lights in the new york skyline an annual memorial to the lives lost on nine eleven yet there's still more light that needs to shine revealing truths that their family members deserve to september eleventh two thousand and one a day that changed history four planes went silent and off course two of those planes crashed into the world trade center twin towers columns were severed and the jet fuel ignited fires that spread over several floors about an hour later millions watched in shock as both towers were suddenly and rapidly destroy killing almost three thousand people for whom truth and justice may have ye served i'm richard gage a licensed architect of over twenty years and member of the american institute of architects and founder of architects and engineers for nine eleven truth a nonprofit organization of well over a thousand nickel and building professional according to official government reports the fires weakened the structural steel framing of both twin towers leading to a sudden progressive and total collaps unknown to most people a third steel frame highrise world trade center seven was also destroyed critical questions have been raised by more than fifteen hundred architects and engineers about official explanations for the destruction of all three of these buildings along with more than ten thousand other concerned individuals these professionals collectively comprising more than twenty five thousand years of experience have signed our petition they're calling for a new investigation into the destruction of these three world trade center high rises this call is based on evidence that reveals a very different evidence and hearing from dozens of these technical experts including many who are among the top in their respective fields we at eighty nine eleven truth are inspired by president  how do we accomplish this we have done our best to fulfill the president's vision by using the scientific method examining the evidence from the world trade center and developing unbiased conclusions from an unbiased experts in their fields listen to the president provide his account of the pervasive political abuse of science and we have watched the scientific integrity has been undermined scientific research politicized in an effort to advance a pre determined ideological agenda as coherent sets of scientific facts are brought into focus by the experts the data and the witnesses in this film you will come to a much greater understanding of the events of nine eleven and will be in a position to draw your own informed conclusion as also psychologists therapists and counselors along with theologians david ray griffin who have a deep understanding of the personal issues associated with nine eleven will explain why it is so difficult for us to come to terms with the reality of these events and learn how we can help ourselves and others with this difficult yet vital responsibility of course the ones still most affected by the events of that tragic day are the family members of the victims lost on nine eleven several have asked to appear in this documentary although our focus will be primarily technical we are deeply moved and honored to give them the opportunity to speak directly to you now let's hear from the eighty nine eleven truth professional signers who will share with you what conclusions they came to among these experts are highrise architects and engineers in the fields of structural design materials science chemistry fire protection metallurgy as well as physicists explosives experts and demolition technicians joining them will be firefighters and nine eleven victims family members who support our call for a new world trade center  came down my name is joe miller and i have a bachelor of architecture degree from temple university in philadelphia and while i was there in philadelphia i worked for two farms on a couple of high rise buildings of the thirteen story federal detention center for using coal cherry and broad i spent about two years on that project and then a year on a high rise dormitory about fifteen stories for n g a partners if we're to believe that fire brought down three buildings on the same day on nine eleven that's very troubling for all of us in the design for fashion's architects engineers even physicists i'm incredulous that this could have happened and very troubled by the implications of this possibility there are thousands of high rise buildings in the united states and more are being built every day in this country and abroad as architects and engineers we have a responsibility to protect people that are far more users of building s the new world trade center building seven looms above the site of its original building seven was a forty seven story high rise not hit by an airplane years building seven to me is really what gives it away because that's a classic case of controlled demolition my name stephen dust to all the mice in the professional structural engineer with thirty seven years of experience in the structural field i have twenty five years of experience as a former principal of my own structural engineering firm here in las vegas i have focused on nuclear power plant design and more to commercial and industrial buildings i first became aware caught my attention where the right failure of the connections in order for the building to come down the rate that it did my name is casey pfeiffer i am a registered national structural engineer in san diego california in san diego california but friend of mine gave me a blueprint for nine eleven truth d v d to review and from that the evidence that i saw was so compelling that i it became obvious that the first story was not correct i'm william right i work for one of the nation's largest design build construction firms on commercial and industrial and institutional projects in boston new york philadelphia baltimore area as as a professor taught engineering materials structures lab and other building related courses at fairmont technical college to architectural engineering students for twenty years i watched building seven fall at an accelerating rate in six and a half seconds this was a massive forty seven storey structure the only way that a building can accelerate as it collapses is by having pre engineered precisely timed and precisely placed explosives in other words controlled demolition my name david thought that i have a masters of science degree in civil engineering and i am a license structural engineer i design new structures and retrofit existing structures from concrete or masonry or structural steel in my professional opinion in my experience for the world trade center seven to collapse straight down upon itself as video in the case says everything that we've  witnessed the supports at the center essential had to be taken out at once i strongly believe it had to have been controlled demolition controlled charges explosives something of that type because it was a sudden failure i'm dr bob bowman tech i did post doctoral look at the von common institute in brussels belgium in finite element analysis i taught at five universities and colleges serving as department head an gras for me was when i found out the building seven had collapsed later that day and when i saw building seven come down to me building seven the fact that it looks like a perfect controlled demolition of an intact building with no visible fires i mean that's what i call a smoking gun my name is robert mccoy i'm an architect of bachelor high rise multistory steel buildings would have us to believe that the that these were was a typical office fires get it office fires if you will that brought this building down since the mid sixty's i've tried to follow highrise fires because they're something we worry a lot about as we design these buildings and i'm not aware of any high rise buildings that have come down as a result of fires i can't remember even a partial collapse in any of these buildings that i've watched over the years i'm steve bearish founder and president of parish architects and associates inc a thirty three year old architecture planning in engineering for we have offices in san luis obispo in pasadena california i hold a bachelor of architecture degree from the university of arizona and a master of architecture in urban design from rice university in houston texas spent three years in london as the first ph d student at the architectural so she one of the things that that really interested me is how quickly the tower seven fell within seven seconds approximately from top to bottom young i'm a licensed architect in both new york state and in california i've been involved in many large project including overseeing several high rise buildings ranging in size from fourteen stories to forty for the course of twenty years i'm mainly called in to help with very large difficult projects when i watched building seven collapse it basically left no doubt in my mind something wrong building seven had not been hit by a plane to me it was obvious that there was some controlled demolition some of the explosions involved was the structural steel from world trade center seven preserved documented analyzed according to standard procedures for investigating engineering failures it was really clear from the beginning that there was a great move to as quickly as possible get rid of all of the rubble and move it off because what they did immediately after nine eleven was they start removing the steel that the debris from tower seven and all the towers immediately they sent it off to china to be recycled four hundred truckloads per day of material were taken away from the world trade center site and sent to china for recycling norma said they had a big incentive to recycle steel for some reason quickly and rapidly they were destroying the structural steel the steel was hauled away and melted down before it could be analyzed it was already being carted away and and destroyed when the female investigators got there is extremely disturbing and is a violation in my opinion the professional code of ethics it was contrary to way all investigations are done if an airplane crashes they see off the entire area and nobody touches anything they move it to a secure location and they are in a reconstructing aircraft normally when you have a structural failure you carefully go through the debris field looking at each item photographing every beam as it collapsed and every column where it is on the ground and you pick them up very carefully and you look at each element we were unable to do that in the case of tower seven aside from this one small piece that was found to have been around or mount an incredibly none of the steel none of the other steel from world trade center seven was saved for an this is this concerning considering world trade center seven would have been the first steel framed high rise building in history to somebody collapse the fire the government has destroyed much of here but there's still available and photographs of the evidence my name is lynn margolis i've been doing science every day since i was about sixteen years old i teach at the university of massachusetts i have a ph d in genetics i reconstruct the past natural history from clues taken to be representational and that's exactly what we're doing with reconstructing of why the buildings were destroyed in nine eleven in the historical science that's what must be done in one thousand nine hundred ninety nine i was a recipient of the president's medal of science from clinton and i receive the dividend award that is the membership of the vinci society you can't do science when you are deprived of the evidence and when your hypothesis is the least valid instead of the most that they found no evidence for explosives so then we asked them well did you look and they said no we did not look for express or residues of explosives i run brookman license structural engineer in california and i received my masters degree and structural engineering from the university of california at davis in one nine hundred eighty six i been practicing structural engineering ever since then and this never a proper evaluation of the collapse site and the debris world trade center seven i would have expected they would have tested for explosives also because the nature of the collapse and the unprecedented nature of steel framed high rise building collapsing in such a fashion my name is roland i civil engineer registered in the state of california i've been practicing in california since one thousand nine hundred sixty seven i'm a graduate university of california and my practice has included among other things design and testing of structures that were designed to withstand blasts specifically for instance the launch facilities for the minuteman missile system i was a green beret for six years during the sixty's i was trained in the use of demolitions and i blew a lot of things up one of the things that we did was go out and attack structures analyze them as to where their weak points were  learned how to place explosives at points that would cause them to fail and then actually demolish them and analyze our results so the method of how to attack a structure and cause it to fail with explosives was one of things that i learned through my military training for the american society of civil engineers was brought into this investigation early on they did a very  superficial investigation of the site they shoot a report without any significant forensic examination and there were laws violated and the destruction of that evidence and for the american society of civil engineers to ignore those events is streaming disturbing and is a violation in my opinion of the professional code of ethics i'm i'm a mechanical engineer in the philadelphia area with over twenty years of experience in the aerospace industry where i design structures for craft and spacecraft and support equipment either mr freeman found standard protocol for fire and explosion investigations or just fire investigators for that matter national fire protection association god number nine twenty one calls for saving the evidence and being prepared to justify why you guides are written from makes one wonder why you have a ph standard would not be followed in this case this is not to answer this question publicly there's national standards that need to be followed and when i started looking into that i went into the investigation manual and so it's called the n f p a nine twenty one and it's the fire and explosion it's the guide for fire explosions investigations and so what it is it's a national standard so if an investigator from new york has to come out to the west coast to help with something they can fit into the system and know where they're what their role is and what they need to be doing and so i when i got the manual from two thousand and one and i went back i looked at the footage from the original days and there were all kinds of firefighters and civilians that were reporting explosion just the fact that there were explosions means they need to be investigated terrorists used explosives and i three we had witnesses two explosions we have audio recording explosions we have overwhelming evidence that there were some explosive events in the manual gets into thermite and if it says if you have melted steel or concrete which we had on nine eleven there's videos of it and people can see it we should test for it it says we have melted steel or concrete you prefer mine so the fact that they're testing for it is crazy we have three thousand  murdered and we had the first three high rise and still collapses we have all these reports of explosions we have the vans pulled over in the history of terrorists using explosives it's absolutely ridiculous that the i mean there's no excuse for it it's criminal in my opinion is absolutely criminal that they refused to follow the national standards and the national standards say that they should be testing that for explosives one of the other big issues we have the firefighters that are members of the firefighters on the truth is the just the blade destruction of evidence it's it's we're not talking about a little bit of evidence they destroyed all the steel all the basically the bones of the building that would have told us how this first high rise steel structure in history that had been struck by an airplane all it had was a few fires on several floors and it only been burning for a few hours we've had other high rises burn much longer this was the way we could have learned from this was analyzing that looking at the steel and seeing how this collapse and how it failed and which steel members did what well we can't do that because what they did immediately after nine eleven was they started removing the steel the debris from tower seven and all the towers immediately why were they destroying this i mean they sent it off to to china to be recycled so they never had any physical evidence to do the investigation and the national standards are very clear we have preservation of evidence  there's all kinds of basically standards that you don't destroy evidence so that's what we're we're calling for we're calling for an investigation into the investigators why they destroyed this we're calling for a re investigation that follows national standards and the big thing is everybody says this is in the past leave in the past and that's not true we have ground zero workers dying today they're getting cancers that and several don't have medical insurance the f d n y most of them how are being taken care of by the department but there were so many thousands of volunteers and members of other departments that showed up and they were there for months afterwards and they don't have the medical coverage and they'd they can't make their house payments that they're sick and dying and we as a country are ignoring them and we promised we'd never forget but it looks to me like most people have forgotten and they want us to forget and that's what we're here for is to basically just ask people to take another look into this you know show some compassion and let's help that you know our brothers and sisters out and really reinvestigate nine eleven i mean we have it's changed our world it's you know not to mention that there were three hundred forty three brothers murdered but we are at war over this we've lost a lot of our freedoms over this and we don't have the real story on what happened because there wasn't a proper investigation done to understand this mysterious event my name is scott granger i'm a licensed fire protection engineer i'm licensed in thirteen states i've been in private practice for twenty five years i've been asked practicing engineer for thirty nine years fifty percent of my practice is in france again generic steel structural frame buildings high rise buildings simply do not collapse d fire there has never been until nine eleven an experience for a high rise building that was steel framed completely collapsed there have been fires burned longer and similar structures without any collapse in my previous career as a firefighter normally you'd never be afraid to go into a type one building because they're not combustible and you would just charge at it put the fire out never  training we ever taught that these type of buildings could just collapse in a so there's definitely much more going on just fire the way in which steel framed buildings behave in fires depends on their construction in this test done by british steel in one thousand nine hundred five a large amount of typical office furniture was burned to see what would happen to the heavy steel beams that supported the ceiling steel is better when it heats up  t gets weaker it's not that it melts in a fire in fact fires normal fires are not hot enough to melt steel even if you were for example to  usual fuel like kerosene you cannot achieve temperatures hot enough to melt steel but what happens is it starts to lose its strength and as it loses its strength it starts to sag it becomes  softer and sags and can no longer support flow this was the largest test of its kind ever conducted it showed how unprotected steel can be distorted even by a normal office fire but as is typical in steel buildings the structural beams only slowly and progressively warped and sag there was no chance of a sudden collapse the world trade center seven building reminds me of the meridian bank building and in some ways in philadelphia the meridian bank building is a thirty eight story skyscraper that burned for eighteen hours in one thousand nine hundred ninety one suffered extensive damage from the fire but did not collapse  dan barnum an f a i am a graduate architect from rice university with a bachelor of architecture degree for the forty plus years that i've been practicing architecture i've designed a variety of buildings from small harrah's office buildings some of the high rises that i have worked on are one shell into shell here in houston and i was a project manager for a twenty two story office building in akron ohio and i'm a fellow of the american institute of architects that design high rise buildings and i know what what they do in fires because i've studied that later in the day when world trade center seven collapsed they had already showed us pictures of  few fires in that building and i mean they weren't even raging and and how could that cause a building to collapse as if it were imploded couldn't happen my name is jonathan small and t i'm a professional structural engineer in the boulder denver area for the past twelve years and one of my specialties is forensic engineering including valuation of structures post disaster what happened to those columns to all collapse at the same time the explanation provided does not match the evidence that we have my name is michael donley p i'm a structural engineer with fourteen years of experience i get involved mostly with the design of steel framed fireproof buildings but we've never had a steel framed skyscraper collapse in the united states or internationally so there's no precedent i don't think building seven could have collapsed by fire as nist tells us that this collapse mechanism starting with thermal expansion that worked its way up toward an outward through the building in a matter of seconds there's not enough time for the building to collapse the way that nist tells us it collapsed i'm at my neck  consult always in the area fire safety and with a goal of keeping the public safe and the first responders say i became fascinated with the government's  version of the events on the nine eleven because this is totally contrary to everything that i ever experienced either working in the field of fire safety or and knowing what i know about mechanical engineering it defies many fundamentals mechanics and materials and physics and just many fundamental engineering concepts world trade center seven this claims the fires were very large very hot and long lasting when and reality observation which has been researched by many people shows these fires that were in the not last very long they were not in the locations were missed its fall what does the speed of the collapse reveal to us essentially and less than seven seconds tower seven came down upon itself building seven they missed reports admits fell at the rate of gravity for the first one hundred feet well that's impossible unless there's nothing we system is just like taking your car keys out and just dropping them that's how fast the building came down for over one hundred feet which the only way you can get that out is when there is zero resistance and so what we're looking at is it building just coming straight down falling right through itself was zero resistance buildings don't have zero resistance which is why you feel comfortable walking into a building a building cannot do freefall with a huge structural steel structural system in place to support it without it being blown up that's the only way it could could come down in freefall the failure of all these connections as the primary means of a structural failure here is inconsistent with a natural gravitational collapse and the case the presence of other agents which would dismember these connections i'm david chandler i have a bachelor's degree in physics from harvey mudd college and a masters in education from claremont graduate university and  another master's in mathematics from california polytechnic university been teaching for over thirty years i heard people say well it came down at free fall or close to free fall and so forth so i decided to measure it myself i have a tool that i teaching which allowed me to take a video and put a dot on each frame to follow the motion of things and so you can make sure speeds in excel are ations and will do the analysis of the fundamental laws of nature as the conservation of energy in order for it to be falling down with zero resistance that means that resistance had to have been removed by something else and this claims that the arms were buckling in the first several seconds before the freefall occurred i don't see that how that's possible and the final report they modified it they tried to doctor it up they still tried to say that it was essential a correct but then they modified it now actually admitted there was a period of freefall valve but they never changed their model like how do you all of a sudden allow for free fall when they just got done explaining how it couldn't have been in freefall if i were a scientist i'd be embarrassed to try to put forward something like that it was clearly a fraudulent argument in other words nist is telling us that the building below it ceased to exist for the first few seconds of the collapse of the building well things in physics just don't cease to exist and cease to resist the that are on them free falling for eight stories so we know that happened it's been measured and it's on videos everyone can see it and this has admitted it went into impossible that's a violation of the fundamental law of physics that says that for every action there's an equal and opposite reaction so that evidence alone would indicate that and that is intended to keep it from going anywhere a building cannot do freefall with huge structural steel structural system in place to support it there's no resistance until the building goes down maybe half way buildings tend to the be delayed as they collapse they don't just pancake down like this in a very short period of time but the pancake theory works it's going to hit hesitation and there was no hesitation going from motionless to freefall instantly one continuous motion there could have been any structural resistance of buildings just don't behave like that it floors fall they tend to fall and are braced by the floor directly beneath it and there is some delay there this is inconsistent with the energy redistribution that would be required from the descending mas remaining structure completely impossible and this themselves have to recognize the implications of this the fact that they haven't as far as will be connections are designed with a safety factor of one point five to three times  the failure mode for the member this is sure is that the member will always fail first first and last move and then a plastic mode ideally the member would fail before the connection you don't want the connections to fail first members to be released and for the structure to descend almost freefall great to fail at the rate that they did progressively across the building  even if the floor wore to collapse it still wouldn't be able to collapse all of the connections simultaneously at the rate that it did without secondary explosions no hesitation there is no hesitation when it was to hit story after story if you ward to look at a standard moment frame steel connection which is a welded connection between the beam in the column it would take on the order of around five hundred thousand pounds to shear off one connection and if you multiply that by four hundred foot maybe a safety factor of four you would require fifteen million pounds of force per second in order to collapse the building the way it was shown based on the nist report and what we saw on the video evidence of the video of the building that day it's is being used to just make it go straight down which means it's coming down through itself and not breaking up the building as it goes something else has to be clearing the way that smoking g happen we might anticipate that in an evenly damaged building would fall over yet videos of the collapse of building seven show a fairly symmetrical fall how do we make sense of this the exterior of the building comes down fully symmetrically and i one time both sides of the building come down completely this is fully indicative of full structural support being removed for at least six stories that could not happen by fire if you know if there was some fire in one corner you would have collapsed maybe in that corner but not the total building free falling  it we saw it come straight down if the buildings had come down by fire we would have seen a more natural progression of collapse we may have seen you know the buildings actually topple over to one side certainly not coming down in its own footprint clearly more asymmetrical pattern i should have been present i'm kathy my grade i have a bachelor's and metallurgical engineering from new mexico institute of mining in technology which i got in one nine hundred seventy nine i then spent the next thirty years with three startup companies the symmetry is the smoking gun it cannot happen that when you have a symmetric damage you will get a perfectly symmetrical and we're not a better uniform class to building might have partially fallen over but the building would not have car lapsed as it did that just doesn't make any logical sense for it to come down straight down upon itself  basically take out the supports at the center of the core of the exterior columns on the outside on the outside as well as on the inside at the bottom would have to be severed almost at the same time in my professional opinion from my experience for world trade center seven to collapse straight down upon itself as video in the case says everything that we've witnessed the supports at the center he said show had to be taken out at once well that's another indicator that this this report is very suspect because i would have expected a classic implosion as i've seen numerous times is the core to fail my name's tom sullivan i work for a controlled demolition of corporate i the top rated explosive demolition firm of the world as an explosive floater my job was to place explosives in the buildings to prepare them for demolition i was licensed while in new york by the new york fire department to handle explosives and i worked on major projects such as seattle kingdome to show you ever stadium philadelphia naval hospital and like and keep the band gas holders in new york i would expect the center of the building to start moving first and then as the as the implosion for grasses then this sides come in then the rest of the building is involved what i saw it was a classic implosion the center of the core the penthouse area starts to move first and then the building falls along with it and  there were so many columns in the building that were not affected by either the fires or the impact damage and they all came down to stood once so it's a little disheartening and it's implausible when it's all finished the outside walls from the lower floors are piled one on top of the other right in the middle of the building just like a house of cards if it were coming down logic tells you that if you have a single failure at some random point in the building but the entire building is not going to collapse they collapse would have been a chaotic random event the building one of partially collapsed possibly but it didn't there was a total collapse and there's very few things that could explain that none of which are dressed by the nist report according to nest the failure occurred at column seventy nine on level twelve this means basically as they're talking about a single an entire building in the way we saw world trade center seven come down because of redundancy because of all the other columns in the building that were not affected provided computer animations the support of their fire collapse theory but what do independent engineers say about these animation when you observe the footage of how the building failed and when you look at the the the animation of the failure and compare that to what you actually observe in reality i think they disprove their own theories it is impossible for for it to fail the way they said  i've seen the animation sequence from the national institute of standards and technology for their model a mathematical model of the collapse of building number seven and they have inside members that one column gave way which element models of the connections individual connections so they had connections failing before the members failed before part connections when three of the four parts failed they considered it to be all failed needs theory or of the miss world trade center seven computer simulation model what's they put together to try to explain their theory so large very large stuff formations which are not exert in the video of the actual i think that the nist model is ford of course they release all of their parameters that they used to model the collapse and that is a primary problem for them and this is also repeatedly refused to release computer and print data that was requested through the freedom information act from them in the past concerning world trade center one so and so these professionals conclude about the destruction of world trade center buildings there had to be some agent that was destroying the connections and building number seven f one hundred connections for second and the only thing that i can see that would be capable of doing this would be explosive devices at the connections and this is why i think that there has to be a new investigation to find out the real physical causes for the small these members to act in an atypical fashion and i certainly believe that they had to have and controlled demolition controlled charges explosives something of that type because it was a sudden failure controlled demolition there's no way that fire did what they said it did to that building impossible couldn't happen it just did not make sense that a building that had a few minor fires in it could possibly the way it did if if if if there was damage it would have been minor though the might have been some deflection of a beam or two here or there but not a total and unequivocal complete collapse it just doesn't ring t a few fires in that building and i mean they weren't even ranging and and how could that cause a building to collapse as if it were imploded couldn't happen to me it was obvious that there was some controlled demolition some explosions involved when i saw the building seven fall it to me appeared to be controlled demolition because it fell in freefall manner into itself it is my opinion as a former twelve bravo combat engineer well trained in the use of explosives that this building all three buildings were brought down as a control as a result of control demolitions this is the original site of the world trade center twin towers construction is now underway where dramatic new facilities are being erected just ten years ago the planes hit the towers cutting through exteriors and interior supporting structural steel columns the fuel from the planes ignited office fires across several floors according to the official reports the structural steel frame was weakened and failed causing a total progressive collapse of each tower does the official explanation make sense was there a comprehensive investigation that examined all of the evidence let's look at the details these buildings were designed to take multiple impacts from airliners and i walked into the office and the first words that i heard was a plane just running into the world trade center and my initial thought was well that's ok it's built to withstand a seven o seven he stated that the fuel would be dumped into the building but the building would still be there although most of the fuel blew out the opposite side of the big fireball and it was gone the fires that were left were office for sheens and carpet things like that a lot of things in these kind of buildings have to be fire resistant by nature it's required by code so there really isn't a whole lot of fuel in there to begin with the media portrayed the friers as being extremely hard where the fires were not that hard and world trade center  degree a master's degree in theoretical physics from xavier university in cincinnati i worked for ten years as a professional physicist engineer systems analyst for government and for industry companies like africa g e bendix and also air force avionics lab and the coast guard electronics division i been burning at about seven hundred fifty degrees fahrenheit i also noticed that the official explanation of what happened was that the heat from the fire supposedly softened the steel and thereby brought the buildings down if you have a flame at seven hundred fifty degrees you can hold that flame under a steel beam forever and you'll never reach a high enough temperature to bend steel level alone melted so immediately i knew at that point but the official explanation was dead wrong there is no way those flames could possibly brought about the collapse of the building it did not seem possible that they used this towers that were designed to withstand the impact of a seven o seven could possibly collapse in such a short order of time from the time that they were hit there's no way the building was designed to take the impact of one if not more multiple airplanes they were designed to withstand hurricane force winds of up to one hundred forty miles an hour my first reaction was that looks like controlled demolitions however i believe the official story because it was played to me over and over again i heard repeated experts telling me that this was terrorists that did this and that it was planes that brought those buildings down so i accepted the official