Plastic Explosives Still Attached to a World Trade Center Beam?

Debunking the Debunkers
February 28, 2014

Please send this to anyone with an interest in NIST´s investigation and a knack for making FOIA requests, in order to get more information about the object observed in this video. According to the owner of the YouTube video below, you can find the footage yourself in the NIST FOIA records, the release number is 14 (entire package is 964 mb) and you need a torrent downloader:
http://911datasets.org/index.php/International_Center_for_9/11_Studies_NIST_FOIA



That thing sure looks out of place!  It's positioned so conspicuously, right under where the column seat was. Explosives spaced out along the perimeter could hardly explain the thoroughness of the pulverization because the floors were so huge, but if they were also placed under the floors like this.. then it makes much more sense.

Click to Enlarge Either Picture

Super-thermite formulations can act as ignitor, explosive or cutter-charge, and the evidence suggests there were several formulations in the dusts, possibly different types for different jobs. Harrit´s paper mentions (in the discussion section) chips not featured in the paper that had "other elements" present besides the std. Fe-Al-C-Si signature in the red layer of the red/gray chips, such as barium and copper - and also chips with an extra unidentified light gray layer not studied in the paper.

If this red blob seen in the video is an explosive it is most likely a normal explosive not a cutter charge because there is no container around it to direct the cut. It can be Semtex or some super-thermite material.

Harrit´s paper refers to super-thermite "matches" that do not need a detonation cord because they ignite via a little application of current, such as a 12 volt spike. Steven Jones also mentions in one of his lectures that he actually ignited some of the red/gray chips with a 12 volt current. So all you need is a 12 volt battery with a remote-controlled switch. 

You might think the perpetrators would not color their secret nano-thermite orange just like commercial Semtex, but then other concerns may have outweighed the choice of color, such as the possibility of having an explosive material that could be tailored to be quieter and less sensitive than conventional explosives.

It sure looks like the cameraman and the FBI guys were fascinated by the "blob," so it is hard to believe that it is just a big piece of chewing gum someone left stuck on the steel. The blob is there and we think it is worth following up on. Perhaps a FOIA request to NIST or the FBI could reveal what people on the scene said about this thing, what happened to it etc.

NIST's Admission of Freefall - Does It Matter?

A debunker on YouTube sent me the above graphic in a message response to my song, presumably to debunk the line "Tower 7 Falls At Freefall Speed". It shows the alleged buckling of floors 7 to 14 during the collapse. Debunkers claim it proves that eight floors of freefall is possible in this case because the buckled floors wouldn't offer any significant resistance.

The amount of hoops that debunkers and skeptics have to jump through in order to get their theories to work is ridiculous. Two sections of building can't slam into each other without there being a jolt ... but the collapse of the North Tower was a special case! Look, a slight tilt! For more than 120 years, Arctic temperatures appear to correlate perfectly with solar cycles ... but the last decade was a special case! Look, warming! Pay no attention to the lying scientists! And a building can't fall at freefall ... but WTC7 was a special case! Look, CGI buckling!

I'm not convinced that even buckled floors like that would behave as if they were turned to air, as freefall implies, but let's assume they would. Note that this is a computer model, and the thing about computers is - BS in, BS out! And since this is NIST we're talking about (or my new name for them, NIMMTCD - The Nanothermite Institute of Molten Metal and Thermal Conductivity Deniers), I don't have much confidence in this model! Since the parameters of their models have never been released to the public, despite numerous FOIA requests, there's really no way of knowing whether or not this model is realistic.

NIST clearly knew admitting freefall would be a problem. In fact, in their list of changes that accompanied their final report, they never actually mentioned their revised analysis! So it's obvious they didn't want to draw attention to it.

Is freefall important? Yes. Is it our strongest evidence WTC7 was demolished? No. Freefall tells us something strange is going on, but the proof comes from the forensics. The strongest evidence in my opinion is the extreme corrosion of the steel, documented by FEMA. Which by the way, NIMMTCD completely ignored... So maybe there should be an extra C in that acronym.