"Anger is a very appropriate and necessary response to an injustice. But stand back now; the truth, clearly spoken, is always your best weapon. Calmly spoken, it can burn a hole through the hardest heart." -Bill Chickering
Here are just a few of the witnesses and recordings that NIST says DO NOT exist.
You be the judge.
Here’s NIST’s Statement from their website “Did investigators consider the possibility that an explosion caused or contributed to the collapse of WTC 7?
Yes, this possibility was investigated carefully. NIST concluded that blast events inside the building did not occur and found no evidence supporting the existence of a blast event.
In addition, no blast sounds were heard on the audio tracks of video recordings during the collapse of WTC 7 or reported by witnesses. …”
On Feb. 19, 2010, Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth held a press conference at the Mariner’s Club & Hotel in San Francisco, CA, USA, announced the milestone of having achieved in excess of 1,000 signatures from architects and engineers from around the world, demanding a new, truly independent investigation of the facts regarding the events of Sept. 11, 2001, saying that the conclusions drawn by the 911 Commission reek of cover-up, are not at all supported by the facts.
The 80-minute press conference included presentations by
Richard Gage, AIA, founder of AE911Truth, who summarized how the facts support demolition being the cause of the World Trade Center buildings 1,2 and 7, not fire;
David Ray Griffin, author of “The Mysterious Collapse of WTC 7″, talking about the questionable science of NIST, concluding that they lied and are party to the cover-up;
Steven E. Jones, professor Emeritus from BYU, who talked about evidence found in the WTC dust that can only be explained by intentional demolition; and
Eric Lawyer, founder of Firefighters for 911 Truth, who pointed out the many ways in which long-established protocols for handling crime scenes involving fire and building collapse were egregiously violated, consistent with a cover-up.
As a sad commentary on the press corps, not one news agency in the world so far has done any coverage on the Feb. 19 event that was simultaneously broadcast at press conferences being hosted concurrently in cities throughout the US including San Francisco, Los Angeles, Las Vegas, Seattle, Portland, Chicago, Austin, Dallas, Madison, Dover, NH, Tulsa, Tucson, Boston, Alexandria, VA (DC), Tampa, Temple Terrace, FL, Denver, Newark; and internationally in Ontario, Vancouver, Brussels, Denmark, Sydney, and Wellington, NZ. Read more…
During an investigation, many things must be considered. Aside from the physical evidence, and witness testimony, suspect criminal history also must be analyzed. The investigation must include past history and the Modus Operandi, “M.O.” for short.
N.F.P.A. 921 19.4.8.2.6 – Extremism” addresses terrorism specifically. It reads: Extremism-motivated firesetting is committed to further a social, political, or religious cause. Fires have been used as a weapon of social protest since revolutions first began. Extremist firesetters may work in groups or as individuals. Also, due to planning aspects and the selection of their targets, extremist firesetters generally have a great degree of organization, as reflected in their use of more elaborate ignition or incendiary devices. Subcategories of extremist firesetting are identified as follows.
(a) Terrorism. The targets set by terrorists may appear to be at random; however, target locations are generally selected with some degree of political or economic significance. Political targets generally include government offices, newspapers, universities, political party headquarters, and military or law enforcement installations. Political terrorists may also target diverse properties such as animal research facilities or abortion clinics. Economic targets may include business offices, distribution facilities of utility providers, banks, or companies thought to have an adverse impact on the environments. Fires or explosions become a means of creation confusion fear, or anarchy. THE TERRORIST MAY INCLUDE FIRE AS BUT ONE OF A VARITETY OF WEAPONS, ALONG WITH EXPLOSIVES, USED IN FURTHERING HIS OR HER GOAL…
It very clearly states the Terrorist may use explosives along with fire to further their goal.
It would seem to be a “no-brainer” that a true investigation would test for the possibility that “the terrorist may (have) use(d) explosives along with fire to further their goal.”
There is no excuse for refusing to test for explosives.
WHY DOES NIST REFUSE TO TEST FOR EXPLOSIVES?
To this day NIST refuses to test for the possibility of explosives. “Considering” is NOT testing. Private parties have tested, and found evidence of explosives.
So, how does NIST explain their refusal to test for explosives? Here it is:
Questions and Answers about the NIST WTC 7 Investigation (Updated 04/21/2009) Did investigators consider the possibility that an explosion caused or contributed to the collapse of WTC 7?
Yes, this possibility was investigated carefully. NIST concluded that blast events inside the building did not occur and found no evidence supporting the existence of a blast event.
In addition, no blast sounds were heard on the audio tracks of video recordings during the collapse of WTC 7 or reported by witnesses. According to calculations by the investigation team, the smallest blast capable of failing the building’s critical column would have resulted in a sound level of 130 decibels (dB) to 140 dB at a distance of at least half a mile, if unobstructed by surrounding buildings. This sound level is consistent with a gunshot blast, standing next to a jet plane engine, and more than 10 times louder than being in front of the speakers at a rock concert.
For the building to have been prepared for intentional demolition, walls and/or column enclosures and fireproofing would have to be removed and replaced without being detected. Preparing a column includes steps such as cutting sections with torches, which produces noxious and odorous fumes. Intentional demolition usually requires applying explosive charges to most, if not all, interior columns, not just one or a limited set of columns in a building.”
NIST has made it very clear that two of the reasons they refuse to test for explosive residue are because 1) no blast sounds were heard, and 2) that they must be necessary for an explosion.
Ironically, the National Fire Protection Association’s guidebook disagrees with their logic on point 2. It is very clearly stated in Chapter 18 - Explosions, 18.1 - General: “…Although an explosion is almost always accompanied by the production of a loud noise, the noise itself is not an essential element in the definition of an explosion. The generation and violent escape of gases are the primary criteria of an explosion.”
And for their first statement that no blast sounds were recorded or heard by witnesses. We offer the following:
These are just a few of the over 100 witness accounts of explosions.
Now, let’s be clear. Explosion sounds can be explained away. But, only after a thorough investigation. When there is this much witness testimony, evidence, and explosive use by terrorists on this very same complex, there is no excuse for refusing to test for explosive residue.
Active Thermitic Material
Unexploded Energetic Materials Found in WTC Dust
In November of 2007, Steven E. Jones, having earlier shown the presence of aluminothermic residues in World Trade Center dust samples in the form of solidified iron-rich droplets, announced his discovery of particles of unreacted thermitic materials, in the form of bi-layered chips with gray and red layers. The chips, which are attracted by a magnet, have about the thickness of an eggshell but are much tougher. The red layers have elemental compositions similar to commercial thermite, and to the iron-rich droplets, according to Jones, with spikes for oxygen, iron, aluminum, potassium, and silicon. Jones describes experiments in which the chips burn vigorously when ignited by a torch. 1
One difference between the composition of the red layers and that of simple thermite preparations is the layers’ abundance of carbon and silicon. The significance of the carbon would become more clear as Jones and his collegues continued to study the samples and research the state of the art of high-tech aluminothermics in 2001. Carbon and silicon are often major constituents of energetic nano-composites or “super-thermites”, forming a matrix that holds the nano-sized iron oxide and aluminum particles in close proximity within a tough, stable material. Additionally, silicon oxides may participate in the thermite reaction as oxidizers of aluminum, and carbon compounds may increase the explosive power of such preparations by generating high gas pressures.
Detailed Analysis of the Chips Provided by 2009 Paper
In April of 2009, the paper Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe documented the detailed analysis of the red-gray chips that had been performed by the authors using analytical instruments such as scanning electron microscopy with X-ray energy-dispersive spectroscopy and differential scanning calorimetry. 2 The paper, summarized in the essay Explosives Found in World Trade Center Dust, includes detailed descriptions of the physical structure of the chips, the chemical compositions of their components, and the chips’ thermal behavior.
Portion of Fig. 4 from Active Thermititic Material Discovered. The corner of a red-gray chip, with the gray and red layers labeled.
The gray layers are a homogeneous material consisting mostly of iron and oxygen, whereas the red layers are a nano-structured composite material, in which thin plates of mostly elemental aluminum and faceted grains of mostly oxides of iron are embedded in a mesoporous material of mostly silicon and oxygen. The plates and grains, which are highly consistent in shape and size, are only 40nm thick and 100nm in diameter, respectively.
1. Demolition explosives leave evidence of their use, just like fingerprints at a crime scene. The “fingerprint”of Thermite (an incendiary explosive which cuts through steel) was conclusively identified in samples from the World Trade Center by Physics Professor Dr. Steven E. Jones. Additional samples from Ground Zero examined by Chemist Kevin Ryan and other scientists also conclusively identified conditions consistent with the use of demolition charges. Documentation of billions of microspheres containing molten metal from the chemical signature of Thermite can be found in the BPAT Report from FEMA; the Report of the United States Geological Survey; and the report of RJ Lee Group (the company hired by the WTC insurance company to conduct an independent private study). Those findings should have led to investigation procedures determined by the National Fire Protection Association:
NFPA very clearly states melted steel or concrete is a sign of exotic accelerants. Therefore, the
debris should have been thoroughly analyzed for exotic accelerants, specifically Thermite.
According to N.I.S.T. the 47 story WTC 7 suffered a complete collapse due to “thermal expansion” caused by isolated fires on 9 floors.
However, this 44 story Mandarin Oriental hotel burned out almost every floor on Feb 9, 2009 and still stands today. Why didn’t it collapse from “thermal expansion?” Why isn’t there molten steel and concrete like that found at the WTC?
strong>This work is dedicated to Chief of Department Peter J. Ganci Jr. and his
342 fellow F.D.N.Y. members killed in action while trying to save others.
Summary of Evidence of Controlled Demolition at the World Trade Center
(Expansive citations below)
The evidence summarized below proves conclusively that 3 World Trade Center buildings should have been tested for “exotic accelerants.” It also establishes the most probable cause of collapse on 9/11/2001 to be the result of controlled demolitions. It makes no attempt to determine why, or to imply by whom. From a scientific standpoint, it is inadvisable to leap to conclusions because there are always scenarios we may not be prepared to imagine. In science, as in life, an open mind is a good thing.
NFPA 9.3.6 covers Spoliation of Evidence. Specifically, 9.3.6.7 reads as follows: “Once evidence has been removed from the scene, it should be maintained and not be destroyed or altered until others who have a reasonable interest in the matter have been notified. Any destructive testing or destructive examination of the evidence that may be necessary should occur only after all reasonably known parties have been notified in advance and given the opportunity to participate in or observe the testing.”
It would seem painfully obvious the very engineers and investigators that are tasked to determine the cause of collapse would be “reasonably known parties” and would find it very helpful to “participate in or observe the testing” in order to aid in their investigation.
Since when do we destroy evidence before we identify the cause of collapse? We don’t solve crimes, or get safer buildings by destroying evidence, and then hypothesize the cause. There is nowhere in the NFPA guidelines, or any investigation guidelines that we have found that call for the destruction of evidence, and then the investigation.
We often hear people say it was about the money in the recycled steel. We haven’t been able to find one other example of a mass murder, and engineering catastrophe where the evidence was destroyed prior to determining cause, for the money. Don’t accept that excuse. Willful destruction of evidence before an investigation completion is only done to hinder the investigation or hide the truth!
Glenn Corbett, Professor of Fire Sciences, discusses the destruction of evidence.
________________________________________________________________________________________________
We believe TOWER 7 is the crux of the entire investigation. There was no official report as to how a 47 story concrete and steel high rise, that was not struck by an airplane, collapsed at near free-fall speed into it’s own footprint. That is until this week (8/21/08) - Almost 7 years later after unrelenting public pressure.
On Thursday, NIST released the following: “Our study found that the fires in WTC 7, which were uncontrolled but otherwise similar to fires experienced in other tall buildings, caused an extraordinary event,” said NIST WTC Lead Investigator Shyam Sunder. “Heating of floor beams and girders caused a critical support column to fail, initiating a fire-induced progressive collapse that brought the building down.”
“Video and photographic evidence combined with detailed computer simulations show that neither explosives nor fuel oil fires played a role in the collapse of WTC 7,” Sunder said.
“Did investigators consider the possibility that an explosion caused or contributed to the collapse of WTC 7?
Yes, this possibility was investigated carefully. NIST concluded that blast events inside the building did not occur and found no evidence supporting the existence of a blast event.
In addition, no blast sounds were heard on the audio tracks of video recordings during the collapse of WTC 7 or reported by witnesses. According to calculations by the investigation team, the smallest blast capable of failing the building’s critical column would have resulted in a sound level of 130 decibels (dB) to 140 dB at a distance of at least half a mile, if unobstructed by surrounding buildings. This sound level is consistent with a gunshot blast, standing next to a jet plane engine, and more than 10 times louder than being in front of the speakers at a rock concert.
For the building to have been prepared for intentional demolition, walls and/or column enclosures and fireproofing would have to be removed and replaced without being detected. Preparing a column includes steps such as cutting sections with torches, which produces noxious and odorous fumes. Intentional demolition usually requires applying explosive charges to most, if not all, interior columns, not just one or a limited set of columns in a building.”
Now, do we have this straight. They investigated it. Although, they self admit they didn’t chemically test for residue. So, they are going off witness testimony, video, photographic, and audio evidence, of which they found none that had blast sounds or indicators. They also used computer models. And, lastly, they admit they did no further investigation for possible explosive charges because….it would have been hard to plant them?!? Did we read that right? So, with that logic, we no longer have to investigate any crime that would havebeen hard for someone to commit from here on out? Is this what we are going to stand for?
Quick, somebody call NIST! We have another “extraordinary event”…we found some evidence! Dr. Steven Jones already did the chemical analysis for them, and tested it in multiple labs. And, we have found the audio evidence and witness testimony that can clear up any doubts as to whether any blast sounds were heard by anyone. Also, look at the video above and see if it looks at all similar to a controlled demolition. Unfortunately, we weren’t able to find any evidence, videos, pictures, or history of another high rise structural steel building collapsing due to fire.
So, you have to decide. Are you going to take a goverment agency’s report (one that has pathetically drug it’s feet, self-admittedly refused to test for residue, and ignored obvious “blast sound” evidence) as the final word? As NIST says, are you going to put all these “conspiracy theories to bed?” Or, are you going to take action and demand the real investigation our Brothers deserve!
If you’re still not convinced there’s more to it than we’re being told, then ask yourself: if Tower 7 did come down due to fire, why didn’t Tower 5? Tower 5 was much closer, had devastating structural damage from the Twin Tower collapses, and much more severe fires burning. But, it remained standing. So, did Tower 3,4, and 6. Look below. Do your own size-up. Our lives depend on the ability to guage when a building will collapse - test your skills.
Notice how we have a complete, multiple floor conflagration along with signifcant structural damage.
Tower 3 was closer to Twin Towers than WTC 7, and it had significantly more crush damage. But, building is still standing.
Tower 4 - Again, closer and more crush damage. Obvious significant core damage, but building is still standing.
Tower 6 - Again, closer than 7, and obvious massive core damage. But, building is still standing.
You decide, are you going to blindly believe what a government investigation team that refuses to test for explosives residue claims? Just because it would have been logistically difficult to place explosive charges, we don’t test for them? Look for yourself. Review the NFPA 921 guidelines-why did they so blatantly destroy evidence and refuse to test for exotic accelerants? Look at the video examples. You decide, does it appear to have every characteristic of a controlled demolition? How about when you compare it to all the other high-rise infernos we have examples of…all of which are still standing today! And, most importantly - don’t our fallen Brothers deserve the Truth?
