Final WTC7 Report Released

[MacCruiskeen]

Jack Riddler's unanswerable question was apparently posed to Sunder, who couldn't answer it:

The answer of course, is that there was considerably more damage to the building than mere fires, as has been shown here time and time again.

Of course that isn't the answer. Those photos prove nothing, and not even NIST presents them as an explanation of the collapse. The explanation, of course (or apparently, at least according to NIST, which should be renamed "MIST"), is "a new phenomenon", i.e. fire damage, which was barely visible in WTC7 at any time.

[Nordic]

The trouble with NIST is that they work backwards.

That's what they are paid to do, it's their job objective.

Here is what they are told basically:

"Well, those buildings collapsed. We know they collapsed due to jetliners striking the planes. WTC7 collapsed, obviously, without a plane hitting it, so your job is to explain how this building could have POSSIBLY collapsed without a plane hitting it. You will not get to use actual scientific method, instead your job is to INVENT reasons that may or may not be true, as to how this thing could have happened. Good luck."

To engineers (and I come from an entire frikkin' FAMILY of them) eat this shit up. It's just another tough question for them on an exam. It's pure hypothetical fun for them, a brain exercise.

These guys aren't investigators, they are the OPPOSITE of investigators.

It's like a man hires a neurologist to explain to his wife why he cheated on her. Piece of cake. Will the wife buy it? Hell no, unless she's a dumbass.

[8bitagent]

I support an effort to lay this at Bandar's feet so much. I have said time and time again that someone needs to look into Riggs Bank, goddamnit. But no one fucking listens. The short form is: no one cares. They want to live out some political thriller with a spectacular event, while no one else will even admit what's happened. I'm trying not to despair over this, because frankly I'm more worried about Cold War 2.0. Something of the humanist in me revolts at the idea of history being buried, but then again, there are cities submerged on continental shelves of which we'll never learn aboout.

It's like Martin Luther King, Jr. An Atlanta civil jury found that there was a conspiracy to kill him. Do you remember hearing about that?

Hey, I hear you loud and clear. Im shocked Fahrenheit 9/11 never mentioned all the evidence of direct Saudi involvement at all.

I mean folks, the Saudi intelligence(their CIA) was caught directing the hijackers through fast tracked Jeddah Visa consulates to an FBI informant and Saudi intel officer in San Diego, where Bandar's wife and other officials sent them money. This is prima facie evidence alone. Not to mention high level Saudi officials were seen at the hijacker homes in San Diego, Vienna Virginia, Falls Church Virginia, and hanging with the hijackers at a hotel the night before 9/11.

You said "people want a political thriller", well the TRUE story of 9/11 is a thousand times more frightening and intense than the fake "remote drone planes, bombs and missiles with Cheney directing it all" story.

People should google al Kifah center, Ptech, Ali Mohamed, World Trade Center FBI informan, ect and tell me thats not the stuff of the ultimate political thriller

And yes, I remember on CNN the William Pepper led verdict. MLK, like JFK and RFK to me are clear examples of deep state hits.

[8bitagent]

There could be videos of WTC7 with hardly a column to stand on, looking like its about to crumble, and people will still claim there was "little or no damage and only a few scattered fires".

So if I'm getting the "truther" story right...

9/11 was conceived by Bush and Cheney when they took office in Jan 2001, going by the PNAC documents and Northwoods.

They then launched 9/11 from an emergency bunker, with planes that had no passengers...oh and a missle disguised as a plane to hit the pentagon.
Then they had Guiliani and Silverstein blow up WTC 1 and 2 from the WTC7 23rd floor, and then blew up WTC7 itself to cover up the whole op.
All made possible because Marvin Bush once sat on a company in 1998 that had some connected dealings with WTC Security.

Oh and not one Arab or person of Middle Eastern or Muslim background was involved...all just the US gub'ment, CIA and Pentagon boys...oh, and maybe the Israelis...posing as al Qaeda.

Did I miss anything?

[MacCruiskeen]

So if I'm getting the "truther" story right...

You're not getting anything right. There is no "'truther' [sic] story[sic]." Instead, various different people have examined the "Official Account[s]", and found in it innumerable implausibilities, anomalies, defects and plain lies, each of which demands to be addressed singly and on its own terms.

Did I miss anything?

Yes. You missed the topic of the thread. And you neglected to tell us why you insist on blathering on so smugly about those generic, dumb "truthers" [sic] of yours, while deflecting every single thread on this damn topic with your own impermeably vain, largely speculative and unimpeachably unverifiable Grand Theory Of Everything About 9/11.

[Hugh Manatee Wins]

So if I'm getting the "truther" story right...

You're not getting anything right. There is no "'truther' [sic] story[sic]." Instead, various different people have examined the "Official Account[s]", and found in it innumerable implausibilities, anomalies, defects and plain lies, each of which demands to be addressed singly and on its own terms.

Did I miss anything?

Yes. You missed the topic of the thread. And you neglected to tell us why you insist on blathering on so smugly about those generic, dumb "truthers" [sic] of yours, while deflecting every single thread on this damn topic with your own impermeably vain, largely speculative and unimpeachably unverifiable Grand Theory Of Everything About 9/11.

8bit's straw men should be incinerated. With thermite.

Only a few USG shills at NIST are peddling the cover-up while hundreds of non-shill architects and engineers are calling foul.

The NIST story, that every single support beam in WTC7 all failed at the same instant causing the whole building to come down in 6 seconds...IS IMPOSSIBLE.

Unless, that is, it was controlled demolition. PERIOD.
Pretty damn simple.

No explanation for all that molten metal except thermite. PERIOD.
Pretty damn simple.

Oh, darn. There went all the SEC's files on corporate corruption including Enron which was a CIA-protected front for Central Asian energy projects with torturing dictators.

[isachar]

I see my work here is done. NIST's two reports - one on the collapse of WTC's 1 and 2, and the latest on the collapse of WTC7 are utterly without merit.

They are nothing less than scientific/analytic fraud.

Nomo, and his head in the sand ilk (orz and jeff among them) are utterly vindicated however. We can now rest assured that the collapse of all three structure was a 'one-off' event defying all previous knowledge and experence as to the behavior of steel under high temperature conditions, and the laws of mechanics.

Note these are 'laws', not theories. Laws are immutable. Accordingly a one-off is impossible.

Documented eutectic reaction. Documented eutectic reaction. Documented eutectic reaction.

For those needing a translation of the above paragraph, it may be read as:

Structural steel transformed into Swiss cheese. Structural steel transformed into Swiss cheese. Structural steel transformed into Swiss cheese.

Not unlike the atrophied brains of the assorted deniers, booger-pickers, and apologists for the official hallucinatory conspiracy theory.

One-off my ass.

[orz]

Nomo, and his head in the sand ilk (orz and jeff among them) are utterly vindicated however.

No Im not. I haven't even read this report yet and even when I do it is very very unlikely that I will refer to it as proof of how WTC7 collapsed. I have never endorsed the previous NIST report either. So turns out you're an idiot.

[thegovernmentflu]

Sometimes I wonder if the WTC7 reports aren't subtly but deliberately drawing attention to the issue. Their explanations and procedure really do seem blatantly shoddy, almost to the point of parody.

It's like I said about Fox News in another thread awhile back: a certain segment of the population will believe absolutely everything that they say, no matter how blatantly hypocritical or irrational... which also means that Fox News could deliberately take extreme or illogical positions in order to target anti-establishment people like us who watch it out of morbid curiosity. I think it's designed to manipulate our emotions and change certain attitudes we have toward politics and our rulers in order to misdirect our energy. The fact that so many intelligent and politically aware people are compelled to regularly watch Fox News as a goof really does support my theory.

The same could be true of this entire Building 7 issue. Does it really matter what's in the report? The explanation will be good enough for most people no matter what it is, since the alternative would be for these people to mentally confront something that they find inconceivable. What if the explanations for Building 7 are deliberately shoddy, in an attempt to keep political dissidents focused on what basically amounts to a non-issue in the grand scheme of current world politics?

What if controlled demolition is TOTAL bullshit? I admit that I've always found CD theories to have extremely compelling and/or convincing aspects to them, but what if the entire thing is a diversion?

That would mean that 911 Truthers got deeply, DEEPLY played. Even if this turns out to be the case, I doubt that most 911 Truthers would admit to themselves that they allowed themselves to be manipulated to such a ridiculous degree.

[Eldritch]

The same could be true of this entire Building 7 issue. Does it really matter what's in the report? The explanation will be good enough for most people no matter what it is, since the alternative would be for these people to mentally confront something that they find inconceivable. What if the explanations for Building 7 are deliberately shoddy, in an attempt to keep political dissidents focused on what basically amounts to a non-issue in the grand scheme of current world politics?

That is a brilliant observation, in my opinion.

[Jeff]

Sometimes I wonder if the WTC7 reports aren't subtly but deliberately drawing attention to the issue.

Likewise. And the same re the Pentagon and Rumsfeld's early "misspeak" of missile, and the farcical foot-dragging on the release of crappy security cam images.

[barracuda]

The same could be true of this entire Building 7 issue. Does it really matter what's in the report? The explanation will be good enough for most people no matter what it is, since the alternative would be for these people to mentally confront something that they find inconceivable. What if the explanations for Building 7 are deliberately shoddy, in an attempt to keep political dissidents focused on what basically amounts to a non-issue in the grand scheme of current world politics?

That is a brilliant observation, in my opinion.

Yes, that is an interesting way to look at it. But another interpretation of the report is that like Hugh's architects and engineers and every other group or individual who has analysed this event beyond the realm of outraged hyperbole, they simply do no know with any degree of certainty what happened.

[Eldritch]

The same could be true of this entire Building 7 issue. Does it really matter what's in the report? The explanation will be good enough for most people no matter what it is, since the alternative would be for these people to mentally confront something that they find inconceivable. What if the explanations for Building 7 are deliberately shoddy, in an attempt to keep political dissidents focused on what basically amounts to a non-issue in the grand scheme of current world politics?

That is a brilliant observation, in my opinion.

Yes, that is an interesting way to look at it. But another interpretation of the report is that like Hugh's architects and engineers and every other group or individual who has analysed this event beyond the realm of outraged hyperbole, they simply do no know with any degree of certainty what happened.

Which is why I think the important focus is on what we know and what we can prove.

That evidence, in and of itself, is damning to those who presume to rule us.

What keeps such evidence from being potent is, in part, the perceived "wackiness" of some of the other stuff.

[8bitagent]

I think it's designed to manipulate our emotions and change certain attitudes we have toward politics and our rulers in order to misdirect our energy. The fact that so many intelligent and politically aware people are compelled to regularly watch Fox News as a goof really does support my theory.

Absolutely. Fox knows a large portion of people who watch them are against them, or watching it for the bizarre comedy entertainment. Hence why they openly say stuff like "Obama should be shot, haha!", or "Anti war people are a cancer". They *know* who a lot of their audience is, and tailors some of their reporting/specials/on air talent to play reverse psyop memes directed at the liberal audience and overall audience watching.

What if controlled demolition is TOTAL bullshit? I admit that I've always found CD theories to have extremely compelling and/or convincing aspects to them, but what if the entire thing is a diversion?

That would mean that 911 Truthers got deeply, DEEPLY played. Even if this turns out to be the case, I doubt that most 911 Truthers would admit to themselves that they allowed themselves to be manipulated to such a ridiculous degree.

The truthers have been getting played and led to the wrong areas
since the beginning.

The first thing that happened was the elites pushed the "Jews did it trap", in fact the first artificial theories pumped out were Jewish in nature.

Then we had Rumsfeld say how a missile hit the Pentagon and brought down Flight 93, in Freudian "slip-ups". There's a reason they don't release the Pentagon footage, and it may be to keep people focused on the Pentagon.

You know how many times I've been called a shill, and idiot, ect by "truthers" for focusing on the activity and origins of the hijackers, the money behind 9/11, Pakistani ISI, Saudi Arabia, FBI informants, FBI obsctruction, flight schools, drug money, and the otherwise "Deep State" from BCCI to Bosnia? You know, stuff that's proven and backed up and usable in a court of law?

Thats why I LOVVVVE the South Park episode making fun of "new Truth" and the grotesquely woven "theory" of neocon orchestration and fake planes/missiles/bombs/ect.

Let's say the buildings did not fall from "Controlled Demolition", there would be absolutely no way on this planet to ever...ever convince many truthers otherwise...just like ALL the ISI/Saudi/deep state/FBI obsctruction
evidence will never convince most people who think 9/11 is as simple as
"blowback/incompetence" and the work of a bearded man in a cave.
(Hell even some NWO aware/fringe politic people believe 9/11 was a case of blowback, lol)

[8bitagent]

Sometimes I wonder if the WTC7 reports aren't subtly but deliberately drawing attention to the issue.

Likewise. And the same re the Pentagon and Rumsfeld's early "misspeak" of missile, and the farcical foot-dragging on the release of crappy security cam images.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honeypots_ ... ge_fiction