Have you seen this video before? Chances are you haven’t. It only aired once, on live TV on 9/11/2001….and then never again. Copies started circulating on the Internet but were quickly wiped out. Finally, with Free Speech safe again on Twitter, we can now post it again. The video in question is an on-the-scenes reporter for CNN standing outside the Pentagram errrrrr “Pentagon” Building and saying they cannot see any evidence of a plane ever hitting the building. No tail section, no wings in the debris, nothing. Just small little pieces. Almost as if…..it was a missile and not a plane? Take a look for yourself: This footage aired only once after 9/11. Who here can remember this? pic.twitter.com/F2KHaVIWSu — DailyNoah.com (@DailyNoahNews) September 11, 2024 Full screen video player here: This footage aired only once after 9/11. Who here can remember this? pic.twitter.com/F2KHaVIWSu — DailyNoah.com (@DailyNoahNews) September 11, 2024 Stew Peters offers a different angle of the impact…. What do YOU see? Weird how this “plane” hitting the pentagon doesn’t have any wings… pic.twitter.com/HjdT4ZpYXn — Stew Peters (@realstewpeters) September 11, 2024 This is the official story they want you to believe: Another angle here: So, are we talking 9/11 today? Are Americans ready to admit they were lied to? It was right in front of our eyes the entire time, showing the power of propaganda and the commitment to the lies. Do you see a plane hit the Pentagon?pic.twitter.com/q0A7LaZrtf — Owen Shroyer (@OwenShroyer1776) September 11, 2024 So that’s the Pentagon. Now let’s talk Building 7, because that’s even worse! #NeverForget…Building 7 It’s 9/11 today, perhaps you’ve heard? While “Never Forget” is being plastered all over online, I’d like to do my version of that and remind you to “Never Forget Building 7”. Many of you may know instantly what I mean by that. For everyone else, please allow me to explain… Building 7 was in the “World Trade Center Complex” but it wasn’t that close to the Twin Towers. Here’s a map: That’s Building 7 in blue. The Twin Towers are WTC 1 and WTC 2. It is undisputed even by believers of the official 9/11 story that WTC was never hit by an airplane. It doesn’t even BORDER the Twin Towers. It’s quite a distance away. And yet….it came down. I’m far from the first person to notice or question this. Oh, and it was announced live on TV 20 minutes before it happened…. Oops! Take a look: Remember BBC reported the collapse of WTC 7 approximately 20 minutes before its actual collapse on 9/11. They even had their reporter deliver this news as Building 7 stood tall in the background. How did the BBC know that a 47 story steel-framed skyscraper would collapse? pic.twitter.com/f0TRtxoTnT — CanadianPatriot1974 (@CPatriot1974) September 6, 2022 2/2Jennings who was inside WTC building 7.He reported multiple explosions before the building fell.He reported that the lobby was completely blown out and that he had to step over dead bodies on the way out of the buildingHe mysteriously died after few years of speaking out pic.twitter.com/6Ie0Eivf1L — Truthseeker (@Xx17965797N) September 11, 2022 This says it all about what happened on that day.How did the BBC report the collapse of building WTC-7 20 minutes before it actually happened?????Who gave them the script? pic.twitter.com/ql41VqL3NL — Yes, it’s me (@ElysiusThor) September 11, 2022 Never hit by a plane, yet collapsed like a controlled demolition: Never forget Building 7 of the World Trade Center was never hit by a plane yet it collapsed like a controlled demolition on 9/11. #911NeverForget pic.twitter.com/7HY3qhXw8S — Conspiracies & Comics (@ConspiraciesCo) September 11, 2022 Luckily we have those great “fact checkers” over at FullFact to set us straight on why this is totally normal and really not odd at all, so please stop questioning it, ok? A post on Instagram has claimed that on 9/11, World Trade Center 7 collapsed “for no apparent reason”. During the terror attacks of 11 September 2001, four planes were hijacked: two were flown into the Twin Towers, one into the Pentagon and another crashed in a field in Pennsylvania. Two planes were flown into the North and South towers, part of the World Trade Center complex of seven buildings. Both towers collapsed shortly afterwards. World Trade Center 7 was a 47-storey building in the complex, which was not directly hit by an aircraft, and also collapsed later that day. There are a number of reasons this building collapsed on the day, despite not being hit by planes, which have been described by investigators, scientists and experts since. According to the US government’s National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), which investigated the reasons behind the collapse for years, a number of fires are behind World Trade Center 7’s collapse. NIST says that debris from the collapse of the North Tower ignited fires on at least 10 floors of World Trade Center 7, some of which burned out of control because the automatic sprinkler system for some floors had failed (partly due to city water lines damaged by the collapse of the Twin Towers). Heat from the fires then caused steel support beams to expand which led to several floors collapsing. This then triggered a number of other structural failures, which eventually resulted in the whole building collapsing. The theory that an explosion caused the building’s collapse was investigated, but no evidence of this was found. It’s true that fire causing tall buildings to collapse is rare. NIST lead investigator Shyam Sunder told journalists at the time: “This is the first time that we are aware of, that a building taller than about 15 stories has collapsed primarily due to fires”. Here’s even more… The TRUTH About 9/11 (EXPOSED — In Their Own Words) The truth will set you free… That’s right folks, we’re going there. Yes, we’re digging into the truth about 9/11 and the truth may shock you. Sorry to anyone who is offended, but we always follow the truth wherever it leads us and it’s time to open up some eyes. This may be one of the most important posts we’ve ever published so be sure to bookmark it and share with others. Ok, let’s dig in, starting with this video… This is video of the building falling floor by floor in what appears to be a controlled demolition. But that’s not just my opinion. Listen as the First Responders talk about it in their own words after watching it happen — watch here on Rumble: Backup here: There words not mine pic.twitter.com/WRVALA4IYC — Shannon Crawford (@shae33172) July 1, 2022 Now let’s go a little deeper… In what may be one of the most brilliant 5-minute videos ever created, watch as the entire “story” of 9/11 is explained to you. Do you buy this? Would ANYONE buy this if it wasn’t force-fed to them by the Crooked MSM fake news media? Watch here on Rumble and be amazed: But we’re only just getting warmed up…. Did you know it’s been confirmed that THERMITE was used? This only leads to one conclusion: controlled demolition. Thermite is a mixture of aluminum powder and a metal oxide (such as iron oxide) that when ignited evolves a great deal of heat and is used in welding and in incendiary bombs. It melts things like steel at temperatures much higher than any other fire or bomb could do. In short, you remember the way the Twin Towers came down at free fall speed? Many believe that is ONLY possible if it were lined with Thermite. And here’s more proof….from the The Open Chemical Physics Journal, 2009, 2, 7-31, here is a deep dive of highly researched scientific findings. Their conclusion? The building was LOADED with thermite: Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe And for the visual learners out there, I have this…. This video that tells you a whole lot more….watch it safely here on Rumble: And that’s not all. Never forget that Donald Trump himself was the first person to say he did not believe even a plane could take down those towers. He knows construction and he knew how those buildings were constructed. In short?  He says completely impossible. Read this from Health Nut News: Donald Trump is a professional builder. He’s spent much of his career in construction, building casinos and restaurants, and his opinion on the way the World Trade Centers came down is that of educated observation. According to Rick Shaddock, Executive Director of the Association for Nine Eleven Truth Awareness, “Donald Trump was the first 9/11 Truther to speak out on TV, on the very same day, challenging the official story, and saying bombs must have been used, years before Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth was founded, from the perspective of people who know buildings are built to stand strong, even against planes.” Indeed, Donald did call out the situation, claiming the immense strength of the steel beams and that the damage done must have been caused by explosives of some sort. He also seemed to think that something other than the plane must have penetrated the building initially (which may or may not have been the case). Of course, since his public exclamation, Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth have laid out a convincing argument that explosives likely lined the inside of the building, enabling a controlled demolition. This, in their opinion, is the only way anyone could have gotten the buildings to fall straight down, in free-fall, like they did. Here is the transcript from the video: Alan Marcus: Donald you’re probably the best-known builder particularly of great buildings in the city. There’s a great deal of question about whether or not the damage and and the ultimate destruction of the buildings was caused by the airplanes by architectural defect or possibly by bombs or more after shocks you have any thoughts on that? Donald Trump: It wasn’t architectural defect. The World Trade Center was always known as a very very strong building. Don’t forget that took a big bomb in the basement (1993). Now, the basement is the most vulnerable place because that’s your foundation and it withstood that and I got to see that area about three or four days after took place because one of my structural engineers actually took me for a tour because he did the building and I said “I can’t believe it”. The the building was standing solid and half of the columns were blown out. This was an unbelievably powerful building. If you don’t know anything about structure it was one of the first buildings that was built from the outside. The steel, the reason the World Trade Center had such narrow windows is that in between all the windows, you had the steel on the outside, the steel on the outside of the building. That’s why when I first looked – and you had these big heavy i-beams. When I first looked at it, I couldn’t believe it, because there was a hole in the steel and this is steel that was, you remember the width of the windows of the World Trade Center folks. I think you know if you were ever up there, they were quite narrow and in between was this heavy steel. I said how could a plane, even a plane, even a 767 or 747 or whatever it might have been, how could it possibly go through this steel? I happen to think that they had not only a plane but they had bombs that exploded almost simultaneously, because I just can’t imagine anything being able to go through that wall. Most buildings are built with the steel on the inside around the elevator shaft. This one was built from the outside which is the strongest structure you can have and it was almost just like a can of soup Rolland Smith: You know, Donald we were looking at pictures all morning long of that plane coming into building number two and when you see that approach the far side and and all of a sudden within a matter of milliseconds the explosion pops out the other side. Donald Trump: Right. I just think that there was a plane with more than just fuel. I think obviously they were very big planes. They were going very rapidly, because I was also watching where the plane seemed to be not only going fast it seems to be coming down into the building. So is getting the speed from going down hill so to speak. It just seemed to me that to do that kind of destruction is even more than a big plane because you’re talking about talking about steel, the heaviest caliber steel that was used on the building. These buildings were rock-solid and you know it’s just an amazing amazing thing. This country is different today and it’s going to be different than it ever was for many years to come. Now watch the video. Here is Donald Trump back in 2001 explaining what he saw and what he believes. Watch here on Rumble: If you want more, please go to these resources: Understanding The Use Of Thermite On 9-11 Theories that Aluminothermic Materials Were Used to Destroy the Twin Towers 9/11 – Who Put Thermite In The World Trade Center? Ok, and here is one more before we wrap this up. George W. Bush admitting explosives were used? A slip of the tongue perhaps, but the Bible also says “Out of the heart, the mouth speaks.” I am ashamed to admit I voted for George W. Bush.  Twice. Granted, the alternative was no better. Actually, I should probably rephrase that….I’m ashamed I wasn’t red-pilled enough back then to understand what was going on. Not many of us were. We all thought the Bushes were great patriots….great Republicans. In fact, we thought the battle was Republican vs. Democrat. We know better now. Now we see it for what it really is….globalists vs. nationalists. Those who hate America and want to destroy it vs. those who LOVE America. We see clearly now. But there was a time we supported Bush and trusted what he said. Oh even then we knew he wasn’t the smartest tool in the shed. And that may be his ultimate downfall, because I have been searching for this video for a long time and finally found it again. This is the video where GWB admits there were explosives used in 9/11. No, it’s not as if he “comes clean” and admits the whole thing….more like he’s just not smart enough to even realize when he’s just accidentally “told the truth”. Watch it here on Rumble: Did you support Bush at one time? Did you vote for him? Do you regret it now? Leave a comment below. By the way, it’s not the first time allegations of explosions have been made. There is a mountain of evidence (plus common sense and trusting what our eyes saw) to realize that it was a controlled demolition. Even Trump himself said so the week of the wreckage. Read this from Daily Commercial News: Despite strong contrary arguments, a McMaster University engineering professor steadfastly maintains the collapse of three World Trade Center buildings after the infamous 9/11 attacks can only be adequately explained if “controlled demolition” is part of the equation. Robert Korol, a civil engineering professor emeritus and a fellow of the Canadian Society of Civil Engineering, authored a report with Steven Jones, former professor of physics at Brigham Young University, Anthony Szamboti, a mechanical design engineer in the aerospace and communications industries and Ted Walter, director of strategy and development for Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth (AE911Truth). The report was titled 15 Years Later: On the Physics of High-Rise Building Collapses published last year in the Europhysics News journal which is a magazine for the European physics community and owned by the European Physical Society. In the controversial paper, the authors reflect the overarching premise of the AE911Truth, which has collected 2,936 signatures from engineers and architects. Among those petition signatories are 19 who earned their respective degrees in Canada, including 15 who live here. AE911 Truth posits: “there is sufficient doubt about the official story and therefore the 9/11 investigation must be re-opened and must include a full inquiry into the possible use of explosives that might have been the actual cause of the destruction of the World Trade Center Twin Towers and Building 7.” The group has long been controversial and its arguments have ignited many debates. The overwhelming consensus has favoured the official explanation which states that fires burning inside the buildings weakened the structural steel and triggered their collapse. This has consistently been reaffirmed by U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) over the last 16 years. The Europhysics News editors also recognize the controversy, publishing the article with the following note: “This feature is somewhat different from our usual purely scientific articles, in that it contains some speculation. However, given the timing and the importance of the issue, we consider that this feature is sufficiently technical and interesting to merit publication for our readers. Obviously, the content of this article is the responsibility of the authors.” Reached at his home in Dundas, Ont., Korol shrugs off the controversy. “I’ve been scratching my head over this one since it happened on Sept. 11, 2001,” he says. “I just couldn’t understand how those buildings collapsed. It didn’t make sense.” While the most iconic images of that fateful day are the collapse of the twin towers World Trade Center 1 (WTC 1) and World Trade Center 2 (WTC 2) within moments of each other, following the fires started by a passenger airplane crashing into each of them, there is a third building most often cited as the smoking gun in the “controlled demolition” theory. This building, World Trade Center Building 7 (WTC 7) was not hit by any aircraft and yet it too imploded like a house of cards, says Korol and his co-authors and others note it housed CIA and Secret Service offices. “Indeed, neither before nor since 9/11 have fires caused the total collapse of a steel-framed high-rise — nor has any other natural event, with the exception of the 1985 Mexico City earthquake, which toppled a 21-storey office building,” they argue. “Otherwise, the only phenomenon capable of collapsing such buildings completely has been by way of a procedure known as controlled demolition, whereby explosives or other devices are used to bring down a structure intentionally.” Korol, who has taken contrarian positions on other engineering-related issues, says it’s important to keep challenging the status quo because we need to know how and why the buildings collapsed in order to prevent reoccurrences. “The fires were on the upper floors, there’s little chance the heat would have spread down and caused the steel columns, or the connectors or floor beams, to sufficiently weaken and collapse in the twin towers,” he tells the Daily Commercial News. “Also they were treated with a fire retardant which would have insulated them.” Further, he says, when the structures did fail they did so with such explosive force that pulverized concrete was ejected at high velocity and scattered on a debris field some 370 metres away. The most probable explanation is a controlled explosion and mostly likely using thermite, he says, adding in the case of WTC 7 some 67 per cent of the supporting steel strength in Column 79 — pinpointed as the cause of the fatal collapse — would have to be lost before it failed and that would mean temperatures of 660C. The paper also notes sprinkler systems would have reduced heat factors, while the overall design of the steel structure would isolate any failure and prevent a domino-effect collapse. The NIST however maintains the heat factor triggered an expansion in floor beams, pushing them off their seats and causing the collapse when other components also failed due to thermal expansion. Korol and other likeminded colleagues, stubbornly disagree. Watch more here:

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. discussed what type of role he would ideally like to have in a Trump administration. In an appearance on “Full Send Podcast,” RFK Jr. said he would possibly do something in “public health.” “Right now they’ve asked me to be on the transition team, which I think is really good. Because that allows me to have input on all of the people who are picked, and ultimately, policy is personnel,” RFK Jr. said. RFK Jr. mentioned that Tulsi Gabbard is also on the transition team. “We need you for the health stuff,” one of the hosts commented. “You know, I don’t know exactly what my function will be in there but I’ll do something with public health,” RFK Jr. said. “You got to run in 2028,” one of the hosts said. “Will you?” another asked. “I don’t know what I’m going to do,” RFK Jr. responded. WATCH: Robert F. Kennedy Jr Hints at What His Role Might Be In the Trump Administration & a Possible 2028 Run?? "Right now they've asked me to be on the transition team, which I think is really good because that allows me to have input on all of the people who are picked…I don't… pic.twitter.com/I5UYwD5SmZ — Chief Nerd (@TheChiefNerd) September 11, 2024 “No matter what state you live in, VOTE TRUMP. A Trump victory is a Kennedy victory,” RFK Jr. said Tuesday. WATCH: Bottom line: No matter what state you live in, VOTE TRUMP. A Trump victory is a Kennedy victory. pic.twitter.com/GBn2p2RLnX — Robert F. Kennedy Jr (@RobertKennedyJr) September 10, 2024 “Yes, we’re joining forces to defeat government corruption, restore free speech, and Make America Healthy Again,” he said. Yes, we're joining forces to defeat government corruption, restore free speech, and Make America Healthy Again. #MAHA pic.twitter.com/mDywiP4Inl — Robert F. Kennedy Jr (@RobertKennedyJr) September 10, 2024 Per Daily Mail: In a linked video he explained that voting for Trump is ‘the only way that we can get me and everything I stand for into Washington, D.C. and fulfill the mission that motivated my campaign.’ He added that a contested election would further fracture the country and so Trump needed to win in a ‘landslide’ in both the popular and Electoral College vote. Trump lost the popular vote in both 2016 and 2020 – but won the Electoral College count in 2016, awarding him his one term in office. Kennedy launched his presidential run in April 2023 as a Democrat attempting to challenge President Joe Biden. The move alienated members of his famous political family. Watch RFK Jr.’s full interview on “Full Send Podcast” below:

Her second solo album, Sirin, finds her in a more confident and assertive place – she’s even reverted to the original spelling of her name

Even 20,000 third-world unvetted people pouring into a small town of 60,000 people won’t deter some from their woke ideology. Take the father of the boy killed by a Haitian driver. The father of Aiden Clark wishes a 60-year-old white man killed his dead son. “I wish that my son, Aiden Clark, was killed by […] The post Parents of Aiden Clark Wish Their Son Was Killed by an Old White Man appeared first on www.independentsentinel.com.

On Tuesday, the Missouri Supreme Court ruled that a proposed constitutional amendment that would strip pro-life protections in the state would appear on the ballot in November.  The court overturned a decision from a circuit court judge that had said that Missourians for Constitutional Freedom, the pro-abortion group backing the amendment, did not follow state law in the language it used for the ballot initiative. The amendment would ban the state government from passing laws that “infringe upon a person’s fundamental right to reproductive freedom.” “Today’s decision is a victory for both direct democracy and reproductive freedom in Missouri,” said Rachel Sweet, campaign manager for Missourians for Constitutional Freedom. “The Missouri Supreme Court’s ruling ensures that Amendment 3, the Right to Reproductive Freedom Initiative, will appear on the November ballot, giving voters — not politicians — the power to decide on this critical issue.” The initiative would prohibit the government from passing any laws that ban abortion before “fetal viability.”  Pro-life advocates have expressed concerns that the amendment’s use of “fetal viability” leaves the door open for effectively all abortions because it allows viability to be defined by the “good faith judgment of a treating health care professional and based on the particular facts of the case.”  Lawyers with the Thomas More Society had challenged the ballot language on behalf of Missouri State Senator Mary Elizabeth Coleman, pro-life advocate Kathy Forck, state Rep. Hannah Kelly, and Our Lady’s Inn President and CEO Peggy Forrest. Last week, Missouri Circuit Court Judge Christopher Kirby Limbaugh, a cousin of the late conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh, ruled in their favor, saying that the ballot organizers violated state law by not including language in the initiative that would make clear what current Missouri law would be repealed by adopting the amendment.  Tickets for “Am I Racist?” are on sale NOW! Buy here for a theater near you. “It is deeply unfortunate the court decided to ignore laws that protect voters in order to satisfy pro-abortion activists who intentionally omitted critical information from the initiative petition,” Thomas More Society lawyer Mary Catherine Martin said. “This ruling takes away important protections from all Missouri citizens to serve the well-funded political goals of a few. Missouri’s Amendment 3 will have far-reaching implications on the state’s abortion laws and well beyond, repealing dozens of laws that protect the unborn, pregnant women, parents, and children—a reality that the initiative campaign intentionally hid from voters.” At least 10 states will vote on abortion in November, including Florida, Nebraska, Montana, South Dakota, and Arizona.  Democrats have made abortion a key campaign topic for the 2024 elections, with Vice President Kamala Harris repeatedly attacking former President Donald Trump over the issue during the debate on Tuesday. Harris promised to sign a bill that would create a federal right to abortion, while Trump said the issue should be decided at the state level.

Former President Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris met at the National Constitution Center in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, where they debated over foreign policy, economic policy, abortion and other topics. Here is a fact-check of some of their claims. “But what Donald Trump did—let’s talk about this—with COVID is he actually thanked President Xi for […]

NOW WE KNOW WHY BIDEN'S TEAM PICKED ABC... 'MODERATORS' SPEND ENTIRE DEBATE TAKING SWINGS AT TRUMP, PROTECTING KAMALA... ‘Disgraceful’: ABC News Roasted For Repeatedly Fact-Checking Trump While Letting Kamala Slide (VIDEO) Viewers took to X on Tuesday to criticize ABC News debate moderators Linsey Davis and David Muir for alleged bias against former President Donald Trump during the debate against Vice President Kamala Harris. Harris and Trump squared off in their first and so-far only scheduled debate as the race between them remains tight.

'Trump made a strong closing statement'