Would a government allow a terrorist attack to happen?

You not fully considering all the evidence, and you are not giving the demolition and nanothermite theories a fair chance to be properly evaluated

The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) conducted a investigation into the collapse of the Twin Towers, and their report concluded that the collapse was caused by fire and structural steel weakening.

NIST determined for some reason that the eyewitness accounts of steel melting and the FEMA steel report were not relevant to the investigation and therefore did not explore them further.

In order to know the truth, a serious individual would reflect on what molten Iron discovery was not important enough for NIST to consider. For FEMA, the melting was a significant event that needed further research.

There are only a few suspects I can think of, who had the means to commit the crime. There's nothing wrong with that speculation when there is hard evidence that Twin Towers steel was melting.

Many YouTube videos show that Sky News broadcast feeds from CNN and Fox News on that day. It is very possible to hear it on Sky News. CNN, Fox News, and the BBC all reported an earlier collapse.

Announcing an early collapse doesn't mean much really, media doing it. Depending on who is giving the information, it is more important.

NIST's refusal to release its actual data means that there is no way for independent experts to verify their new "thermal expansion progressive collapse" phenomenon,. It is really hilarious when something brand new is invented at NIST headquarters to explain the collapse of the WTC seven and then they refuse to share the actual data about this new phenomenon with the world. It is truly a clown world in which science is disregarded, and many people are just going about their daily lives as if nothing has changed.

Bullshit, why would the BBC be involved in controlling the demolition of building seven? As I recall, I said the people involved in this conspiracy may have released information earlier to clear the surrounding area for the event.

There is no physical evidence or historical record to support NIST's assertion that steel's thermal expansion caused the collapse. Furthermore, all the other steel-framed buildings that have been involved in fires have not seen this phenomenon occur.

NIST's refusal to release the modeling data undermines the credibility of their findings and makes it difficult to verify their conclusions. Furthermore, the omission of key elements such as stiffener plates and 32 shear studs from the construction at column 79 renders their modeling data incomplete and prevents a thorough and accurate evaluation of the building's integrity due to fire. Official study about the collapse a joke. 

By the way they even laughably made mistakes about the fires before the collapse. The work is so sloppy. 

NIST claimed the fires on floor 12 are red hot between 4 and 5 o clock using this model. Remember column 79 is located between 12 and 13 floor.

https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/Legacy/NCSTAR/ncstar1a.pdf page 30.

A screenshot of the actual North Face of WTC seven at 4 o'clock shows a fire on floor 12 has long since been put out. Where are the 900 degree Celsius fires NIST imagined in this simulation model?

The photograph rotated pretty much shows that the fires were completely fabricated by NIST. They're not even a single fire; there are only broken windows on Floor 12. This building seven progression of fires at 3.55pm in the afternoon.

A falling girder at Column 79 did not cause the building to collapse. 

To prove the debunkers wrong and to demonstrate that the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) is incorrect, evidence of the fires is necessary.

Even though floor 12 does not have a single fire, you debunkers insist that people should believe the NIST version

You can go off on tangent all you want; the evidence is in the links and photographs posted 

The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) was the body responsible for investigating the collapse of the Twin Towers and Building Seven and the fact that NIST lied about the true nature of the collapses here is important to some people. You even have to look too far to see the lies. I showed you photographic evidence of what was happening inside Building Seven on 9/11 at 4 p.m. ( this photo was officially taken around that time)

According to their progression of fire model, the fires on the 12th floor are red hot and out of control at 4 pm, I provided a link to the NIST study so you can verify what I am saying.

The physical evidence in the photos cannot be disputed and shows that no fire was still happening on the 12th floor. In the east corner.

The photos show that the windows of the 12th floor were damaged, but there are no visible signs of heat or fire damage anymore. How can extinguished fire thermally expand steel, knock the girder down, and destroy column 79? Under the broken windows are white dots representing floor 12's east corner where the Penthouse fell.

Regarding the BBC. The fact that the building was controlled demolition makes an announcement early curious. My knowledge is limited on what exactly happened here and who gave the BBC the news.

Heard rumors from the scene that something was going to happen? People would be thinking on the day that the building would fall based on what occurred to the towers. I don't know why they announced it early, it's unimportant to the overall evidence anyway.