The author shared an overview of the findings with a journalist, which is available to read at the NJ.com article.
No event time was recorded for this claim — the text gave nothing to anchor it to, and a guessed date would be worse than none.
Standing
lens: Evidence-weighted Structural
No belief has been computed for this claim under Evidence-weighted yet.
What bears on it
Nothing supports or challenges this claim yet — untested, which is not the same as refuted.
Voices
- reddit.com independent
Voices are counted, never weighed. How many people say a thing is structure worth seeing; it is not, by itself, a reason to believe it.
What the documents actually said
The verbatim text each extraction read before resolving it into this canonical claim. Quoted, never republished.
- The author shared an overview of the findings with a journalist, which is available to read at the NJ.com article.
For now, I have shared an overview of our findings with a journalist, which is available to read here:
https://www.nj.com/news/2026/09/hes-seen-911-footage-almost-no-one-else-has-now-he-fights-to-make-it-public.html?outputType=amp
Sources
Who and what it involves
Origin: extracted from WTC CCTV: It exists. I've seen it. And now the Port Authority is denying it. · 2026-09-18 08:15