Building 7 didn't go down due to fires or controlled demolition

Truth seekers have been bamboozled by the "trusted experts" for nearly 2 decades

Why can’t most 9/11 truth seekers count past 3?

Well, that’s because a lot of them are emotionally and financially invested into the talking points sold to them regarding the ‘controlled demolition” of Building 7 and in part, because they are lazy and they’ve outsourced their thinking to the ‘experts”, that only talk about 3 buildings that were destroyed and they ignore the other 5, because they cannot explain what happened to those other 5 buildings using their bomb, thermite or nuke theories.

Let me give you a hint, the damage to those five buildings were not due to falling debris from the Twin Towers. Read this article.

Remember covid and what the trusted ‘experts” were telling you to do, and not to do, as well as what to think, or not to think? Whatever you do, DON’T do your own research!

Don’t do your own research and don’t count past three. Only focus on the towers and building seven. Forget about buildings three, four, five, six and the Bankers Trust Building.

That’s exactly what has been happening in the 9/11 ‘truther” movement for nearly the last 2 decades. I’m sorry to inform you, but you’ve been hoodwinked and bamboozled. If you have children, you’d remember how upset your little one was once they heard the tooth fairy or Santa does not exist. It’s the same emotions for 9/11 truth seekers once they really critically think about Building 7.

So, before I jump into the demolition of the ‘controlled demolition” THEORY of Building 7, it’s time to remind you of something.

Just because something looks or feels similar, doesn’t mean it is the same thing, you are assuming and not dealing with evidence.

From the “9/11 Observable Evidence” Series

The Lucky Larry "Pull It" distraction

As you could see in the video above, the REAL “pull it” was Building 6.

Then when people mention the BBC reporting on Building 7 going down 20 minutes before it did, most people seem to have forgotten that CNN reported on it ONE HOUR before it went down.

I regularly come across people sharing a video of Building 7 showing flashes going off with the sounds of loud booms.

This video was released in 2011 and went viral rather quickly and for the 20th anniversary of the Sept 11, 2001 attacks the creator of that video came clean about his tom foolery as well as taking a poke at the proponents of the ‘controlled demolition” THEORY. Read all about it, here.

I do applaud him for calling these organisations out, but I do still disagree with him wanting to lean back to the original narrative as put forth by NIST wanting to argue the ‘fire induced” collapse.

NIST is correct though - There were NO EXPLOSIVES used to bring down Building 7.

Let’s listen to him explain why he made that completely bogus video nearly 12 years ago.

I have been in email contact with the creator of the video and I’ve discussed an anomaly with Building 7 with him, but he too took the stance of a child learning that the tooth fairy and Santa is a LIE. And I’ll be letting you in on the glaring ANOMALY that cannot be explained away no matter what stupid logic you try and apply to distract away from this glaring irrefutable fact, that demolished NIST’s position, and that of the 9/11 ‘truther” community. You need to watch the following 16 minute video explanation.

The first couple of minutes has no sound for a reason. You need to focus on what is written on the screen.

You might have to re-watch it a couple of times too to fully wrap your head around it.

For the lazy bones, who don’t want to spend the time watching a 16 minute video and want to be spoon-fed the answers (outsource their thinking) here is a brief summary in two pictures, but you really should watch the video.

Please refer back to my article “The 100 days of "smoke" at ground zero.” to better understand the very high “dust cloud” of Building 7 and the Twin Towers.

Here is another good question from the above video.

Now some 9/11 “truthers” have tried to address the seismic reading of 0.6, but they are dare I say, well trained to distract you with a lot of blah, blah, blah. NIST nor the 9/11 “truth” talking heads EVER mention that a 0.6 isn’t in line for a 230 000 ton building!

Have a listen to the following and note how your attention gets taken away from the LACK of a seismic reading of 0.6, and could it be that the other “expert” is also just making an assumption regarding the origin of the reading? He does not go into the fact that the reading is too LOW for a 230 000 ton building hitting the ground.

Now in the following interaction, when pressed on the LACK of a significant seismic reading, also notice the change of body language, listen to the waffling going on, not answering the question, making false statements that the equipment aren’t sensitive to pick up crash of of a 230 000 ton building 20 miles away, when the same stations picked up an earthquake in the Fox Islands on the SAME DAY, a 5 hour plane ride away from NYC, and what the hell has the planes hitting the towers got to do with a question about Building 7? What is going on here?

After lecturing on Building 7 for nearly 20 years, you just have to love that woke answer - “I’m not a seismologist.”

Now, there is a scientist that looked into all of these strange anomalies, but you’re not allowed to mention this scientist name and these 9/11 “truth” talking heads quickly dismisses the EVIDENCE this scientist presents and they NEVER discuss that this scientist actually SUED NIST’s subcontractors for science fraud.

Remember, all these THEORIES proposed by all these 9/11 “truther” talking heads have NEVER been filed against NIST for correction or in a court of law, trying to prove their case. Yet, they keep pushing their THEORIES as some sort of truth or evidence, whilst asking for donation after donation after donation.

You need to really pay attention to the words they use that give the impression of being truthful. After all, they’ve been at this fulltime for 20+ years.

Removing all mainstream and “mainstream alternative” narratives aside, our eyes show us exactly what happened… Building 7 @ 7+ Hours = Fast Forward 45x Speed

Video by: Math Easy Solutions - Uploaded Sep 11, 2019

And in closing here is a short summary and points to think about next time you run into the various narratives trying to persuade you that their THEORIES are the truth behind WHAT happened on September 11, 2001.

When our eyes show us exactly what happened…

For the full 1985 CNN investigative report this clip below is taken from click here.

Als read: Building 7: The REAL Truth Cut here.

To find out what else is NOT being discussed by the 9/11 ‘truther” movement, I suggest getting your hands on the following book.

---

---

Thank you for reading, thank you for watching, listening and still caring.

---

If you like reading my articles and would like to buy me a coffee, please follow the link to my PayPal, as substack does not allow for payments to my country yet.

---

If this is the first article of mine you’re reading, please rewind to my first article and work your way through all of them, as you’ve missed out on a lot of valuable 9/11 and “9/11 truther movement” information.

---

Remember DO NOT get your hands on this absolutely scary book by Dr Judy Wood.

And whatever you do, don’t watch the 1h “9/11 Essential Guide”.

Free PDF book downloads by Andrew Johnson:

9/11 – Finding the Truth and also 9/11 – Holding the Truth

---

Come join the discussion on Telegram, find me on X and check out my Rumble channel.