See other 9/11 Articles
Title: NIST To Probe Whether WTC 7 Downed By Bombs
Source:
Prison Planet
URL Source: http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/august2006/310806wtc7.htm
Published: Aug 31, 2006
Author: Paul Watson
Post Date: 2006-08-31 00:16:28 by Eoghan
Keywords: None
Views: 158
Comments: 14
Forced to issue response to 9/11 truth movement questions on official website The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) is set to conclude its investigation of the World Trade Center complex by analyzing if bombs brought down WTC 7, the 47 story skyscraper that was not hit by a plane yet collapsed in a controlled demolition style in under seven seconds. NIST today released a page on its website that is intended to answer skeptic's questions about why the towers and WTC 7 were the first and only three buildings to collapse from fire damage alone. Though the vast majority of the NIST rebuttal seeks to reinforce the notion that the twin towers were brought down from nothing other than jetliner impacts and heavy fires, NIST makes the admission that investigation into WTC 7 has been insufficient and that they are now, "considering whether hypothetical blast events could have played a role in initiating the collapse." The report continues by saying that, "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." While it would be a brave prediction to foresee NIST's investigation contradicting the official explanation for 7's collapse, this at least shows the growing power of the 9/11 truth movement in eliciting answers to longstanding questions. In Popular Mechanics' infamous 9/11 hit piece, they quote a FEMA building performance study as saying there were no firefighting actions undertaken in Building 7 and yet WTC complex owner Larry Silverstein's explanation of his "pull it" quote was clarified to mean removing firefighters from the building. The two statements contradict each other so they both cannot be true. NIST's discussion of the twin towers' collapse largely repeats its initial assertions that faulty fire proofing and weakened steel caused a sagging effect on the floors, causing them to pull their support columns inward. NIST seeks to distance itself however from the 'pancake theory' that was espoused in the months after the attack and has since been discredited. Will NIST seek to conduct an empirical investigation of WTC 7 or are they simply going through the motions to placate an increasingly vocal chorus raising doubts about what really happened on September 11, 2001?
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Kamala, Arator (#0)
what's your bet?
"Freedom4um" -- The Forum for Real Americans and where America and Americans are always First!
"If there’s another 9/11 or a major war in the Middle-East involving a U.S. attack on Iran, I have no doubt that there will be, the day after or within days an equivalent of a Reichstag fire decree that will involve massive detentions in this country." - Daniel Ellsberg Author, Pentagon Papers FWIW, NIST has its own page dedicated to the WTC controversy, at http://wtc.nist.gov. Of especial interest is this quote from the FAQ page: 14. Why is the NIST investigation of the collapse of WTC 7 (the 47-story office building that collapsed on Sept. 11, 2001, hours after the towers) taking so long to complete? Is a controlled demolition hypothesis being considered to explain the collapse? When NIST initiated the WTC investigation, it made a decision not to hire new staff to support the investigation. After the June 2004 progress report on the WTC investigation was issued, the NIST investigation team stopped working on WTC 7 and was assigned full-time through the fall of 2005 to complete the investigation of the WTC towers. With the release and dissemination of the report on the WTC towers in October 2005, the investigation of the WTC 7 collapse resumed. Considerable progress has been made since that time, including the review of nearly 80 boxes of new documents related to WTC 7, the development of detailed technical approaches for modeling and analyzing various collapse hypotheses, and the selection of a contractor to assist NIST staff in carrying out the analyses. It is anticipated that a draft report will be released by early 2007.
Well, seeing how all the evidence has been destroyed already, I guess it will be just another farce, follwed by a "we told you so..."
Do I hear a fat lady singing?
From the FAQ page I referenced, [In addition to a ditsy debris-causes-critical-column-failure-causing-vertical-failure-causing-horizontal-failure-all-leading-to-global-collapse theory], 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. Is the door cracking open a bit? We'll see....
I saw this yesterday on PP. No way is NIST going to allow that WTC 7 was pre rigged to implode. By using a hire out company, they separate them selves from the conclusion. 2007 gives them plenty of time to model up using computers. Initiating the collapse is a term NIST came up with where all NIST worries about is getting to the how point of collapse but not why. Hypothetical blast scenarios or event is a new term that, in my speculation they are going to use as the excuse. When the 2007 "report" comes out it will claim that the fires caused the diesel tanks to explode, and the blast initiated the failure. Mark
If America is destroyed, it may be by Americans who salute the flag, sing the national anthem, march in patriotic parades, cheer Fourth of July speakers - normally good Americans who fail to comprehend what is required to keep our country strong and free - Americans who have been lulled into a false security (April 1968).---Ezra Taft Benson, US Secretary of Agriculture 1953-1961 under Eisenhower
I happened to catch yesterday a program about The Great Chicago Fire. It had a live scale model of the wooden barn, and it was set a blaze for the program. This wooden barn burned like a blow torch and it took over 30 min. When it finaly burned itself out, the outer framing was still standing. This program just shows how the fires in the 3 WTC buildings could not melt or weaken steel to cause a global collapse. Mark
If America is destroyed, it may be by Americans who salute the flag, sing the national anthem, march in patriotic parades, cheer Fourth of July speakers - normally good Americans who fail to comprehend what is required to keep our country strong and free - Americans who have been lulled into a false security (April 1968).---Ezra Taft Benson, US Secretary of Agriculture 1953-1961 under Eisenhower
Everyone should know, that for the record, what brought down WTC7, was Swamp Gas. That is all.
Will NIST seek to conduct an empirical investigation of WTC 7 or are they simply going through the motions to placate an increasingly vocal chorus raising doubts about what really happened on September 11, 2001?
#2. To: Eoghan, *9-11* (#0)
they are now, "considering whether hypothetical blast events could have played a role in initiating the collapse."
#3. To: Eoghan, christine, Kamala, Arator (#0)
#4. To: christine (#1)
what's your bet?
#5. To: robin (#2)
they are now, "considering whether hypothetical blast events could have played a role in initiating the collapse."
#6. To: christine, *Alex Jones*, *9-11* (#1)
(Edited)
...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...
#7. To: Critter (#4)
(Edited)
#8. To: Eoghan (#0)
 | What's that Mr. Nipples? You want me to ask the nice lady about her rack?. |
#9. To: Eoghan (#0)
I'm just reading David Ray Griffin's new book Christian Faith and the Truth Behind 9/11: A Call to Reflection and Action. Just finished Chapter 2, which has lots of evidence supporting the conclusion that planted bombs at least helped to bring the WTC towers down. Here's how one of the Amazon reviewers summarized the chapter: In Chapter 2, Griffin quotes from and summarizes the extensive testimony by firefighters and other first responders at the WTC on September 11 which proves beyond any doubt that multiple bomb explosions occurred throughout both towers both before and after the buildings were struck by flying objects. Some of this testimony he has culled from news reports, but the majority of the accounts comes from newly released oral histories collected by the FDNY but suppressed until last summer by the City of New York.
Griffin is very critical in that chapter of NIST for its failure to follow up on the testimony of witnesses about sounds of explosions.
#10. To: aristeides, Arator (#9)
Arator is reading it too!
"Freedom4um" -- The Forum for Real Americans and where America and Americans are always First!
#11. To: Kamala (#6)
OMG...how anyone could watch 7 come down as it did, the same with 1&2, and still believe anything of this nonsense (putting it nicely) is beyond my comprehension. "the bigger the lie..." i suppose.
When the 2007 "report" comes out it will claim that the fires caused the diesel tanks to explode, and the blast initiated the failure.
"Freedom4um" -- The Forum for Real Americans and where America and Americans are always First!
#12. To: christine (#10)
Griffin's two earlier 9/11 books were impressive and persuasive, but he's got a lot of new evidence in his new book.
#13. To: Eoghan (#0)
They are basically already admitting that their first investigation of WTC7 sucked (i.e., even many sheeple didn't buy it). So they are coming up with another version that will suck less, but will still not acknowledge the fact all non-sheeple's know, it was a controlled demolition. This may, or may not, satisfy the few sheep that still have some slight ability to think on their own, which is of course is the only the people they are remotely interested in satisfying. Non-sheeple already know the truth and will not be swayed by whatever they report and they are fully aware of this. This reinvestigation of WTC7 is only to stop a growing number of sheeple that have doubts about WTC7 from completely waking up. Will it work? Knowing sheeple, probably.
Will NIST seek to conduct an empirical investigation of WTC 7 or are they simply going through the motions to placate an increasingly vocal chorus raising doubts about what really happened on September 11, 2001?
God is always good!
"It was an interesting day." - President Bush, recalling 9/11 [White House, 1/5/02]
#14. To: Eoghan (#0)
No doubt, the conclusion has been pre-written.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest