The NIST 9-11 Report on the WTC Collapse

[LA RAM FAN]

But the American people have been conditioned to think it is all of our lives. It's like discovering your uncle "Sam" has been the one behind a serial killing spree. I don't believe everyone in our system of government is inherently evil or even corruptible. Maybe I'm being naive, but I still think there are decent people in the system, just misled and pressured to go with the their party's agenda, which is being influenced and dictated mostly by corporate or foriegn political monied interests.

No it would not take legions of people in the know to carry out such a crime. Like most secretive operations, the details would only need to be known by only a few within our government agencies and depts.
Why else were the attacks done on the same day as terror drills? To divert and confuse,
"is this real world or exercise?"

Again tho, only a few men in key positions of authority within our government were instrumental in facilitating this crime. For example, I sure as hell don't think Bush had anything to do with any strategic planning of 9-11. The details were probably known to Cheney and the rest of the PNAC members in the administration. Others I believe were threatened and made to stand down. Trillions announced as missing from the Pentagon the day before 9-11 and a fear of disclosing wrong doing by those might have been enough for some to just fall back, this is just one speculative theory.
The planes were tools used as weapons to show America was under attack, but those buildings had to come down and this was assured before hand.
Even if they weren't totally destroyed the fact that the attacks happened would have been enough to proceed with the invasions, and war agenda previously planned. But why rebuild/repair those buildings that had so many problems,and plans were made years ago to dismantle them anyway, when you could assure that they would be completely destroyed, repairing the damage wouldn't be cost effective, and demolishing 7 and whatever harmful secrets it contained probably was beneficial to some as well.

If NIST would have said they strongly suspected other means of destroying those buildings was suspected and found, it would have caused a shit storm and fingers would get pointed in other directions, and they couldn't have all that going on. Alqaeda and Muslims had to be blamed, and the Taliban for "harboring" them.
Take a close look at who was in those positions of power and authority at the time, and then take a good look at the PNAC and who they were affiliated with and who their loyalty is to. Nuttyyahoo was so bold he declared the 9-11 attacks as "good for Israel", because there were people in the US government that ensured America would go and kill Israel's enemies around the world, and especially in Iraq where Saddam was paying 25 grand for each suicide or terrorist plot that killed Israeli's.
So to say "THE" US government was behind it all is wrong. There were well placed Israeli operatives and loyalists within it that facilitated the attacks, and their Sayanim that allowed their buildings to be the target. It was a brilliantly evil plan, that along the way had its miscues and it's those miscues that demanded a closer examination of the details the perps deemed unimportant, ignored, or pretended did not even exist and this is why many don't believe the OCT.
If these criminals had the kind of power, people and resources to carry out such a plan, it wouldn't be too difficult to make life very hard on those that even dared to speak up. They would be quite capable of intimidating, bribing, or "disposing" off any thing or anyone they felt was a threat.

The NIST report had to stay in line with there being only outside source that used planes to attack the US, and that there was nothing else used to destroy those buildings. They had to stay on script as only planes hijacked by fanatical Muslim extremists were responsible, but upon closer examination it falls apart.
The NIST report is not the only instance where the conspiracy theory falls apart either
but it was crucial in keeping the fable going.

It might not take many people to plan 9/11, but I think it would take a decent number to execute it. Transporting and planting all the explosives, working with the terrorists and setting them up to make the attack, covering up afterwards, that's going to require quite a few 'bit players' to accomplish.

I don't believe the rigging of the buildings was done by Americans, at least at this moment. Silverstein is an Israeli Sayanim, and the security was controlled. Besides if like many of you suspect that gravity
was all that was needed to finish the "collapses" after "weakening" a few floors, then not much else would have been needed. Providing access to a small crew under the guise of "repairs" for a few months wouldn't necessitate including "thousands' like some idiots on here have proposed was needed. Recruiting fanatics would not require shit loads of personnel either. Once you get them on a plane that would be guided courtesy of Dov Zakheim's System Planning Corporation after it was hijacked from the hijackers in flight, and knowing that the terror drill/war games are going to take place, who else is needed?

As you said, if the objective was to go to war in Afghanistan and Iraq, simply having the planes hit the towers would have done it, even without the collapses. Why then go through all the trouble, and risk discovery, to add explosives to bring the buildings down?

Because as I just explained the WTC had to come down they were tagged for dismantling years prior. Read about those buildings and the myriad of problems the Port Authority was having with them. They were a prime target for an insurance scam, and subsequently an illegal demolition, and they planned ahead of time to rush the crime scene evidence away, and had their spin-masters in place ready to tell the world it was Alqaeda and OBL within minutes after the attack.
The cover worked well then and it's still working on people like yourself..."What are you talking about? WE ALL saw what happened!"
Right??

I haven't yet seen the NIST report, or the idea that the planes caused the collapses, fall apart. I guess that's what we're doing here, finding out how you think that it does and how I think it holds together. We've already disagreed to some degree about the molten metal/steel. What's next to view differently?!

How can you defend a conspiracy theory when so much is ignored out of the body of the investigation that is supposed to explain things? It's not just that the NIST investigation ignored relevant information that warranted further study, but it's also HOW they came to their conclusions, manipulating data to fit the "observed outcome" and in other cases keeping the data and how it was obtained a secret.
We've seen in this thread many instances of having to rely on ignoring evidence and witnesses, and people having to jump to highly improbable assumptions regarding the molten steel, to the point that when they are shown all the evidence against them, they resort to sidetracking tactics bringing up Nazis's and the Joooos and such.

I think that I made my point clear that the instance of the NIST ignoring molten steel, that was even seen my Robertson and many others, and how much steel there was compared to the quantity of aluminum, and where it was placed throughout the towers, and where the melted steel was reported to have been uncovered and seen, not to mention that WTC 7 had the same phenomena and had even less aluminum then the towers....Well it should be a no brainer when I say I lost respect for the NIST and feel they have no credibility or integrity.
If you or others feel that this is no big deal, then you are purposefully doing so in order to maintain your official CT intact in your own minds, and that;s fine by me as I made my point, and made some of you look foolish in the process of doing so.

Now the primary objective of the NIST investigation was to determine the cause of the WTC buildings collapses, and NIST should have conducted a forensic examination of the full body of evidence and this includes the molten steel. GZ was a crime scene, wasn't it?
And because many credible eyewitnesses, including firemen who were on the scene that day, reported that they heard and saw explosions,NIST should have investigated this without any bias, but they again chose to downplay these reports that were as widespread as the reports of the molten steel "running like little rivers".

The NIST investigators should have viewed their testimony of the molten steel and the explosions as hard evidence and considered this a starting point in its investigation, but they didn't because NIST assumed, from the outset that the hijacked planes solely responsible for the demise of the 2 TTers. They took it for granted that the plane impacts set in motion a chain of events that led all the way to "catastrophic structural failure". They even stated this explicitly in their Executive Summary

“The tragic consequences of the September 11, 2001 attacks were directly attributable to the fact that terrorists flew large jet-fuel laden commercial airliners into the WTC towers. Buildings for use by the general population are not designed to withstand attacks of such severity; building codes do not require building designs to consider aircraft impact".
NIST NCSTAR 1, WTC Investigation, Preface, xxxi.

Because NIST never even entertained the possibility of a planned demolition, or infiltration of the buildings by "terrorists" it never bothered to look for evidence of any.
This despite the WTC being bombed in 1993.
NIST was NOT going to go there, and I'll bet they were "encouraged" not to do so either.
There's no fucking way the head people at NIST were going to go against the Bush administration, and the many in it who were powerful enough to replace them, end their careers, or worse... risk some unfortunate "accident" befalling them or their families.
I just can't see the intelligent people within such a prestigious institution conducting the investigations in such a manner, and full of such glaring discrepancies, and highly questionable tactics, some "secret" that a lowly high school physics teacher forced this multi-million dollar financed agency to back track and have to admit they were wrong about the FF that indeed occurred at WTC 7.

Hundreds of people and reports about molten steel, some seen falling out of the window of one tower? All 3 wreckage piles confirmed to have molten steel UNDERNEATH them, but only 2 of the buildings had planes inside them? No obstacle was too great to overcome for NIST, they simply pretended all these people and what they saw didn't even exist. Close to the same number of credible people who saw and heard explosions? No problem there either....What people, what melted steel???
How convenient that they were forced to have to resort to computer simulation instead of real world testing of the remnants of the buildings, because someone saw to it that most of it was hauled away...
It never tested steel samples recovered from GZ for traces of explosives.
Their investigation included omissions of importance and wreak of of political interference
and pressure.
Not only were there eyewitness accounts of these things, but they also ignored 2 scientific papers that were published, one of them by FEMA that claimed and confirmed that sulfur residues on samples of WTC steel. This indicated the possibility that something else attacked the steel other then planes and jetfuel that day.
The possibility of this needed to be checked, if only just to rule it out but those in charge at NIST yet again, chose not to go there and pretended this didn't exist.

It's really telling when we have people come on here and confidently proclaim that nothing like this occurred or was never found or never confirmed and that somehow the responsibility of the investigation should have fallen to the people at GZ like firemen, rescue workers and others who were there to document the aftermath. This is dishonest and weakens their argument even further even without having to post all the things that I did a few pages back.

If some of you think that NIST conducted a credible investigation because they ignored these important things and instances and ignored all the hundreds of people that were witness to them, then have the nerve to use this and try to proclaim the views of others are a wild CT, you folks are only here to be antagonists and don't give a fuck about accuracy, honesty, credibility, or integrity.

This is akin to a crime scene having evidence that a gun was also used in the crime because gunshots were heard by witnesses and GSR (gun shot residue) or shell casings were found on site, but because this evidence would point to other suspects other then the one you were encouraged to suspect who you were told used a box cutter only, and who your CO's had in mind all along, (maybe even before the actual crime took place) then the shell casings and GSR were "lost" or ignored, and because of that, you feel you can declare "see there was no evidence" that a gun was used, so it just had to be the these guy/s.
The circumstances, the villains and the "evidence" were set up and easily confirmed because "we all saw the planes and the buildings collapsed!" and come hell or highwater that was the way any investigations and reports were going to go, but there is proof of evidence tampering.

Boy the troll never gets tired of having his ass handed to him on a platter everyday.

 

[Mr. Jones]

Did any of those witnesses have the sense or ability to test the molten metal in an effort to properly identify it?

You SLIMBALL COWARD SOB....
Wow you want to put the responsibility of testing on the GZ workers? You fucking twat, the responsibility was all on NIST. The GZ workers and contractors hired, reported, confirmed and informed everyone about what they saw, many with their own eyes, and it was up to NIST to follow through and conduct a thorough investigation.
Your logic depends on what NIST ignored and dismissed.
I have shown where NIST fucked up, and how stupid you are for even assuming it was melted aluminum by using your own debunked debunking sites calculations, and it should be obvious that there was waay more steel then aluminum, and that the aluminum was mostly on the outside of the towers, whereas the melted steel was in the centers of the wreckage piles and up to some 70 feet below the surface.

No you haven't but you have proven you are delusional. Since the fire's temps are known to have been well below the temp required to melt steel it is far more rational to conclude the molten mats contained no steel than it is to assume some super secret stuff was used to burn through and melt the steel, burn for weeks and leave no residue. The amount of steel vs. aluminum is of absolutely no significance ... all that was need was enough non-steel metals to create those pools of molten material.

And just what the fuck do YOU know about the fire temps? Care to elaborate and confirm your assumptions with links like was requested at the outset of the thread?
You mentioning rational in a post is ironic, as you don't know the meaning of it.
Rational would have been for NIST to follow through on their mission statement and investigate the numerous reports, sitings, and eyewitness who saw the melted steel "flowing like little rivers" like Robertson clearly said in the video that you tried to lie and claim was not true.
Rational would be to honestly look at the information posted in a thread that shows your stupid assumptions that "something else" was in the "melted mats" are more then highly unlikely to be accurate. You still can't explain why WTC 7 had the exact same fucking phenomena underneath it, as the towers. 7 didn't have aluminum cladding.
Again you must ignore stronger evidence against your official CT to keep it going in your feeble little troll mind.
Or maybe you want us to all believe that the GZ workers, who you claim should have taken it upon themselves to do the investigation for NIST, are Nazi's who think it was Da Jooos as well?
Get lost you trolling imbecilic idiot. I proved my point with facts, and figures, and calculations that even used your stupid debunking site, and I even showed what a liar you and your site are about Leslie Robertson, that tried to claim there were only 2-3 instances of the molten steel even reported..

 

[daws101]

these threads should be in the clean debate zone..these clowns could not possible hold a debate with out their silly pictures strawmen and ad hominem

whine on.....

 

[daws101]

You SLIMBALL COWARD SOB....
Wow you want to put the responsibility of testing on the GZ workers? You fucking twat, the responsibility was all on NIST. The GZ workers and contractors hired, reported, confirmed and informed everyone about what they saw, many with their own eyes, and it was up to NIST to follow through and conduct a thorough investigation.
Your logic depends on what NIST ignored and dismissed.
I have shown where NIST fucked up, and how stupid you are for even assuming it was melted aluminum by using your own debunked debunking sites calculations, and it should be obvious that there was waay more steel then aluminum, and that the aluminum was mostly on the outside of the towers, whereas the melted steel was in the centers of the wreckage piles and up to some 70 feet below the surface.

No you haven't but you have proven you are delusional. Since the fire's temps are known to have been well below the temp required to melt steel it is far more rational to conclude the molten mats contained no steel than it is to assume some super secret stuff was used to burn through and melt the steel, burn for weeks and leave no residue. The amount of steel vs. aluminum is of absolutely no significance ... all that was need was enough non-steel metals to create those pools of molten material.

And just what the fuck do YOU know about the fire temps? Care to elaborate and confirm your assumptions with links like was requested at the outset of the thread?
You mentioning rational in a post is ironic, as you don't know the meaning of it.
Rational would have been for NIST to follow through on their mission statement and investigate the numerous reports, sitings, and eyewitness who saw the melted steel "flowing like little rivers" like Robertson clearly said in the video that you tried to lie and claim was not true.
Rational would be to honestly look at the information posted in a thread that shows your stupid assumptions that "something else" was in the "melted mats" are more then highly unlikely to be accurate. You still can't explain why WTC 7 had the exact same fucking phenomena underneath it, as the towers. 7 didn't have aluminum cladding.
Again you must ignore stronger evidence against your official CT to keep it going in your feeble little troll mind.
Or maybe you want us to all believe that the GZ workers, who you claim should have taken it upon themselves to do the investigation for NIST, are Nazi's who think it was Da Jooos as well?
Get lost you trolling imbecilic idiot. I proved my point with facts, and figures, and calculations that even used your stupid debunking site, and I even showed what a liar you and your site are about Leslie Robertson, that tried to claim there were only 2-3 instances of the molten steel even reported..

the above is a masterpiece of irrationality bigotry, paranoia, hubris, egomania and the author claims everybody that disagrees with him is irrational. (place irony here)

 

[SAYIT]

Eat shit slimeball, you got your ass kicked and your sources as well.
You and "9/11Myths" got punked bitch, where is NIST to help you on that one?

200,000 tons of steel minimum...in each tower, but you bitches want to insist it was Aluminum....Robertson on video tape no less, saying he saw it too...on top of the hundreds of others, including hired contractors, and satellite imaging...
And then you expect GZ people to do NIST's work on top of it. What pathetic little whiny bitches you sayit are.

Robertson said no such thing. That video had Gage reading from the James Williams article in which Robertson was misquoted. Robertson did not test the molten mats nor did he check their temp and admitted he had no way of knowing what it was. I realize you have your heart and soul in your 9/11 CT but that doesn't make it factual.

You once again must be grabbed by the hand like a child and shown what you purposefully ignore, when your CT is starting to fall apart.
You are a liar, and so is your "debunking" site where it seems you get most of your lies and disinformation from.

Les Robertson, in presentation at Stanford University, confirms that he saw a "river of molten steel" at the B1 level of the WTC debris pile. This video also has a clip of Robertson confirming that the WTC Towers were designed to absorb the impact of a Boeing 707, the largest airplane of its time.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=rjmHqES_lto#]Les Robertson Confirms Molten Metal in WTC Basement - YouTube[/ame]!

Unlike you I neither have a CT nor do I lie. There's another video in this thread perhaps, from another poster, in which Richard Gage quotes from the James Williams article.
So Robertson said he saw a "river of steel" flowing weeks after the attack. As well established here, molten steel looks like molten aluminum. Did Robertson do any testing to substantiate his suspicion? Could you post his proof? Do you know of any material which could burn through thick steel and continue to melt it weeks later?
BTW, you have only proven 9/11myths.com contains "lies and disinformation" in your small, delusional mind.
Carry on, Princess.

 

[Montrovant]

A few quick questions.

Are there any photographs or video recordings of the molten steel at GZ? If not, why not?

Where did this steel go? At some point it would cool and harden, and anyone seeing it would probably be able to tell it had been molten. Are there any reports of the cooled steel being found, or only sightings of it in molten form?

If molten steel was so prevalent, does that mean most of the GZ workers saw it? Should there be more accounts about it, more people questioning? Do you think most of the workers were threatened/bribed/coerced to be silent about seeing molten steel?

What constitutes confirmation in your mind? Every time I see that molten steel was confirmed to be at GZ I wonder just what that is supposed to mean. Molten steel samples were taken and tested? Steel hardened after having been liquid was found? To date I have still only seen some eyewitness reports, not anything like conclusive proof or confirmation.

Finally, if the problems with the NIST report are so glaringly obvious, why is there not more of an uproar about it? Do you think that all the scientists in the country (and world) who have had access to the report have simply ignored its flaws? Are all the scientists who have said the collapses WERE due to the planes and subsequent fires being coerced or paid by the government? If that is the case, doesn't it lend credence to the idea that this conspiracy and cover up required a lot of people to implement?

 

[daws101]

A few quick questions.

Are there any photographs or video recordings of the molten steel at GZ? If not, why not?

Where did this steel go? At some point it would cool and harden, and anyone seeing it would probably be able to tell it had been molten. Are there any reports of the cooled steel being found, or only sightings of it in molten form?

If molten steel was so prevalent, does that mean most of the GZ workers saw it? Should there be more accounts about it, more people questioning? Do you think most of the workers were threatened/bribed/coerced to be silent about seeing molten steel?

What constitutes confirmation in your mind? Every time I see that molten steel was confirmed to be at GZ I wonder just what that is supposed to mean. Molten steel samples were taken and tested? Steel hardened after having been liquid was found? To date I have still only seen some eyewitness reports, not anything like conclusive proof or confirmation.

Finally, if the problems with the NIST report are so glaringly obvious, why is there not more of an uproar about it? Do you think that all the scientists in the country (and world) who have had access to the report have simply ignored its flaws? Are all the scientists who have said the collapses WERE due to the planes and subsequent fires being coerced or paid by the government? If that is the case, doesn't it lend credence to the idea that this conspiracy and cover up required a lot of people to implement?

here's the closest thing to molten metal at GZ I could find

this image shows what seems to be cooled aluminum.
but there is no way to tell if it happened during or just after the collapse or during clean up .could be residue from cutting torches.

this photo shows red hot metal ,if it were molten it would be a thick liquid.

this photo was touted by twoofers as smoking gun evidence of molten steel...in reality it was a work light being lowered into the 1st basement..
any help?

 

[eots]

 

[eots]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1WWAnCd_6lg]9/11 WTC Meteorites Molten Iron Concrete - YouTube[/ame]

 

[SAYIT]

9/11 WTC Meteorites Molten Iron Concrete - YouTube

So you are now claiming a nuke hit the WTC. Woo.

 

[eots]

9/11 WTC Meteorites Molten Iron Concrete - YouTube

So you are now claiming a nuke hit the WTC. Woo.

I am not claiming anything I am providing information from the curators of the 9/11 museum .. why ? does it make you think a nuclear device was used ?

 

[SAYIT]

9/11 WTC Meteorites Molten Iron Concrete - YouTube

So you are now claiming a nuke hit the WTC. Woo.

I am not claiming anything I am providing information from the curators of the 9/11 museum .. why ? does it make you think a nuclear device was used ?

That's what they said on your video, Princess. You did watch it, right?

 

[eots]

So you are now claiming a nuke hit the WTC. Woo.

I am not claiming anything I am providing information from the curators of the 9/11 museum .. why ? does it make you think a nuclear device was used ?

That's what they said on your video, Princess. You did watch it, right?

that was the speculation of one person I am only interested in the fact that according to the museum curators and NBC reporters there was both molten concrete and this physical evidence still exist..

 

[SAYIT]

I am not claiming anything I am providing information from the curators of the 9/11 museum .. why ? does it make you think a nuclear device was used ?

That's what they said on your video, Princess. You did watch it, right?

that was the speculation of one person I am only interested in the fact that according to the museum curators and NBC reporters there was both molten concrete and this physical evidence still exist..

There has been a lot of speculation by a lot of people but I too found that video interesting. Did either the curators or reporters test to find what mats had melted and fused it all together?

 

[Mr. Jones]

9/11 WTC Meteorites Molten Iron Concrete - YouTube

So you are now claiming a nuke hit the WTC. Woo.

I am not claiming anything I am providing information from the curators of the 9/11 museum .. why ? does it make you think a nuclear device was used ?

Notice how this troll tries to spin things and put words in your mouth, when all you were doing is providing info relevant to the above posts?

 

[daws101]

So you are now claiming a nuke hit the WTC. Woo.

I am not claiming anything I am providing information from the curators of the 9/11 museum .. why ? does it make you think a nuclear device was used ?

Notice how this troll tries to spin things and put words in your mouth, when all you were doing is providing info relevant to the above posts?

relevant to what ?
it only proves high heat not causation (thanks for playing )

 

[Mr. Jones]

A few quick questions.

Are there any photographs or video recordings of the molten steel at GZ? If not, why not?

Yes there are. The question should be "was this investigated by NIST, if not why not?"

Where did this steel go? At some point it would cool and harden, and anyone seeing it would probably be able to tell it had been molten. Are there any reports of the cooled steel being found, or only sightings of it in molten form?

The steel was packed up and hauled away, hence why there wasn't much left to analyze.

If molten steel was so prevalent, does that mean most of the GZ workers saw it? Should there be more accounts about it, more people questioning? Do you think most of the workers were threatened/bribed/coerced to be silent about seeing molten steel?

There were enough reports, sightings when it was in its molten state and after they cooled down to warrant further evaluation by NIST, period.

What constitutes confirmation in your mind? Every time I see that molten steel was confirmed to be at GZ I wonder just what that is supposed to mean.

It means to me anyways, that it was seen, it was shown to others like Robertson, it was confirmed as being seen directly, and down the line to to news agencies etc...and NIST who ignored them

Molten steel samples were taken and tested? Steel hardened after having been liquid was found? To date I have still only seen some eyewitness reports, not anything like conclusive proof or confirmation.

NIST did not take any or test any, and they were the responsible party to have done so. Re examine the many links I posted pertaining to this a few pages back, I don't understand why it is that you just can't process the facts that this phenomena was seen, reported, confirmed to have been seen and reported by numerous people, and affiliations at GZ, and that NIST did not give a shit. These are questions that the agency placed in charge to investigate should have explained instead of ignore.

Finally, if the problems with the NIST report are so glaringly obvious, why is there not more of an uproar about it?

It is a hands off career ending subject to question or call attention to this or anything 9-11 related. There are government contracts on the line and jobs at stake, and ridicule to overcome like is prevalent on these forums, but fear mostly.

Do you think that all the scientists in the country (and world) who have had access to the report have simply ignored its flaws? Are all the scientists who have said the collapses WERE due to the planes and subsequent fires being coerced or paid by the government? If that is the case, doesn't it lend credence to the idea that this conspiracy and cover up required a lot of people to implement?

Research Bush and junk science.

The point has been made and it should be clear what I am trying to relate. NIST also ignored reports and witnesses to explosions, and didn't bother to follow up on this either.
As I stated they had a preconceived conclusion already made up. Planes, jetfuel, fires in that order, and they simply ignored anything that would be problematic to their conclusion
there could not be anything allowed in that strayed from this.Too many credible people reported too many incidents to just simply ignore, end of story. Diffuse flame office fires do not melt steel, but all we heard at the outset of the aftermath was how these fores most likely did. The thinking has changed since it was found that the fire temps did not elevate to the melting point of steel, nor did the fires burn long enough, so the question remains..what caused the melting steel? This has already been discussed and it was shown that there were more then enough people, and sightings to warrant a comprehensive, detailed analysis, but as we all know none was done by the chief investigating agency.
We don't know the answer as to why they didn't, but there should be no doubt these sightings and reports, and confirmations of them were not a fucking hallucination.
3 buildings in a wreck of rubble, 2 towers that had most of their aluminum as cladding on the outside of them. 1 building that did not, but still experienced the same phenomena deep within its wreckage pile..It seems that the only way most of you are trying to explain this and rationalize it, is to conclude it did not exist, and all other manner of crazy speculation. The fact is it did exist, and the fact is NIST ignored it. Now we can speculate as to why they didn't,, but saying it was non existent is a huge stretch, and totally bullshit.
The reports of explosions were not hallucinations either.

 

[Mr. Jones]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G_sx4XJfGR0]9/11 Molten Steel At World Trade Center Site For Weeks After The 1 Hour Fires - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Mr. Jones]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nqJSDn5dgJc]9-11 Molten Steel Forensic Evidence & Eyewitness Accounts - YouTube[/ame]


Funny no mention of any aluminum in the basement levels, but Leslie Robertson mentioned he saw steel "running like little rivers" at the B1 level. All these numerous sightings and reports by so many people yet NIST decides to ignore this. Why would that be?
You can't answer this with any amount of reasonable logic. It's no wonder that people distrust the NIST.
Now you know. What else did NIST ignore, that you have to jump through hoops in trying to justify in order to keep your 9-11 official conspiracy myth going?
NIST and John Gross are simply fucking lying, plain and simple. Office fires do not reach the temp level required to melt steel, and not one of you people have even come close to making a rational argument it might have been aluminum, and the reasoning that you clowns are trying to use is pathetic and laughable. WTC 7 had no mass quantity of aluminum.
There was waay more steel within the towers then aluminum.
The molten steel wreckage was reported centered in the sub basements of all 3 buildings.
These are facts that can not be rationally explained away, and should not have been ignored, and lied about.
How fucking more obvious does this have to be, or must you have to try to continue to explain this away so nothing deviates away from the planes, jetfuel, and Alqaeda narrative?
This is no longer up for debate. I will not discuss this part of your CT anymore.

But I will show you where else NIST was forced to stray from honest investigative policy, namely the reports of numerous secondary explosions
and devices.

 

[Mr. Jones]

EXPLOSIONS-

There were many reports and witnesses to explosions within the WTC towers. These came from many sources that included news reporters who were told to step back because of reports of 2ndary devices. There were witnesses to huge explosions in the basements as well.
It would seem logical that an investigation would include some analysis of these explosions.
The WTC was bombed in 1993 afterall, and so many people on 9-11 reported this.
Something ripped through the WTC 1 concourse lobby at about the time of the impact, blowing out windows and crumpling steel doors. The same blast even knocked marble slabs off the walls in the lobby. Custodians also heard explosions in the WTC 1 basement. A machine shop was wrecked, as well as a car garage.
NIST, has never identified an energy source in the WTC capable of producing such massive explosions.
We can see on videos explosions taking place throughout the towers, some many stories below the collapse fronts. I even found one video that shows a person being blown out of a window...
We can also see that much of the towers were pulverized by some energy source that remains unidentified. If this were a collapse with floors pancaking down on top of each other, we should expect to see some floors remaining relatively intact, in the middle of the "pancaked" floors primarily.

Each floor of the 110 story WTC towers, one acre in size, consisted of a 4-inch thick slabs of concrete on a deck of 22 gauge steel. During the collapse some force pulverized nearly all of this concrete into dust.

The concrete wasn't pulverized as the 1 acre floors hit the ground, but instead, they seemingly were pulverized in midair as the buildings explosively disintegrated.
One towers top section even tilted, but mysteriously instead of toppling over, it disintegrated and there were forcible ejections of massive tons of building materials.
Concrete wasn't the only thing to be disintegrated as many of the furnishings, like desks, chairs, storage cabinets, and people were blown to bits. Some bone fragments were found way across the street on the Deutsch Bank building.
Less than 300 corpses were recovered in the wreckage.
Workers found more than 700 slivers of bone, on the roof and within the that structure.

These towers did not seem to pancake floor by floor, and provide any resistance, instead they looked to just be exploding one by one in rapid succession. The towers fell straight down as if there was no resistance whatsoever., as we can see plumes of ejected materials exploding out of the buildings with great force, and again some of these plumes were 10-20- stories BELOW the collapse fronts. This would rule out them being "air" caused by the "pancaking" floors.

So I challenge any of you OC theorists, to explain this and point out what the NIST report has to say regarding these other anomalies...

Could gravity turn massive slabs of concrete, thousands of tons of material, into fine dust, in midair?