It was controlled demolition. And it was very obvious to see. Buildings don’t fall down in their own footprint!It’s kinda like Geoengineering it’s blatantly obvious if you just look up, but people think it’s conspiracy theory when you attempt to talk about it.
It was not a controlled demolition. The seismic data was on a 2.3 and 2.1 for both WTC towers. Plus there was no S or P waves in the seismic data, which should have been present in the seismic readings. Plus the fact the bath tub was not damaged by two 500,000 ton buildings allegedly falling to the ground. Plus, there was hardly any rubble piles for both buildings. WTC 7 only registered a 0.6 seismic reading, which is not enough for a 47 story building. Please, see the work and evidence Dr. Judy Wood. The towers were turned mostly to dust by a directed energy weapon. Please check out Dr. Wood's book, Where Did The Towers Go?
You have definitely not been following my substack from the beginning...
Please start with my first article and work your way through to the most recent one, then you'll understand exactly what evidence there is for my point of view on 9/11.
It was controlled demolition. And it was very obvious to see. Buildings don’t fall down in their own footprint!It’s kinda like Geoengineering it’s blatantly obvious if you just look up, but people think it’s conspiracy theory when you attempt to talk about it.
It was not a controlled demolition. The seismic data was on a 2.3 and 2.1 for both WTC towers. Plus there was no S or P waves in the seismic data, which should have been present in the seismic readings. Plus the fact the bath tub was not damaged by two 500,000 ton buildings allegedly falling to the ground. Plus, there was hardly any rubble piles for both buildings. WTC 7 only registered a 0.6 seismic reading, which is not enough for a 47 story building. Please, see the work and evidence Dr. Judy Wood. The towers were turned mostly to dust by a directed energy weapon. Please check out Dr. Wood's book, Where Did The Towers Go?
What a great interview!
Great supplementary article to go with the podcast!
9/11 Planes: 3D Volumetric Image Projection Technology vs Video Fakery and CGI
Is seeing believing, or believing seeing on 9/11?
Article: https://911planesresearch.substack.com/p/911-planes-3d-volumetric-image-projection
You have definitely not been following my substack from the beginning...
Please start with my first article and work your way through to the most recent one, then you'll understand exactly what evidence there is for my point of view on 9/11.
Bro, are you off your meds or something?
New to your Substack. This was so educational. The interviewer didn’t interrupt you, which is so refreshing. Thank you for what you are doing.
Many thanks for your comment Kristin, it is much appreciated.