this post was submitted on 07 Jul 2026
108 points (75.2% liked)
Today I Learned
30465 readers
945 users here now
What did you learn today? Share it with us!
We learn something new every day. This is a community dedicated to informing each other and helping to spread knowledge.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rules (interactive)
Rule 1- All posts must begin with TIL. Linking to a source of info is optional, but highly recommended as it helps to spark discussion.
** Posts must be about an actual fact that you have learned, but it doesn't matter if you learned it today. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.**
Rule 2- Your post subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your post subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Posts and comments which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding non-TIL posts.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-TIL posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
Rule 7- You can't harass or disturb other members.
If you vocally harass or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
For further explanation, clarification and feedback about this rule, you may follow this link.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.
Unless included in our Whitelist for Bots, your bot will not be allowed to participate in this community. To have your bot whitelisted, please contact the moderators for a short review.
Partnered Communities
You can view our partnered communities list by following this link. To partner with our community and be included, you are free to message the moderators or comment on a pinned post.
Community Moderation
For inquiry on becoming a moderator of this community, you may comment on the pinned post of the time, or simply shoot a message to the current moderators.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Yeah, most people don't realize the wtc was a really shitty building that no one really wanted to lease from. Part of the reason the collapses were so bad was because the city management had moved as many publicly run organizations headquarters there as a way to subsidize the building. One of the reasons the port authority was awal for much of the event was because the port authority headquarters was located in one of the towers.
I haven't looked into the information that video uses for their sources about finace, but just judging by what they had to say about the engineering aspects about wtc7 collapse, I would be dubious.
The study they are talking about from the university of Alaska fairbanks is very flawed and was paid for by the Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth.
Their conclusion was that the collapse couldn't be accounted for by fire alone, but that ignores the fact that the structural fire was caused by large debris that penetrated multiple floors and caused a huge amount of damage to the structural supports of the building.
The study has also been proven incorrect about their assumption about fire being unable to suddenly collapse a steel framed building of that size. Since 9/11 there have 2 or three steel framed sky scrapers that have suddenly collapsed due to uncontrolled fires.
If the video's misrepresentation about engineering is reflected in the financial portion of the video...... I wouldn't be confident that anything they said was an accurate reflection of reality.
Exactly HOW building 7 fell isn't really relevant when it's well-documented that the building was fully evacuated and destroyed, despite being nowhere near ground zero. It's also very suspicious as to how the fire even started in the first place.
It might be impossible to know the exact details of how every little thing went down. But, just because you can't determine all that doesn't mean the narrative we've all been given is completely correct.
The idea that Bin Laden operated alone, independently of US influence, and without anyone in the US knowing what he was planning, stinks to high hell.
I think that's called moving the goal post.
It's pretty normal to evacuate a building when it's been hit by debris and has been set on fire....... Also wtc7 was only 350 feet north of a near 1400 foot tower, it's extremely easy to see why that's still in the danger zone. You don't even have to use your imagination, you can look up pictures of the damage caused by the debris.
A large chunk of debris falling through several floors of an office building does not seem like a very suspicious reason for a fire.
First of all, I didn't make any claims about the narrative. I was just commenting on misleading engineering claims. Secondly, just because you can't determine the exact details of how every little thing went down does not necessarily mean that the narrative is inherently false.
Who is making these claims? Its well known that 9/11 was political blowback from the deterioration of the US and Bin Ladens relationship the Middle East. It's also pretty well known that several US intelligence agencies were alerted of potential terrorist attacks via airlines, and that they were being uncooperative and incompetent.
If we are evaluating competing scenario of what really happened that day we can use some reason and logic. One story requires a massive conspiracy conducted by multiple intelligence agencies, wealthy private citizens, demolition crews, and politicians...... potentially hundreds to thousands of people who have all been extremely competent and have kept their mouths shut for several decades.
The other scenario requires decades of the US government doing stupid shit in the middle East, and a couple intelligence agencies with an established history of fucking around and finding out to be incompetent.
Now I'm not saying there weren't clandestine actors who didn't ignore credible information about a potential attack, or there isn't funny business between the US government and a country like Saudi Arabia. But that tends to be how things go, politicians never let a good tragedy go to waste.
(I'm a different guy and I'm not arguing you on anyting else BUT:)
Totally possible. There've been things of that magnitude that were hidden for decades that finally did get whistle blown, it's entirely possible (I mean it's almost impossible that there wouldn't be) other things that never did get whistle blown (at least yet.)
Just look at some of the large scale operations we have come to learn about (be they leaked or later declassified), MK Ultra, MK Naomi, Operation Paperclip, Project PRISM, now they're doing UFO disclosure so apparently that's been real in some capacity and been covered up since like 1947, that recent Mossad deal with the pagers, pretty sure Epstein was a Mossad honeypot (but that one "isn't proven yet.")
"Well we know about those now" yeah and we didn't for years before we did, it's more likely than not that "now" is the "before we knew" years for something large and conspiratorially organized (not necessarily 9/11). To say otherwise is to assume we know everything the various agencies (CIA, FBI, Mossad) are doing, which is patently ridiculous to assume.
Furthermore I think it'd take less people "in the know" than you may think. Those agencies (namely CIA) work because of compartmentalization, the agent knows his part and any info needed to make that happen, and that's it. The next agent in the chain knows his part and nothing more, and so on. In the end there may be only a couple people who actually know the entire picture. Also "we'll fucking kill you and frame you for CP and destroy your entire family" will do wonders for a motherfucker's will to speak up, and I don't think a little murder here or there "in the interest of national security" has ever stopped the CIA before. I don't think they're stopping at "but you signed an NDA" for something as big as like Operation Northwoods.