NIST's Final report On WTC 7

[VoteForRonPaul]

What do you think about the final report of the National Institute of Standards and Technology regarding the collapse of building 7 on Sept. 11, 2001

http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/releases/wtc082108.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_World_Trade_Center

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

What do you think about the final report of the National Institute of Standards and Technology regarding the collapse of building 7 on Sept. 11, 2001

http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/releases/wtc082108.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7_World_Trade_Center

Seven doctors and one nurse at Parkland Hospital looked at injuries in an operating room and then confirmed the same prognosis independently, without them assembling beforehand in a conference, to the media. These seven doctors were qualified scientists.

So, the doctors saw what they saw. That was the truth. Conspiracy. No need for an investigation.

That truth was intimately alluminated by ample amounts of light. There were no shadows in such a room: no dark periphery. The doctors' job discriptions as surgeons were to determine the extent of injury to the patient so they could implement the necessary measures to save the presidents life.

There will never be better evidence of U.S. government conspiracy than this. It is a self-evident truth. The problem is we don't try to express power in terms of what is true. Instead, we try to think like shifty lawyers.

The lawyers who investigate national events don't live by the scientific method alone. They also use legal investigation which allows them to also think in both legal and civil terms. Something can be 100% scientifically substantiated in the observable world as true; yet, such a conclusion can be 100% legally overturned because it is inadmissible. In such a world as this, OJ Simpson is innocent, Oswald is guilty and Peter Pan flies. Any script can be written. When one needs to lead the plot in one direction, one turns to the scientific method; when one needs to lead it in the other direction, one turns to legal investigation and the question of inadmissible evidence in terms of civil and legal cases.

So, the doctors saw what they saw. No need for an investigation. Their expertise superceded that of the two pathologists at the autopsy whose qualifications made them unqualified in comparison.

In terms of the 911 event, what is true?

[VoteForRonPaul]

Bump

[pacelli]

Looks like all those conspiracy theorist whackjobs who thought that the fuel tanks inside WTC 7 caused the building to implode were crazy after all. Instead, we're back to square one: fires from debris.

[entropy]

The US government is full of incompetency. The US government that so many people lambast as stupid, incompetent, ineffectual so on so forth actually staged 9/11.

WOW, I am still amazed this 9/11 truthers stupidity is still swirling the drain....someone please flush it away. IDIOTS believe the tripe of the 9/11 truthers.

[lucius]

The US government is full of incompetency. The US government that so many people lambast as stupid, incompetent, ineffectual so on so forth actually staged 9/11.

WOW, I am still amazed this 9/11 truthers stupidity is still swirling the drain....someone please flush it away. IDIOTS believe the tripe of the 9/11 truthers.


I have cable and I love it. Great stations like history channel, science channel, discovery channel, military channel. Also HBO produces the absolutely best series.....Rome, Sopranos to name 2. If you have never seen Rome and you are a history buff like myself I highly recommend it.

I laugh at the thinly veiled attempts the commercials make to influence my opinions or decisions. It really is laughable how simplistic their provocations are....the worst part is most people are stupid enough to be influenced by them.

:D

[krazy kaju]

Case solved:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_kSq663m0G8

[VoteForRonPaul]

Case solved:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_kSq663m0G8

Quote from the NIST report:

“while debris impact from the collapse of WTC 1 initiated fires in WTC 7, the resulting structural damage had little effect in causing the collapse of WTC 7.”

“Would WTC 7 have collapsed even if there had been no structural damage induced by the collapse of the WTC towers?
Yes. Even without the structural damage, WTC 7 would have collapsed from the fires that the debris initiated. ”

[Paulitician]

"extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence"

It's highly unconvicing. If true, the cause was rather lame. And if true, this should be pretty huge news no? First skyscraper to collapse because of fire. Rather amazing. I really don't hold a strong opinion on 9/11, and probably wont until there is conclusive proof one way or another. The smoking gun for 9/11 truth (well, at least WTC7): confessions are made, plans are found etc. Proof for this most recent hypothesis: it being reproduced.

[VoteForRonPaul]

Collapse of Building 7- N.I.S.T. Technical Briefing - Tuesday, August 26th 11am EDT - Broadcast Live on No Lies Radio.

http://noliesradio.org/

[acptulsa]

Quote from the NIST report:

“while debris impact from the collapse of WTC 1 initiated fires in WTC 7, the resulting structural damage had little effect in causing the collapse of WTC 7.”

“Would WTC 7 have collapsed even if there had been no structural damage induced by the collapse of the WTC towers?
Yes. Even without the structural damage, WTC 7 would have collapsed from the fires that the debris initiated. ”

Gotta love that.

[VoteForRonPaul]

AN ALERT PLEASE TUNE IN :cool:


collapse of building 7- n.i.s.t. Technical briefing - tuesday, august 26th 11am edt - broadcast live on no lies radio.

http://noliesradio.org/