The delayed National Institute of Standards and Technology report on the collapse of the World Trade Center 7 following the 9/11 terrorist attack in 2001 will be released for public comment this July. A final version will be published a month later, in August 2008. NIST’s investigation of the WTC 7 collapse was supposed to have been completed by the end of 2006, but more complex, and time-consuming, computer simulations, along with a consideration of some additional evidence (mainly architectural and construction documents and plans), has stretched out the process, according to Michael E. Newman of NIST.

...

Some 9/11 conspiracy theorists maintain that WTC 7 was “pulled down” in a controlled demolition ordered by the government, an allegation that has been advanced by celebrity “9/11 Truthers” Charlie Sheen and Rosie O’Donnell. While there has been no credible evidence produced for these claims, they have been a staple of those arguing that 9/11 was part of a sinister government conspiracy.
...

http://www.bloggernews.net/112871

***

Comment:

#

Quote. While there has been no credible evidence produced for these claims. Endqoute

Three 9/11 Truth and Justice activists, David Slesinger, of 911courage.org, Richard Ochs, of FreeFromTerror.net, and an unnamed videographer, stood outside the National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST) building on October 11, 2007 holding a sign encouraging NIST employees to look at the ae911truth.org website.

Thank you, gentlemen, for the mention, and your activism. Keep up the great work!

The text of their sign (shown above) was:

Show Courage:
Respond to AE911Truth.org
Architects
& Engineers for
9/11 Truth

The following is a slightly edited video from the NCST Advisory Committee Meeting with the NIST staff working on the WTC7 investigation (18 Dec 2007). We added slides and speaker names to better understand the status of the investigation. The last part of the meeting includes three different public comments, including Richard Gage (Architects for 9/11 Truth http://www.ae911truth.org/) and James Gourley (representing the RST to NIST filed by Jones, Ryan, Gage and other scholars).

DivX stream link (DivX web player needed):
http://www.stage6.com/user/ISIS2001/video/1971510/NCST-Advisory-Committee-Meeting,-December-18,-2007

I saved the HTML source code from the online closed captioning of yesterday's NIST NCST Advisory Committee Meeting and applied it to constructing this blog. The captioner made quite a few transcription errors but the majority of the text is intelligible.

The NIST NCST Committee on WTC7 held a public meeting on the progress of the WTC7 report. One of the public commentators was Richard Gage AIA.
The call contains a number of stunning admissions by NIST regarding the WTC7 fires, as well as interesting questions from NIST committee members and powerful statements from three citizen commentators.

Full Call (113MB): http://nasathermalimages.com/images/NIST_NCST_Advisory_Committee_Meeting_12-18-01.mp3
Richard Gage's Comments (6MB): http://nasathermalimages.com/images/NIST_NCST_Advisory_Committee_Meeting_12-18-01_Richard_Gage_AIA.mp3

The complete call is exceptional and is well worth the time to listen to.

This is the official trailer for Between The Lines, a documentary I started over a year ago. It contains some new evidence and key research from my hero Steven E Jones (Thanks Professor!). I'd appreciate any comments about it, be it good or bad, as I'm deciding on whether or not I should finish the movie. Thanks Everyone, hope you like it.

17: What best describes your role in visiting this site today?
Engineer
Government Employee
Job Seeker
Media / Journalist
Medical Professional
Private Citizen
Program Manager
Researcher
Standards Professional
Student - Elementary / Middle School
Student - High School
Student - College
Teacher / Educator
Technician

Other (please specify) WTC7 = WTF

18: Which category best describes your organization?
Elementary / Middle School
High School
College / University
Federal - U.S. Congress / Committee Staff
Federal - Other
Foreign Government
Non-Profit / Non-governmental Organization
Private Citizen
Private Sector
State or Local Government

Other (please specify) Thermite? Kevin Ryan? 6 second collapse?

19: What industry or sector of the economy do you work in?
Aerospace
Automotive
Chemical Processing
Communications
Computers
Construction
Education
Electronics / Semiconductors
Energy Use and Conservation
Government
Health Care
Homeland Security
Manufacturing
Services
None

NIST has released a supplement to there FAQ's today:

National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Federal Building and Fire Safety Investigation of the World Trade Center Disaster

Answers to Frequently Asked Questions - Supplement (December 14, 2007)

Since the release of the Final Report on the Collapse of the World Trade Center Towers in October 2005, NIST has received many questions from interested readers curious about NIST’s findings and the technical basis for them. The complexity of the investigation and the length of the final report (including all of the supporting volumes) have made understanding of the investigation a challenge for many interested readers. In response, NIST has prepared simplified answers to the most frequently asked questions.

http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_12_2007.htm

I, together with two other individuals (a Doctor of Political Sciences and a Senior Engineer), yesterday submitted the following to a number of NIST personnel, including lead investigator S. Shyam Shunder, who in 2006 said to New York Magazine "But truthfully, I don't really know. We've had trouble getting a handle on Building No. 7". The contact information used can be found at the end.

The idea was mainly to remind them that there are people who will be looking at their report (if they come up with a report one day) with a critical eye.

* * * * * * * * * *
Dear NIST investigators,

we undersigned wish to pose a few questions and comments to NIST regarding the still ongoing WTC 7 investigation.

NIST has stated that "no steel was recovered from WTC 7". This is clearly not accurate. FEMA has noted, e.g., that a steel sample from WTC 7 had undergone thinning due to "high temperature corrosion due to a combination of oxidation and sulfidation". FEMA continues: "Evidence of … oxidation and sulfidation with subsequent intergranular melting, was readily visible in the near-surface microstructure." Please see

I asked David Ray Griffin for permission to post his email here -- because of it's insightful content. He agreed, asking that I post it with all the names of the authors of the Appeal written to NIST.

Dear James, Steven, Kevin, Richard, Frank, Bob, Bill, and Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice,

I have just read your Appeal to NIST. It is absolutely brilliant and very useful.

(I will be quoting bits of it in an updated edition of The New Pearl Harbor, which I’m working on now.)

Thanks very much for this great contribution to the cause.

David

The Appeal to NIST was penned mainly by James Gourley and he deserves recognition for his work in the 9/11 Truth movement. It is available here: http://journalof911studies.com/volume/2007/AppealLetterToNISTGourleyEtAl.pdf James and I have written a technical paper which we hope will be published soon. (I'm going to ask you to do a little prepatory homework; please work through the problems here: http://www.glenbrook.k12.il.us/gbssci/phys/Class/newtlaws/u2l4a.html . All four lessons are helpful.)

Source: http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_stephen__071125_science_behind_the_t.htm

November 25, 2007

Science Behind the Theory: An Inside Job

By Stephen Demetriou

Explosive and Revealing Quotations about 9/11 Completely Ignored by the Mainstream Media

By Arabesque

These explosive and revealing comments about 9/11 have been completely ignored by the Mainstream Media. While talking about the 9/11 commission, 9/11 family member Patty Casazza reveals that FBI translator and whistleblower Sibel Edmonds had incriminating insider information about the 9/11 attacks:

In April, the team of presented a Request for Correction to the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), a lab under the Department of Commerce. This request was published in the June issue of the Journal of 9/11 Studies. The authors were James Gourley, Bob McIlvaine, Bill Doyle, Steven Jones, Kevin Ryan, Richard Gage, Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice

In their reply dated September 27, 2007, NIST states: “we are unable to provide a full explanation of the total collapse.”
And they expect the requesters to be satisfied with this response?!?
Remember, NIST is making these statements to men who lost family members in the Towers destruction… Bob McIlvaine and Bill Doyle, as well as to serious researchers Jones, Ryan, Gourley, Gage and the Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice.

Further from the NIST response letter: “NIST has stated that it found no corroborating evidence to suggest that explosives were used to bring down the buildings.” The next sentence admits: “NIST did not conduct tests for explosive residue…”

Noticed a very revealing fact while watching Waco: Rules of Engagement on Google Video that was posted recently in a blog comment.
This is relevent to 9/11 Truth as it shows that James Quintiere has a history of covering up Government wrong doing.

---

For information about FLIR (Foward Looking InfraRed) see this portion of the video.
27:15-28:41 (Edward Alaurd and an explaination of FLIR)

---

Why this is significant?
Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center

http://georgewashington.blogspot.com/2007/10/family-members-and-scientists-file-nist.html

On April 11th, 2007, family members Bill Doyle and Bob McIlvaine, scientists Steven Jones and Kevin Ryan, architect Richard Gage and the group Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice filed a petition with NIST demanding that it correct its erroneous methods and findings.

On September 27th, NIST finally replied.

Messieurs McIlvaine, Jones, Ryan and Gage and the group Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice have now filed an appeal to NIST's reply.

A redacted version of the appeal can be read here.