A group of engineers and architects is demanding the American National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) retract and correct a 2008 report that concluded one of three World Trade Center buildings collapsed because fire weakened the steel supporting it in the 9/11 terrorist attacks.
The Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth (AE911T) has formally filed a Request for Correction with the NIST following a new and detailed four-year analysis by a team at the University of Alaska Fairbanks (UAF).
It says the World Trade Center (WTC) building 7 collapse was a “near-simultaneous failure of every column in the building” and dismissed the NIST finding that heat from the fire caused beams to “walk off” their moorings.
Sept. 11, 2001 is the tragedy of when two hijacked planes hit the WTC 1 and WTC 2 towers sending debris tumbling onto WTC 7. The NIST claimed that embers ignited a fire which then caused the 47-storey building to collapse on itself at 5:20 p.m., hours after the initial incident that morning.
“We have filed a request for correction because the NIST report is wrong,” says Ted Walter, spokesperson for AE911T, which is a group of 3,000 engineers, scientists and architects, including more than a dozen Canadians ones, that paid US$316,000 for the study.
“From an engineering perspective it is imperative to understand how and why this building came down under design load conditions,” said Walter.
The study says NIST made some fundamental errors in how engineers estimated the rigidity of the outside building frame and that the heat generated by the fire did not trigger “thermal movements” at a critical base plate support.
Further, the group, which includes families of those killed, asserts that the investigation is flawed and that the conclusions as to what happened must be based on “science and engineering” and accept that controlled demolition is a plausible cause.
For expediency and because it was not hit by a plane, the study looked only at WTC 7 not the other two but AE911T has long claimed all three were subject to something beyond heat induced failure.
“The report notes that the outside frame was more flexible than the inside framing which is where the elevator shafts were,” says McMaster University professor emeritus of civil engineering, Robert Korol, a fellow of the Canadian Society of Civil Engineering who is also one of two peers who reviewed the UAF study.
“Under the conditions described, the displacement of the outside steel would have been only one inch, not the 6.25 NIST claimed and not enough to cause failure.”
Further, he says, the debris from WTC 1 which fell 943 feet to WTC 7 did not attain sufficient mass to cause structural damage to the steel in that building.
The bottom line, he says, is that the NIST report is flawed and of no value to future engineering or architectural learning.
The Alaska report adds new momentum to long standing claims by the AE911T that all three of the buildings should not have collapsed in the spectacular and deadly manner they did. Further, and Korol underlines this, there was nothing in the offices beyond basic desks, chairs, computers and paper that would be of such a combustible nature so as to feed a fire and raise the temperature to above 1,400 degrees Celsius and melt the steel structure.
“We don’t even know if the steel was fireproofed,” says Korol.
The group makes no assertion as to why it may have been a “controlled demolition” and says its only interest is in ensuring that there’s no need to rethink the structural steel design of highrises because the design was not at fault.
UAF civil engineering professor Leroy Hulsey, principal investigator, his research assistants, Feng Xiao, now an associate professor at Nanjing University of Science and Technology and Zhili Quan, now a bridge engineer for the South Carolina Department of Transportation, found that the design standard of the building was not exceeded by the fire and that simultaneous and controlled demolition caused the structural steel to fail.
“Fires could not have caused weakening of displacement of structural members capable of initiating any of the hypothetical local failures alleged to have triggered the total collapse of the building,” the report states. “Nor could any local failures, even if they had occurred, have triggered a sequence of failures that would have resulted in the observed total collapse.”
The NIST report held that lateral support beams buckled because of thermal expansion from the fire and because they had “nowhere to go” and thus deformed and weakened the structural integrity. Other failures were triggered when joists and beams “walked off” their connections, NIST found.
It was also the first NIST finding of a highrise collapse from thermal deformation caused by fire which the 125-page Alaska report disputes.
It presents arguments showing it was a simultaneous global failure not a localized failure causing a domino effect.
Hulsey et al argue that the collapse was straight down in a pancake fashion with about 2.25 to 2.5 seconds for free fall acceleration.
“In a typical building collapse (given a localized structural steel failure) WTC 7 would be expected to experience a combination of axial rotation and bending of members, resulting in a disjointed, asymmetrical collapse at less than free-fall acceleration,” the report states.
The study team undertook extensive computer and physical modelling, paying particular attention to the area around Column 79 which had been identified as the critical juncture of failure.
Their conclusion is that Columns 79, 80, and 81 did not fail at the lower floors of the building and were not subjected to heat above floor 30 because there were no fires there.
Even if they did, they would not trigger a horizontal progression of core column failures and the team was unable to find any other plausible cause for the progressive sequence of failures.
![Denver airport to use $560M to accelerate concourse projects](data:image/svg+xml,<svg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" width="300" height="169"><rect fill-opacity="0"/></svg>)
This occurred the day after Rumsfeld stated that there was 2.3 Trillion dollars missing from Pentagon. 9-11 happened and the budget spigot went wide open. It appears that Bush, Big Oil, and the military industrial complex wanted a war for the $.
Thank you for sharing these critical findings with the public in such a factual way. The science cannot be argued with, as anyone with basic knowledge of high school physics knows that high-rises do not collapse at free fall speed against the path of greatest resistance. The hard part is assessing the who, where, how and why behind the events of that day. The truth must be more freeing than the lie we were sold.
Moreover, Building 7 experienced freefall acceleration for about 2.25 seconds (roughly 8 floors) meaning that no energy was available to crush any floors below during that timeframe. No one has ever been able to demonstrate the downward motions observed for Building 7 (or the twin towers) using a real world experiment, by fire and gravity alone. It’s impossible.
Thank you for providing this fair assessment of the UAF Report. It is refreshing to have a journalist report on a challenging subject in this manner.
Statements made in this article are consistent with video evidence of the collapse of WTC 7. Video showed that the building was undoubtably taken down by a flawless controlled demolition.
The fact that this is the only news story on this shows just how bought and paid for the entire field of mainstream news is. Anyone watching a video of building 7 falling, at free fall speed for a large chunk of it, mind you… can see that it was a controlled demolition. Small office fires don’t cause what we saw that day. It’s ludicrous.
This 2014 letter to NIST provides some details of the technical objections to the NIST investigation and report.
http://www.journalof911studies.com/the-nist-report-on-the-collapse-of-wtc-building-7-challenged-by-2100-architects-and-engineers/
I head that WTC7 was the control centre for all the buildings to come down, and this is why it was destroyed last of all. If you look at Grenfell Tower in London from a few years ago now, that was like The Towering Inferno, and it is still standing which makes a complete mockery of the NIST report.
This is some of the questioning directed to the NIST investigators and their responses following their release of their draft Final Report in August 2008.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iGMvnwjUizY
This article was enabled by the diligent work of the AE911T and UAF teams. Many thanks to DCN for publishing this article. We can only hope that despite the American media, and the sheepish reluctance of so many American engineers to speak up, someday the entirety of the truth behind the events of 9/11 will surface.
Thank you to Daily Commercial News for having the integrity to print an unbiased assessment of the work of A&E for 9/11 Truth. I only wish American MSM has such integrity.
I would like to point out the the evidence for controlled demolition of all three towers is extensive, including another academic paper on the twin towers collapse published last year that falsified NIST’s explanation. After this study, that other evidence must be viewed in a new light. And, it’s time to start asking uncomfortable questions about who was behind it all and why has the US government been lying to us for 20 years.
The entire interior of the steel structure was covered with asbestos. The steel was E81 and the structure support was from a mesh from the combination of structural steel from the elevator shafts, floor trusses to the steel enforced concrete on the outer structure which all went up in a pyroclastic flow of pulverized concrete, everything inside the structure and nothing was found bigger that a soccer ball that would be found in a collapse and the power was such that ejecting several hundred thousand tons of large portions of the structure was over several hundred feet. Deutsche Bank’s top of their building had the remains of bones that were closer to splinters and small bone segments.
Watching this situation unfold is one more example of how corrupt our government is. Here is a group of Architects and Engineers with scientific fact providing the buildings could not have fallen the way NIST hypothesis said it did, and it was a theory. Yet still the case can’t be reopened and investigated properly. The media doesn’t mention anything about this case. It just proves the powers to be that controlled/orchestrated the whole thing will not be held accountable. The truth won’t come out until they are deceased. If then. This is bigger than the Kennedy assassination and can’t make the news. This blow’s my mind! But let me run a red light and see what happens to me.
I applaud engineers and architects 911T for challenging the NIST report. I totally agree that this should be based on evidence, not some hair-brained theory.
It is for that reason that I don’t think the cause of collapse should be listed as controlled demolition. Let scientists decide what caused the collapse, it’s enough to get the NIST report changed for this group. For scientific evidence concerning the collapse, see Judy Wood’s “Where did the towers go?”. Let’s get this right this time, we’ll never get another chance.
Thank you to the University of Alaska Fairbanks and AE911T for this!
Hearty congratulations are due the Daily Commercial News for this fine article describing problems with the official explanation of the collapse of World Trade Center Building 7. I have long been aware of these concerns with the NIST report and applaud your publication here for the accuracy, pertinence, and concision of the article. I hope this will indeed aid in disseminating the truth about Building 7 and the other buildings of the World Trade Center complex on that fateful day in September 2001.
Baby steps. Now let’s hear about the other two buildings and the thermite and the no plane at the pentagon….
Now that they have proved the obvious, what’s next?
It’s absolutely disgusting this took 18 years when it was obvious to any observer in the 10 seconds it took to fall down. Couple that with the BBC getting off script by about 30 minutes and you have a slam/dunk conspiracy … blowing the government’s 19 cavemen with box cutters theory out of the water.
Where’s the outrage? Well, by my personal poll, less than 6% (19 out of 346 people who engaged me to talk about some current event) know anything about WTC7. And worse, once you tell them they ask if I really thought we went to the moon. They are oh so well indoctrinated. It’s no accident that you never see the WTC7 collapse when they repeatedly play back the collapse of WTC1 & 2 at the annual media celebration of the event.
Heads will not roll … but they should. That being the case, it’s time for iterative secession. Smaller groups will still have corruption … but never on this scale. And there is always that remote chance that one of the splintered groups will be corruption free.
The Lawyers’ Committee for 9/11 Inquiry has submitted multiple legal cases regarding the World Trade Centre building collapses on 9/11. One is for a Grand Jury to examine the evidence which is a 52 page filing with 57 exhibits of evidence where they state that the evidence is “conclusive” for controlled demolition of all three WTC building collapses. The legal document, including all the exhibits of evidence, can be read on their website.
https://lawyerscommitteefor9-11inquiry.org/grand-jury-petition-executive-summary/
So sad that it could take nearly 20 years for some of the more courageous media to ask questions about this.
That’s a whole generation after a great number of scientifically-educated individuals first started asking those questions.
I do not believe in conspiracies. How is it possible that powerful people with motives like blowing up the military budget, no-bid contracts for military contractors, gaining access to the resource-rich Middle-east with all the resources at their disposal, including the ability to control the media narrative, could organize and pull-off a massive crime such as 9/11? It must have been 18 guys from a mix of countries like Saudi Arabia, among others that just got lucky. Even though they didn’t have anything to gain unless you consider having war your backyard lucky? Oh, wait, isn’t Saudi Arabia, the US’s friend? Hmm…there is something just a little suspicious besides 3 buildings collapsing in perfect demolition form going on here. Maybe we should actually investigate crimes? All sarcasm intended.
Just shows the Level and depth of corruption that had to be involved to get NIST to ever suggest it was anything other than a controlled demolition….and let’s get real here…the Twin Towers suffered the identical fate….All you have to do is open your eyes….it’s there to be seen.
It’s great to read an intelligent review of Dr. Hulsey’s study and Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth request for NIST correction.
The Hulsey University of Fairbanks Alaska report & the whole modelling, study & calculations of Architects & Engineers for 911 truth has for 19 years now, been public, open, transparent, reviewed by 1,000s of building & demolition experts, fire-fighters, 1st responders, doctors, professional organizations, academic bodies, government officials, lawyers & interdisciplinary researchers. As Canadians we have a lot to learn from this scientific process. Our buildings are structured on the same standards. However the excuse of 9/11 to panic the public into agreeing with the onslaught of genocide against Arab nations to which Canada’s economy & political acquiescence has contributed is criminal. Canada’s leaders are involved in a world oligarch criminal cabal.
I heard the owner of bldg. 7, Larry Silverstein, say on TV on 9/11 that: “they decided to pull the building” – meaning TAKE IT DOWN. Also, my daughter lives in the U.K. and a British news broadcast said bldg. 7 had collapsed but it was visible still standing right behind her! I am not an engineer, but when I saw the building go straight down within seconds I told my daughter “that’s a demolition”! (My 9th grade physics class was enough to tell me that.)
AE911T has, for its entire existence, approached the unanswered, or inaccurately answered, questions that are integral to the government’s false narrative of the 911 tragedy in a logical, measured, irrefutable manner. This study follows suit, and hopefully, it will become the cornerstone to eventually discovering the full truth of that day, and those who precipitated it.
I commend Dr. Hulsey and his team for their excellent report. And congratulations to Architect Richard Gage and all the members of “Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth” for their relentless efforts to uncover the truth about what happened to Building 7 … and the Twin Towers. This revelation is but the tip of the iceberg. There is much more to this story! Now’s the time to RE-OPEN 9/11 and start a completely new and independent investigation into what really happened on 9/11. To get you started, have a look at: http://www.GlobalOutlook.ca which covered the cover-up from Day One.
Since the dawn of skyscrapers, there has been no highrise steelbuildings ever, to collapse from fire. Yet on 11 september 2001, three such structures miraculously happened to do just that.
Although I’m not a structural engineer nor an architect of any kind, I’ll find such a coincidence, by plain logical reasoning, to be whishful thinking from NIST’s part. Every voice lending credibility to such mockery and misconceptions, when it comes to structural engineering or any other human endeavours, should be placed in New York townsquare at a saturday evening, with an artificial monkey’s tail up his buttocks.
I say these things out loud, because I’m not prohibited by a feeling of patriotism towards a US failing state, which treats it’s citizens like they’re stupid cattle. And because I’m a seeker of truth, not comfort, no matter what the consequences might be. I detest the stench of foul play, just as much as a despise the cowards hiding murderers.
Nice to hear a bit of fact-based reporting now and then.
Daily Commercial News is to be commended for publishing a balanced and factual article about an issue that most media outlets are still too cowed to touch. One point deserves clarification for those unfamiliar with the layout of the World Trade Center. Building 7 was a full 100 metres away from the nearest of the Twin Towers (the North Tower), and was separated from it by another major building (WTC 6). Debris from the collapse of the North Tower caused superficial damage to the south face of WTC7. Exactly how much has never been made clear, but NIST itself dismissed the possibility that the damage contributed to the structural weakening of the building.
Thank you,
Architects and engineers,
And,
For Canada’s Top Construction News Site Covering Ongoing Challenge to NIST Report.
For not giving up, thanks to you more than half the country does not believe the story told. Sooner or later they will have to come to terms with who really did this, and I am hoping for a great awakening.
Controlled demolition would leave obvious visible evidence on the steel structural elements of the building after the building collapsed. That evidence would be clear to anyone and everyone at the site after the dust settled. It would be unmistakable. AE911T’s concern is not with building safety but in promoting the idea that fire does not represent a danger to the safety of buildings which is the opposite of what good engineering practice should be. The reason they promote this idea is in order to get ‘justice’ for the victims of 9/11 and explanations involving the structural failures of buildings on 9/11 would undermine the objective of their campaign and the reason for the existence of their organisation. Engineers whose objective is to argue against and not look for structural explanations for building collapses are not going to find them.
Despite all the proof presented by the Architects and Engineers condemning the NIST REPORT, the SILENCE from the American Government has been a deafening Silence. One would like to think that the Government would seize on new evidence, but, to them, it looks like “Case Closed”.(even though Larry Silverstein has admitted on the record that “He, and the NYFD decided to “Pull the Building”???
“There are none so blind, as those who WILL NOT see…….and the American Governments silence is DAMNING.
Thank you Leroy Hulsey and team for providing irrefutable scientific evidence of what did and did not happen to Building 7. The door is wide open for NIST to make the corrections.
With an exhaustive 4-year examination using open-source computer models (unlike NIST’s), this study showed that the U.S. government’s account of how WTC 7 fell was fraudulent on many levels. It showed that it was impossible. But the truth of the free-fall collapse is very simple. Just looking at the video clips of the 47-story building dropping symmetrically, with little deformation reveals to most open-people that it was a controlled demolition. Just watch it, and judge for yourself. In this vein, I would like to point to a very important expert interview that is incredibly damning of the official story. The interview was conducted by Dutch television reporters, who asked Danny Jowenko, a leading building demolition expert in Europe, what he saw when they showed him a clip of WTC 7 falling. They did not tell him what building it was beforehand, nor did he appear to recognize it. His immediate and unequivocal reaction was that it was a controlled demolition. “A very good one.” He looked puzzled and shocked when they told him it was a World Trade Center building that dropped on 911.
The interview is in three parts on YouTube, in Dutch with English subtitles. Here is a link to the first part:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=10&v=k3DRhwRN06I&feature=emb_logo
Excellent article, thank you. And well done to all the architects and engineers who tirelessly helped realise this important scientific body of work. All these efforts really go to show that “the amount of energy necessary to refute bullsh*t is an order of magnitude bigger than to produce it.” Let’s now see how Popular Mechanics tries to “debunk” this one!
The findings from UAF are unimpeachable. A full copy of the report is available for free at the University website, where all professionals should see for themselves. Hulsey et al, and all those at AE truth, are to be commended for their perseverance and bravery.
Dr Hulsey’s work is excellent! The BBC is fully aware of issues surrounding WTC 7, but now they are curiously silent. In fact, BBC’s Jane Standley infamously reported the collapse of WTC 7, 20 minutes before it happened! WTC 7 was clearly visible behind her in the background. BBC to this day have not explained how they knew WTC 7 would collapse. This is particularly troubling, as WTC 7 was probably one of the most secure buildings in the USA, with the US Secret Service, Department of Defense, and CIA among its tenants. A full list of WTC 7 tenants appears in Dr Hulsey’s report. This and other contradictory evidence raise the question of the actual authorship of the 9/11 attacks.
At last, after nearly 20 years, a mainstream media outlet is properly reporting critical information about 9/11. Scientific evidence provided by Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth have shown that all three WTC buildings could not have collapsed in the manner reported by the government investigation team, NIST. This has now been confirmed by University of Alaska Fairbanks. There should now be a fully and thorough investigation into what really happened on 9/11.
My compliments for this honest and factual reporting. Thank you. Please stand up to the upcoming requests to censor yourself speaking about reality in stead of some narrative pushed by those Powers that Should Not Be. Have a nice day.
Iron-rich spheres also found in dust according to RJ Lee.
http://www1.ae911truth.org/documents/WTCDustSignature_ExpertReport.051304.1646.mp_.pdf
The NIST report isn’t the true.
The collapse was only a controlled demolition.
No one under the logical science could believe the NIST theory.
Surprise surprise…..finally someone has the courage to speak the truth. After the NIST report is rectified for WTC7, its the twin towers collapse which should be also looked into. Wouldnt be surprised if the WH tries to stop all that.
Time and time again several experts have concluded that the whole 9/11 drama was staged but clearly American people would not believe because they just don’t want believe the truth. All those people who lost their lives and some families are still in trauma, deserve to know how American Govt murdered its own people in cold blood.
Be still, my heart! This is the kind of rational recognition of NIST BS that has been wanting for ever so long! I believe that the US Federal Gov’t has a vested interest in stonewalling on this issue, but AE911Truth.org persists in exposing official cover-ups.
It is encouraging that a large newspaper has covered this story as it certainly lacks coverage practically every where else. This is a major scandal what NIST has gotten away with, and no one has talked regarding the need to rethink design; they have these “official” results and no one mentions these structures are not safe if they come down this easily due to fire? Clearly they know this is not true. I have followed AE911Truth.org since it started – these architects and engineers are serious, sincere men and women that dedicate a lot of their time to getting at the truth. I feel they are on the correct track.
Thank you Dr Hulsey and your research team. We always knew the NIST report was BS.
Personally, I think it is important that we keep this a scientific discussion rather than get distracted on who, why and for what.
NIST needs to be able to prove that the UAF study(which is publicly available) is not accurate or at least be able to make their modelling information public so that others can scrutinize their findings. As far as I know, NIST is refusing to make their information public saying that it will ‘endanger public safety’, whatever that is supposed to mean.
NIST, it’s your opportunity to challenge the UAF study and prove that you have adhered to scientific standards in arriving at your conclusions.
The evidence is clear and now we must get out the crayons and show the fact that you have exposed The real criminals . Time now for justice before they all die of old age.
Thank you for this long overdue story it demonstrates a truly honest approach to this remarkable coverup of facts by NIST. Well done.
Kudos to the Daily Commercial News team for reporting the relentless twenty year efforts of truth seekers in the architectural & engineering profession to bring to light the factual circumstances behind the events in New York on September 11th. With further support from our industry & it’s educational institutions, we have the opportunity to restore this industry’s safety & credibility record & in so doing, reveal to the public at large, the indictable corruption within our governmental institutions.
Steel framed buildings cannot collapse in free fall unless the strength has been completely removed below the falling section. In the case of WTC 7 that means that for 32 m / 105 ft / 8 stories there was zero resistance from any of the building structure below the section in free fall. Even Shyam Sunder (lead investigator for NIST) explained why that is impossible from fire in a press conference in August 2008 to launch the draft edition of their report into the collapse.
not only was there $2.3 trillion missing from the US budget but the offices of the agency investigating the budget was located in the exact spot of the Pentagon that was struck on 9/11 destroying all files and evidence already collected for the investigation and the offices being investigated were in the wtc making it impossible to investigate and clean up crews whisked everything away so any surviving evidence could not be recovered. anyone who believes the official conspiracy theory is either a dunning-kruger suffering from stupidity and cognitive dissonance or in denial. then there are those who say they believe the official narrative but actually don’t. those people are cowards because its someone who wont speak out because either they don’t want to lose their job or they are in the military and aren’t actually brave because they wont follow their oath to defend against enemies foreign AND DOMESTIC because that would mean following a path of fighting with a few against many making the chances of losing your life to death or life imprisonment become likely. instead they’d rather continue killing people to profit psychopathic criminals because its easy to feel secure when you’re fighting on the side that’s superior in every way.
If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it’s probably a duck. Looks like a demolition to me!
We have Larry Silverstein on camera saying “there had been so much loss of life that I told them to pull it” a standard demolition command. Silverstein is the main sponsor of Benjamin Netanyahu who was in New York on 9-11 and London on 7-7-2005 with his side kick Ridy Giuliany because both were Mossad Exercises along with Pan-Am 103,
This report just confirms what my eyes were telling me when the buildings came down. It was a controlled demolition and a false flag operation so the administration could pass the patriot act without any pushback from anyone and it worked perfectly. Even Senator Bob Graham of Florida has many questions concerning this physical impossibility but he has ben kept from stating his knowledge due to the possibility of prosecution.
I also wanted to add that in this world the physics would make this kind of free fall collapse impossible. The amount of steel in these building would have sheared the wings off the aircraft first and this didn’t happen and this is an impossibility!
See also: „A Sad Anniversary: 18 Years Since Nine Eleven and a Sign on the Wall“: https://wipokuli.wordpress.com/2019/09/11/a-sad-anniversary-18-years-since-nine-eleven-and-a-sign-on-the-wall-ein-trauriger-jahrestag-18-jahre-seit-nine-eleven-und-die-feuerschrift-an-der-wand/
Stay safe!
911 is the trigger for much of the misery of the 21 Century: leading to the ongoing illegal wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and Syria which have taken more than a million lives. In this day and age – during the information revolution – we should not have to wait twenty years for there to be mainstream discussion of the event from a scientific perspective. NIST, by abandoning science, has done the world a terrible disservice. Those responsible deserve to be held in opprobrium.
John Hort is on target. ‘Rebuilding America’s Defences’ stated (p51) “The process of transformation [of military strategy] is likely to be long, absent some catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbour”. ‘9-11’ was that ‘new Pearl Harbour’. Neo-Cons Zakheim, Wolfowitz, et al participated in the study. Zakheim was Comptroller of the Pentagon budget. A missile hit the Pentagon destroying the section where the ONI was investigating the fraud. Owner Silverstein wanted to redevelop the WTC but faced billion dollar bills for asbestos fire-proofing removal. He is a Friend of Israel which wanted war on Islam, especially Iraq (see ‘A Clean Break’). Israeli ‘art students’ were videoed in one tower with boxes of Gelignite fuses. NIST’s report on Bdg.7 claimed a fire in one corner caused failure. But the failure visibly began in the centre. Each fraud was covered up by another. (See Bollyn (2011) ‘Solving 9-11: The Deception that Changed the World’).
..and “nobody” remembers that the SEC office in WTC7 were investigating the gory details in the ENRON case papers, the seized original papers, that in the absence of “9/11” might have caused “W.’s Watergate.” Instead, we now live in the presence of the aftermath of a skillfully executed “9/11.”
..we also live in the absence of mainstream media videos of a beautifully executed demolition job on the “Postgirobygget” high rise in Oslo, Norway, about half a year before “9/11”, it was taken down with demolition charges and came down in its own foot print, “just like WTC7”, except of course without all that “American” media drama. A few thousand spectators, some may have videotaped it, a nice reward may tease out a few of these so we can compare the tapes.
Delivered coffee to Windows on the World restaurant , the elevator banks were two and three feet deep steel reenforced concrete , they would have been standing if a fire took down the buildings . The cleaning crews and bomb sniffing dogs were removed in the Summer of 2001 . Too many unanswered questions , this was the Millitary Industrial Complex and the Corporate Masters of the Universe looking out for their interests .
Our government will continue to lie to the people when it comes to what really happen on 09/11/2001. I will believe a scientist over a politician any day, but of course our politicians will always try to find a way to arm twist a scientist to go along with the politician’s narrative, thus we have those who will go along with our government’s narrative. SAD. Journalists are in the same situation. If you value your job, you better go along with what the government says. Thank you AE911T for being a voice of reason.
The collapse initiation, according to NIST, was centered upon a single girder on Floor 13, but NIST purposely omitted bearing stiffeners on the C79 end. Here is an explanation of their importance. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sz7v8EgCzJM
“9/11 Unveiled” and other materials were submitted to the International Criminal Court. Here is their reply — http://www.twf.org/News/Y2012/1127-EM_T03_OTP-CR-315_12.pdf You can download the FREE, google it.
Lucky Larry!!
There is no doubt that the whole of 9/11 is a phys-op. If you study what happened right after the “Event”, any one with a sane mind can see the whole thing was a setup. For one thing you don’t go into a complete war unless you have been setting it up months if not years in advance. They were in Afghanistan the month after. Sorry that’s a setup.
Thank you for an article on 9/11 2001. I am very ill from the toxic poison and the dust was 6% boiled lead and steel/iron when inhaled will cause neuropathy. The first study found 50% like me have nerve damage. 100,000+ are ill, oh yeah I cannot breath anymore. Please research what we are saying. God Bless
WTC 7.
The collapse of this building, when viewed from most angles, does appear to resemble a demolition. Of particular concern is this building was not a towering inferno by any stretch of the imagination.
The UAF report raises some very important questions which must be answered thoroughly and precisely.
There is much at stake here for two reasons. NIST’s credibility and the importance of both current and future building design and engineering regarding safety.
No individual or agency has ever been able to demonstrate the motions observed for both Building 7 and the twin towers, using a real world experiment. As Richard Feynman said, it doesn’t matter how beautiful your theory is or how smart you are; if it doesn’t agree with experiment, it’s wrong. The NIST analysis and progressive collapse theory disagrees with experiment. It’s wrong.
It’s pretty obvious to anyone who observes and thinks, that Building 7 could not have been brought down by fire nor was it a “progressive collapse”. Rather it was brought down in a classic controlled demolition manner.
John is 90% right the other very critical 10% is very complicated and won’t get into it here but absolutely this was done using thermite and if you think about it if they got away with it this long on the media imagine the big picture of the world we live in. And thanks very much to daily commercial news for printing this, very happy to see this.
Judging by practically every comment here there are a lot of people due to be disappointed if they think anything should result from this, since the collapse of WTC7 was not a controlled demolition, but a structural collapse. Unfortunately when an organisation of engineers spends 18 years not looking for structural reasons for the collapse of a building – the actual thing engineers should be doing- it’s not surprising that they haven’t found any.