Email: paranaughtica@gmail.com Twitter: @paranaughtica Facebook: The Paranaughtica Podcast It's not everyday that a steel-framed building, a really sturdy one, nice and solid.....just up and collapses on itself in a perfect demolition-style fall. A fall that the National Institute of Science and Technology admits fell at a "free fall" speed for between 1.25 and 1.5 seconds. That is why we are going to commit a two-part series, or more, who knows....to Building Seven that stood strong at the World Trade Center complex until about 5:20pm on September 11th, 2001.Listen in!sources: 1. https://ine.uaf.edu/wtc7 A Structural Reevaluation of the Collapse of World Trade Center 7 2. www.civil.northwestern.edu 3. https://benthamopen.com/contents/pdf/TOCPJ/TOCPJ-2-7.pdf 4. https://thepeoplesvoice.tv/24-hard-facts-about-911-that-cannot-be-debunked-you-be-the-judge/ 5. http://wtc7.net/warnings.html 6. https://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/oralhistories/b7foreknowledge.html 7. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GOVPUB-C13-4d4c17460292ee57ef313f6491fa8d1e/pdf/GOVPUB-C13-4d4c17460292ee57ef313f6491fa8d1e.pdf 8. https://thepeoplesvoice.tv/24-hard-facts-about-911-that-cannot-be-debunked-you-be-the-judge/ 9. https://files.wtc7report.org/file/public-download/A-Structural-Reevaluation-of-the-Collapse-of-World-Trade-Center-7-March2020.pdf https://www.justice.gov/nsd-ovt/us-government-acronym-list https://www.magicalkingdoms.com/cruise/ports/stthomasexcur.html You can always help us out with financial donations on our Spotify page! Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
How we love each and every one of you with endless and unconditional love and respect and all things good and great.
And hopefully, everyone is feeling confident in themselves and feeling especially comfortable in all things Velcro, as we do here.
In fact, these new Velcro underwear I was gifted by a fan.
Thank you, Maria L. from Hartford, Connecticut.
They fit great and can be extra tight when I need them to be.
So thank you.
Fantastic. No, really, they're rather uncomfortable, to be honest.
But ladies and gentlemen, if you recall from last week, Scott will not be here with us today as he is on his honeymoon with his dear wifey somewhere that is a closely guarded secret for his own protection.
No, no, don't worry.
He's safe and he'll be back next week.
I, on the other hand, am here with you all and I am exhausted from that wedding last week.
Let me tell you.
With that said, today is going to be a bit different.
We'll be introducing our first guest host.
So with us now...
Is a long-time fan who reached out to us asking if she could fill the extremely large shoes that Scott has left vacant for us this week.
Shy, why don't you go ahead and introduce yourself for the people of the world.
Hello, I'm Shy.
And no, I'm not in fact Shy, S-H-Y.
I'm excited to be able to share my lovely vocal cords with you guys and hope that my feet are in fact big enough to at least walk in Scott's shoes.
Have you heard of the art of distraction?
The art of distraction.
I mean...
Like, what kind of distraction?
Just any distraction.
Just the art of it.
I mean, are we talking like billboards in Vegas with naked ladies?
Are we talking like, I don't know.
Yeah. I mean, all that fits into it.
So, the art of distraction is the term given to the usefulness of the very meaning of the words that the phrase contains.
What is art?
Well, this comes from the Oxford Dictionary.
The expression of application.
Of human creative skill and imagination, typically in the visual form.
And from Merriam-Webster, skill acquired by experience, study, or observation.
And the conscious use of skill and creative imagination.
And what is distraction?
Again from the Oxford, a thing that prevents someone from giving full attention to something else.
And extreme agitation of the mind or emotions.
And from Merriam, something that distracts, meaning a person, thing, idea, or event.
And as it pertains here, a distraction is literally anything that keeps your attention away from what your attention should be focused on.
And of course, what a person should or shouldn't be focused on is all objective, and ultimately, the question of what a person should be focused on is not only a philosophical conundrum, the questions come down to the individual's current frame of mind, which is a very precise culmination of a swath of circumstances and experiences and observations and beliefs,
right? Is it kind of like when I go to work and I should be working, but instead I'm just showing my coworkers stupid videos?
Yeah, I mean, that's definitely a distraction.
We've all been distracted.
More times than we care to realize, and much of the time, it is a conscious choice.
We often choose to be distracted from one thing or another.
Maybe our dog died and we don't want to look at his carcass out there in the yard, right?
So what do we do?
Well, we fucking play some solitaire.
I mean, what else?
Maybe roll some dice.
I don't know.
Distract ourselves from the sight and the smells.
I mean, you could convince a bunch of ravens to come and take care of it.
That'd be a good way to get rid of that dead dog in your yard.
Was it your dog, though?
Yeah, yeah, you know, it was the pet dog.
Just kind of, I don't know, died out there.
The point is, we're always consciously looking for things to keep our attention, and it isn't hard to do in the year 2023, as there's just far too much going on in every aspect of our reality that is constantly permeating our vulnerable little brains.
Shy, I don't know if you remember this, but in the 1990s, it was an era where the television and video games kind of became the live-in babysitter.
And for a lot of kids, TV and video games became the actual replacement for their siblings, their parents, and their friends.
I definitely remember spending more time watching TV and playing video games than ever talking to my mom.
Yeah, and sadly, it's even more true now.
Because studies have shown...
I like that.
The listeners can't see, obviously.
But Coop just put up the hardest air quotes I think I've ever seen.
It's true.
I really emphasize the quotations on that one.
But they say that the average American home has three televisions.
One is typically put in the common area, or the living room as we call it, and it's mainly just an ornament because a TV is pretty much expected to be there by everybody.
And the others would be found within the bedrooms.
And this is obviously to ensure that the average American is paying attention with maximum efficiency, but clearly lacking a bit of retention due to how much we are mentally consuming each and every second.
But TV, with its programming through the use of programs, isn't enough.
We need our PlayStations and Xboxes.
We need our computers and tablets.
We need our laptop-sized smartphones and our virtual reality headsets, which are only getting started.
And we'll prove to further provide the distraction we are all looking for because reality is just too damn boring.
And speaking of distractions in our reality, I think it's time that we issue this week's edition of Trey.
Poor Trey.
Now shout.
I know you must be excessively nervous right now, filling those shoes of Scott's.
Or those boots, I should say.
But don't be.
You've got this all day.
I certainly hope so, because these are really big shoes to fill, and this is a really important part of this podcast, and I know that.
Absolutely. Ladies and gentlemen...
Put your Velcro-gloved hands together for a special presentation of Trey Portray, presented to you by our special dear host, Shai.
Shai, what do you have for us?
I have three incredible stories that I found while doing deep dives on that, you know, interwebs that we all use.
The first one's pretty rough.
As of October 16th, more than 5 million people have fled their homes in the Gaza Strip, and over 4,000 are dead.
Oh, man.
And I can't imagine being those families over there having to leave everything and worrying about their safety.
But being over here in America, most people feel pretty safe to go home and be in their own homes, right?
I feel safe.
I live in the woods, though, so it's a little different.
For a mother, a 32-year-old mother and her 6-year-old son, this was not the situation.
They had lived with a man named Joseph Kuzbaz for two years, and on this Saturday, October 14th...
He stabbed the boy 26 times and unfortunately he did not make it.
Wow. And the mother was stabbed at least a dozen times.
And what's the race of the landlord?
White. He's white.
Yes. And the victims were?
They were Muslim and they were living in a Palestinian suburb kind of area.
That is horrible.
And what happened to this landlord?
He's being convicted of a count of murder and attempted murder.
The mother's still in the hospital, so not sure if she's going to make it or not.
Man. Well, she probably is.
She's been in there for a while then, right?
This happened on the 14th?
Oh, that was just two days ago?
Yeah, Saturday.
Happened on Saturday.
Oh, wow.
Man. I just hate some people.
I hate racists.
I hate racists.
I think the worst part was that the landlord had let the kid play in the pool.
He bought him toys.
He built the boy a treehouse.
That's unreal.
Just because of this war that pops up, now he's just like, now you're an evil little boy.
You need to die.
And the mother, of course.
I don't understand how a person's mentality can just...
Flip like that.
I don't either.
I can't even wrap my head around it.
Let's move on to something a little less, you know, sad.
This one is a deeper...
Well, that's what this show's all about, is sadness.
Well, yeah, I get that, but sometimes you need a little bit of laughter, right?
Ah, we laugh all the time.
Well, I really, really like this one.
So a teacher in Missouri has been put on leave from the school she was working at because...
They discover that she was performing on a pornography website to supplement her salary.
Yeah, okay.
OnlyFans, I'm assuming?
Brianna Coppin.
See, I was thinking it was Pornhub.
I never think of OnlyFans as like a porn website.
I think of it like an app.
Yeah, well, it is an app, isn't it?
But it's like, I mean, I've never been on it, but that's just like a webcam app, isn't it?
That's what I thought.
I've never been on it either.
I do not have an OnlyFans account, I promise.
If you have an OnlyFans account, it's like your account and you're getting paid for it, right?
You're not on there looking.
Right, yeah, that's how that works.
That's how it works, right?
You have an account, it's like you're presenting your body to the camera, right?
That's how that works.
Well, yeah, but you have subscribers who pay for it.
Yeah, well, I don't.
This teacher, the reason she did her OnlyFans account is because It was her second year teaching and she was only making $42,000 a year.
So she started making that OnlyFans account so that she could make money during the summer.
Man. She used the OnlyFans account.
She was hoping nobody was going to find it.
She really was thinking OnlyFans, it's pretty secret.
You have to subscribe to it.
She's not really out there.
It's not like Pornhub.
But she doesn't know how she was found out.
But she was found out.
Well, I don't know where she's from, but...
Those smaller towns, I mean, OnlyFans is everywhere, and especially being a teacher, I think that's a huge fetish of a lot of people, and so people want to see that teacher get naked, right?
And so it's a small town, they're looking through the webcams in their area, and lo and behold, there's this woman they recognize, and it happens to be a teacher.
Their kid's teacher.
Yeah, she said she didn't do any content or film anything on school grounds.
So, there's that.
That's good.
That's good.
Now, is she just doing this as a single person?
No. Or does she, like, have a husband doing it with her boyfriend?
She has a husband.
Didn't really say much about him, but that's a husband.
She said that she wasn't ashamed and doesn't think sex work is shameful as a whole.
It shouldn't be.
She said she also wished...
Yeah, I agree.
She also said things, or she wishes things would have been different, happened in a different way.
Of course.
And that she would miss her students, which I thought was kind of strange to throw in there, but okay.
Just the male ones?
But I mean, let's hear for this teacher, though.
She went from making $42,000 a year, where now with her OnlyFans account, she was making from $8,000 to $10,000 a month.
So if you think about it, let's face it, she won.
Even though she's not working at the school anymore, she won.
Our education system needs teachers, but honestly, it goes beyond the teachers.
It's the board of education that needs to change.
The teachers aren't teaching what they need to be teaching, so they're just getting hosed on left and right.
Most teachers hate teaching nowadays because they can't do anything.
There's no accountability in the classroom.
The students suck these days.
There's no respect toward the teachers.
No teacher wants to sit in that environment anymore because it's been destroyed from the top to the bottom.
And they're not getting paid shit.
They do not get paid enough at all.
I got two kids in school, and oh my lanta, some of those kids, I wouldn't be able to tolerate it.
I mean, okay, she's making that much money.
Now, does it work with men and women?
Yeah. OnlyFans thing?
Oh yeah, definitely.
Maybe I'm going to leave this podcast and start an OnlyFans.
I guess I could do both.
I mean, I've heard some weird fetishes out there.
There's girls who burp and make bank doing it.
That's ridiculous.
What? This is the world we live in.
Yeah, idiocracy for sure, man.
You know that Crocs weren't going to be a shoe.
They were a startup company and then idiocracy paid for them for their show.
And now look at Crocs.
Look at that.
That's idiocracy right there.
It's happening before our eyes.
Well, what's the third story you got for us?
Alright, the third story is pretty crazy, and honestly, I'm pretty interested in this one.
So, Google is halfway through the biggest U.S. antitrust trial in 25 years.
The Meadow wants to rule that Google has been running an illegal monopoly in the search industry.
Yeah? Yeah.
I would agree.
Well, I completely agree.
Because it comes down to, like, whenever you get a new smartphone or something like that, what's programmed in there for you to even, like...
Open the, uh, begin the process of unlocking your phone or whatever.
Google. You have to use your Google.
Download apps?
Google. Google Play, yeah, or like the other one, Windows or whatever, but no one uses that.
People still use Windows?
Yeah, what is that?
Windows? But, uh, did you know that Google actually pays billions of dollars a year just to ensure that the search engine is the default choice for answering everything in the most popular smartphones and web browsers?
No, continue.
Yeah, that's what this whole thing is about, is that they want other options for new online avenues for consumers and businesses to find other sources of information, entertainment, and commerce.
So instead of going and searching on Google, which I don't even use Google, but I constantly tell people, oh, you can Google that.
It's not going to be Google anymore.
It's going to be some other search engine that will actually give you different results than just what Google is trying to force-feed you.
Do you see how powerful that is?
It's made everyone just say, oh yeah, just Google it.
That's just a go-to phrase we have in our freaking little mind banks up here.
It's ridiculous, and I hate it, but then I also did just watch Hot Tub Time Machine, so you could also Google it.
Nice. Very good reference.
But yeah, so that'll be interesting to see where that heads to and how that ends.
Because it'd be pretty nice to get Google out of that whole searching thing and maybe get some other actual factual information.
Yeah, and not to mention, because everyone is saying go to DuckDuckGo and stuff, but man, if you go to DuckDuckGo, you're still getting Google results in DuckDuckGo results.
It's ridiculous.
What is that about?
How did Google Equal Trade DuckDuckGo?
When the Hillary Clinton-Trump election was happening, I did my own little bit of research and went on Google and searched Hillary Clinton, and then went on Yahoo and searched Hillary Clinton, and then went on MSN or whatever it is now.
I'm old.
It was MSN.
I don't know.
But whatever that is.
And every one of them had different results for positive or negative, but none of them were neutral.
And that's exactly what they want, is something neutral.
Good. I mean, man.
So, let's hope that they keep that going.
Yeah. And by the way, folks, don't use Google.
At the least, use DuckDuckGo, but you can use Startpage, even like Gandex.
There are other search engines out there that do not track you and don't infiltrate your entire computer and flood you with ads and all this crap you don't want.
So just go out there and find other search engines to use.
Pretty easy to find.
Absolutely. I love DuckDuckGo.
You can clear your tabs pretty easily and they don't track you or cookies or any of that crap.
Yeah, it's just that you're getting Google results in there now.
At least I am.
When I'm looking at DuckDuckGo, I'm getting Google results in my shit.
I don't know what the hell that's about.
Yeah, I think I just have learned to not look at those things anymore and just kind of scroll past them.
Because, ugh, Google.
That is the end.
The end of the tray portraying.
That was really excellent for our choice of stories you brought for us today.
It was very riveting.
I'm literally on the edge of the seatless stool right now.
Are you on the edge of that seatless stool?
Or are your stools on the edge?
My stools are on the edge of the seatless stool.
It's a symbiotic relationship this stool and I have.
With my stools.
Good, good.
Okay. Oh, the guys at work always say if you turn a stool upside down, you got four stools.
That's right.
That's exactly right.
That's space efficiency.
Work smarter, not harder.
And it's cool, too, because you get four people on the four stools there, you can all lean back and support each other up, you know what I mean?
It works out great.
Yeah, I mean, you gotta have each other's backs, for sure.
*music*
Alright, first, let's get on with the story here.
First, I want to point out that the sources for this episode come from numerous university studies and the Architectural Engineers for 9-11 Truth, which has over 3,000 reputable engineers, scientists, and architects, plus thousands of others helping to do the research with them.
Another source is both the FEMA report done in 2002 and both of the NIST reports issued in 2004 and 2008.
We also get a lot from the...
We also got a lot of information from Richard Gage, who started Architects and Engineers for 9-11 Truth and then branched out on his own, and obviously other various sources that are in the show notes.
And Richard Gage himself is an architect, and for over 20 years he'd built numerous fireproof steel frame buildings, none of which have ever collapsed due to an office fire, and he's done...
A tremendous amount in terms of getting to the truth, which the government fights against tooth and nail and actively pushes out a false narrative.
In fact, the U.S. Supreme Court has dismissed lawsuits he and his team of attorneys have filed to get to the truth, which is both good and bad news because that means the lower courts have found merit in their claims.
But the bad news is obviously that when it gets to the higher court, well, those guys all have the pocket version of the official report in their back pockets.
As you know, Shai, from a young age, we are indoctrinated into believing a certain set of truths that are for us fed to us through every medium known to humankind, such as, I don't know, news in the form of newspapers, magazines, radio, television.
And now the younger generations are brought up with, you know, a smartphone instead of a binky.
So that just adds to the overall impact of what I'm talking about, because for us and the generations before us, we didn't have cell phones or tablets growing up or the internet as we know it today.
We had some sticks to play with in comparison, you know, an abacus.
But now these kids do, and the cell phones and tablets have replaced the godlike television set.
Oh, 100%.
I got two boys, and man, they love their video games and their freaking phones and their games.
I mean, I force them to go outside because, I'm sorry, you need to play with sticks.
You need to learn how to play with things that don't have a screen and can't just suck you into it.
Get dirty.
We gotta get dirty.
Oh, germs is how we grow.
Without germs, you're just gonna be a sickly child.
I used to eat dirt.
Good for my immune system!
Mud pies?
But in other words, we are prompted to be distracted purposefully and trained to enjoy every moment of those distractions.
It's not really our fault.
It's not really...
You know, our parents' fault, or their parents for that matter.
It's just that this is where human innovation has brought us to this point in history where we are being bombarded with all sorts of content coming from every direction.
And the government, with their psychologists and behavioral white coats, has utilized this to their advantage since the very beginning.
I mean, they've been studying this and how it works on the minds of people, right?
And this whole thing is just, it's inescapable unless you have the ability to just completely disconnect from society and escape to where there is no metropolis.
And if you haven't yet, you should definitely watch the film by that same name, Metropolis by Fritz Lang, which we mentioned in the previous episode, I believe.
It's a great depiction of a futuristic urban dystopia showing the discrepancies between the lower, middle, and upper classes, basically what today is.
There's even reference to the powerful and elite who follow a different religion and make child sacrifices to Moloch, the Canaanite god of the Bible who is associated with child sacrifice, which is connected to this whole story.
That's pretty crazy, though, because Hillary Clinton has openly talked about Moloch and, quite frankly, has venerated the deity while in office.
And that's on top of all sorts of other weird cultish shit.
Like sacrificing chickens with the Podesta brothers and that whole clan, with chickens being code word for children.
And it's not just Hillary Clinton, it's her entire family, all of her closest associates and friends, and well...
It's all of Washington, dude.
There is something much larger going on within politics that we think we know than we are allowed to know.
I mean, there is a system, a certain system that has been systematically put into place over many, many, many, many years, hundreds if not thousands.
There are stages you go through, right?
Like, first you go to school to study politics, and then you graduate and go on to prove yourself, prove that you have what it takes to be a sociopath, or I mean, a leader.
And once you have garnished enough support from your constituents and, you know, absolutely betrayed the public at large who vote for you, Then you eventually move up in the ranks, you know?
I mean, it's a tightly knit process.
You don't just get in and think that you're going to change things for the better.
There's a careful vetting process at hand there.
And it's complete bullshite.
Because, you know, because you and I know, the average folk, the workers who are the employers of those bastards to begin with, we pay their salary.
We pay for their jets, their homes, their cars, their caviar, their sacrifices.
We paid for their trips to Little James Island, for fuck's sakes, to go hang out with Epstein and Ghislaine.
And now that they are gone, we are paying for their trips to the next Little St. James Island, or variety thereof, because those places are all over the world.
It wasn't just that one island of Epstein's.
There are many.
Anyway, you don't just walk into the Capitol and think that you were legitimately going to change things that you promised the people you would.
That's just not how it works.
First, you gain the trust of the people at the lowest level of politics, which gives you that rise in power, that initial step up.
And once you reach that point, then the higher-ups will see your potential, and that's when it becomes a whole new ballgame.
And then once you're in, if you can survive up to that point, that means that you have been compromised somehow, meaning that those who actually hold the power up high have something on you.
They bring you up, but they have a little piece of blackmail.
So you cannot refuse to do their bidding or else, you know, these photos get released to our journalists, you know, who are all bought and paid for and also work for them, as we mentioned last week.
But they also give you the perks that keep your ego-driven life satisfied.
Yeah, like the trips to secret islands and bathhouses in places like Turkey.
On our dime.
Or maybe something bad happens to someone you love.
Or if you really don't want to follow the rules, you'll be shot in the back of the head in a park and...
You know, then their bought and paid for journalist will just write up some quick sob story about how you were so depressed and overworked and couldn't handle the stress and pressure of your job and just committed suicide or whatever, you know?
But if your goal is to be the leader of a nation, then you will have to prove yourself to those higher up than you who hold the almost unimaginable amounts of power and influence and who will then allow you to move up to those ranks.
It's cutthroat up there, man.
They're just part of this really tight-knit group of rich and powerful people who will stop at nothing to keep that power.
And will go to great lengths, really great lengths, to protect each other because it protects them.
And they are often involved in cover-ups.
Like, always.
There is always at least one, two, three, four, five major cover-ups in every administration.
Why is that?
Because they have the power.
Because they can.
And look at today.
And maybe the past, I don't know, three administrations.
We are seeing some really heavy accusations being directed toward a lot of politicians with a great deal of evidence to back it all up.
But it just gets swept under the rug time and again.
And then we just forget about it.
Anyway, it gets really frustrating at times when you actually think about the very, very major and very apparent differences between the rich and the poor in terms of everything.
The law, the justice system, investigations, convictions, criminal sentencing, everything.
It's all very biased, unbalanced, and disparaging.
The group of people who run this democratic republic of ours are by design a secret society made of men and women who are required to take many oaths.
And the biggest takeaway from all of that is that they do not have our best interest in mind.
They do not care about any of us.
All they want to do is further their own standing in their power structure so that they have much more reach, much more influence, and just have more strings to pull like puppeteers while we're all down here dancing around like marionettes thinking that the world is our stage
when in reality it's their stage.
Yep, we're just here to run their big, big corporation or whatever they want to call it.
They don't care about us.
They say that there's, you know, we have governments that are there to serve and protect, but they're coming after us.
They don't...
They don't serve and protect us.
No, they do not.
And it sucks because we do hold the power.
We are an impediment in their whole mission, but we just can't seem to organize ourselves and do anything because we're just so distracted.
They fear us.
They fear us.
These people do fear us.
That's why they're always hiding away and slowly trying to kill everyone off.
But you know what?
Let's move on.
A little bit ago, I mentioned how one of these politicians does a bit of a no-no or someone does something fucked up.
It somehow gets conveniently slept under the rug and forgotten about.
And they love that we know about it and can't do anything because they run everything.
They run every level of government down to your local police.
And by the way, currently there are at least 88 different government organizations that we know about in the U.S. Did you know that?
It's fucking crazy.
I did not know that.
That's insane.
Why are there so many?
And how many more are not known, you know?
That's what I'm saying.
Like, yeah, okay, there's 88 that they're telling us about.
88 different branches doing their own little thing, all connected.
And then what about the other 88 we don't know about?
But, you know, they run the media, they run the hospitals, the health system, the food, and most importantly, they run the so-called experts in everything, right?
Oh, yeah.
They love their...
Experts. And apparently a lot of people do too.
It's ridiculous.
Experts everywhere.
Even if they're your experts, then they're not experts after all, because the only experts that exist today can only be the ones bought and paid for by the government.
But to my point, when the government makes a bit of a boo-boo, or a politician gets caught diddling a preschooler, or a massive child sex ring involving numerous politicians gets discovered, such as, you know, the famed Franklin cover-up, or maybe Little St. James Island, better known as Epstein Island.
Really quick here, Shai, have you noticed how much safer it is now that Jeffrey was murdered?
It's safer?
I mean, I would like to feed your lies and tell you yes, but no.
No, I don't feel any safer.
Honestly, I feel less safe.
Right? Yeah, yeah, exactly.
It's like these two people were in charge of everything, right?
They were doing everything.
But what about all those rich shakers and movers who were definitely part of that shit?
Why aren't they being prosecuted?
Why aren't we hearing about these other people involved?
Because it wasn't just these two people involved in it.
Whoever is in charge of that whole sham investigation has the evidence.
They have the names of who was involved.
They have victim statements naming these people.
They're just not going to investigate them.
Nothing will happen to them.
Life for them will go on as usual.
Just one pizza shop closes, but another opens up down the street.
Oh, there's always another one.
There's always someone higher than someone else.
It's never base level what they show you.
I don't know.
And dude, speaking of habitual liars and Epstein, get this shit.
Disney Cruises had this package that they were selling where children eight years and up and in good health could go to Little St. James Island to do some snorkeling.
And just to further point out how the media is controlled, if you search whether Disney Cruises was selling this package or not in Google, for instance, you will find result after result from all these reputable and trusted media companies and these quote-unquote fact-checkers such as Snopes.
You guys are part of the problem.
People need to not rely on these fools.
They just play along with whatever official narrative is being rolled out by the powers that be.
Anyway, if you search for that in Google, you'll see that all of these assholes claim it to be false.
That's what you'll see.
False, false, false, false, false.
Everywhere false.
Now, if you just do a tiny bit of research for yourself, you can go to the Magical Kingdom's website and look at the packages that they offer, and you will find that they indeed offer a Captain Nautical Snorkeling Expedition, which in fact does take place at the one and only Little St. James Island.
Now, isn't that a little telling?
Doesn't that speak volumes?
I believe that goes back to what I was talking about with Google and how they're controlling your search engines.
Yes. And perhaps people need to not rely on the paid opinions of the people at Snopes or any of these so-called fact checkers at these mainstream media companies.
And I'm sure every major publication has their alleged fact checker section.
And just like the government, they don't have your best interest in mind.
Which brings us back to the point that people are easily distracted.
It's all about the art of distraction.
The media.
The fact checkers.
It's all part of the big distraction.
So, to bring it back to the government covering shit up and distracting us, let's talk about a certain 47-story building made of reinforced concrete with a heavily reinforced inner core.
and an exoskeleton of fire-resistant steel beams that somehow collapsed in on itself with a near-perfect symmetrical fall which included the actual documented free fall of just over 100 feet of the 610-foot-tall building which fell for between 2.25 and 2.5 seconds and was admitted by the 2008 NIST report.
But facts get swept under the rug and people just forget about it.
Forget about it!
But it's also really fucking stupid because I've had interactions with at least 60 people who deny that Building 7 collapsed at freefall speed.
And it's like, people, read the fucking documents.
Quit relying on the quote-unquote fact checkers.
I'll say this a third time.
NIST admitted that Building 7 fell at freefall speed for between 2.25 and 2.5 seconds.
You need to understand the implications of that single fact.
So, okay.
Wait. Hold on.
Shai. Yes.
Tell us how many buildings...
You having fun yet?
You having fun here?
I am, yeah.
I hope I'm not a pain in the ass or being stupid.
Trust me.
Everyone here at the Paranautica Podcast, we're all stupid.
We're all pain in each other's asses.
We have no idea what we're doing here.
All right.
But tell the world...
You know, tell us all, how many buildings did the world see get just totally destroyed on live television at the World Trade Center on September 11th, 2001?
Well, the media heavily focused on Towers 1 and 2, and that's pretty much all that people talked about.
I kind of remember, like, there was the plane that crashed into the Pentagon, but that obviously wasn't near the Twin Towers at all.
But otherwise, that's all the buildings I remember.
Would it be a bit shocking to know that World Trade Center buildings 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 were all destroyed on that day?
And guess what?
That was every building that made up the World Trade Center complex.
All 7, Shai.
There were 7?
7 buildings?
There were 7 buildings in the World Trade Center complex.
7. But Shai, how many buildings, I guess, quote-unquote, collapsed?
Well, I know that the media made sure to put into the minds that only two buildings collapsed.
Towers 1 and towers 2. Yeah, everyone knows that, right?
Everyone knows that World Trade Center towers 1 and 2 collapsed.
Everybody knows that.
But not everyone is aware that a third building collapsed in front of real people's eyes and was broadcast on live television all over the world.
But let's back up.
Now, we all know that towers 1 and 2 both had 110 floors.
Each were struck by commercial airliners pretty high up.
Both were hit above the 76th floor.
The North Tower was hit by Flight 11, which crashed into floors 93 through 99. And the South Tower was hit by Flight 175 and crashed into towers 77 through 85. Interesting to note here is that the owner of the buildings in the World Trade Center, Larry Silverstein,
had some construction and upgrades done, including fireproofing on beams and columns on certain floors in both towers just about a year and a half before September 11th.
In the North Tower, he had these upgrades on floors 92 up to 100 plus the 102nd floor.
In the South Towers, floors 77, 78, 88, and 89. 92, 96, and 97 were upgraded.
Therefore, these upgrades just so happened to be on the very floors where both airplanes would strike.
How coincidental, right?
I don't...
How is it those floors specifically and the planes just managed to hit those exact floors?
Pretty interesting.
Pretty interesting.
Also, within just six weeks before the incident, Silverstein upgraded his own insurance policy on each tower to include terrorist attacks.
Again, how coincidental.
Yeah, it's rather strange that, I mean, like, did he know?
How could he know?
I mean, he definitely knew.
He definitely knew, but you know what?
Wait, though.
Okay, so if someone, you know, say murders their spouse and they get a life insurance policy, you know, a few months before, it's an obvious red flag that they're the murderer, right?
So why wouldn't this be an obvious red flag?
That's the first person they go after.
Right? Right.
The insurance company is going to be like, well, hey, that's kind of suspicious.
Like, we're going to be paying out a shit ton of money, so we want to do an investigation and see how this actually worked before we pay out.
So, yeah.
Yeah, strange.
Strange coincidences.
In this case, that did not happen.
The exact opposite of that happened.
Although, the insurance company did have a little bit of, like, they were battling against it, but for other reasons.
Not because...
I don't know.
We'll actually get into that somehow later.
And get this ironic piece of information.
Larry Silverstein, who was pretty much verified by employees and whoever, said that he was at his office in either Building 7 or Tower 1 every single day of his entire career.
And it just so happened that he was late for work in the first time in his entire career on that day.
Not only him, though, his daughter Lisa, vice president of Silverstein Properties, was also running late, and his son Roger, another vice president of something, was also running late.
This is not to mention many corporate executives and imported people who were also late or sick or lying on that day.
Not only that, but at the end of the day, it was Silverstein who gave them the green light to pull it, meaning to bring down Building 7. Now, any person familiar with demolitions...
To even the slightest degree knows damn well that the term pull it means to initiate a demolition of a building or structure.
And here is a clip of him saying this.
I remember getting a call from the fire department commander telling me that they were not sure they were going to be able to contain the fire.
I said, you know, we've had such a terrible loss of life.
Maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it.
And should we mention that there was verified insider trading on the stocks of American Airlines to whom the planes belonged before the attack?
That's something that's called foreknowledge.
But I don't want to get too far into the weeds of the Twin Towers in this episode because we will be covering those in depth at a later time.
And in fact, we're going to be covering many aspects of this whole...
September 11th, quote-unquote conspiracy in separate episodes, which will not be back-to-back because there's so much information about it that it would be detrimental to our mental health to do that.
You know, a back-to-back series on the topic, which would be like 20-plus episodes, each an hour and a half long or something.
So yeah, this will just be the first installment, and we don't know when the next will be.
But Towers 1 and 2 both collapse in a near-perfect symmetrical fall into and on top of themselves.
Which was simply impossible without something, some force, removing the resistance below each floor as each floor literally disintegrated.
The concrete literally crumbled to dust and the steel beams conveniently buckled joint by joint, each floor simply flapjacking on themselves, leaving contained piles of rubble for a quick and easy cleanup.
And a lot of evidence tampering to go along with it.
But who in the government is worried about evidence tampering and destroying multiple crime scenes to cover their own asses?
Now, if we are to accept the National Institute of Standards and Technologies or NIST's official report and the 9-11 Commission who think they have the final say, Then that means that Building 7 is the only steel-framed, reinforced concrete building in the history of skyscraper fires both before and after September 11th to have collapsed due to fire alone.
The NIST report cites precisely that the collapse of Building 7 was due to multiple office fires on multiple floors.
According to their blatantly fabricated final report, which was issued in 2008, on page 15 of their final report on the collapse of World Trade Center Building 7, They state that there was only minor damage inflicted by the aircraft and that a few windows on the lower floors of the south face of World Trade Center 7 were broken and dust and small debris were deposited in the third floor lobby.
None of the large pieces of debris from World Trade Center 2 hit World Trade Center 7 because of the large distance between the two buildings and there was no evidence of structural damage to World Trade Center 7. So what you're saying is there wasn't much damage caused from World Trade Center 1 or 2,
but they're saying that Building 7 was damaged from those other two buildings.
I'm not.
Even though there was no actual.
Yeah, well, I'm not saying anything.
See, the government is saying that...
They're the ones that are saying only small pieces of debris were deposited into the building and that no large pieces of debris from World Trade Center 2, Tower 2, hit World Trade Center 7. So they're saying that there's no evidence of structural damage to Building 7. They're saying that.
I'm repeating what they're telling us.
So I want people to understand that.
So then...
If they are saying that, then why did the building collapse?
We'll get into it.
But see, a medical triage unit would be set up in the lobby of Building 7 very early, like right after the first plane hit Tower 1, but it would later be moved.
The report goes on to say...
When World Trade Center Tower 1 collapsed, most of the debris landed in an area not much larger than the original World Trade Center 1 building footprint.
However, some fragments were forcibly ejected and traveled distances up to hundreds of meters.
Pieces of World Trade Center 1 hit World Trade Center 7, severing six columns on floors 7 through 17 on the south face and one column on the west face near the southwest corner.
Debris also caused structural damage between floors 44 and the roof.
They go on to say, Compared to the airplane impact damage to the World Trade Center towers,
There was relatively little damage to the interior of World Trade Center 7. There was no superficial or structural damage to the north and east faces.
That sort of sounds like an admission to me.
What do you make of that, Shy?
I mean, they're giving you all the facts.
I mean, these seem like they're actual facts they're giving us, which is shocking.
But it just seems awful strange that these buildings collapsed in a...
In my opinion, a demolition style, because buildings don't just collapse to the ground like that.
Usually they fall or crumble or there's chunks of the building missing, but...
Where did it get mixed up?
Like, they're telling us the facts.
I don't know.
It seems awful.
There was relatively little damage to the interior of World Trade Center 7. There was no superficial or structural damage to the north and east faces.
Right? But...
That's where, like, column 79 was in the northwest.
That's where the collapse happened, they said.
That's where it started.
And really quick here, I just want to touch on the towers 1 and 2 really quick.
Flight 175 did not hit the building square on.
It hit at a slight angle more towards the southwest corner and exited through the west side of the building.
of Tower 2 which caused the vast majority of the fuel to be ejected outside of the building rather than inside of it which means if anything was weakened it would have been that corner of the building and if anything were to have happened as a result it would have most likely have been a cave-in or a buckle where those top 34 floors would have buckled into the impact site where the support columns were the weakest and
at most But it did not happen like that.
What happened was that the top portion, above the impact site, did in fact buckle, but it didn't just fall over.
it fell over and disintegrated in midair as it fell away from the lower part, as you can clearly see in the footage.
But that's not all it did.
The top 34 floors that were disintegrating in midair right before our eyes also somehow completely pulverized the remaining structurally sound 76 floors beneath it.
Somehow... 425,000 cubic yards of concrete was exploded into a powder as small as 100 microns, or similar to that of baby powder.
And those 34 floors didn't fall down onto the floors beneath them.
They were falling away from the building itself.
So how could that top section of 34 floors of what was pulverized concrete completely demolish every single floor beneath it, leaving not a single notable chunk?
And the exact same thing happened to Tower 1, except for the top part didn't fall over.
It simply disintegrated and fell at nearly free-fall speeds.
Both towers completely pulverized themselves in the same exact fashion on the same day.
The odds of that are questionably low.
Also, Tower 2 fell first even after being hit second at an angle, dispersing most of its fuel outside of the building.
The fraudulent 9-11 commission would declare that Tower 2 fell first because it sustained more damage than Tower 1, even though Flight 11 damaged more of Tower 1's outer steel beams and most of its fuel was dispersed inside of the building,
which would have caused considerably more damage.
Right? Definitely.
I mean, it makes sense, right?
Keep in mind here.
And just go look at the photos if you don't believe me here.
But there were no actual chunks.
I mean, chunks of concrete anywhere in the rubble.
Go look.
All you see are the remains of the steel beams.
Many with very peculiar ends with straight-angle cuts that have been oxidized.
Now, some say these cuts were caused by thermite or nanothermite or superthermite, while others say that the cuts were made during the cleanup process, which acted as a front to carry out the criminal act of destroying the crime scene and removing evidence.
And along with the roughly 185,100 tons of steel beams, you see other random pieces of metal.
That didn't melt from the excessive and unnatural heat that burned underground for over three months afterward.
And this fact was vehemently denied by a man named John Gross, who was a lead engineer employed by the government while he did some sort of videotaped deposition.
But tons of people were eyewitnesses to a literal molten pool of metal deep underneath the debris.
This included many firefighters, first responders, government officials such as the highly, highly disgraced and embarrassed.
Ex-mayor of New York, Guli Giuliani.
So you're telling me there was a puddle of metal, but these buildings collapsed because of planes.
Yes. For three months.
For three months.
Yes. After both towers collapsed, they were taking heat signatures from above, and those heat signatures show that there was...
Very intense heat below the debris that was burning for over three months after the towers fell.
That's just wild.
And the question is, how was that burning?
Metal. It was metal.
Molten metal.
Melting. Melting.
Some firefighters said it looked like a stream of lava from a volcano.
The more we're getting into it, the more things don't make sense.
For three months.
Yes, it wasn't until about around December, mid-December, or late December they actually finally put it out.
And you can see videos of those big excavators with claws going down to pick up steel beams and bringing them up, and you see melted metal dripping off.
Yeah, it's crazy.
It's crazy.
So... The University of Alaska Fairbanks conducted a years-long comprehensive study which pretty much scrutinized every word of the NIST official report and concluded without a doubt that Building 7 did not collapse due to fire.
They published that report in 2020.
Aside from that, there was another eye-opening study published in 2008 done by the University of Copenhagen with the Department of Physics and Astronomy at Brigham Young University and SNJ Scientific Company.
Also with Logical Systems Consulting, Architects and Engineers for 9-11 Truth, the 9-11 Working Group of Bloomington, and the International Center for 9-11 Studies.
All right, this is a huge study, okay?
Now, this study's title is Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9-11 World Trade Center Catastrophe.
Can you guess what they found, Shai?
Thermitic dust?
Thermitic material?
Stuff that shouldn't be there, I'm assuming?
Yeah, stuff that shouldn't have been there.
Let's go with that one.
And I'll just read the abstract of their report.
Quote, One sample was collected by a Manhattan resident about 10 minutes after the collapse of the second World Trade Center tower.
Two were taken the next day and a fourth about a week later.
The properties of these chips were analyzed using optical microscopy, scanning electron microscopy or SEM, X-ray energy dispersive spectroscopy or XEDS, and differential scanning calorimetry or DSC.
Oh my god.
The red material contains grains approximately 100 nanometers across, which are largely iron oxide, while aluminum is contained in tiny plate-like structures.
Elemental aluminum is present.
The iron oxide and aluminum are intimately mixed in the red material.
When ignited in a DSC device, the chips exhibit large but narrow exotherms occurring at approximately 430 degrees Celsius or 800 Fahrenheit, far below the normal ignition temperature for conventional
thermite.
Numerous iron-rich spheres are clearly observed in the residue following the ignition of these peculiar red-gray chips.
The red portion of these chips And by the way, when they're talking about far below the normal ignition temperatures, what they're referring to is that the thermite residue indicated a military-grade thermite,
not the type of thermite civilians can purchase, because civilians can purchase certain grades of thermite, and they can even buy all the ingredients needed online to make it.
But you will not be making anything even remotely close to military grade, no matter what you get.
Unless you're getting some, you know, some fucking crazy shit from someone that shouldn't have it.
Some black market.
Yeah, like they have to go steal it from a fucking military base or something, wherever they store weapons shit.
You know, there's corrupt military men out there.
Which would be government inside job.
Yeah, there you go.
But here is something pretty damning.
When the architects and engineers for 9-11 Truth and Richard Gage and all those guys brought all of this to be presented to a grand jury, the court wouldn't even accept it.
They totally disregarded it.
They didn't even allow it to be looked at.
And that was after a very long stall on the government's part to even think about convening a grand jury to begin with.
And check this out.
FEMA did the first quote-unquote investigation.
And released the first official report called the World Trade Center Building Performance Study in 2002.
In that report, they provide a substantial amount of useful data about the events of September 11, 2001 that is not documented anywhere else.
NIST doesn't even mention this data in either of their official reports.
And the 9-11 Commission conveniently disregarded this information as well.
Even though they did the first report, you'd think that that would be part of it, you know?
It's insane.
You would think.
In Appendix C of FEMA's report, they make some very interesting observations in a very forensics point of view before all of those steel beams were very quickly removed from the crime scene.
So FEMA documented that a lot of the steel beams were severely corroded by a sulfidative attack.
I'm going to paraphrase directly from FEMA's report here.
There's evidence of a severe high-temperature corrosion attack on the steel.
Oxidation and sulfocation with subsequent intergranular melting was readily visible in the near-surface microstructure.
A liquid eutectic mixture containing iron, oxygen, and sulfur formed during the hot corrosion attack on the steel.
The sulfur-rich liquid penetrated preferentially down grain boundaries of the steel, severely weakening the beam and making it susceptible to erosion.
The eutectic temperature for the mixture strongly suggests that the temperatures in the steel beam approached 1000 degrees Celsius or 1800 degrees Fahrenheit.
There was copper and sulfur in addition to iron sulfide formation adjacent to iron oxide in the oxidized surface layer.
The severe corrosion and subsequent erosion are a very unusual event.
It is possible that the phenomenon started prior to collapse and accelerated the weakening of the steel structure.
Now, eutectic comes from the Greek word eutectos, and meaning easily melted.
This last thing they say here is very important, though.
They say, Well, guess what?
No government-backed study took place ever to follow through with any of that as you would expect to have happened by this point.
Because that's pretty important to know what is going to damage and make a freaking steel building fall.
You know what I mean?
You'd think they'd want that information.
I mean, I would want that information if I was them.
I mean, we want the information ourselves.
Like, why wouldn't they want that information?
Why wouldn't they go through with the study?
Why do they just leave it?
Especially if this is the first building to collapse specifically due to office fires, you'd think they would want to know how that happened.
Well, yeah, how does an office fire...
That normally doesn't destroy a building.
All of a sudden start melting, you know, beams.
Huge, huge beams that hold an entire building up.
Yeah. Yeah.
In a building the size of a football field to make them all collapse simultaneously for the building to fall on top of itself.
All at the same time.
But we're getting ahead of ourselves here and basically chipping all over our unvalcored go-go boots.
Yeah. Let's talk about the building itself really quick.
It was a 47-story building built with a steel frame and reinforced concrete and completed in 1986.
The first three floors were actually connected to the Con Ed substation, which it was built directly over top of.
It was trapezoidal in shape and its footprint was actually larger than either towers and about the size of a football field.
And each floor held roughly 47,000 square feet or 4,400 square meters of office space made available for rent.
The frame was designed to distribute the weight of itself, called gravity loads, and to resist lateral loads such as wind or impacts.
From the 7th to the 47th floors, there were 24 interior columns that were massive in size to take into account the weight of the building, and 58 perimeter columns, which were not as large, but obviously still very large.
And I know earlier I said 100 columns, but...
It's like, what, 80, 82 or something?
Yeah, something like that.
21 of the interior columns formed a rectangular core and pretty much contained and protected the approximately 30 elevator shafts.
The core was immensely strong and was designed as the main supporting structure for the building itself.
And it's generally how skyscrapers are designed.
The other three columns were larger in size to accommodate the long floor plans on the east side of the building.
And the floors below the 7th were virtually the same in design with a few alterations and additions over the years to add further support and gave no room for concern in the official report.
And I guess I can point this out here, but the NIST report states that, quote, Now, the floors around Column 79. Now, okay,
which floors burned specifically around Column 79?
All the floors?
30 floors?
20? 10?
What are they talking about here?
You know?
They just say the floors around Column 79. Which floors?
Which ones?
Column 79 goes all the way up and down the floors.
I mean, the NIST report says that there were 10 floors that had fire on them, but not all those floors were next to Column 79. They also state that, and I quote, So in total,
there were six out-of-control fires.
Now, the worst visual damage to the building by far was on the southwest corner, where a pretty big chunk was missing, like a bomb had gone off.
NIST says that most of the fires and damage was to the south and southwest sides of the building, so let's ask, where was column 79?
Well, it wasn't near the south and southwest sides at all.
It was in the northeast corner in the east penthouse.
In the NIST report, they have photographs, believe it or not, but in the section titled Observed Fires, they have two photos on the first page.
The first photo was taken about...
Around 3 p.m. and shows two very small office fires that did not cover the entire floor.
It's not even close to it.
And the fire on the 12th floor was about three offices wide and the fire further below it, down on the 7th floor, shows either two separate fires that were one office length away from each other or it was one fire that burned a three office length area but the middle one was already out.
Either way, this comes from NIST.
So just keep that in mind.
They're like showing us the evidence here.
But then they deny their own evidence.
Then they have another photo taken at 5.20pm right before the collapse and it shows the absence of any fire.
Also in their report, another photograph shows a fire that was burning on the east face of the building on floors 11 and 12 at about 2pm.
On floor 11, it looked like a 6-7 office-length area that was on fire, with only 4 still showing actual fire.
And on floor 12, it looks like an area about 10 office lengths is actually on fire, with at least one already out.
They say that a large chunk of debris fell on the roof of the building near the northeast area, causing extensive damage to the penthouse rooftop that was up there.
Well, Shai, I mean, there's just one problem with that.
A simple look at FEMA's website, FEMA.gov.
Shows a perfectly clear photograph of the top of Building 7 after both towers, 1 and 2, had fallen, and the ridiculous pyroclastic-like cloud covered Manhattan, and it shows no damage.
And that's on FEMA's website.
You can easily just look up World Trade Center No.
7 Rooftop 9-11 in any search engine, like startpage.com or something.
And you'll see that it's true.
There's no damage up there.
Picture after picture after picture after picture.
No debris caused damage to the roof of building number seven.
Yet people were like, there's so much damage up there.
That's what caused it to fall.
And then you're like, no, because look.
And they're like, well, it was because the fires in the building.
You're like, well, the fires weren't really that hot.
And they're like, well, it was the weakening of something else.
Well, that wasn't it either.
They just go on to have another excuse.
They're just ready to just have excuses of why it's not an inside job.
With all this quote-unquote damage that they say happened, like the chunk on the roof, but yet there's no actual evidence of the chunk on the roof.
And yes, debris did hit Tower 7 and debris did fall on the roof, but not huge chunks of debris that caused damage.
That's what we're trying to say here.
Just look at the pictures.
If the chunk was large enough to do catastrophic damage to the building, it would be large enough to see in an overview.
Exactly. It's not like they could hide it or edit it or whatever.
And this is 2001.
It's not like...
I mean, Photoshop existed, but not like it does now.
Yeah, I mean, did you see that Photoshop of Osama bin Laden they had?
They just took a real-life picture of him when he was living.
This was back in the day, I forget, like 2007 or something.
But they just took a picture of him when he was alive, and they Photoshopped it to make it look like he was dead.
And they literally put that out to the world, just be like, he's dead.
And it's like, no, he's not.
He's alive and this is photoshopped.
I think it's like CNN and like all those news channels.
They were all pumping that out.
It's one of those like clearly photoshopped pictures that like, you know, when the girls try to give them smaller waist and then the walls are bending.
Exactly. It's so dumb.
And it's like, we're just like, oh, government.
Poor you made a mistake.
It's okay.
You know?
No. It's not okay.
Just blatantly lying to us, and we just accept it.
We don't question anything that they told us.
But you know what?
Let's move on.
Each floor slab was made with a varying thickness of reinforced concrete poured on top of a deep corrugated metal decking.
These thicknesses went from 3 inches to 14 inches, with most being between 6 and 8. These slabs were all just about one acre in size and were supported by the floor beams being connected directly to the concrete deck.
This is referred to as a composite floor, as each part works together or compositely, which adds overall strength.
The floor beams were connected to a number of girders, which transferred the gravity load from the floors to themselves, and the girders were also connected to the columns.
I mean, this shit was strong.
Now, construction of Building 7 was done by at least six different architectural and construction companies that we know of.
Namely, the owner and developer, 7 World Trade Center Company, Silverstein Development Corporation, and General Partner.
Now, the construction manager of the project was the Tishman Construction Corporation of New York, who had built at least 45 other large buildings, none of which have ever collapsed due to office fires.
The design architect company was Emery Roth& Sons, who built at least 123 other large buildings, none of which have ever collapsed due to office fires.
The structural consultant was the office of Erwin G. Cantor, which changed to Cantor Sign-It Group, who designed and specialized in high-rise buildings.
He was responsible for skyscrapers all over the world and received many awards over 60 years of running his structural engineering firm.
Again, none of his buildings have ever collapsed due to office fires.
The mechanical and electrical consultant was Siska and Hennessy, who are a global engineering firm and who have worked on at least 53 buildings internationally, none of which have collapsed due to office fires.
The structural consultant was Leslie E. Robertson Associates, and Leslie was the head structural engineer for the World Trade Center Complex.
He was also responsible for the Shanghai World Financial Center, the Bank of China Tower in Hong Kong, the Puerta de Europa in Madrid, and the U.S. Steel Tower in Pittsburgh, all skyscrapers, among many other projects.
He and his firm are behind three of the six tallest buildings in the world, and none of the skyscrapers that he is responsible for have ever collapsed due to office fires.
Have any skyscrapers fallen due to office fires?
Ever? No.
World Trade Center 7 is the only steel-supported skyscraper, at least taller than 15 floors, if people want to argue that point, that has ever collapsed due specifically to office fires.
Man, and they don't want to do research into why.
Why, why, why, why, why it happened?
Why? They don't want to make sure to avoid that problem in any other skyscrapers.
So everyone out there listening, you can thank the government for not...
Looking after your best interests because they don't care if that steel skyscraper that you're working in collapses because maybe they could find a problem with the weak spots by doing a little investigation into why Building 7 fell, but they don't want to do that.
So technically, everyone that works in a skyscraper, a steel-supported skyscraper, is in dire danger.
And I thought my building was bad with the black mold.
Well, that is pretty bad.
You should get that checked out.
We're moving soon, is what they keep telling us.
Good. And then burn that thing down.
So, sometime after the events of September 11th, Leslie Robertson would say in an interview that both towers, 1 and 2, were specifically designed to withstand the impact of a Boeing 707, which was the largest plane at the time.
To be clear, both planes that hit the towers were 767s.
Larger planes, obviously, but surprisingly, not that much.
And the differences between the planes is that the 767 has a wingspan that is exactly 10 feet wider, and its length is exactly 6 feet longer.
So there's not much difference there at all.
Also, the 767 can carry 1,000 gallons more than the 707, but it is 40 miles per hour slower.
Leslie went on to say that the towers could probably have survived multiple impacts from jetliners from planes even larger than the 767s that struck them.
To be fair here, he did publicly accept the official narrative, but whether that was his own view or someone else's that he was pressured to publicly say, we won't know.
But Charlie Thornton, another structural engineer, stated, As far as a plane knocking a building over, that would not happen.
So we have many people who know lots of things about skyscrapers, stating that what happened couldn't actually happen.
Including the actual engineers involved in the construction of the towers.
Yeah, not just random people who've built skyscrapers, but the people who actually constructed the towers are telling you that this is really not possible.
Really just not possible.
Yeah. And then you just have so many, like, well, the problem is you have so many people out here and out there in the world who blindly accept the official narrative and it just adds to the problem and it's just everything gets obfuscated and nobody knows what to believe.
And it, like, pushes people that are actually doing the real research, like, it pushes them further away because everybody attacks them for Trying to find the truth.
They get ridiculed consistently.
Well, yeah.
You're a conspiracy theorist.
You believe in lizard people at that point is what people think.
They don't think that you're doing actual research.
They think that you're more brainwashed than they are by the main media.
Yeah. And that word is weaponized.
Conspiracy theorists.
It's weaponized.
And it's a CIA-derived term.
The CIA developed that in the 60s.
They are the ones who created it to make Americans think the conspiracy theorists are crazy.
Exactly. So it's all an inside job.
Literally, it's just this big ball of everything rolls back to being an inside job and there's someone higher controlling it.
Because everything is controlled.
Everything is controlled.
And the psyops go so deep.
People can easily just look this stuff up and connect the dots, but they just don't.
Yeah, research is so easy.
You got your phone in your pocket.
You can just pull it out and do research.
It's really that easy.
It is that easy.
And it sucks because I give people proof.
I give people the studies that Alaska Fairbanks did and FEMA.
The evidence is there.
And they're like, nope, that's not real.
And then, like, the whole thing, how, like, Congress was like, we're not gonna let grand jury see this evidence, because it was, like, it is the evidence that is needed to prove it.
And they're like, no, nah, we can't let them see that, you know?
So, huh.
Why would we let them have the actual facts?
Who's controlling the narrative here?
Fucking government.
And they won't let, they won't let the truth out.
They let the truth out about aliens, but they're not going to give us the truth about something that happened to our country.
Well, they're letting out their truth about aliens.
That's all.
Yeah. None of you want to get into that.
That's another story for another day.
But in other words, Building 7 was very, very, very strong and more than capable of holding its own weight, obviously.
And it was clearly built with careful precision and...
Obvious expertise from companies with mind-boggling experience.
There's no question about it, and I don't think anybody questions that fact.
So, what about the fireproofing?
Yeah, so every beam, every column, and every metal deck was applied with between about a half of an inch to about two inches of a fireproof solution made of monocoat MK5, which is gypsum-based and contained a vermiculite aggregate and would provide a two- to three-hour resistance to fire.
And it was a great fire retardant, no doubt.
And the building was in full compliance with fire and building codes that were required at the time of construction, per port authority.
As for the fire alarm and sprinkler system, again, they were in full compliance with regulations.
Not only was there a direct connection to the main water supply below ground, there was a massive supply of water specifically for the sprinkler system on top of the roof.
Says that at the time, everything was up to code and past inspections.
So, the sprinkler system should have kicked on, right?
It should have put those fires in those office buildings out?
Well, the fire system did work, yeah.
Not completely.
We'll get into that too.
But right, so now that we have an idea about the structural integrity of Building 7, let's move on to where these fires in Building 7 were actually located.
Now, going along the official narrative, They said the fires likely started around the western half of the south face and most likely began as a result of burning debris from the collapse of World Trade Center 1. The report goes on to say,
They were typically observed as single floor fires.
Unlike the World Trade Center towers, there was no dispersion of jet fuel in World Trade Center 7 causing simultaneous fire initiation over extensive areas of a single floor.
Or over multiple adjacent floors.
So again, they admit that the damages were not severe.
These fires were relatively small and contained and deemed to be office fires.
Now, a typical office fire generates about 1200 degrees of heat Fahrenheit or about 650 Celsius.
And as we know...
Heat rises, and in an environment such as an enclosed space like an office, the heat will accumulate toward the ceiling where it has nowhere to escape, which will inevitably cause the heat to increase, and can easily get around 2,000 degrees Fahrenheit, or 1,100 Celsius, if completely unabated and left to burn uncontrollably.
But to get to your point about sprinkler systems, these fires were not completely unabated.
They kicked on the sprinkler system, which did work.
The water lines were not completely destroyed.
But they were said to be damaged enough that the pressure was fairly low.
Initially, firefighters were running around everywhere trying to do their job, and many of these first responding emergency workers or firefighters were actually looking around the building structure to make observations as to its integrity.
In terms of building codes and safety and all of that, when something happens to a building which causes damage, You know, to a degree where it could be deemed unsafe, then that needs to be observed before anything else.
And that is what happened at Building 7 until they were told to evacuate.
And after Tower 1's collapse at 1028 AM, a small group of firefighters would go back to search Building 7 and try to put out the various pockets of contained fire, but the water pressure was low so there wasn't much that they could do.
Again, the official report states that none of the debris from either tower's collapse So,
the water lines were damaged.
Yes, the water lines were damaged.
So, it makes sense that the fires would have continued going just simply because the sprinklers weren't working as well, if the firemen were having problems with that as well.
So there's a little bit of sense there.
The pictures show the fires are basically out towards the end, right before the building was pulled.
It shows there's hardly any smoke coming out of the windows at all.
Yeah. And in skyscrapers, like in office buildings, they're designed to be able to handle office fires because they burn themselves out.
Over time, they will just burn themselves out because there isn't a shit ton of fuel to be burned.
There are cubicles, chairs, computers, plastics.
Carpet, tiles, but all of that will burn and all of it is designed to be self-contained and burn itself out over a period of a few hours because that's why you have a few hours of fireproofing on all the cement or the steel beams.
Like these office fires in skyscrapers are designed to burn.
They're not just going to cause buildings to collapse.
They're designed to not let that happen.
So why did this one burn so badly that the building collapsed?
They think concrete and steel burn.
I don't know.
I don't know what they're thinking.
But the official report says that at around 2 p.m., firefighters noticed a bulge in the southwest corner of the building between the 10th and 13th floors.
A sign that Fire Chief Peter Hayden told him the building was unstable.
And then at 3.30 p.m., Chief of Operations with the Fire Department, Daniel Negro, Interestingly, there is footage from CNN on the grounds showing firefighters leaving the vicinity of Building 7 with accompanied audio.
The footage shows a number of firefighters at the ground level of Building 7, and an emergency worker warns everyone that the building is quote-unquote about to blow up.
You hear an explosion and then a voice asking, you hear that?
Then you hear the voice of an emergency worker saying, keep your eye on that building, it'll be coming down.
Then you hear the voice of a second worker saying, building's about to blow up, move it back, there's a building about to blow up.
And here is that clip.
Why? You know, why were they hearing explosions going off?
And how did these people know that Building 7 was going to blow up and come down?
Yeah, that's pretty strange.
How did they know?
Who told them?
Definitely foreknowledge.
And here's a clip of Michael Hess, who was the corporate counsel for the city of New York and who was in Building 7. That's right.
I'm standing here right now just off Broadway by City Hall with Michael Hess, who is the city's corporation counsel.
Mr. Hess, you were trapped in, I believe, Seven World Trade Center.
Go ahead, sir.
Yes, I was.
I was up in the emergency management center on the 23rd floor, and when all the power went out in the building, another gentleman and I walked down to the 8th floor where there was an explosion, and we'd been trapped on the 8th floor with smoke, thick smoke, all around us for about an hour and a half.
But the New York Fire Department, as terrific as they are, just came and got us out.
And here is Barry Jennings, the man that was with him.
Barry Jennings, you're on the eighth floor.
You work for the city housing department.
Explain to me the moment of impact.
Well, me and Mr. Hess, the corporation council, were on the 23rd floor.
I told them we got to get out of here.
We started walking down the stairs.
We made it to the eighth floor.
Big explosion.
and it was back into the eighth floor.
And I turned to Hesh, I said, this is it, we're dead.
We're not gonna make it out of here.
I took a fire extinguisher and I bust the window out.
That's when this gentleman here heard my cries for help.
Now, Barry Jennings would later say in an interview that he was stepping over dead bodies inside of Building 7. But the official report says that not a single person died in Building 7. He would also say that the entire lobby of Building 7 was utterly destroyed.
And nothing from either tower struck Building 7 to cause such extensive damages to the lobby of the 47-story building.
There was only minor damages to a few parts of the building where some debris had struck.
But there was nothing to explain those damages other than bombs that had been planted.
But in NIST's report, it says that there was quote-unquote, No heavy debris observed in lobby area.
White dust coating.
Well... Barry heard the bombs exploding.
Hess heard the bombs exploding in Building 7. Norman Mineta heard the bombs exploding.
And not only that, hundreds of other people heard the same thing going on all around the complex.
Unfortunately, Barry would be found dead on August 19, 2008.
The thing is, though, is that there is no information about the manner or cause of his death.
Barry had been admitted to a hospital for two or three days.
And then...
Apparently he just died.
And there was no autopsy, there was no pathology report, no death certificate, nothing.
Furthermore, it seems that his entire family had also disappeared around the same time.
All gone.
Wife, kids, maybe a dog or two.
But they all went missing right after Barry's own death.
And the guy who made the awesome documentary, Lose Change, Dylan Avery, said that he had hired a private investigator to find out what happened to him.
But the PI came back to him sometime later and refunded all of his money and told him never to contact him again.
So if that's true, what's going on there?
And then, two days after his death, NIST released its final report.
That timing is just impeccable.
Because Barry was out there publicly saying all of these things that were in direct contradiction to the government's narrative.
And he was a ranking public official.
And he just mysteriously dies with nobody coming forward to talk about him, such as the nurses or doctors that were in the hospital where he was.
No one's saying shit.
So, there's also that.
But in fact, there were at least 26 first responders, emergency workers, firefighters, etc., all around the grounds of Building 7 who heard early warnings by other people, even their higher-ups, that the building was going to collapse.
They were part of like 500 other witnesses who heard or witnessed strange things that went against the official narrative.
And one deputy fire chief, Nick Visconti, said he was seeing these fires burning in Building 7 and nobody was putting them out.
Then another guy, Frank Fellini, he came over and said that there were hundreds of guys inside Building 7 and that they needed to get them out because of an imminent collapse.
Now let's listen to this audio clip of Craig Bartmer, who was a New York first responder, explaining his experience near Building 7. It was nothing I would ever imagine seeing in my life.
You know, the thing started peeling in on itself.
There was an umbrella of crap seven feet over my head that I just stared at.
Somebody grabbed my shoulder and I started running, and the shit's hitting the ground behind me.
And the whole time you're hearing, thum, thum, thum, thum, thum.
So, I think I know an explosion when I hear it.
There's even a clip from Ashley Banfield reporting just a few blocks away from Building 7, which is in the background of the scene, and she's interviewing a woman with a baby, and right after she asks this woman a question, both she and this woman become startled by explosions, loud explosions, multiple explosions and repetition,
which are audible.
Number 7 World Trade Center.
Heard several reports from several different officers now that that is the building that is going to go down next.
And she wasn't the only one who knew of its collapse.
Listen to Brian Williams interviewing David Restuccio.
Can you confirm it was number 7 that just went in?
Yes, sir.
And you guys knew this was coming all day?
We had heard reports that the building was unstable and that eventually we need to come down on its own.
Or it would be taken down.
And there's a video of Building 7 right before its collapse.
It's a close-up shot of the south side face, but you can clearly see a series of explosions, at least seven that shatter windows as they happen.
You see their flashes.
Most are centralized in one area of maybe 10 floors around the middle of the building, just to the, I guess, right a little bit maybe.
And you can see a couple others in about the same area, but to the left a little bit more.
And you see these little flashes just before it collapses.
And as it's collapsing.
And these correspond to the series of explosions that Ashley Banfield and the woman were hearing as they watched only blocks away.
So that's pretty interesting.
And there's no doubt that the collapse of Building 7 was anticipated.
And anticipated so strongly that multiple media outlets were focused on the imminent collapse of the building.
Shai, do you recall the BBC News anchors reporting on the collapse of Building 7 about 20 minutes before it actually collapsed?
Do you remember that?
And apparently CNN also reported on the same thing just briefly before it happened.
Honestly, I was a child.
We were watching a 19-inch tube TV, so I don't really remember much of any of the reporting other than the buildings, you know, getting dropped by planes.
So this is how that reporting went down.
The male anchor at the studio of BBC headquarters stated, Now, more on the latest building collapse in New York.
You might have heard a few moments ago, I was talking about the Salomon Brothers building collapsing, and indeed, it has.
And he goes on to introduce a female anchor, Jane Stanley, who was apparently in New York, in a building some distance away from the World Trade Center, with the World Trade Center 7 in the background.
And in that background, you can clearly see that Building 7 is still very much standing, well after the massive cloud dust from the Towers 1 and 2 had settled.
So they're precursoring to what was going to happen?
Well, yeah.
I mean, they had foreknowledge.
They were told well in advance that Building 7 was going to be demolished.
But what was the BBC's response to this?
Well, they said that the reporters had mistakenly gotten information that was initially passed on by the news agency Reuters, which was passed on and passed on until BBC got a hold of it.
And CNN, by the way.
And the question is then, how or why did Reuters know, and where did they get their information?
Indeed, where did they get this information?
And it was passed along awful quickly as well.
But BBC went on to say that their sources had word that authorities on the World Trace Center grounds believed the building was going to collapse, and that the BBC simply got their information and reported on it a bit too early.
So, okay.
Why did the authorities on the grounds believe it was going to collapse?
The building was far from being damaged enough to fall on its own.
And even if you wanted to pull it, what would be the reason?
The building could easily have been repaired and reinforced.
Or maybe there was a financial reason for wanting it to be destroyed.
Hmm. But who would financially gain from a building being, you know, destroyed?
We'll talk more on that aspect in a later episode with Towers 1 and 2. But every news anchor was talking about the imminent collapse of Building 7, despite the building not being hit by a jetliner, nor being damaged to the extent that would even be cause for an imminent collapse.
And as I mentioned earlier, the official report by NIST stated that the structure of Building 7 was not compromised by the debris from either towers collapse, nor from the debris ejected from the collisions of the planes into the towers.
And remember...
The official report states that Building 7's collapse was due precisely to fire, which would make it the only steel-framed skyscraper in architectural history before and after September 11, 2001 to every collapse due solely to fire.
But as the architects and engineers for the two stated, there were a number of other buildings in the World Trade Center Complex vicinity that were on fire and sustained far greater damage than Building 7, yet Building 7 was the only building that the authorities and the media focused on.
They completely disregarded all of the other buildings that visually presented a greater degree of danger.
Why is that?
And if you recall, every World Trade Center building, 1 through 7, were destroyed that day.
So, why was 7 the hot topic?
In the report by FEMA, which came out about one year after the events unfolded, they conducted a building performance study and concluded that there was, quote, only a low probability of occurrence, end quote, Of the building's near-perfect flapjacked collapse.
And even as late as March of 2006, the lead investigator of NIST told New York Magazine that he and his team could not figure out how Building 7 collapsed.
That's five years later.
Five years of alleged investigations into the cause, and they still couldn't give an explanation.
And fast forward to 2008, they chalked it up to being caused by fire.
But remember, The 9-11 Commission failed to mention anything about Building No.
7, which, for being the only steel-framed building in history to collapse due to office fires, you'd think it would sort of be important to add into their commission report.
It should be, like, number one.
I mean, it's never happened before.
It's never happened again.
Like, and why did they focus so hard on it?
See, they focused really hard on letting everybody know that it was going to collapse.
There's an imminent collapse coming.
But the important departments completely ignored to give it any attention in their reports.
And it's the only known building that has done that.
Yeah, it's insane.
You'd also think it would be important to follow up on the first official report issued by FEMA where they said a detailed study into the mechanisms of this phenomenon is needed to determine what risk, if any, is presented to existing seal structures exposed to severe and long burning fires, but they didn't.
The important things were completely ignored by the 9-11 Commission.
But okay, let's assume Building No.
7 had fires burning on 10 floorers.
Okay. Ten floors with relatively small pockets of fire in a 47-story building.
But keep in mind, the floors that were on fire were not all adjacent floors.
They were like six lower ones with small fires and a couple a bit higher, but nothing above floor 30. Okay, so that's great.
Let's look at some other buildings that caught fire, and we'll come back to this.
The One Meridian Plaza Fire?
This... This is a 38-floor skyscraper in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania that had a severe fire back in 1991.
The fire started on the 22nd floor and burned for 18 hours, totally gutting 8 floors.
It was later said by Philly officials to be the most significant fire in this century.
Not a single part of the building collapsed.
Then there was a first interstate bank fire.
This was a 62-floor skyscraper in Los Angeles.
Shout out to our Paranautica angels on yonder.
This would be the city's worst high-rise fire in its history of city-ing, and it began in the evening of May 4th in 1988 and burned extensively for four and a half hours.
Floors 12 through the 16th were gutted as 64 different firefighting companies battled the Inferno.
Despite everything, there was no significant damage to the main structural supports, there was some minor damage to a single secondary beam and a few floor pans, but nothing...
That would make it collapse all flapjackety on itself.
Okay. All right.
Yeah. This is just literally feeding the fire.
This is ridiculous.
There's just so much evidence.
There's just no way.
There's just no way that building collapsed the way they...
Because of office fires.
There's just no way.
It gets better.
There was also the New York Plaza Fire.
This is a 50-story office tower that is actually less than one mile from the World Trade Center.
On August 5th, 1970, the fire was severe and would last more than 6 hours.
It didn't collapse.
Now let's check out the Caracas Tower fire in Venezuela that happened on October 17th, 2004.
This fire was very extensive and burned more than 26 floors of the 50-floor building, which also burned for over 17 hours.
Not a big deal, right?
Still, it did not collapse.
There's also the Windsor Tower fire in Madrid, Spain.
This was a 32-story building with three stories underground.
It was completely gutted by fire on February 12, 2005, after a fire was detected on the 21st floor.
The fire quickly spread and burned extremely hot for 24 hours.
24 hours.
Also, the building sprinkler system was being retrofitted and was not in operation at the time.
And while there was a partial collapse, and the entire building was a total loss, 32 stories still stood strong.
So a way, way, way, way worse fire.
Way worse fire.
It burned for way, way longer, way longer, way longer.
And the building still stood.
Still stood.
The structure still stood.
And the last one we're going to mention is the Beijing Mandarin Oriental Hotel Fire.
This was a 44-floor building.
With a wedge-shaped design, the fire would burn for five hours in a massive fiery inferno that was fully engulfed in 20 minutes.
And every floor was burned out.
The entire building was literally on fire for hours.
The pictures are like, oh my god, that is insane.
Yet, it didn't collapse.
High-rise buildings are designed to survive a fire, even if the fire has to burn to extinction.
This means the structural systems need to endure fire for the entire length it takes for all combustibles to be consumed.
There were a couple of other fires in the United Kingdom, the Cardington and the Broadgate fires that resulted in there being full-scale experiments in the UK, to see how steel-framed buildings would endure fire longer than they were designed for.
And they found that overall...
Steel-framed buildings, such as World Trade Center Building 7, could overperform their intended design.
Isn't that interesting?
It's insane.
Plus, there was a B-52 bomber that crashed in the Empire State Building in 1945 when the pilot couldn't see where he was going in the dense fog, but the building did not fall and did not lose any of its structural integrity.
Yeah, none whatsoever.
None whatsoever.
So, bringing it back to Building 7. Again, Building 7 had at best 10 floors that had small office fires that were not extensive and which burned around 6 hours at most.
None of the footage or photographs of Building 7 show anything that could indicate that a fire or range of fires throughout the building could have burned hot enough to weaken every single steel beam and support beam all throughout the entire building from end to end just about instantaneously.
The building was the size of a football field, and the entire 47-story building fell into its own footprint with only a slight deviation of lateral movement.
It's impossible without something being the catalyst of instantly removing all resistance, aka the 81 or 82 steel columns that held the building in place.
It's simply impossible.
And NIST has admitted that in their final report.
Yet here we are still trying to get enough attention on this issue to bring those responsible to justice.
Unfortunately, Donald Rumsfeld, who was arguably the worst one of them all, is already dead.
And I'm certain that anyone highly suspected of being involved will be long gone before the government makes any admission of guilt, which, yeah, that's not happening.
They've probably already gotten rid of everybody.
Yeah, the Bushes are still alive.
Tons of Bin Ladens.
Cheney's still alive.
Yeah, but they know it's not the damn mouth.
The Clintons.
They know not to say anything.
Oh yeah, they're not going to say shit.
No one's going to admit anything.
Oh, hell no.
But when all of those people are dead, the people that lived in that time period that had a part of it, once everyone's gone, maybe people will start leaking information.
Makes sense.
NIST completely denied it in their first report in 2004 by saying that the building fell 40% slower than Freefall.
But four years later, they switched their stance and explained that the building fell in three stages.
Stage one lasted 1.75 seconds with an acceleration less than that of gravity, which makes sense because there has to be an initiation point where the fall begins and accelerates.
Gravity isn't going to suck a building down like a vacuum.
The building has a lot of material, which all acts as a resistant force.
Therefore, a building can only collapse as fast as any resistance below it.
Stage 2 lasted from 1.75 seconds to 4 seconds, and this was officially documented as free fall by NIST, which means that every steel beam in that football field-sized building was completely removed from acting as a resistance force all at once.
Stage 3 lasted from 4 seconds to 5.4 seconds with a decreased acceleration that was less than that of gravity.
Which, yeah, of course, there were thousands of tons of material in the air and piling up below it.
So yeah, it's going to slow down.
So stage 2, the beam just magically disappeared.
Basically. Yeah, free fall speed.
They had to just completely just went away.
They're gone.
It's admitted by NIST.
This is admitted by the National Institute of Science and Technology.
Like, they're telling us, yeah, it fell at free-fall speed, which means for that 1.25 to 1.5 seconds, every piece of support just was gone.
Well, you know what?
I think this is where we should stop for today.
We're at that time.
And next week, we will finish up with some small things about stuff like military-grade thermite, Securicom, Stratasec.
Kuwaiti business partners and airport security, some demolition firms, some weapons firms, the CIA, the DOD, Wirt Walker, and just the insane network of connections between these powerful elites such as the Bush crime family.
Oh, and the Bin Latins, by the way.
They're involved.
Anyway, it'll be a good show.
Shai, how are you feeling?
I feel like I made it to the end.
Yeah, we're almost there.
Did you have fun?
Of course I had fun.
How could I not have fun talking about all kinds of cool conspiracy facts about what happened on 9-11, the event that everyone saw?
Conspiracy facts.
Conspiracy facts, yeah.
I mean, we all watched this happen.
It's very, very eye-opening to see the truth of what actually happened and not what we all watched on the news that day.
Yeah, I mean, the real conspiracy here is the government's official narrative.
That's the conspiracy.
Oh, absolutely.
Billion percent.
Well, lads and gentlewomen, thanks again, and we really hope you enjoyed our guest host today.
Again, Scott is off on his honeymoon with his wife, having a great time, starting a new chapter in their lives.
But Scott will be back here in the studio next week with some stories to tell us all.
I will demand it.
And I just flew back in from the wedding a few dozen states away yesterday, and I'm still exhausted.
And I don't even drink.
Neither of us do.
But it was a great time.
I met a lot of incredible people on both sides of the family.
Truly incredible people who have a special place in my heart.
And I want to give a special shout-out to Genjo and Joanne.
You guys are incredible.
I love you both so much.
Anyway, since this will have to be, at the very least, a two-parter, I think we'll have Shai back next week to finish it out because it would be pretty ridiculous not to, right?
Shai, are you okay with that?
To come back next week as a guest co-host alongside Ol' Boot Scootin' Booty.
And myself.
Man, I might have to buy a new pair of shoes just to do it if you're gonna be doing some boot scootin'.
Well, I think you did a great job.
I'm sure Scott will be more than happy with the simple fact that you kept his boots warm while he was gone, and that you did a really good job.
I think he'll be happy with the results.
And also, like, share, and subscribe to the Paranautica Podcast.
We kindly ask that you provide us with a five-star rating wherever you can.
Help us out by spreading the name of the show any way you know how.
Maybe it's writing the podcast name all over the streets in chalk.
Get creative.
Let the artistic flow come out.
Or maybe it's running around a grocery store as fast as you possibly can, just running up and down the aisles, dodging people, sliding around corners at breakneck speeds and shouting for people to stop what they're doing to listen to the Paranautica podcast.
I don't know, but it would be really cool if you all helped us out.
We would really appreciate it.
And we are all out of stickers, by the way, but we should have more as soon as Wayne Dale actually goes and does something around here.
