WATCH: Senator Demands 9/11 Investigation Into ‘Controlled Demolition’ of Building 7

One would have been hard-pressed to imagine, just a few years ago, a sitting United States senator suggesting that the Building 7 collapse may have been a "controlled demolition."

“What would you like to know about September 11, the official story there, Senator?” podcaster Benny Johnson prompted.

Sen. Ron Johnson's (R-Wisc.) answer:

Well, start with Building 7. Again, I don’t know if you can find structural engineers other than the ones that have the corrupt investigations inside NIST that would say that that thing didn’t come down in any other way than a controlled demolition… You just look at that…
There’s an awful lot of questions. Who ordered the removal and the destruction of all that evidence? Totally contrary to any other firefighting investigation procedures. I mean, who ordered that? Who is in charge? I think there’s some basic information. Where’s all the documentation from the NIST investigation.
Now, there are a host of questions that I want and I will be asking, quite honestly, now that my eyes have been opened up.

Senator Ron Johnson drops BOMBSHELL:

Tells us that 9/11 Hearings are being planned, Building 7 was potentially a "Controlled Demolition"

“Structural Engineers say that thing didn't come down in any other way than controlled demolition. Molten steel. Destruction of evidence. We… pic.twitter.com/aBQzCakll7
— Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) April 21, 2025

Indeed, the 9/11 investigation was a sham from start to finish, in the same vein as the JFK assassination investigation.

As the senator noted, you don’t have to be a structural engineer to look at this building — which was not hit by a plane and definitely not anywhere near its foundation — collapse at near-freefall speed and doubt the official story that the event was triggered by jet fuel melting the steel columns.

To be clear, I don’t claim to know for sure what happened that day. If, after a legitimate and transparent inquiry — which has never happened — the results show that the collapse was triggered by debris or whatever the case may be, then so be it.

Why would anyone oppose investigating the deadliest attack on American civilians in history?

If the evidence debunks all of the conspiracy theories, then all the better for building a real consensus based on fact.

For years and years and years, anyone who even broached the topic of 9/11, suggesting the government may have lied about what actually transpired that day — which was later used as a pretext for unprecedented civil liberties crackdowns and at least two foreign wars costing trillions of dollars — was immediately maligned as some kind of traitor or terrorist apologist.

That dog ísn't going to hunt anymore.

We know that they are lying, they know that they are lying, they even know that we know they are lying, we also know that they know we know they are lying too, they of course know that we certainly know they know we know they are lying too as well, but they are still lying. In our country, the lie has become not just moral category, but the pillar industry of this country.
—Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

Editor's note: The National Institute of Standards and Technology addressed the planned detonation theory in its report on Building 7:

NIST concluded that blast events inside the building did not occur and found no evidence supporting the existence of a blast event.
In addition, no blast sounds were heard on the audio tracks of video recordings during the collapse of WTC 7 or reported by witnesses. According to calculations by the investigation team, the smallest blast capable of failing the building's critical column would have resulted in a sound level of 130 decibels (dB) to 140 dB at a distance of at least half a mile, if unobstructed by surrounding buildings. This sound level is consistent with a gunshot blast, standing next to a jet plane engine, and more than 10 times louder than being in front of the speakers at a rock concert.

For the building to have been prepared for intentional demolition, walls and/or column enclosures and fireproofing would have to be removed and replaced without being detected. Preparing a column includes steps such as cutting sections with torches, which produces noxious and odorous fumes. Intentional demolition usually requires applying explosive charges to most, if not all, interior columns, not just one or a limited set of columns in a building.

As we’ve painstakingly documented here, Google's censorship of PJ Media is out of control. This article is likely to be flagged as “misinformation” — or hate speech, or whatever alleged violation of constantly changing policy — and demonetized by Google. If you appreciate the independent journalism we offer, free of corporate slant or state censorship, consider lending financial support to our heavily censored operation.

Get your monster 60% discount on your new VIP membership with promo code FIGHT.