Try this one: ask any of your friends how many Manhattan towers collapsed on September 11th 2001; what answer do you think you will get? Two. Obviously: all of us have been impressed by the planes crashing against the Twin Towers. If two is also your answer to the question, well: the truth is that there was a third tower collapsing in the area that day, though it hadn’t been hit by a plane!
The forgotten tower
The World Trade Center (WTC) was indeed made of seven buildings, the Twin Towers being the first two and the Marriott World Trade Center being the third one. The other buildings were just numbered from four to seven. One of them, precisely the World Trade Center Building 7, or WTC-7, was standing a couple of blocks away from the Twin Towers….
|Arrangement of World Trade Center buildings before September 11th 2001|
|(by MesserWoland from Wikipedia)|
On September 11th 2001, the WTC-7 received some pieces from the collapsing Twin Towers. Police and fire department officers started its evacuation, claiming that the building was about to collapse as well. And they were right: at about 5:20pm local time, the WTC-7 Eastern Penthouse started falling down. As the available footage shows clearly, a few seconds later, also the Western Penthouse caved in, and the rest of the building went down in a free fall.
Curiously, there is no mention of any of the above in the 500-pages 9/11 Commission Report, that was supposed to provide answers to all the questions that arose immediately after the facts. As if the WTC-7 never existed….
|The Twin Towers and the WTC-7|
The US Government appointed a Government agency, the National Institute of Standards and Technologies (NIST), for the technical assessments. The NIST took its time, published some intermediary draft material and, in November 2008 (yes: more than seven years later), issued the Final NIST Report on the Collapse of World Trade Center Building 7 (see the summary findings here).
Their theory is that the pieces coming from the collapsing Twin Towers were not determinant for the WTC-7 fall down (though this has been later contradicted), that the building collapsed because of intense fire developing inside it and it didn’t fall freely but progressively. The NIST repeatedly declared itself unable to perform any metallographic analysis of the WTC-7 pillars steel simply because there were no samples. Their explanations are based on a computer simulation, which doesn’t really qualify as evidence, even if using computer simulations was justified by the fact that there were no steel samples to analyse…. It has to be said that Rudolf Giuliani, the New-York mayor, has been very efficient in removing the debris – together with potentially crucial evidence – of the disastrous collapses; very few know that the wrecked steel parts have been swiftly transferred to China to be melted….
The concealed truth
How much truth is there in the NIST report? Well: not everything is ending up being pure truth. There is now evidence for that.
Regarding the fall and fire aspects, if you observe the footage (that was made available only a few years later), you can easily see the Eastern Penthouse collapsing before and separately from the rest of the building (even if just a few seconds earlier): there were no evident damages up there from the falling pieces (these can be seen at a much lower floor), the building was still appearing intact and there were small fires – definitely not to the level of damaging the structure and provoking a collapse. Moreover, the collapse that follows is of the entire building over its whole length (about 100 yards from East to West), in a cloud of dust that looks like the Twin Towers one. It’s now been widely proven that not even a gigantic fire (that, by the way, did not happen) could have weakened the steel pillars. Unless explosions break the junctions between pillars….
There are definitely some suspicious coincidences that are summarised here that may lead to yet another potential concealment of truth: the WTC-7 was pulled down!….
Anyway, the clear attempt to hide truth is really obvious about the steel samples. The NIST, in different papers, confirmed their inability to perform any metallographic analysis because no steel samples were found. It goes without saying that, if there were some samples, it would be much easier to confirm or deny the theory of the fire-weakened steel structure.
Well, (body of evidence #1) three researchers (Jonathan R. Barnett, Ronald R. Biederman and R. D. Sisson Jr.) from the Worcester Polytechnic Institute (WPI) in Worcester (MA), already in 2001, published an article in the Journal of Mineral, Metals and Materials Society (JOM) whose title was Initial Microstructural Analysis of A36 Steel WTC Building 7 [JOM , 53(12), 2001, p. 18]! It looks like they found what the NIST hadn’t…. This is made worse by the fact that a Government agency, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), in 2002, admitted the truth, i.e. to be aware of the results from the three researchers: some of this information is available from them here. Moreover, in 2005, the very same NIST published a preliminary study (body of evidence #2) where there is a reference to steel coming from WTC-7: how could this be forgotten in the definitive report (or should I ask why)?
In 2012, there is the definitive proof of the NIST lying and concealing the truth. Another document (body of evidence #3) was made public following the prescriptions of the Freedom Of Information Act (FOIA) and shows quite a few pictures of John Gross examining pieces of steel from the WTC-7: John Gross is one of the main authors of the NIST report that was attributing the WTC-7 collapse to the fire!
The historical truth
More details on what has been summarised above are available here. There is also a FAQ section in the NIST website, dedicated to the WTC-7 collapse: at the time of publishing, all the links there repoint to the high-level summary findings of the 2008 report.
As far as I am concerned, I am more than convinced that WTC-7 did not collapse because of fire.
I don’t have certainties beyond the ones just exposed, and I do have more and more doubts about the information that has been divulged on this topic. More importantly, the trust in the institutions (especially the Government ones) is jeopardised by these more-or-less-successful attempts to conceal the truth: it generates mistrust – surely not confidence – to discover about a suspicious zeal and speed in disposing potential evidence, in disregarding details, in rushing into easy conclusions – let alone the fact that they are officially published too late to make a difference….
And, far from being a surprise, once more in history, war – with its heavy load of destruction and death – has been triggered through the clever concealment of truth, a few well-placed lies and tons of brain-washing. Isn’t it well known that information and truth are the first victims of any war?
If you liked that post, then try these...
The Italian Who Brought Down The Berlin Wall by Armando Gherardi
Peter Norman, The Forgotten by Armando Gherardi
Why 'I' Is Always Capitalised by Armando Gherardi
The Curious History Of The First Marathon Races by Armando Gherardi
How America Got Its Name by Armando Gherardi
The Remaining Issues From World War I by Armando Gherardi