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: 506
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
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 12.
#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:
Arator is reading it too!
Griffin's two earlier 9/11 books were impressive and persuasive, but he's got a lot of new evidence in his new book.
There are no replies to Comment # 12. End Trace Mode for Comment # 12.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestIn 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)
#12. To: christine (#10)
Replies to Comment # 12.