killed when Building 7 fell”

    A Secret Service agent (Craig Miller) was killed in building 7. It’s in the Congressional Record, reported in the news and was on the US Treasury website.

    • biggestbird

      Barry Jennings, the asst. to Giuliani’s Emergency Magmt. leader; the same one that dropped dead right before he was supposed to testify before NIST was in the building when the explosions went off and as he came down through the powerless, dark hallways and out through a hole in the wall created by the explosion and was “stepping over the BODIES”. That being said, I read this rather quickly, but I read the premise that no wars were started over bldg. 7; it’s all based as if the entire complex was just the Twin Towers. This was an afterthought destroyed to destroy evidence contained within and better ignored, hence little time or effort was spent on trying to explain or justify why it came down. It was the left hand of the right-handed illusionist!

      • Albury Smith

        Here’s an example of a real controlled demolition:

        What a pity the people of Dallas/Ft. Worth didn’t have a “whistle blower” like Barry Jennings to tell them that demolition explosives were detonated, innit?

  • Reader11722
  • gozounlimited

    ReThink 9/11: The Truth That Could Still Unravel an Empire of Lies…. Though this subject matter has been heavily trodden already by many courageous individuals concerned about the truth, it remains – 12 years after the fact – critical that anyone who doesn’t want to go on blindly as a victim in this world to confront this evidence and awaken to a realization, however harsh, that we are living through a dangerous worldof the unreal…. http://www.activistpost.com/2013/09/rethink-911-truth-that-could-still.html

    9/11 in 60 Seconds: Mass Trauma That Shocked the National Mind …. ‘The spiritual supporting pillars of the world’s societal structure were essentially demolished on 9/11…symbolically, allegorically,
    ritualistically and literally….. http://www.activistpost.com/2013/09/911-in-60-seconds-mass-trauma-that.html

    After 12 Years, It Is Time For The Truth! ….. Once again, I am addressing this heinous conspiracy on behalf of the approximately 3,000 grieving families as well as the American people who deserve to be told the truth…… http://www.activistpost.com/2013/09/after-12-years-it-is-time-for-truth.html

  • edwinalowes

    The one thing that i remember the most clearly over the
    past 40 years of my school days at Brandeis University in 1970’s are my
    student adviser’s words that when he was growing up that his grand
    parents and parents used the term “‘goyishe kup,’” meaning that the
    “Non-Jews are Stupid”
    Later in life I learned that the exact translation of “GOYISHE KUP” means that the “Cattle are STUPID”..
    remember him recalling whatt his father told him when he was growing up
    in Eastern Europe. One of them being that when his father was in high
    school he and a group of friends would skip school early on Fridays and
    go over to his friend’s father’s butcher shop. That they would buy at
    cost any cows , that had not been butchered by the end of the day on
    Friday before the start of shabat . They would take the cow home and
    wash it and then the boys would procede to “beat the udders of the cows
    so that they would swell up and turn pink” so as to sell them to the
    “GOYISHE KUP” as milk producing cows.
    The part that I remember
    him asking me if the East Europeans are so naive, so gullible and so
    stupid to buy old “non milk producing cows” from a bunch of young Jewish
    So thinking of it now I agree with the Jewish saying that
    the “GOYISHE KUP” are indeed” Stupid” as they believe that a Bunch of
    Arab Moslem Kids who were not able to Fly a Cessna Airplane took it upon
    themselves to FLY a Jumbo 747 and outwitted the US Militaryand Civilian
    authorities. The “Jewish Lightning Insurance Scam” of the 1960’s is
    still alive and well has been put to good use by Larry Silverstein in
    putting 15 million down and comming out with 7 billion dollars for
    buidings that no one wanted to buy because it would have cost a billion
    dollars to remove the asbestos from. Then on top of that the people in
    America actually believe that they actually decide who is elected
    President or for that that actual VOTE is really counted and makes a
    difference in deciding who represents them in the White House and

    bollyn.com , rense.com




    Yeh I agree that the AmericanNon-Jews are indeed American “GOYISHE KUP” or “STUPID CATTLE”!

    • gozounlimited

      Phooey! fooey, pfui pavolyeh petseleh (yiddishkeit)

    • Albury Smith

      One hijacker in each crew (Atta, al-Shehhi, Hanjour, Jarrah) had an FAA commercial pilot certificate earned for training in Boeing cockpit simulators for wide-bodied twins, i.e. 737s, 757s, 767s…not Cessnas or the jumbo 747s. There was NO asbestos problem in any WTC building; WTC 7 was built LONG after the code revision, the South Tower wasn’t closed in until after the code changed, and only 38 floors of the North Tower had any at all, most of which had been abated during tenant fit-outs before 2001.
      What is the point of lying about a deadly al Qaeda suicide attack on the US?

      • Mike215

        According to the 911 Commission Report, they were trained in simulators, but because they kept failing their written tests (in English) they were not allowed to actually fly any planes. Yet the report goes on that their flying abilities were so good you would think they were the Blue Angels: cut all voice communication, change the navigation computers where they could divert the planes 500 miles from their original course and hit their targets with great accuracy.
        For people who could not understand English, yet were taking courses in flight schools where they kept failing their tests AND NEVER ACTUALLY FLEW AN AIRPLANE, they did pretty well where tehy could be regarded as members of the Blue Angels.

        • Albury Smith

          YOU might think they were the Blue Angels, but all they had to do was navigate and steer already-airborne Boeing wide-bodied twins in perfect VFR weather conditions into huge targets using nothing more than the skills gained in their cockpit simulator training. They also spoke adequate English and understood it, didn’t cut off all voice communication (which requires flipping a switch), and overrode the autopilot navigation so they could steer manually.
          Flying an actual airplane requires takeoff and landing skills, and they didn’t have or need them. Doesn’t it strike you as odd that they picked flight training of airliners as a hobby with no intention of becoming pilots? I think your imaginary evildoers picked great “patsies.”

          • Mike215

            According to commission report, the flight schools thought that these Muslims were so stupid that they would not even allow them to fly a single engine Piper Cub. You are telling me actually flying skills are not necessary to carry out their suicide mission.
            I remember watching a history channel program about training of tank crewmen on simulators. The officer in charge told them their experiences mean nothing until they actually get into a tank. The same could be said about these aircraft simulators.

          • Albury Smith

            All four were crappy pilots who lacked the necessary qualifications to rent Cessnas and other small aircraft and fly them unsupervised, and none of them could hang glide or do a triple Salchow/triple toe loop either. It does not take great aviation skills to steer and navigate an already-airborne 767 or 757 into a huge target in perfect VFR weather conditions after basic training in cockpit simulators for those models.
            What al Qaeda member or relative of one has denied the mainstream account of their 9/11/2001 Planes Operation suicide attacks on the evil US infidel in the last 13 years?

          • Mike215

            When you claim that non English speaking Muslim who failed all tests in their aviation schools and were not allowed even to fly a Piper Cub would have no problem in flying a jet airliner 500 miles off course and hit its target with great accuracy. And you may wonder why nearly 60% of the people in recent polls do not believe the 911 commission report.

          • Albury Smith

            When did I or any other honest and knowledgeable person ever claim that the 9/11 hijacker/pilots were non-English speaking, and why is flying 500 miles off course so difficult to do? Thousands of pilots hit the exact centerlines of runways every day, so why do you think hitting huge buildings is so remarkable in perfect weather conditions? If you owned a Piper Cub, would you rent it to an inexperienced pilot who’d never trained in taking off and landing one?
            Do United & American Airlines and Boeing question the mainstream account of the 9/11/2001 al Qaeda suicide attacks on the US? WHAT in the 9/11 Commission Report don’t these alleged “60% of people” believe?

          • Mike215

            The 911 Commission Report (see google) stated that nearly all of the hijackers came from rural areas in the Middle East and most did not even know how to read and write in their own languages, and that is why the kept failing all the written tests in the aviation schools and not allowed to fly any airplanes. But the Report goes on to claim that the airplane simulators made up for all this lack of knowledge anf made them into pilots as good the Blue Angels.
            Of course recent polls show that over 60% of the American public do not believe this report, which forget to mention that Building 7 collapsed even though it was not hit.

          • Albury Smith

            What damaged or destroyed NYC buildings other than the WTC towers are mentioned in the 9/11 Commission Report (that you’ve obviously never read)?

          • Albury Smith

            No one ever claimed that your Sacred Tower 7 was hit by anything but flaming debris from the North Tower collapse. Here are some of many people who’d be glad to explain to you why it finally collapsed at ~5:21 PM:

          • Mike215

            Then why did the 911 Commission Report did not even mention the collapse of Building 7?

          • Albury Smith

            Have you ever considered actually reading the 9/11 Commission Report instead of just asking foolish questions about it? The Commission members were not forensic structural engineers, and even a brief look at the contents page should tell you that reporting the collateral damage to nearby NYC buildings wasn’t in the scope of their investigation.
            Read the bios on the hijacker/pilots you keep lying about too. All 4 had FAA commercial pilot certificates and at least 3 of the 4 had attended college.

          • Mike215

            The Report is complete fiction. See 911 Commission Report 28 missing pages. They were taken out by Bush and are still secret. They deal with foreign governments actually controlling the attacks. If that is true, then the hijackers were government agents and not a bunch of peasants.

          • Albury Smith

            If they’re secret, then how do you know what’s in them? Al Qaeda doesn’t disagree with the 9/11 Commission Report, so why don’t you enlighten them?

          • Mike215

            Where does it state that Al Qaeda does not disagree with this report? Mean these terrorists actually sit down and documented the fact that the report is telling the truth. So the criminals are running the prison? That is a great source.

          • Albury Smith

            If you were being hunted dead or alive by the most powerful military on earth for something you didn’t do, you’d mention it to the media at every opportunity. Al Qaeda brags about their 9/11 Planes Operation suicide attacks on the evil US infidel and threatens more of them.

          • Mike215

            Al Qaeda hates the US and the West so they just took advantage of the publicity about 911 knowing they were not responsible and the country really responsible, Israel, would never admit it.

          • Albury Smith

            So your al Qaeda heroes just like being hunted and killed by the evil US? You’re spewing nonsense.

          • Mike215

            Saudi Arabia wants the secret 28 pages released to the public because they know they were innocent in these attacks. Meanwhile, Jewish groups have been fighting to keep them secret. So what does it tell you?

          • Albury Smith

            It tells me that you just invent your own fantasies.

          • Mike215

            You think I am making up the missing 28 pages of the Report? Then look up “911 Commission Report missing 28 pages ” on google and read the articles for yourself.

          • Albury Smith

            You made up the part about SA wanting the pages released and da Joos “fighting to keep them secret.” You’re also fantasizing about why the pages weren’t released. Since the 9/11 Commission Report is all about al Qaeda, what do they think of it?

          • Mike215

            “What does al Qaeda thinks about the report.?” It is like asking a dog why he does his thing on the sidewalk instead of the street. The dog will bark and continue to do his thing on the sidewalk. You get the same response from al Qaeda.

          • Albury Smith

            What response have you gotten from al Qaeda? If da Joos did their 9/11 Planes Operation suicide attacks in the US, why would they want to be hunted and killed by the evil US infidel for it?

          • Mike215

            If you look up the articles on google, “911 Commission Report missing 28 pages” to see the speculation on which country was in charge of 911/ There are two choices: Saudi Arabia and Israel, but that chose is still secret.

          • Albury Smith

            It’s neither. Duh.

          • Mike215

            That is amazing that hijackers who do not know English and could not even read or write in their own language were able to understand the complex electronics of those airliners. So they could read the control the computer screens but they could keep bringing up the correct screens to run the airliner.
            That is amazing! I am a college graduate and I cannot understand the displays on those airliners, much less bringing up the correct info. The 911 Commission Report makes the Warren Commission Report look sane and rational. At least they mention Oswald’s name.

          • Albury Smith

            The 9/11 Commission Report names all 19 of the 9/11 hijackers. It truly “is amazing that hijackers who do not know English and could not even read or write in their own language were able to” get FAA commercial pilot certificates and order the passengers and flight attendants around.

          • Mike215

            Since the hijackers did not know English and could not real or write in their own language, how did the work the simulators?

          • Albury Smith

            All 4 hijacker/pilots had FAA commercial pilot certificates, so please notify the FAA that they were unqualified to have them. Look up their educational backgrounds instead of lying about them. At least 3 of the 4 had college backgrounds, and all 4 could communicate sufficiently in English. Muhammad Atta was recorded speaking clear English to the passengers of AA 11.

          • Mike215

            I do not know how they got their certificates, but they fail the written tests in the schools and were not allowed to fly any planes as a result.

          • Albury Smith

            Written tests on what? They were very inexperienced pilots who knew nothing about taking off and landing airliners, but didn’t need to know that on 9/11. Ask the FAA if you don’t know what an FAA commercial pilot certificate is.

          • Mike215

            Look up p.242 of the 911 Report where two of the pilots tried to make practice runs up and down the Hudson valley in rented planes with instructors Two of thee pilots were totally incompetent as pilots with very bad piloting skills. They were so bad the instructors refused to fly with them. Yet the Report tells us they had no problem piloting the airliners hundreds of miles off course and perfectly hitting their targets like the Blue Angels.

          • Albury Smith

            Who has ever claimed that Atta, al-Shehhi, Hanjour, and Jarrah were good pilots? Why do you think it takes the Blue Angels to crash already airborne planes into enormous buildings that can be seen for more than 50 miles? They knew how to steer and navigate 767s and 757s, and that’s all they needed to do.

          • Mike215

            I just found out that the Commission Report is all lies. See 911 Commission Report 28 missing pages. 28 pages were taken out of the Report by Bush and are still secret. They blame foreign governments for the attacks, but they do not mention which ones because that is still secret. Speculation is that it is either Saudi or Israel. Anyway, if a government sponsored these attacks, then everything we have been told are lies.

          • Albury Smith

            This document contains information deliberately removed from the public version of it:
            If the evil US gubmint opts not to release some classified information within a report, does that make the publicly released part of it false?

          • Mike215

            If the report says that hijackers were trained government agents working directly for a foreign government then everything else in the Report cannot be trusted, especially if Israel was the country behind the attack.

          • Albury Smith

            That isn’t what the 9/11 Commission Report says, so your hypothetical is meaningless. I’d suggest reading it before offering all of this spurious conjecture.

          • Mike215

            The 28 missing pages of the Report dealt with the role of a foreign power in the attacks. The name of that country is being kept secret and that is what all the screaming is about. See 911 Commission Report 28 missing pages on google.

          • Albury Smith

            The pages apparently dealt with foreign ENTITIES, not nations, that may have aided al Qaeda in its Planes Operation suicide attacks on the evil US infidel, and there are both political and intelligence concerns in publicly releasing every detail. They most likely included wealthy Saudi, Yemeni, and other M.E. Arabs. If any nation other than the Taliban government in Afghanistan was complicit in the slightest, it was Iran.

          • Mike215

            IF the hijackers are trained government agents taking direct orders from foreign government then the rest of the report is meaningless. We are dealing now with an act of war not a simple terrorist attack.

          • Albury Smith

            Al Qaeda was/is not government-affiliated. Saudi Arabia banished OBL in the early ’90s and Israel doesn’t suicide attack its most powerful ally.

          • Mike215

            The report said that a government such as Saudi Arabia or Israel was actually in charge of the attacks. As Qaeda had nothing to do with it. As for Israel being in charge, read about they tried to sink the USS Liberty and kill everybody on board. See THE DAY ISRAEL ATTACKED THE US on google. Even in World War II German subs never machine gun the lifeboats which the Israel gun boats tried to do. The out did the Nazis and 911 could be traced back to the attack on our ship because the Israelis responsible were never brought to justice.

          • Albury Smith

            If Israel “tried to sink the USS Liberty and kill everybody on board,” then WHY DIDN’T THEY SUCCEED? Why does every US president and congress since 1967 believe that it was mistaken identity? Read & learn:

  • EffexZoxStyle
  • James

    Personally, I believe the 9-11 conspiracies must be kept alive by misinformationalists – wanting to create outrage and distract non-scientific and gullible people.

    So all the evidence of a conspiracy for this building is based on the video of it falling? – FAIL

    It takes literally months to prepare a medium sized building for controlled demolition. WTC7 was not a small building, but a very large one. It would have taken the better part of a year to plan and execute the controlled demolition of this single building. It would have taken thousands of pounds of explosives, designed and placed precisely. Placing the explosives and wiring them would have taken weeks and required quite a bit of tear-out to gain access. It would not be possible to do it without all business in the building being affected for weeks prior.

    I was personally in those buildings within two weeks of 9-11. I wasn’t really looking for a demolition team, but I was observant of what was going on, and I saw no evidence of any untoward activity. These were some of the busiest buildings in the world, literally thousands of people passed through daily.

    Furthermore, there are only a handful of companies that do that kind of controlled demolition work in the world. If none of them were involved, then it was not a demo job.

    I was as shocked as anyone to see the buildings fall, including #7, but I don’t for a second believe that is was some kind of pre-planned event.

    • http://suijurisforum.com/ noone special

      The only reason a controlled demo takes months is because there are regulations , inspections permits, safety issues, sign-offs etc….

      In this case, they don’t give a shit what the local building inspector thinks.

      WTC 7 was a straight demo job. The towers are something different and novel. I don’t think anyone has a handle on how that was done.

      One other thing, how about a little logical consistency.

      Month to demo a building with explosives because the have to do it “just right” but hours to do it with non-explosive jet fuel randomly ejected into a building?

      Oh didn’t you know? Jet A DOES NOT EXPLODE AT SEA LEVEL. There is over 40 years of Jet A data. The latest data being a result of TWA 800 investigation done by Caltech.

      Anyone that thinks they saw a Jet Fuel explosion on 9/11 should read this.

      “What makes jet fuel explosive?The liquid fuel is not explosive by itself. Explosive conditions are created when the fuel evaporates and mixes with the air in a partially empty tank. The evaporated fuel is referred to as fuel vapor. The fuel vapor consists of fuel molecules that have escaped from the liquid fuel and form a gas in the volume (ullage) above the liquid in the bottom of the fuel tank.”

      A Review of the Flammability
      Hazard of Jet A


      “Jet A and A-1 flash points are currently specified to be a minimum of 37.8°C (100°F). This limit was set in 1975, when it was reduced from 40.6°C (105°F), in order to conform to commodity classifications of “nonflammable” liquids”

      DOT Requirements for Transporting Fuels in Tanks

      Quote:Current 49 CFR 173.120(b) language generally defines combustible liquids as materials with a
      FP > 141F (60.5 C) and < 200F (93 C).

      A twelve year study on the properties of Jet fuel done by NASA.


      • Albury Smith

        The jet fuel on 9/11 did exactly what jet fuel does when a plane carrying it crashes – it created a huge fireball, not an explosion. Arguing about phenomena that were witnessed by THOUSANDS of people and caught on numerous videos is even more stupid than your secret C/D “theory.” Ask Box Boy* and his “experts” to show you on video with audio how explosives or incendiaries secretly cut the 4.91″ flanges, 3.07″ webs, and 215 sq in cross sections of W14 X 730 columns like the 11 of 24 in WTC 7’s core, and the 4 corner columns in each tower’s core:
        If they ever HAD TO do it, this “debate” would be OVER.

        *Box Boy’s ONLY 9/11 “research”:

        • http://suijurisforum.com/ noone special

          1000’s of people think they witnessed an explosion not a flash over.At least three stories of the aluminum facade is COMPLETELY ejected.
          Should I mention the burn velocity of Jet A is only 6 cm – 20 cm per second.
          This is data they came from the TWA 800 investigation. The data was used to conclude the maximum pressure from the Jet A explosion in the wing was 60 PSI but more in the range of 20. This is inside a closed container mind you. Not flung around at 500 MPH.

          I guess this is another “special case” were the fuel aerosolized perfectly and caused a hyperbaric blast akin to a Fuel Air explosive……

          I’ll show you what a fireball from a fully loaded aircraft looks like.

          Anyhow you wanna keep bringing up the NIST and their WTC 7 “walk-off due to thermal expansion” theory so I guess I will have to bring up the fraud.

          • Albury Smith

            Thanks for showing me. It looks EXACTLY like the impacts of AA 11 and UA 175 into the WTC towers. Now explain to me why Box Boy* and his “experts” won’t demonstrate for us on video with audio how explosives or incendiaries secretly cut the 4.91″ flanges, 3.07″ webs, and 215 sq in cross sections of W14 X 730 columns like the 11 of 24 in WTC 7’s core, and the 4 corner columns in each tower’s core:

            If they ever HAD TO do it, this “debate” would be OVER.

            *Box Boy’s ONLY 9/11 “research”:

          • http://suijurisforum.com/ noone special

            Looks just like it … with the exception there’s no mile wide mushroom cloud and no ejected material.

          • Albury Smith

            What “mile wide mushroom cloud and…ejected material” did you see in the impacts of AA 11 and UA 175?

          • http://suijurisforum.com/ noone special

            They ones shown in multiple videos of the “impact”.

            They are all over youtube.

            You however , it seems , are a copy and paste troll.


            No one is buying your bullshit.

            The game your playing is simplistic at best.
            Muddy the waters with drivel so an unattenative reader thinks the issue is “debatable” when in fact it isn’t.

            It’s no secret that this is a high traffic blog.
            It is likewise no secret that you aren’t talking to me. You are doing these machinations to readers of the comments.

            My gut instinct tells me you are one of the Psyop scumbags that have been trolling any 9/11 video and blog comments repeating themselves like broken records.

            Over 1000 comments related to 9/11 on your discus profile? Obsess much?

            Maybe I can have one of your canned comments …

            Let’s try
            “I’m not the topic here”

          • Albury Smith

            Please urge Box Boy* and his “experts” to demonstrate for you on video with audio how explosives or incendiaries secretly cut the 4.91″ flanges, 3.07″ webs, and 215 sq in cross sections of W14 X 730 columns like the 11 of 24 in WTC 7’s core, and the 4 corner columns in each tower’s core:
            If they ever HAD TO do it, this “debate” would be OVER.

            *Box Boy’s ONLY 9/11 “research”:

          • http://suijurisforum.com/ noone special

            Here’s your ejected material. This is the plane IMPACT point not the opposite side where the plane would have supposedly exited.

            The photographer neither saw nor heard a plane.


            Here’s the mushroom cloud. It’s not even at full size yet.

            Summary and Conclusions of Explosion Research Team
            M. Birky (NTSB), J. Kolly (NTSB), J. E. Shepherd (CIT), P. A. Thibault (CDL), M. R. Baer (SNL),
            K. van Wingerden (CMR), J. E. Woodrow (UNR), J. C. Sagebiel (DRI)
            A team of researchers contributed to the TWA 800 accident investigation by carrying out a research
            program on issues connected with the explosion of Jet A (aviation kerosene) vapors.


            The measured peak pressure rises recorded during our experiments were between 1.5 and 4 bar (20
            to 60 psi), sufficient to cause failure of structural components inside the CWT of a B-747 aircraft

            Structural Response
            1. Structural failure modeling. The CWT is a typical modern airplane structure and consists of a large number of individual components such as stringers, stiffeners, and panels held together with rivets and removable fasteners.

            Now I will just rub it in…

            Jet A Explosion Experiments:
            Laboratory Testing


            Quote:The leaner the mixture, the lower the flame speed.
            Near the flammability limit, the flame speed decreases to about 4 to 5 cm/s. There is no data available in the literature on Jet A flame speeds other than a range of 0.3 to 0.6 m/s quoted in CRC (1983).

          • Albury Smith

            Tell all of this to American and United Airlines, not me. No-planers suck even more than regular 9/11 truther nuts..

          • http://suijurisforum.com/ noone special

            I know , it sucks getting your ass kicked all over the place.
            Anyhow , I didn’t say there was no plane. The eyewitnesses in that video did.

            There was an explosion.

            Jet A doesn’t explode.

            The plane had Jet A in it.

            You do the math.

            Maybe you should watch this in HD and slow motion.
            One of the only videos from the west of the WTC complex. I only know of one other.
            WTF is this blob?

          • Albury Smith

            Have you contacted United Airlines yet? You’re an idiot.

          • http://suijurisforum.com/ noone special

            Why would I contact either airline? No eyewitnesses to the event even work there. They couldn’t testify in court about what happened.It would be hearsay.

            Not capable of anything beyond a pre-canned answers or logical fallacies are you?

          • Albury Smith

            You could tell the airlines’ crash investigations what they “really” saw on the streets of NYC, inside the Pentagon, and at Shanksville, idiot.

          • Boredmuch?

            United airlines?That is in tact with the government the government isnt bad its the people in it,so if you asked them and even if one of them knew they would be required to tell you the governments story…And if they did tell you ,and you started something they could get in trouble and im sure they wouldnt take this risk

      • Albury Smith

        Real C/Ds take months because there’s a LOT that has to be done, including ripping out the architectural enclosures around the columns to be cut. Only imaginary ones are possible in occupied buildings.

    • EvanRavitz

      No need for wiring. Never heard of wireless???

    • LetFreedomRing

      My my.. I’m not sure if I should even try to explain the things that you claim you can’t see how they could have been done, etc… because I can’t see a logical, intelligent person, (which you ‘do’ seem to be, here), who’d be willing to listen, even if I try to do so. Anyone who at this point in time is still convinced that we have not been blatantly lied to about the events of 9/11, has either kept their mind and/or ears completely “closed” for the last decade, or has been cut off from the outside world (society) completely for all that time. But I’ll give it a shot anyway, if not for yourself, it might benefit someone else…

      For over eleven years now, I’ve been researching this topic, which I had my doubts about the “official story of” from day 1, actually. I put my own personal investigation on hold for the first 6 months, out of what I thought would be only fair to myself, because I didn’t want to jump to any sort of irrational, emotionally charged conclusions about it. When I started my work, I took heavily into consideration, that I was sure to come across a great deal of misinformation, and therefore went to great lengths to first, always, verify credibility of any and all given information I would come across to the utmost best of my ability.

      Basically, what I’m trying to say, is that I undertook that “call for the fair and independent investigation into the events of 9/11″ everyone talks about, on a purely personal level; and I felt I absolutely needed to do so. For ‘me’. I went into it hoping to find that my doubts were completely unfounded, to be honest with you.. but the further I delved, the more it became overwhelmingly obvious to me that the truth was indeed the horrific, and the unthinkable that I prayed it would not turn out to be.

      “All the evidence of a conspiracy for this building is based on the video of it falling?- FAIL”

      – Hardly. The video of it falling in a perfectly straight down pancaking demolition-style at near free-fall speed, is just the tip of the iceberg. Free-fall speed, meaning absolutely no resistance as it falls, from one floor falling upon the next. Just as WTC 1 and 2 fell 6 hours earlier that day.. making these the ONLY 3 steel structured buildings in all of world history to ever simply collapse like that. Building 7, of course, being unique in that it was never hit by a plane at all – and was reported having only a few “minimal” small-sized fires which allegedly caused this phenomenon of apparent demolition, to occur. It out-and-out defies the laws of physics for this to have happened that way. (Most all of the WTC building occurrences given the ‘official story’, by the way, I could ‘maybe’ give an iota of credit towards them having ‘maybe’, could be a chance in a million – but perhaps even the slightest, near infinitesimal, teensy possibility of merit if it was just merely WTC 1 & 2, but when you throw building 7 into that same equation… that chance is “obliterated”.

      Building #7 was not a public/business building like the Twin Towers were. It was a government-only building, where ton’s of paperwork were held. Lots of very important paperwork; much of it, incriminating paperwork – depending on your perspective, I suppose. The use of nano-therMATE as a means for weakening all 3 buildings, and being placed in the months proceeding 9/11 is the most logical explanation of how the collapses occurred. For up to 6 months, is how long it would have probably taken. Both the towers had workers who reported strange construction that was going on in the wee hours of the morning prior to 9/11. The elevators were being worked on during that same time period.. and many possible scenarios about how the multiple “tons” of nano-thermate required to accomplish the task might have been brought in, placed, etc. have been considered. Workers in the buildings also reported power outages, evacuation drills, and the like, which were ‘not’ of the norm during this time frame.

      (Now, much of what I’m saying here are ‘conclusions’ I’ve made, not necessarily ‘the’ right answer; nor the only answer. The reason, of course, is that my investigation lacks what a real investigation into 9/11 would have, and that is adequate access to evidence, required resources at my disposal, and of course, funding. So while I’m 99% sure of the fact that we have been lied to by our government about it, to at least ‘some’ degree, & that they indeed did have at least some prior knowledge that what happened was going to happen; or at very worst, actually had a hand in it, or even planned the entire thing themselves… To what actual degree their involvement was ‘for sure’, on that, I can only speculate. But I do have strong reason to believe that most all of what I’m stating here, is indeed true. That being said:)

      I strongly feel that what happened with WTC building #7, had to do with a plane that was hijacked that day, intended to target building 7, but never making it. I’m talking about the airliner that reportedly crashed in Shanksville, PA. The fourth plane that was hijacked that day, very well could have been “why” building 7 was set up to collapse in exactly the same fashion as WTC’s Twin Towers did. When that “plane crashing” fell through, however, Larry Silverstein likely gave that “pull it” (anyway) command that we the people were never supposed to have overheard in the first place, but did. After all, the buildings in that complex were all heavily… well, “extra heavily” insured and owned by Silverstein.

      Like the twin towers, also, there was this literal “pool” of.. rivers of molten steel that went on burning in their molten-states for months afterwards. Some claim that the molten metal was caused by plane fuel, since regular fire can’t melt steel.. but if that was the case, how in the world could there be molten metal under building 7 as well, when no plane hit it? It’s the nano-thermate, who’s ‘effect’, it’s by-product when cutting through steel, is molten iron.

      I won’t even address your “no contracted company” statement, it’s pretty obvious that they wouldn’t be foolish enough to go that route. (key word being “cover-up” ?)

      Also, my last “point” I’ll leave you with, is quite incriminating indeed, and one that only came up just recently. Most have heard, already, about the BBC slipping up and before WTC building 7 actually collapsed, (a good 20 minutes before-hand!), the BBC announced it on national TV there, that the building had already collapsed. How they could have even predicted it, let alone declare it 20 minutes early; what with there only being reported only the small fires, makes one think they must have had some sort of prior knowledge. No? Anyway, this has now been proven as “fact” (that the BBC did make the announcement 20 minutes before) in a British court case there. The case took place just a couple months back, but here we now have a pretty strong “foot in the door”, so to speak, for the first time.. in that a highly regarded country’s courts have gone and proven the advanced knowledge “by at least ‘some” (British media) of the events of 9/11. Meaning that, in the future, this court case can be cited.. and used in other cases here and abroad. What may be considered somewhat “small”, is actually the wake of something “huge” as it gets rolling; definitely a step in the right direction, in my opinion.

    • Daryl Revok

      Why isn’t the government willing to release it’s “data” on their version of the model on why they say “fires” collapsed building 7 into a nice neat pancake? If they have nothing to hide they would just come out with it. You can tell just as much by what ISNT said as you can by what IS.

  • apeman2502

    High radiation nukes causing low radioactive isotopes in the primer paint to go critical to produce huge amounts of heat, combined with various thermetic and other conventional explosives, and a resin based concrete to incinerate for each floor, all documented and rigged as of 1969. You people just can’t leave the porn button on your computers alone long enough to hit the libraries. You poor fools. You won’t believe what they have planned for you next. The lady in the picture is already married to a bankster. Yap yap yap, yourself.

  • Dang dang

    The day it happened, 9/11/01, there was a news guy who stated on tv that it was a controlled drop. Didnt anyone else see this?

  • Seth A. Yellin

    INDEED. WTC7 wasn’t even mentioned in the Commissioner’s Report either (I never read it but have seen countless testimonies, videos, pictures).

  • Poo bear

    “Poll: More Americans Believe World Trade Center 7 Was Demolished On 9/11 than Believe the Government’s Explanation”

    Doesn’t surprise me at all. Americans are mostly scientifically illiterate. What do you expect?

  • Alex

    All you crazy conspiracy theorists need to stop being so paranoid–we’ve got several wars for profit to fight, there are still jobs in the military so give your sons to the Anglo-American war machine and stop complaining! So what if NORAD failed 4 times on 1 day! Who cares that the NSA is spying on everyone and that we’re torturing non-terrorists in Guantanamo Bay! And big deal if Cheney is all over the media warning us the big one is coming and that his war company Halliburton makes billions off staged terror and the subsequent war theatrics that kill millions! So what if he’s all over the media instructing us (like the democrats) that the government loves us and is going to protect us from the government sponsored terrorists as long as we give up our due process! Just wave your Chinese made American flag and slap your “God Bless America” bumper sticker on your now foreign made American vehicle and be an uninvolved, uninformed, disconnected, over-entertained TV head.