Trade Center Building 7 on Sept. 11, scientific study reveals

Fire did not destroy World Trade Center Building 7 on Sept. 11, scientific study reveals

Tue Sep 10, 2019 01:37PM [Updated: Tue Sep 10, 2019 01:56PM ]

1. Home
2. US
3. Politics

The Building 7 of the World Trade Center is collapsing. (file photo)

A comprehensive study conducted by the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering at the University of Alaska Fairbanks (UAF) in association with Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth found that fire was not the cause of the collapse of the Building 7 of the World Trade Center (WTC).

The official theory established that the 47-story colossus collapsed on its base after the tragic attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, at 5:20 p.m., when it was affected by the fire coming from the Twin Towers—Buildings 1 and 2 of the World Trade Center. The building was completely destroyed in just seven seconds.

However, after investing four years in computer simulations, the FAU scientists published a draft report that concludes that the collapse of the third WTC skyscraper on Sept.11, 2001 was not due to any fire, but “the almost simultaneous failure of every column in the building.”

“Despite calls for the evidence to be preserved, New York City officials had the building’s debris removed and destroyed in the ensuing weeks and months, preventing a proper forensic investigation from ever taking place,” Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth explained on its website.

“Seven years later, federal investigators concluded that WTC 7 was the first steel-framed high-rise ever to have collapsed solely as a result of normal office fires,” the specialists emphasized, noting that new evidence invalidates that hypothesis.

Request to reopen the investigation

Some time ago, more than 3,000 active and retired architects and engineers called on the US Congress to conduct a new investigation into the three WTC skyscrapers that were destroyed on Sept. 11.

Under the name ‘Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth,’ they said there was “sufficient doubt about the official story to justify reopening the 9/11 investigation.”

“The new investigation must include a full inquiry into the possible use of explosives that might have been the actual cause of the destruction of the World Trade Center Twin Towers and Building 7,” they said.

‘Possible use of explosives’

In 2009, independent research conducted by a team of international scientists discovered, after analyzing some dust samples from the debris in the area where the skyscrapers collapsed, that they all contained a red layer of active thermitic material, incorporating nanotechnology.

The study conducted by Niels H. Harrit, a chemist at the University of Copenhagen in Denmark, determined that it was a high energetic explosive material that would explain the remains of molten metal, and why the fires lasted under the rubble for months.

Professor David Ray Griffin, author of a reference work in which he details up to 115 omissions and distortions in his work, “The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions,” which aims to dismantle the official version of the attacks on the World Trade Center, as well as the Pentagon and the White House, which occurred on the same fateful day, collaborated in the investigation.

The following is a summary of some of the most important points that Griffin mentions in his book alleging a possible complicity of some elements of the government in the attack:

• The omission of evidence that at least six of the alleged hijackers—including Waleed al-Shehri, said by the Commission probably to have stabbed a flight attendant on Flight 11 before it crashed into the North Tower of the WTC—are still alive (pages 19-20).
• The omission of the fact that President Bush’s brother Marvin and his cousin Wirt Walker III were both principals in the company in charge of security for the WTC (pages 31-32).
• The omission of the fact that The Project for the New American Century, many members of which became key figures in the Bush administration, published a document in 2000 saying that “a new Pearl Harbor” would aid its goal of obtaining funding for a rapid technological transformation of the US military (pages 117-18).
• The omission of the report that at a meeting in July 2001, US representatives said that because the Taliban refused to agree to a US proposal that would allow the pipeline project to go forward, a war against them would begin by October (pages 125-26).
• The failure to probe the issue of how the “war games” scheduled for that day were related to the military’s failure to intercept the hijacked airliners (pages 268-69).
• The failure to discuss the possible relevance of Operation Northwoods to the attacks of 9/11 (pages 269-71).
• The failure to point out that the Commission’s claimed “independence” was fatally compromised by the fact that its executive director, Philip Zelikow, was virtually a member of the Bush administration (pages 7-9, 11-12, 282-84).

In this context, former CIA analyst George Beebee recently alleged in his new work that Russian leader Vladimir Putin personally warned President George W. Bush two days in advance to prevent the 9/11 attacks. (Source: thebl.com)