NIST Ongoing Investigation into WTC 7 (March 2007 Update)
Posted by jeremiasx on March 1, 2007
WHY isn’t NIST ANY FURTHER ALONG in investigating the collapse of WTC 7 than they were in 2005? WHY do they not have access to the original blueprints…especially concerning what, if any, type of fire-proofing material was used in the construction phase of the building? From the following report, it is EASY to see that they are lacking CRITICAL information in doing any kind of an authoritative, empirical investigation into the collapse of the Salomon Brothers building. I contend that NIST and the US Government are moving in the investigative process in direct proportion to the amount of pressure being exerted from those of us that many like to accuse of sitting around wearing “tin-foil hats.” Why are WE having to drive this bus?
What are the main objectives of the investigation?
The primary objectives of the NIST-led technical investigation of the World Trade Center disaster are to determine:
- why and how the World Trade Center buildings 1, 2, and 7 collapsed after the initial impact of the aircraft (AUTHORS NOTE – WOW, I didn’t know that 7 was hit by a PLANE)
- why the injuries and fatalities were so low or high depending on location (by studying all technical aspects of fire protection, evacuation,
and occupant behavior and emergency response);
- the procedures and practices that were used in the design, construction, operation, and maintenance of the World Trade Center Buildings; and
- which building and fire codes, standards, and practices warrant revision and are still in use.
How long is the investigation expected to take?
NIST’s investigation of the technical conditions that contributed to the outcome of the World Trade Center disaster on Sept. 11, 2001, started in August 2002 and will culminate with the release of a draft final report in December 2004. (AUTHORS NOTE – LOOKS LIKE WE GOT A LATE START AND WE’RE STILL NOT DONE ACCORDING TO YOUR RELEASE BELOW)
They say in this report that they are going to evaluate the possibility of the use of thermite, as has been suggested by the 9/11 Scholars for Truth…but they have already summarized in their report that it has been ruled out? What evidence did they have available to work from? What samples of building debris did they look at, if any? Was this an assertion based merely on theoretical hypothesis or did they BOTHER to get over to the scrap pile over at JFK, pick up some columns and do the necessary spectral analysis to determine if any latent residue from any type of blast might have still been present?
The specific tasks that ARA will perform with SGH (task 1) and LGI (task 2) include:
- Identify and analyze hypothetical blast scenarios in three phases, with the results from each phase being used to decide if the analyses in the next phase is required:
- Identify hypothetical blast scenarios, using analysis and/or experience, to determine conditions that would fail specified column sections by direct attachment of explosive materials.
- Analyze the overpressure produced by the blast load and determine if the overpressure would have failed windows in WTC 7.
- Determine if the overpressure would result in sound levels transmitted through intact WTC 7 windows that could be heard outside the building.
MY CRITIQUE OF THIS CONTRACT
(1A) OK…so they are going to use HYPOTHETICALS…will they get to look at actual debris to test for residue? This is still UNCLEAR.
(1B) I have seen specials on controlled demolitions and USUALLY people put up blast barriers to avoid this kind of stuff…not hard to believe it could have been incorporated by someone smart enough to crack a peanut.
(1C) Sound baffling devices (incorporated into the blast barriers) could easily mute the sounds of explosions…the military (perhaps EOD or Special Forces saboteurs) should be consulted on these potential applications.
What is with the cover-up and secrecy involved with this investigation? Why does Popular Mechanics have to do a story on the WTC 7 collapse trying to debunk the theories presented in Loose Change, a documentary produced by a KID to prompt our government to DO THEIR JOB? Why was Popular Mechanics given primary evidence for a magazine article while NIST was left to languish in their own investigation based on a smaller body of evidence…they got the photos on WTC 7 AFTER Popular Mechanics had them…and the public STILL hasn’t seen these “alleged photos”? I just DON’T UNDERSTAND IT. The U.S. Government is FAILING us in bringing to light any of the critical explanations needed to set our minds at ease about the collapse of these buildings. Why does the government leave it to the concerned citizens of this country to investigate the collapse of ANY building, let alone those taken down by a “terrorist attack?” I would go look at building 1 and 2 but building 7 seems to be the most obvious source of inconsistency and was NOT hit by a plane and did not have ANY more damage than the multitude of building which were still standing after the end of that day.
How did both CNN AND THE BBC know to report the imminent collapse of WTC 7, as opposed to the looming possibility of the collapse of Buildings 3, 4, 5, or even 6, which suffered EXTRAORDINARY amounts of damage from falling debris, as you’ll see in the picture which follows here?
I believe you’ll understand the importance of this building as it relates to the entire picture of what was happening on that day if you consider what offices were in the Salomon Brothers Building…the CIA, FBI, IRS, and FEC all had New York field offices in the building…any relevant documents and/or evidence in that building was UTTERLY DESTROYED on 9/11. Interestingly enough…the COMMAND POST of the New York Office of Emergency Response, which briefly served as Rudolph Giuliani’s perch on 9/11…was also destroyed.
Folks…I’m not claiming to know WHO done it…I’m not claiming to know HOW or WHY they done it…but they done it, OK? This is GLARINGLY obvious if you look at the evidence and the utter LACK of real investigation by NIST into the collapse of WTC 7…
For further reading I suggest the following: