Prelude 9/11 morning Flight 11 hijacked Flight 175 hijacked WTC 1 hit Flight 77 hijacked WTC 2 hit Flight 93 hijacked Pentagon hit WTC 2 collapses Flight 93 crashes WTC 1 collapses WTC 7 collapses Epilogue


How do you get the most out of this site?

Truth Movement



Fact sheets


We are available for booking a lecture or a workshop here.


The official account is self-contradicting


Proponents of the official account claim on one hand that it required a lot of explosives to get the World Trade Center 1 and 2 to collapse and on the other that the collapse could only happen due to the plane impacts.0


The claim was made by Brian Fløe, webmaster at, the Danish Truth Movement’s website:

”…Another example is how it is often argued that it is absurd to imagine that the World Trade Center had been filled med explosives because it would require so many explosives to tear down those buildings. One often hears “do you realize how much explosives were required in those buildings????” versus …but planes can easily accomplish the task.”

“…Et andet eksempel er hvordan det ofte argumenteres at det er absurd at forestille sig at WTC var mineret da der skulle bruges så meget sprængstof for at rive de bygninger ned. Man høre ofte “er du klar over hvor meget sprængstof der skulle placeres i de bygninger????” versus …men flyvemaskiner kan sagtens klare opgaven.”0


The editors are not aware of a single proponent of the official account who can be quoted for such a claim.

The official account states that the World Trade Center 1 and 2 collapsed due to structural damage from the impact of the planes and the subsequent wide-spread unfought fires1

The official account does not point to any theoretical or practical amounts of explosives that would be needed to destroy the World Trade Center 1 and 2.

On the other hand, the Truth Movement can be quoted for an assumption of a fairly specific amount of explosives needed, namely 10-100 tons, which should have been moved into the World Trade Center 1 and 2 on pallets. This assumption is undocumented.2


The claim is either built on a misunderstanding of what the proponents of the official account believe or a conflation of the Truth Movement’s own views which are applied to reach a false logical conclusion.

It is obvious that it would probably not require that many tons of explosives to topple one or both towers. We know this from the experience from the terror attack on the World Trade Center 1 in 1993, where al Qaeda parked a truck with a 580 kilo fertilizer bomb which detonated, wounded more than 1,000 people, and caused serious damage. The plan was to damage the World Trade Center 1 enough to make it fall into the World Trade Center 2. The plan could well have succeeded, had the truck been parked differently. 3

In other words, it is not impossible – perhaps not even difficult – to drive a lot of explosives into the World Trade Center. What is difficult is to place the explosives on just about all floors in the towers, without anyone noticing anything, which is what the Truth Movement implicitly claim by saying that it was a controlled demolition from top to bottom.4

Something points to the Truth Movement, represented by Brian Fløe, deliberately or not reinterpreting the statement:

“It is absurd that 100 tons of explosives could be placed in the World Trade Center 1 and 2 without being discovered”

to this statement:

“It is absurd that it would take a lot of explosives to bring down the World Trade Center 1 and 2.”


The claim is therefore:

  • Undocumented
  • Misleading
  • Illogical


  1. En kujons bekendelser…,
  2. Investigation of WTC 1 and 2, NIST
  3. Niels Harrit, interview, TV2 (05:15)
  4. World Trade Center Bombing 1993, Wikipedia
  5. North Tower Exploding, David Chandler

Q & A