WATCH: The Toronto Hearings on 9/11 – Jon Cole: "how did the towers fall?"

In 2011, experts from around the world gathered in Toronto, Canada to present new and established evidence that questions the official story of 9/11. This evidence was presented to a distinguished panel of experts over a 4 day period.

Jon Cole is a professional engineer and sometime expert witness. He has made numerous videos of experiments that demonstrate his contention that the official explanation for the collapse of the three WTC towers is in violation of Newtonian physics.


If you enjoy OffG's content, please help us make our monthly fund-raising goal and keep the site alive.

For other ways to donate, including direct-transfer bank details click HERE.

Notify of

oldest most voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Norman Pilon
Norman Pilon
Sep 16, 2016 5:35 AM

Random impressions: . . . because “empirical facts,” eh. . . .Jon Cole: the humble idiot who proved the unprovable! . . . Popular Mechanics debunks itself debunking 9/11 myths by omission and historical amnesia: “Its never ever been done, ever, because it can’t be done! ” and then “Well, that’s a story we made up back in the 30s. But we don’t make up our stories anymore. Well, maybe a little bit because we do patriotic science.” . . . National Geographic for dummies, not as in “explained” for dummies, although Jon does a brilliant job of that, too, but as in literally a magazine for dummies. Does anyone read the magazine anymore? If you do, you need to stop . . . now! Don’t read it, don’t watch it. (Here, however, I must momentarily digress, because if you don’t break your habit with N.G., you will come to… Read more »

Sep 13, 2016 9:40 PM

Another thing that puzzles me is, why bother to go to all the trouble of rigging WTC 7 for demolistion at all? What’s the point or reason for doing that? Hadn’t they already ‘made their point’ with the Twin Towers?

Sep 14, 2016 7:50 AM
Reply to  michaelk

@michaelk — that’s a question that we can’t answer because we can’t mind-read.
What we can do is focus on the hard science and follow facts where they take us.
What we can establish is what did not happen.
Fire alone (the US govt’s version) can’t sever scores of steel columns simultaneously.
Fire alone can’t cause seven-second pulverisation of tall structures, which is actually
reassuring to all who live and work in tall skyscrapers.
Focusing on the best evidence is what the best criminologists and forensics experts do and many cases are solved this way, even cold cases.

Sep 13, 2016 9:38 PM

I think it’s a very interesting piece of analysis, well presented too. I just have difficulty accepting what he said at about 56 minutes in, where he quotes Ryan about the planes hitting the floors that had recently been refurbished. Cole says that perhaps this was because those floors had been structurally prepared for demolition, weakened, waiting for the planes to hit and finish the job, presumably. It’s the logistics that puzzle me. Why bother with yet another level of complexity, hitting the towers at precisely those places. Cole agrees with Ryan that this wasn’t a coincidence, but something that was deliberately planned in advance. Phew, the mind boggles at the skills required to organize and carry out such a precision attack, using planes like darts hitting the bullseye on a dartboard. It probably goes without saying that if all that’s true, the planes hitting a pre-determined spot on the… Read more »

Sep 13, 2016 5:13 PM

Well, if it was nano-thermite, the only people admitting to manufacturing the stuff in 2002 in the USA was The Naval Surface Warfare Center – Indian Head Division. Conveniently, their record keeping protocols saw all pre-2002 records of private-sector partnerships destroyed in 2009 (http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=113766.0 ) It is clear that the most likely technology used involved sol-gel methods, since both silicon and carbon were found in the nano-thermite powders at the WTC site. Whilst there may be other military organisations outside the US who were also capable of supplying industrial-level amounts of sol-gel-derived nano-thermite explosives, Suspect 1 as a supplier of such material should be the Naval Surface Warfare Center. I wonder whether there are any whistleblowers out there who can confirm whether NSWC supplied nano-thermite explosives to the CIA in 2001 and whether any CIA operatives will confirm that they installed it into the WTC buildings in summer 2001? Of… Read more »

Sep 14, 2016 2:27 PM
Reply to  rtj1211

Great post!

Sep 13, 2016 3:50 PM

Talking of Toronto: there are plans currently to build two condo towers at the junction of Yonge St and Bloor. At 300 metres they will be second only to the CN Tower in height.
There are likely to be hearings, involving the Ontario Municipal Board (aka the Developer’s Friend) before the plans are authorised.
Now the question is “Why, when such plans are discussed, does nobody among the public ever object to the danger that airliners (the site is minutes away from two international airports) hitting one of these towers must pose?”
It would be interesting to see what officialdom would make of a case citing the 9/11 Commission’s reports as evidence of the dangers of such buildings collapsing as a result of fire? Or will the developer argue that such fears are ridiculous because a collapse just could not happen?