So, why didn't THIS happen on 9/11?

I love how they put the demolition company's name on a big ass banner on the fail.

I can't connect the dots. Can you provide more clarity with your assertion? Thanks

Because the 911 crew employed better demolition experts.

Somewhere in this world there's a team of demolition experts either:

1. Dead (most probable)
2. Rich beyond their wildest dreams
3. Hiding like scared little children

Imagine how much weight and force was moving in a downward direction after the bottom floors were blown out, but without more structural demolition the building almost deadstops from freefall speed.

Which makes sense because a shitton of debris is piling up below it as it falls...(at the very least it should tip over rather than completely pancake)

How the fuck did THREE GIANT ASS BUILDINGS turn to dust on 9/11?

Either these building were LITERALLY the WORST built skyscrapers in existence(the company that built them should be investigated and so should every other building constructed by them),

OR...

Also remember that building 7 DID NOT get hit by a plane and reports were that the fires were in the BOTTOM of the building.

So we have two skyscrapers that disintegrated because of plane strikes + one building that disintegrated because of fires at the base...

What are the odds of two completely DIFFERENT scenarios causing the EXACT same type of destruction?

This is the modern method:

4. Former military demolitions experts who were hired as contractors who know they will be convicted of bogus child "pron" charges if they ever say anything. And they probably didn't volunteer for the mission either. They were chosen for their already high level clearances and although they were paid, it wasn't a lot.

how about plain invisible?

they'd have to be to plant the invisible charges that left invisible evidence.

On the exact same day