left-panel-lighter-heading
    9-11-explosive-evidence-experts-speak-out

    Architects and Engineers - Solving the Mystery of WTC 7)

    RT TV Show Interviews AE911Truth Experts About ReThink911 Campaign


    Ben Swann, formerly of Cincinnati's FOX19, questions the official story of the collapse of the World Trade Center High-rises

    Ben Swann, formerly of Cincinnati's FOX19, has to admit that World Trade Center Building 7 probably did not collapse due to normal office fires as NIST would want us to believe


    Architects and Engineers - Solving the Mystery of WTC 7)

    Architects & Engineers:
    Solving the Mystery of WTC 7
    A 15-min Documentary with Ed Asner


    9/11: Explosive Evidence – Experts Speak Out (4-minute trailer)

    9/11: Explosive Evidence -
    Experts Speak Out - Trailer
    Duration: 4:09


    9/11: Explosive Evidence – Experts Speak Out (58 minute free version)

    9/11: Explosive Evidence
    Experts Speak Out
    Free 1-hour version


    FOX TV, Fresno, with Richard Gage, AIA

    FOX TV, Fresno,
    with Richard Gage, AIA


    CBC the fifth estate unofficial story

    CBC - The Fifth Estate
    "The Unofficial Story"


    The Reality Report with Richard Gage

    The Reality Report
    with Richard Gage, AIA


    CCTV, with Richard Gage, AIA

    CCTV,
    with Richard Gage, AIA


    FOX News with Richard Gage, AIA

    FOX News
    with Richard Gage, AIA


    Vancouver Omni TV,
    with Richard Gage, AIA


    Richard Gage Live on TV3 - The Masterplan Event

    Richard Gage Live on TV3 - The Masterplan Event


    Read it at AE911Truth.org
    Gross Negligence: DeNISTifying the Destruction of the WTC Skyscrapers Print E-mail
    Thursday, 02 September 2010 19:23

    A review of the U.S. government reports on the September 11, 2001, destruction of the WTC twin towers in New York City will reveal that even though NIST (National Institute for Standards and Technology) was tasked by the U.S. Congress to provide a complete explanation for the unprecedented collapses of these buildings, the authors admittedly stopped their analysis at the “initiation of collapse” where they say “the building was poised to collapse”. Only half of one page of this 10,000-page report is spent on the actual collapse, and it merely speculates that “the structure below the level of collapse initiation offered minimal resistance to the falling building mass” and that it “came down essentially in free fall as seen in the videos”. NIST’s response to formal Request for Correction filed by this author and five other concerned citizens stated “we are unable to provide a full explanation of the total collapse.”

    An impartial review of the available public evidence concerning the three high-rise building collapses reveals that  the government engineers behind the report have omitted and obscured much of the relevant evidence. At the AE911Truth February 19, 2010, press conference in San Francisco, we enumerated some of these:   

    Regarding All Three High-Rises

    1.    NIST provided conflicting information about the fire severity and duration in all three skyscrapers.
    2.    NIST’s John Gross evidently lied about the evidence of molten iron/steel.
    3.    NIST refused to test for explosives residue or even consider the explosive demolition hypothesis in its report when explosive demolition was the most likely hypothesis.
    4.    Neither NIST nor FEMA followed the National Fire Protection Association 921 Guidelines for Fire and Explosion investigation (NFPA 921), which specifies that looking for residue from explosives is the standard procedure for fire and explosion investigations where there is “high order damage” (as there obviously was at the WTC). The guidelines specifically suggest testing for thermite when there is evidence of extremely high temperatures such as molten iron or steel (also evident at the WTC).

    Regarding WTC 7

    5.    NIST did not discuss the finding, documented in FEMA’s Building Performance Assessment Report , of steel beams exhibiting evidence of an extremely high temperature corrosion attack  – including “intergranular melting, rapid oxidation, and sulfidation”. The New York Times called this finding “perhaps the deepest mystery uncovered in the investigation.”
    6.    NIST has refused to release the computer model input data in response to FOIA requests, claiming that its release would “jeopardize public safety.”
    7.    NIST’s animated computer model bears no resemblance to the actual collapse as seen in the videos, but the NIST official declared them to be consistent with each other

    The NIST WTC 7 computer animation shows buckling of exterior columns, and toppling, and ends after only 3 seconds whereas, the video reveals a straight-down symmetrical collapse.

    Vs.

    Regarding the Twin Towers

    8.    NIST claimed that the “upper block” of each of the Twin Towers crushed the lower block, but video analysis reveals clearly that the "upper block" disintegrated in waves of explosions prior to any crushing of the lower block.
    9.    In NIST’s tested of the steel floor truss assemblies in a 2-hour/2,000° fire test , they sagged only four inches, yet NIST claimed that these results prove that the actual trusses sagged 42 inches,  forcing the exterior columns to buckle by imparting 5,000 pounds of horizontal force against the outside of each column.

    In short, NIST’s official technical explanation is fraudulent and inconsistent with basic laws of physics. By contrast, the hypothesis of explosive controlled demolition is consistent with all the available technical evidence.

    Since official FEMA and NIST reports provide insufficient, contradictory, and fraudulent accounts of the towers’ destruction, AE911Truth is calling for not only a new investigation into the destruction of the skyscrapers, but for the US Attorney General, Eric Holder, to lead a Federal grand jury investigation of the top individuals responsible at NIST – including Lead Investigator Shyam Sunder, and Co-Project Leader John Gross.