have sustained any "severe damage & raging fires" at all? Was it made of paper-maché and not steel & concrete?

Able Danger
Saeed Sheikh
Sibel Edmonds
Alhazmi and Almihdhar

Also they write:
"The second airplane struck the South Tower between the 78th and 84th floors, but sliced in at an angle, severely damaging the entire northeast corner of the building."
Northeast? No, southeast.

"Compared with the North Tower, the South Tower sustained damage that was both less evenly distributed and significantly lower on the building’s frame, requiring the weakened point to support more upper building weight than the corresponding crash site on the North Tower."
The columns in the towers were tapered and the columns at the south tower impact zone were proportionately thicker than the columns at the north tower impact zone, because they had to support more weight anyway. The idea that the columns are not tapered and the south tower collapsed first because it was hit lower down is pure bunk put about by people who haven't even read the FEMA summary, let alone the whole NIST report.

and
"Best engineering estimates tell us that steel loses 50% of its strength at 650° F"
Not according to NIST they don't. The graph on page 30 of NIST's final report says steel loses half its strength at about 600 degrees centigrade, not fahrenheit.

and
"244 exterior columns"
Actually, 236.

and
"The impact and explosion of the airplane crashes probably knocked off most of the insulating material intended to fireproof the steel beams,"
There is no proof or evidence of this. NIST's assumption is that the plane transformed itself into buckshot, but I am unaware of any previous crash in which an airliner transformed itself into buckshot. Therefore, I think it is unlikely.

I just picked a section and went through a couple of paragraphs, you could probably do this for any section.