9/11 revisionism and why evidence matters

➡️ This is an early access release for paid subscriptions.

I remember the day. I'd just arrived at my girlfriend's house and heard her brother shouting from the lounge. Her mom and brother were standing in front of the TV, watching the first tower billowing smoke. Then the next plane hit and we all thought it was the start of WW3.

But what actually happened?

Did planes hit the buildings and did jet fuel bring them down? Or did planes hit but controlled demolition—or mini-nukes—cause the collapse? Or did no planes hit and something else bring down the towers?

The latter is what 9/11 Revisionist argues.

Something else happened

Have you ever actually looked at that?

Look at that photo above. Have you ever actually looked at that?

More specifically, he argues that directed energy weapons (DEW) were used and, based on the evidence, it's the only viable conclusion one can make.

With so many visuals, it's a watching episode, not a listening one. It's long but worth it.

'Empirical evidence is the truth that theory must mimic.'

—Judy Wood