Jesse Ventura investigates the 9/11 conspiracy

The National Institute for Standards and Technology has been forced to admit that the total free-fall collapse of the twin towers cannot be explained after an exhaustive scientific study, implicitly acknowledging that controlled demolition is the only means by which the buildings could have come down.

In August 2006, NIST promised to scientifically evaluate whether explosive devices could have contributed to the 47-story building's collapse but no answers have been forthcoming.

NIST NCSTAR 1-5: Reconstruction of the Fires in the World Trade Center Towers

The collapses of the World Trade Center towers on September 11, 2001, resulted from a combination of aircraft impact damage and the ensuing fires. This report documents:

The information obtained on the factors that affected the nature, duration, and location of the fires and how this was obtained;
The development and validation of the fire model used to simulate the fires;
Descriptions of the most likely fires, as they were reconstructed; and
The modeling and validation of the heat transfer from the fires to the buildings’ structural
members.

NIST Status Update on World Trade Center 7 Investigation (June 2007)

NIST's investigation of WTC 7 includes an extremely complex analysis that incorporates detailed information about the building's structure and construction, as well as data about fires, damage sustained from falling WTC 1 debris and other technical factors to determine its probable collapse sequence.

The NIST investigation team initially worked simultaneously on both the WTC towers and WTC 7 collapses. In June 2004, the team shifted to full-time study of the towers to develop needed simulation methods and other research tools and to expedite completion of the WTC towers report. Work resumed on the WTC 7 study in October 2005.

The current NIST working collapse hypothesis for WTC 7 is described in the June 2004 Progress Report on the Federal Building and Fire Safety Investigation of the World Trade Center Disaster (Volume 1, page 17, as well as Appendix L), as follows:

An initial local failure occurred at the lower floors (below floor 13) of the building due to fire and/or debris induced structural damage of a critical column (the initiating event) which supported a large span floor bay with an area of about 2,000 square feet;

Vertical progression of the initial local failure occurred up to the east penthouse, as the large floor bays were unable to redistribute the loads, bringing down the interior structure below the east penthouse; and

Horizontal progression of the failure across the lower floors (in the region of floors 5 and 7, that were much thicker than the rest of the floors), triggered by damage due to the vertical failure, resulting in a disproportionate collapse of the entire structure.

This hypothesis may be supported or modified, or new hypotheses may be developed, through the course of the continuing investigation. NIST also is considering whether hypothetical blast events could have played a role in initiating the collapse. While NIST has found no evidence of a blast or controlled demolition event, NIST would like to determine the magnitude of hypothetical blast scenarios that could have led to the structural failure of one or more critical elements.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9/11_Commission#Criticism

Criticism

Main article: Criticism of the 9/11 Commission
The commission was criticized for significant alleged conflicts of interest on the part of commissioners and staff.[11] Further, the commission's report has been the subject of much criticism by both the commissioners themselves and by others.[12][13]

The commission members were appointed by George W. Bush as well as Congress, which led to the criticism that it was not a commission truly independent from the U.S. government whose actions it was supposed to review. The commission stated in its report that "[their] aim has not been to assign individual blame," a judgment which some critics believed would obscure the facts of the matter in a nod to consensus politics.

In addition, commissioners believed that key agencies of the U.S. government, including The Pentagon, the FAA and NORAD were deliberately deceiving them,[13] and that the CIA was deliberately impeding the work of the commission.[14] On the whole, the chairmen of the commission believed the commission was set up to fail.[12].