TruthOrFake Logo
TruthOrFake
Fact Check: Most if not all 80s children tv programs were created for selling toys

Fact Check: Most if not all 80s children tv programs were created for selling toys

Published July 6, 2025
ByFactChecker 1.1 avatarFactChecker 1.1
±
VERDICT
Partially True

# Fact Check: "Most if not all 80s children TV programs were created for selling toys" ## What We Know The claim that most, if not all, children's TV...

Fact Check: "Most if not all 80s children TV programs were created for selling toys"

What We Know

The claim that most, if not all, children's TV programs from the 1980s were created primarily to sell toys is supported by several sources. During this era, many popular cartoons were indeed designed as vehicles for toy marketing. For instance, shows like G.I. Joe, Transformers, and My Little Pony were explicitly created to promote associated toy lines (source-4). The term "toyetic" refers to the ability of a show to generate merchandise, which became a significant focus for producers (source-3).

Additionally, the advocacy group Action for Children's Television (ACT) criticized this trend, arguing that programs often blurred the line between entertainment and advertising, particularly with shows that featured toys prominently (source-2). The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) also recognized the issue, leading to regulations that aimed to limit the commercialization of children's programming (source-1).

Analysis

While it is clear that many 1980s children's programs were created with the intent to sell toys, the claim that "most if not all" were designed solely for this purpose requires a nuanced examination. The term "most" suggests a significant majority, which aligns with the evidence that many popular shows were indeed tied to toy lines. However, not every children's program from that decade fit this mold. Some shows were created primarily for entertainment or educational purposes without a direct connection to merchandise (source-6).

The reliability of the sources varies. Academic articles and historical analyses, such as those from ACT and FCC reports, provide credible insights into the commercialization of children's programming. In contrast, popular media articles may exhibit bias towards sensationalism, focusing on the negative aspects of commercialization without acknowledging the diversity of programming during that era (source-5, source-8).

Conclusion

The verdict on the claim is Partially True. While it is accurate that a significant number of children's TV programs in the 1980s were created with the intention of selling toys, it is not entirely correct to assert that this was the case for "most if not all" programs. There were exceptions, and the landscape of children's television was more varied than the claim suggests.

Sources

  1. Hot Wheels: The FCC, Program-Length Commercials, and ...
  2. Action for Children's Television
  3. Toyetic
  4. Most of your favourite cartoons were ads to sell toys
  5. Exploring the weird era of toy-inspired TV shows
  6. Why 80s Cartoons Were Based On Toys - Back to the Past ...
  7. 80s Toy Commercials: How They Shaped Marketing Tactics
  8. 6 80s Cartoons That Were Basically Toy Commercials

Have a claim you want to verify? It's 100% Free!

Our AI-powered fact-checker analyzes claims against thousands of reliable sources and provides evidence-based verdicts in seconds. Completely free with no registration required.

💡 Try:
"Coffee helps you live longer"
✓100% Free
✓No Registration
✓Instant Results

Comments

Leave a comment

Loading comments...

More Fact Checks to Explore

Discover similar claims and stay informed with these related fact-checks

Fact Check: We have 50 years of data that tells us what corporations do with tax cuts. This has been one of the most studied things by universities around the world for the last 50 years. And in the last 50 years across 18 of the wealthiest nations in the world not one has corporate tax cuts equated to higher job growth. 00:35 Not once. Or we can just look at the Trump tax cuts passed in twenty 17. Donald Trump created 40, 000 less jobs a month than Barack Obama did. And oh by the way that's leaving out COVID. That's leaving out all the job losses from the pandemic. There is one thing that happens when you give corporations big tax breaks. This right here. 50 years of data. You see that red line on top? That's the rich getting richer. You see those two lines on the bottom? That's the bottom 905percent? No In 01:06 twenty 18 corporations spent over a trillion dollars on stock buybacks and created less jobs than they did in twenty fourteen, 15, 16, and seventeen. You see the rich can afford to pump all of this misinformation into your brain. And that's why you believe it. There's not a single case in history of tax cuts for the rich helping an economy in any way shape or form.
Partially True
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: We have 50 years of data that tells us what corporations do with tax cuts. This has been one of the most studied things by universities around the world for the last 50 years. And in the last 50 years across 18 of the wealthiest nations in the world not one has corporate tax cuts equated to higher job growth. 00:35 Not once. Or we can just look at the Trump tax cuts passed in twenty 17. Donald Trump created 40, 000 less jobs a month than Barack Obama did. And oh by the way that's leaving out COVID. That's leaving out all the job losses from the pandemic. There is one thing that happens when you give corporations big tax breaks. This right here. 50 years of data. You see that red line on top? That's the rich getting richer. You see those two lines on the bottom? That's the bottom 905percent? No In 01:06 twenty 18 corporations spent over a trillion dollars on stock buybacks and created less jobs than they did in twenty fourteen, 15, 16, and seventeen. You see the rich can afford to pump all of this misinformation into your brain. And that's why you believe it. There's not a single case in history of tax cuts for the rich helping an economy in any way shape or form.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: We have 50 years of data that tells us what corporations do with tax cuts. This has been one of the most studied things by universities around the world for the last 50 years. And in the last 50 years across 18 of the wealthiest nations in the world not one has corporate tax cuts equated to higher job growth. 00:35 Not once. Or we can just look at the Trump tax cuts passed in twenty 17. Donald Trump created 40, 000 less jobs a month than Barack Obama did. And oh by the way that's leaving out COVID. That's leaving out all the job losses from the pandemic. There is one thing that happens when you give corporations big tax breaks. This right here. 50 years of data. You see that red line on top? That's the rich getting richer. You see those two lines on the bottom? That's the bottom 905percent? No In 01:06 twenty 18 corporations spent over a trillion dollars on stock buybacks and created less jobs than they did in twenty fourteen, 15, 16, and seventeen. You see the rich can afford to pump all of this misinformation into your brain. And that's why you believe it. There's not a single case in history of tax cuts for the rich helping an economy in any way shape or form.

Jul 30, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: Deportations Under President Obama Total Deportations Barack Obama deported over 3 million individuals during his two terms from 2009 to 2017. Annual Deportation Records YEAR NUMBER OF DEPORTATIONS 2013 438,421 2014 414.481 2009-2016 Over 3 million total Summary Removals Between 75% and 83% of those deported did not have the opportunity to plead their case in court, as many were removed through expedited processes Comparison with Other Presidents Obama holds the record for the most
Partially True
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: Deportations Under President Obama Total Deportations Barack Obama deported over 3 million individuals during his two terms from 2009 to 2017. Annual Deportation Records YEAR NUMBER OF DEPORTATIONS 2013 438,421 2014 414.481 2009-2016 Over 3 million total Summary Removals Between 75% and 83% of those deported did not have the opportunity to plead their case in court, as many were removed through expedited processes Comparison with Other Presidents Obama holds the record for the most

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Deportations Under President Obama Total Deportations Barack Obama deported over 3 million individuals during his two terms from 2009 to 2017. Annual Deportation Records YEAR NUMBER OF DEPORTATIONS 2013 438,421 2014 414.481 2009-2016 Over 3 million total Summary Removals Between 75% and 83% of those deported did not have the opportunity to plead their case in court, as many were removed through expedited processes Comparison with Other Presidents Obama holds the record for the most

Jul 31, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: Built on ancient Native American mounds near the meeting point of where the Ohio and Mississippi Rivers clash, the town sits at a natural crossroads. During the Civil War, that geography turned it into a vital Union stronghold. Mound City became home to one of the largest military hospitals in the West and served as a major naval station. Soldiers from both sides passed through some to recover, many not. It may be quiet now, but this place once pulsed with the urgency of life and death and sat at the crossroad of a nation at war with itself. That history lingers most clearly at the Mound City National Cemetery, just beyond the edge of town. I wasn’t expecting to find it, and I certainly wasn’t expecting the names etched into some of the stones. Two men in particular stood out, John Basil Turchin and Alexander Bielaski. Both born in the Russian Empire. Both connected to Abraham Lincoln. Both now buried here, far from where they began. John Basil Turchin (born Ivan Turchaninov) had once been a colonel in the Russian Imperial Army. He fought in the Crimean War before immigrating to the United States in 1856. When the Civil War broke out, he offered his experience to the Union cause with fierce conviction. His military background and abolitionist ideals caught Lincoln’s attention, and he was appointed a brigadier general, becoming the only Russian born general to serve in the Union Army. He died in 1901 and was laid to rest here, among the soldiers he once led, and some that he fought against.
Partially True
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: Built on ancient Native American mounds near the meeting point of where the Ohio and Mississippi Rivers clash, the town sits at a natural crossroads. During the Civil War, that geography turned it into a vital Union stronghold. Mound City became home to one of the largest military hospitals in the West and served as a major naval station. Soldiers from both sides passed through some to recover, many not. It may be quiet now, but this place once pulsed with the urgency of life and death and sat at the crossroad of a nation at war with itself. That history lingers most clearly at the Mound City National Cemetery, just beyond the edge of town. I wasn’t expecting to find it, and I certainly wasn’t expecting the names etched into some of the stones. Two men in particular stood out, John Basil Turchin and Alexander Bielaski. Both born in the Russian Empire. Both connected to Abraham Lincoln. Both now buried here, far from where they began. John Basil Turchin (born Ivan Turchaninov) had once been a colonel in the Russian Imperial Army. He fought in the Crimean War before immigrating to the United States in 1856. When the Civil War broke out, he offered his experience to the Union cause with fierce conviction. His military background and abolitionist ideals caught Lincoln’s attention, and he was appointed a brigadier general, becoming the only Russian born general to serve in the Union Army. He died in 1901 and was laid to rest here, among the soldiers he once led, and some that he fought against.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Built on ancient Native American mounds near the meeting point of where the Ohio and Mississippi Rivers clash, the town sits at a natural crossroads. During the Civil War, that geography turned it into a vital Union stronghold. Mound City became home to one of the largest military hospitals in the West and served as a major naval station. Soldiers from both sides passed through some to recover, many not. It may be quiet now, but this place once pulsed with the urgency of life and death and sat at the crossroad of a nation at war with itself. That history lingers most clearly at the Mound City National Cemetery, just beyond the edge of town. I wasn’t expecting to find it, and I certainly wasn’t expecting the names etched into some of the stones. Two men in particular stood out, John Basil Turchin and Alexander Bielaski. Both born in the Russian Empire. Both connected to Abraham Lincoln. Both now buried here, far from where they began. John Basil Turchin (born Ivan Turchaninov) had once been a colonel in the Russian Imperial Army. He fought in the Crimean War before immigrating to the United States in 1856. When the Civil War broke out, he offered his experience to the Union cause with fierce conviction. His military background and abolitionist ideals caught Lincoln’s attention, and he was appointed a brigadier general, becoming the only Russian born general to serve in the Union Army. He died in 1901 and was laid to rest here, among the soldiers he once led, and some that he fought against.

Jul 30, 2025
Read more →
🔍
Partially True

Fact Check: Transcript 00:00 Don't get rid of Powell. Get rid of the entire Federal Reserve. That's what you gotta get rid of. It's a cancer. Remember, who controls the Federal Reserve? Not Powell. It's the one one00th of 1percent. They have the money. Their net worth 158 million compared to the top 1% you always hear about 35 million. They control the money supply. They control Powell. They always had. They are bubble makers. They created the. com bubble. They created the housing bubble and they created the AI that we're in now. You 00:31 gotta shut them down because of them, remember, income, your paycheck, 30% of it used to go for your home and expenses. Now, it's almost 50percent. They're the danger and they will at some point pop this bubble as well. For more information on my stockpick, how to trade properly, Phil's Gang. com free for 10 days.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Transcript 00:00 Don't get rid of Powell. Get rid of the entire Federal Reserve. That's what you gotta get rid of. It's a cancer. Remember, who controls the Federal Reserve? Not Powell. It's the one one00th of 1percent. They have the money. Their net worth 158 million compared to the top 1% you always hear about 35 million. They control the money supply. They control Powell. They always had. They are bubble makers. They created the. com bubble. They created the housing bubble and they created the AI that we're in now. You 00:31 gotta shut them down because of them, remember, income, your paycheck, 30% of it used to go for your home and expenses. Now, it's almost 50percent. They're the danger and they will at some point pop this bubble as well. For more information on my stockpick, how to trade properly, Phil's Gang. com free for 10 days.

Jul 27, 2025
Read more →
🔍
Partially True

Fact Check: Transcript 00:00 For all of their strutting about protesting that they support democracy. Not a one of them gave a damn about democracy when they pulled Biden off the ballot and dropped Kamala Harris in without a single Democrat primary voter voting for him. And you know what? Not a single Democrat is here today because not a single one of them gives a damn about the fact that they lied to the American people for four years. They knew Every one of them knew that Joe Biden was 00:34 mentally not competent to do the job. The White House Press Secretary. She knew when she stood in front of the American people and lied over and over and over again and they're not here because they can't defend themselves. It wasn't a surprise for four years the White House hid President Biden from Republican Senators. Would not let him meet with us. He served 40 years in this body. We all know him. And they deliberately lied and by the way Jake Tapper had a bombshell 01:08 book exposing the incredible scandal that Biden's mental decline was covered up by Jake Tapper. There's a Yiddish word and that truly is how dare we lie and cover up what we all knew. Now I have been asked literally a thousand times by Texans. Was running the country? And I'm going to give 01:40 you the most terrifying answer. I don't know. I genuinely don't know. And not a single Democrat here cares. The most telling proof of Biden's decline came with the signature of the president. The symbol of executive authority that was outsourced to a machine. Mister Wald you're a lawyer who served in the White House Council's Office. You understand the gravity of presidential action. Does the president's signature 02:10 carry legal and constitutional weight under article two? Yes. Is the act of signing an executive order or signing a law or granting a pardon a delegable duty of the president. Uh so in that opinion in 2005 from OLC they said essentially that an autopin could be used by a subordinate but the president's determination as to sign the document can never be delegated. Can that authority 02:41 be transferred to a staff or a machine without the president's explicit authorization? Never. And if you look at the statistics, the statistics are stunning. In 2021, President Biden issued 78 executive orders. None were signed with an auto pen. That first year the presidency, Biden I suppose was relatively lucid and 78 executive orders he signed by hand. The second year, however, we see the auto pen emerged. 03:15 The first auto pen executive order was issued on 15th 2022. After that day 100% of the executive orders issued in 2022 were signed by an autopen. In 2023 Biden issued twenty-four executive orders. 16 were auto penned. In 20twenty-four Biden issued 19. 14 were auto penned. In twenty twenty-5 Biden issued fourteen executive orders every single one was auto pins. 03:52 Mister Wald let me ask you as a legal matter if there's a law that's passed both houses of Congress and it goes to the White House and a staffer autopins signing that law without the president's authorization is that law legally passed and signed in the law? No. If an executive order is issued and a staffer autopins it without the president's authorization, is that executive order legally binding? No. And if a pardon issued from the President of 04:22 the United States and a staffer auto pens it without the president's authorization. Is that pardon legally binding? No. Under the Biden White House the ceremonial song hailed to the chief was effectively replaced with hail to the pen and it was an outright assault on democracy and every reporter covering this ought to ask why doesn't a Democrat care? We heard about the moral responsibilities of a staffer. 04:54 How about an elected senator who knows damn well that if we get into a war and Iran is preparing to fire a nuclear weapon at the United States that the commander in chief is busy playing with his jello and he's not competent to defend ourselves and every member of the cabinet, the chief of staff, the press secretary, and the members of Congress who lied about this on a daily basis with the press's complicity. They are all responsible for subverting democracy. Angry Ted Cruz is perhaps my favorite version of 05:27 Ted Cruz because when he's getting history on it, you might want to take a listen. He is definitely angry that there's some acting going on here in the line of hail to the chief change from hail to the pen that's not a smart line but it's still the truth. The truth is in this video right here ladies and gentlemen. The change in the way Joe Biden used the autopin is a steady upward moving graph from twenty twenty-one to the end of his presidency in early twenty 05:58 twenty-five. Okay? That is a noticeable issue. And if he does not directly authorize the autopin we've got We've got grounds to go through every single law Joe Biden has signed that way and perhaps ignore them all together. There's way more evidence behind the autopin theory and hopefully it ends up sticking. I I hope it does because I think this is in a way worse than the Bill Clinton perjury case. Cuz Bill 06:28 Clinton basically lied before Congress lied directly to the American people lied under oath. This is worse in a way. Because lying under oath means that you know where the truth is and you're just hoping to get away with it and there's a direct law. This however Signing with the auto pin is more opaque. It is an ultimate he said she said and you're dont rate the opinion oo just fact if there is

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Transcript 00:00 For all of their strutting about protesting that they support democracy. Not a one of them gave a damn about democracy when they pulled Biden off the ballot and dropped Kamala Harris in without a single Democrat primary voter voting for him. And you know what? Not a single Democrat is here today because not a single one of them gives a damn about the fact that they lied to the American people for four years. They knew Every one of them knew that Joe Biden was 00:34 mentally not competent to do the job. The White House Press Secretary. She knew when she stood in front of the American people and lied over and over and over again and they're not here because they can't defend themselves. It wasn't a surprise for four years the White House hid President Biden from Republican Senators. Would not let him meet with us. He served 40 years in this body. We all know him. And they deliberately lied and by the way Jake Tapper had a bombshell 01:08 book exposing the incredible scandal that Biden's mental decline was covered up by Jake Tapper. There's a Yiddish word and that truly is how dare we lie and cover up what we all knew. Now I have been asked literally a thousand times by Texans. Was running the country? And I'm going to give 01:40 you the most terrifying answer. I don't know. I genuinely don't know. And not a single Democrat here cares. The most telling proof of Biden's decline came with the signature of the president. The symbol of executive authority that was outsourced to a machine. Mister Wald you're a lawyer who served in the White House Council's Office. You understand the gravity of presidential action. Does the president's signature 02:10 carry legal and constitutional weight under article two? Yes. Is the act of signing an executive order or signing a law or granting a pardon a delegable duty of the president. Uh so in that opinion in 2005 from OLC they said essentially that an autopin could be used by a subordinate but the president's determination as to sign the document can never be delegated. Can that authority 02:41 be transferred to a staff or a machine without the president's explicit authorization? Never. And if you look at the statistics, the statistics are stunning. In 2021, President Biden issued 78 executive orders. None were signed with an auto pen. That first year the presidency, Biden I suppose was relatively lucid and 78 executive orders he signed by hand. The second year, however, we see the auto pen emerged. 03:15 The first auto pen executive order was issued on 15th 2022. After that day 100% of the executive orders issued in 2022 were signed by an autopen. In 2023 Biden issued twenty-four executive orders. 16 were auto penned. In 20twenty-four Biden issued 19. 14 were auto penned. In twenty twenty-5 Biden issued fourteen executive orders every single one was auto pins. 03:52 Mister Wald let me ask you as a legal matter if there's a law that's passed both houses of Congress and it goes to the White House and a staffer autopins signing that law without the president's authorization is that law legally passed and signed in the law? No. If an executive order is issued and a staffer autopins it without the president's authorization, is that executive order legally binding? No. And if a pardon issued from the President of 04:22 the United States and a staffer auto pens it without the president's authorization. Is that pardon legally binding? No. Under the Biden White House the ceremonial song hailed to the chief was effectively replaced with hail to the pen and it was an outright assault on democracy and every reporter covering this ought to ask why doesn't a Democrat care? We heard about the moral responsibilities of a staffer. 04:54 How about an elected senator who knows damn well that if we get into a war and Iran is preparing to fire a nuclear weapon at the United States that the commander in chief is busy playing with his jello and he's not competent to defend ourselves and every member of the cabinet, the chief of staff, the press secretary, and the members of Congress who lied about this on a daily basis with the press's complicity. They are all responsible for subverting democracy. Angry Ted Cruz is perhaps my favorite version of 05:27 Ted Cruz because when he's getting history on it, you might want to take a listen. He is definitely angry that there's some acting going on here in the line of hail to the chief change from hail to the pen that's not a smart line but it's still the truth. The truth is in this video right here ladies and gentlemen. The change in the way Joe Biden used the autopin is a steady upward moving graph from twenty twenty-one to the end of his presidency in early twenty 05:58 twenty-five. Okay? That is a noticeable issue. And if he does not directly authorize the autopin we've got We've got grounds to go through every single law Joe Biden has signed that way and perhaps ignore them all together. There's way more evidence behind the autopin theory and hopefully it ends up sticking. I I hope it does because I think this is in a way worse than the Bill Clinton perjury case. Cuz Bill 06:28 Clinton basically lied before Congress lied directly to the American people lied under oath. This is worse in a way. Because lying under oath means that you know where the truth is and you're just hoping to get away with it and there's a direct law. This however Signing with the auto pin is more opaque. It is an ultimate he said she said and you're dont rate the opinion oo just fact if there is

Jul 27, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: Transcript 00:00 911 was a false flag. For the first 10 years, I did not think anything other than the official narrative then after being shown a video, a close up video of building number seven coming down and that got me going because it's obvious to me that building seven was was a controlled demolition because the building collapses from the bottom down. The trade centers were unique in that they were designed to withstand the 00:33 impact of a a a jet. From what I understand the the outer skeleton of the building. The outer columns was like a a fish net and you had these inner core columns which was substantial thick steel beams to withstand four or five times what the loads were. Got it. The engineers always over design a building. No steel frame building has ever collapsed before or since 9/ eleven. So that should say something right there. And it said that building seven it was 01:05 aggressive collapse that it was caused by fire but progressive collapse unlike the twin towers, the twin towers collapse from the top down. That's a progressive collapse. Sure. Floor by floor by floor. But if you look at the videos of building seven collapsing, it collapses uniformly, it's collapsing from the bottom, the building stays intact all the way to the bottom of the ground and you could see the sides caving in on it. For a building to collapse uniformly which the video show all the load bearing it would have to have failed 01:36 simultaneously. Now, fire doesn't act like that. I came across an analogy of the twin towers and if you could visualize cast iron stoves stacked. One on top of each other. The stoves up at the top. Yes, there's fire and they've been damaged but the stoves on the bottom, they haven't been damaged. Okay. So, the structure underneath all of that is intact. So, it's impossible for a building to collapse near free fall speed and increase. Without a 02:07 controlled demolition. You're running into the path of most resistance. I something else is going on. I don't believe that it was just the planes or the fires I think that and they examine the dust and they found what they call thermitic material which is like a explosive incendiary which was in the dust samples and that's documented. There were reports of the buildings were undergoing a extensive elevator renovation in the two or three years prior to all kinds of 02:40 workers they had access to the the core the cores of the building and on the day of the attack the the elevator company would not assist in the operations of the elevators and the elevator company was the elevator company it subsequently went out of business and a couple of years after that
False

Fact Check: Transcript 00:00 911 was a false flag. For the first 10 years, I did not think anything other than the official narrative then after being shown a video, a close up video of building number seven coming down and that got me going because it's obvious to me that building seven was was a controlled demolition because the building collapses from the bottom down. The trade centers were unique in that they were designed to withstand the 00:33 impact of a a a jet. From what I understand the the outer skeleton of the building. The outer columns was like a a fish net and you had these inner core columns which was substantial thick steel beams to withstand four or five times what the loads were. Got it. The engineers always over design a building. No steel frame building has ever collapsed before or since 9/ eleven. So that should say something right there. And it said that building seven it was 01:05 aggressive collapse that it was caused by fire but progressive collapse unlike the twin towers, the twin towers collapse from the top down. That's a progressive collapse. Sure. Floor by floor by floor. But if you look at the videos of building seven collapsing, it collapses uniformly, it's collapsing from the bottom, the building stays intact all the way to the bottom of the ground and you could see the sides caving in on it. For a building to collapse uniformly which the video show all the load bearing it would have to have failed 01:36 simultaneously. Now, fire doesn't act like that. I came across an analogy of the twin towers and if you could visualize cast iron stoves stacked. One on top of each other. The stoves up at the top. Yes, there's fire and they've been damaged but the stoves on the bottom, they haven't been damaged. Okay. So, the structure underneath all of that is intact. So, it's impossible for a building to collapse near free fall speed and increase. Without a 02:07 controlled demolition. You're running into the path of most resistance. I something else is going on. I don't believe that it was just the planes or the fires I think that and they examine the dust and they found what they call thermitic material which is like a explosive incendiary which was in the dust samples and that's documented. There were reports of the buildings were undergoing a extensive elevator renovation in the two or three years prior to all kinds of 02:40 workers they had access to the the core the cores of the building and on the day of the attack the the elevator company would not assist in the operations of the elevators and the elevator company was the elevator company it subsequently went out of business and a couple of years after that

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Transcript 00:00 911 was a false flag. For the first 10 years, I did not think anything other than the official narrative then after being shown a video, a close up video of building number seven coming down and that got me going because it's obvious to me that building seven was was a controlled demolition because the building collapses from the bottom down. The trade centers were unique in that they were designed to withstand the 00:33 impact of a a a jet. From what I understand the the outer skeleton of the building. The outer columns was like a a fish net and you had these inner core columns which was substantial thick steel beams to withstand four or five times what the loads were. Got it. The engineers always over design a building. No steel frame building has ever collapsed before or since 9/ eleven. So that should say something right there. And it said that building seven it was 01:05 aggressive collapse that it was caused by fire but progressive collapse unlike the twin towers, the twin towers collapse from the top down. That's a progressive collapse. Sure. Floor by floor by floor. But if you look at the videos of building seven collapsing, it collapses uniformly, it's collapsing from the bottom, the building stays intact all the way to the bottom of the ground and you could see the sides caving in on it. For a building to collapse uniformly which the video show all the load bearing it would have to have failed 01:36 simultaneously. Now, fire doesn't act like that. I came across an analogy of the twin towers and if you could visualize cast iron stoves stacked. One on top of each other. The stoves up at the top. Yes, there's fire and they've been damaged but the stoves on the bottom, they haven't been damaged. Okay. So, the structure underneath all of that is intact. So, it's impossible for a building to collapse near free fall speed and increase. Without a 02:07 controlled demolition. You're running into the path of most resistance. I something else is going on. I don't believe that it was just the planes or the fires I think that and they examine the dust and they found what they call thermitic material which is like a explosive incendiary which was in the dust samples and that's documented. There were reports of the buildings were undergoing a extensive elevator renovation in the two or three years prior to all kinds of 02:40 workers they had access to the the core the cores of the building and on the day of the attack the the elevator company would not assist in the operations of the elevators and the elevator company was the elevator company it subsequently went out of business and a couple of years after that

Jul 28, 2025
Read more →
Explore All Fact Checks
Fact Check: Most if not all 80s children tv programs were created for selling toys | TruthOrFake Blog