Why some people think 9/11 was an inside job

Despite the obvious problems with the official narrative, you are too stubborn to notice them. It is absurd that in the face of 7 seconds of collapse, none of the windows would break, no deformation of the walls, no dust, complete cuckoo land.

Essentially, the Video shows the first building on the eastside of the building collapsing inward. It is most likely a column failure underneath. There is a pause, and there is no movement for 6 to 7 seconds. After that, there is some movement. clearly, that structure had failed and could no longer bear the weight of the rest of the building. The freefall of the building has begun., 

Having Mick West finally admit that truthers had valid points about column 79 we can now question how the collapse even began let alone how it ended.

As you fail to understand, NIST's best explanation is that some heat expansion of steel girders on the eastside caused it to heat to a point when came off its bracket seat, which caused other girders to displace in the same area, causing progressive collapse.

If that girder cant come of its seat as NIST claim that collapse on eastside happened in total different way.

Open that was controlled demolition of a crucial column that resulted in some cascading event all the way across to bottom.

The collapse models of NIST began with column 79. It is fascinating that evidence indicates that steel bolts, stiffner plates, and web flange plates were removed years after the final report was released. You are essentially stripping down the building for no apparent reason. Why would you do that unless you were having trouble getting the girder A2011 to pop off its seat and collapse? You gave a model that was not real world representation of the building design.

When you remove all the nails and bolts in a door handle, what is expected to remain in place? Because of this, NIST left off the steel reinforcements to prevent failure. There was clearly something wrong with their data to make them do that, but we cannot verify it since it would jeopardize national security. It is more likely that they are afraid someone in the engineering world will notice that something isn't right and question their credibility. Due to funding concerns, they do not want to be called out.

There is no truth in the later claims, and the start of the claim is even incorrect. Again dont expect debunkers question this part of course. 

I have already told you what I believe happened at Twin Towers. I think nanothermite was used to structurally weaken the steel to cause it to collapse. Fire alone was not enough to cause the steel to collapse.

Iron Microspheres. These are pure iron droplets without any impurities. No one in the mainstream has ever explained how this could be achieved. RJ Lee, just says it right, it took place at extreme temperatures. There has never been an office building fire with temperatures over 1500 degrees Celsius. The main steam study of NIST shows 900 degrees Celsius at its maximum temperature. It matters a lot to find millions of iron droplets in thick WTC tower dust. Nobody in the debunker world can explain how that came about. No one talks about this key signature found in dust as if it doesn't matter. There is very low probability that someone was lighting flint or there were millions of lighters in the room or whatever theory is put forth that explains it.

Also, we have some steel pieces that FEMA mentioned that were located at a dump. Regardless of what you call them, these steel pieces clearly show signs of evaporation or corrison. There are holes in the steel and the steel that made it up has disappeared. That's how I know firefighters and work crews were telling the truth about finding liquid steel flowing in the rubble. The runoff has got to go somewhere. Describing finding pockets of it looked like lava/ foundry. The steel melting is definately evidence that something other than fire was going on here.

Unfortunately, the mainstream media are too afraid or do not have the investigative skills to put everything together. Something as large as 9/11 had to have some shady factions within the government to stop certain people from coming out with the truth. The event seems to have been staged by a faction of US society. You cannot tell who they are in particular by looking at the evidence. It has always been my suspicion that Rumsfield was one of them, but I do not know how true that is. 

In the absence of evidence, it does. NIST study, anomalies found, international drug flight schools, Pakistani and Saudi Arabia connections, CIA cover-ups for terrorists, terrorist drills on 9/11, FBI assets reports of hijackers living with them, hijackers going to strip clubs and drinking, government official lying to the 9/11 commission under oath, Norad official lying under oath,, an endless list of weird things. 

We nearly had world war 3 last week because Zelensky government military went rogue and targeted a position in Poland to drag them in. Zelensky's military lied to him in a false flag operation. That is why the Americans told him to stop. A missile was fired west by someone in that country to cause a major event. Here I just wanted to highlight that Ukraine went off reservation here this time. Thankfully, the Biden administration knew what was going on and spoke up. 

It's a mystery to me how a anti air battery moves its radar west to stop a missile coming in from east. Why don't people in the media and debunkers seem to understand that part yet?

My reasons for believing nanothermite was used here simple because don't understand why isn't my concern.

Try again. When, where, and what action formed the millions of iron droplets

How do you explain RJ Lee's claim that happened during the building fires before collapse?

No theory, just wasting time. 

On Metabunk a couple of years ago (video), one of his posters referenced what he said recently past month. I posted that image on here a couple of weeks ago. Where that thread and post is unsure now.

According to him, truthers' work on column 79 was comprehensive, and NIST left some details out.

Then he went on a tangent that would not really have mattered: collapses here and there. That's complete rubbish As Mick knows NIST theory isn't really working, he's now trying to come up with a new theory outside of NIST's work collapse.

You are free to believe whatever you want. This post had been saved by me and in the post the poster on Metabunk ( Mick debunking site) includes a quote from his video. It is claimed by the poster quoted that NIST has nothing to answer for, and Sauron uses Mick's quote to prove this is false.

I'm having trouble finding that video on Mick's page. He probably removed once people noticed the truthful comments.

There is irony in the fact that Mick West insists that AE911 truth work on column 79 is comprehensive, yet his own user base insists the same? And you claim otherwise?

What was the cause of the collapse, Nal? Do you understand NIST's claim is that the first steel structure to fail inside the building was column 79's girder?

Fact Mick's admission that truth community was right there calls into question the rest of the work. Mick trying to move goalposts and claim a collapse elsewhere. Tony called Mick out on that. Where how that happen?

It is finally acknowledged by a leading 9/11 debunker on the internet that NIST work is shoddy.

What the problem with that connection?

There are no shear studs, web plates, or stiffener plates on NIST A2001 isteel girder.

Left image : NIST

Right image is the actual reality of connections along the girder.

There is something wrong with the NIST girder and Mick West knows that too. What mainstream engineers should ask is why did it remove so much construction and for what reason did not comment on it later?

Take off 36 shear steel studs there, take off the plate and stiffeners and move the girder the wrong way, you might get a local collapse, but that's not science. You're stressing the girders without connections, but they're there to prevent collapse during a fire. This is a twisted attempt by NIST to pass this off as legitimate work of engineering. You model the girder with the connections on and then stress them during a fire. As far as I can tell, its pseudoscience that has been passed off as legitimate. 

Do you expect anything else from them other than fire? If so, disregard all the anomalies surrounding this event?

There is no satisfactory mainstream explanation as to why some of the steel inside the buildings underwent a melting process, or why millions of pure iron droplets were found in dust samples from the World Trade Center.

Twin towers orthe WTC7 fire cannot produce such large amounts of iron. Iron droplets are produced only in fires or above 1500°C and higher. There no mainstream explanation how building made of steel is producing millions of Pure Irons droplets in particles of WTC dust.

It is not mixed with anything in these buildings where the pure iron coming off? Since mainstream reports of fire intensity were 900 C based on air jet fuel and burning materials, there is an unknown heat source unaccounted for in mainstream reporting of the event. The iron is the evidence of that conclusion.

Modeling is minimal in the investigations; they dont show how the building collapsed in freefall. NIST is the only mainstream group to have actual models of progressive collapse. You can claim anything on paper, but you must show that the parameters actually occur with modeling. 

There were recently released George Bush and Dick Cheney's secret testimony notes regarding 9/11, now exposed finally part of the official narrative is clearly false.

According to intelligence given to media sources, the White House learned of Al Qeada members inside the United States in August 2001, but was unable to track them down.

In Bush's view, he did not receive any intelligence that he could act on that Al Qeada was present in the country. Why did they give a fake narrative? Who is behind it? 

Jimmy Dore went over this.

In some ways you are on the right track but in some places you are mistaken. Demolitions on 9/11 was done by same network you referring to here in parts of your post.

Nanothermite, a military-grade substance, was placed here in addition to the fire caused the collapse of the Twin Towers, not explosions, as I have maintained for years.

The presence of these iron-rich microspheres found in WTC dust samples ( official studies) show that a high-temperature thermite reaction occurred inside the Twin Towers. Debunkers will give silly reasons why there are millions of iron molten droplets with the WTC dust particles. Finding millions not just a handful or few hundred that clearly can only come from foreign substances that were not internal to the towers. Someone externally came in and planted chemical substances to do what was seen on 9/11. Additionally, we can see red/ yellow hot liquid pouring out of the collapse point before the second tower collapsed.The collapse was likely due to the intense heat generated by the nanothermite rather than any structural strain on the steel trusses. The nano thermite heat caused the steel to weaken and eventually melt in some spots, causing the towers to collapse. 

It appears that Building seven was the only one to actually control demolition on 9/11, and there are plenty of signs that it was not a natural collapse. Evidence of explosion can be heard on video.