9/11 Conspiracy Solved?: Names, Connections, Details Exposed...

[Mad Scientist]

Didn't any of you read the 9/11 Report? That's all you need to know.

 

[eots]

Still waiting to hear what else caused the bowing in of the buildings if the fires weren't causing the floor joists to bend........

what bowing...link

 

[eots]

What he said in 1993 was that according to their study, conducted the early 1960s, the World Trade Center was strong enough to withstand the impact of a Boeing 707, which it did. Unfortunately their ability to perform the necessary tests was, by today's standards, primitive.
His comment about the "horrendous fire" was subjective. You provide no info from that study but he stated that they were more concerned about the fire than the collision and in that regard they were correct but his belief that the structures would remain intact was incorrect. The combination of impact and fire brought the towers down, just as the NIST study explains. Pretending you have proof of a controlled demo is still just pretending.

Pretending the NIST study is logical, rational, correct and complete is still just pretending.

Perhaps, yet it is infinitely better than the pre-construction study from the early 1960s which, BTW, you have repeatedly referenced yet never posted.

infinitely better why ?

 

[SFC Ollie]

Still waiting to hear what else caused the bowing in of the buildings if the fires weren't causing the floor joists to bend........

what bowing...link

Please, you can't tell me after all this time you haven't heard about and seen the bowing for yourself. And if you haven't we have little to talk about because you are too far gone....

 

[eots]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ArjGOlhggOY]NIST FOIA: R14 -- CNN Dub18 01-15, Timer Added (Twin Towers Burning/Impact Zones/WTC2 Collapse) - YouTube[/ame]

 

[SFC Ollie]

Debunking 9/11 Conspiracy Theories and Controlled Demolition - Sagging Trusses and Bowed Columns

 

[SAYIT]

Pretending the NIST study is logical, rational, correct and complete is still just pretending.

Perhaps, yet it is infinitely better than the pre-construction study from the early 1960s which, BTW, you have repeatedly referenced yet never posted.

infinitely better why ?

Because the technology and thus our ability to conduct such studies has improved significantly. I thought that would be obvious.

 

[eots]

Debunking 9/11 Conspiracy Theories and Controlled Demolition - Sagging Trusses and Bowed Columns

not very convincing...

 

[eots]

Perhaps, yet it is infinitely better than the pre-construction study from the early 1960s which, BTW, you have repeatedly referenced yet never posted.

infinitely better why ?

Because the technology and thus our ability to conduct such studies has improved significantly. I thought that would be obvious.

only if properly applied that... should be obvious

Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation

James Quintiere, Ph.D., former Chief of the Fire Science Division of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), has called for an independent review of NIST’s investigation into the collapses of the World Trade Center Towers on 9/11.

Dr. Quintiere made his plea during his presentation, “Questions on the WTC Investigations” at the 2007 World Fire Safety Conference. “I wish that there would be a peer review of this,” he said, referring to the NIST investigation. “I think all the records that NIST has assembled should be archived. I would really like to see someone else take a look at what they’ve done; both structurally and from a fire point of view.”

“I think the official conclusion that NIST arrived at is questionable,” explained Dr. Quintiere. “Let's look at real alternatives that might have been the cause of the collapse of the World Trade Towers and how that relates to the official cause and what's the significance of one cause versus another.”

Dr. Quintiere, one of the world’s leading fire science researchers and safety engineers, also encouraged his audience of fellow researchers and engineers to scientifically re-examine the WTC collapses. “I hope to convince you to perhaps become 'Conspiracy Theorists', but in a proper way

OpEdNews - Article: Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation

 

[SFC Ollie]

Debunking 9/11 Conspiracy Theories and Controlled Demolition - Sagging Trusses and Bowed Columns

not very convincing...

Take off your sun glasses and put down the pipe for a week........

 

[SAYIT]

infinitely better why ?

Because the technology and thus our ability to conduct such studies has improved significantly. I thought that would be obvious.

only if properly applied that... should be obvious

Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation

James Quintiere, Ph.D., former Chief of the Fire Science Division of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), has called for an independent review of NIST’s investigation into the collapses of the World Trade Center Towers on 9/11.

Dr. Quintiere made his plea during his presentation, “Questions on the WTC Investigations” at the 2007 World Fire Safety Conference. “I wish that there would be a peer review of this,” he said, referring to the NIST investigation. “I think all the records that NIST has assembled should be archived. I would really like to see someone else take a look at what they’ve done; both structurally and from a fire point of view.”

“I think the official conclusion that NIST arrived at is questionable,” explained Dr. Quintiere. “Let's look at real alternatives that might have been the cause of the collapse of the World Trade Towers and how that relates to the official cause and what's the significance of one cause versus another.”

Dr. Quintiere, one of the world’s leading fire science researchers and safety engineers, also encouraged his audience of fellow researchers and engineers to scientifically re-examine the WTC collapses. “I hope to convince you to perhaps become 'Conspiracy Theorists', but in a proper way

OpEdNews - Article: Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation

Typically you post half the story and we both know why:

Although Dr. Quintiere [*who left NIST in 1989] was strongly critical of NIST’s conclusions and its investigatory process, he made it clear he was not a supporter of theories that the Twin Towers were brought down by pre-planted explosives.

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...9MEE0s3hXjS46WpdOniTt0w&bvm=bv.43148975,d.dmg

 

[Capstone]

In the spirit of the video in the original post, here's a nicely preserved copy of E.P. Heidner's 58 page essay, Collateral Damage: U.S. Covert Operations and the Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001 (complete with charts and references), which connects the dots between the financial/regulatory fallout of the destruction, the impact on several ongoing investigations at the time, and a number of those who benefited from the collective demise of a slew of investigators and much of the evidence that might have put away some of the biggest scumbags in the history of the planet ...as well as provided the catalyst for meaningful political reform at home and abroad.

Here's a brief synopsis of the paper.

 

[eots]

Because the technology and thus our ability to conduct such studies has improved significantly. I thought that would be obvious.

only if properly applied that... should be obvious

Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation

James Quintiere, Ph.D., former Chief of the Fire Science Division of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), has called for an independent review of NIST’s investigation into the collapses of the World Trade Center Towers on 9/11.

Dr. Quintiere made his plea during his presentation, “Questions on the WTC Investigations” at the 2007 World Fire Safety Conference. “I wish that there would be a peer review of this,” he said, referring to the NIST investigation. “I think all the records that NIST has assembled should be archived. I would really like to see someone else take a look at what they’ve done; both structurally and from a fire point of view.”

“I think the official conclusion that NIST arrived at is questionable,” explained Dr. Quintiere. “Let's look at real alternatives that might have been the cause of the collapse of the World Trade Towers and how that relates to the official cause and what's the significance of one cause versus another.”

Dr. Quintiere, one of the world’s leading fire science researchers and safety engineers, also encouraged his audience of fellow researchers and engineers to scientifically re-examine the WTC collapses. “I hope to convince you to perhaps become 'Conspiracy Theorists', but in a proper way

OpEdNews - Article: Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation

Typically you post half the story and we both know why:

Although Dr. Quintiere [*who left NIST in 1989] was strongly critical of NIST’s conclusions and its investigatory process, he made it clear he was not a supporter of theories that the Twin Towers were brought down by pre-planted explosives.

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...9MEE0s3hXjS46WpdOniTt0w&bvm=bv.43148975,d.dmg

he made it clear blah blah is an editorial comment just let the man speak for himself...
.

“If you go to World Trade Center One, nine minutes before its collapse, there was a line of smoke that puffed out. This is one of the basis of the ‘conspiracy theories’ that says the smoke puffing out all around the building is due to somebody setting off an explosive charge. Well, I think, more likely, it’s one of the floors falling down.”

OpEdNews - Article: Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation

 

[eots]

More likely

Synonyms: allegedly, as if, as though, at a glance, at first sight, evidently, externally, in all likelihood, intuitively, it appears that, it seems that,,Most likely on the face of it, ostensibly, outwardly, plausibly, possibly, probably, professedly, reasonably, reputably, seemingly, speciously, superficially, supposedly, tangibly, to all appearances

 

[SFC Ollie]

There was a report from some guy on the phone with 911, on the 105th floor that claimed several floors below him had caved in or fallen. I forget his name or where I saw it......

 

[Gamolon]

Because the technology and thus our ability to conduct such studies has improved significantly. I thought that would be obvious.

only if properly applied that... should be obvious

Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation

James Quintiere, Ph.D., former Chief of the Fire Science Division of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), has called for an independent review of NIST’s investigation into the collapses of the World Trade Center Towers on 9/11.

Dr. Quintiere made his plea during his presentation, “Questions on the WTC Investigations” at the 2007 World Fire Safety Conference. “I wish that there would be a peer review of this,” he said, referring to the NIST investigation. “I think all the records that NIST has assembled should be archived. I would really like to see someone else take a look at what they’ve done; both structurally and from a fire point of view.”

“I think the official conclusion that NIST arrived at is questionable,” explained Dr. Quintiere. “Let's look at real alternatives that might have been the cause of the collapse of the World Trade Towers and how that relates to the official cause and what's the significance of one cause versus another.”

Dr. Quintiere, one of the world’s leading fire science researchers and safety engineers, also encouraged his audience of fellow researchers and engineers to scientifically re-examine the WTC collapses. “I hope to convince you to perhaps become 'Conspiracy Theorists', but in a proper way

OpEdNews - Article: Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation

Typically you post half the story and we both know why:

Although Dr. Quintiere [*who left NIST in 1989] was strongly critical of NIST’s conclusions and its investigatory process, he made it clear he was not a supporter of theories that the Twin Towers were brought down by pre-planted explosives.

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...9MEE0s3hXjS46WpdOniTt0w&bvm=bv.43148975,d.dmg

Quoted from Mr. Quintiere:

Dr. Quintiere then presented his and his students’ research that contradicts the NIST report and points to a different cause for the collapses; the application of insufficient fire-proofing insulation on the truss rods in the Twin Towers. “I suggest that there’s an equally justifiable theory and that’s the trusses fail as they are heated by the fire with the insulation intact. These are two different conclusions and the accountability for each is dramatically different,” he said.

Fire, heat, and failed trusses.

OpEdNews - Article: Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation

 

[SAYIT]

only if properly applied that... should be obvious

Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation

James Quintiere, Ph.D., former Chief of the Fire Science Division of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), has called for an independent review of NIST’s investigation into the collapses of the World Trade Center Towers on 9/11.

Dr. Quintiere made his plea during his presentation, “Questions on the WTC Investigations” at the 2007 World Fire Safety Conference. “I wish that there would be a peer review of this,” he said, referring to the NIST investigation. “I think all the records that NIST has assembled should be archived. I would really like to see someone else take a look at what they’ve done; both structurally and from a fire point of view.”

“I think the official conclusion that NIST arrived at is questionable,” explained Dr. Quintiere. “Let's look at real alternatives that might have been the cause of the collapse of the World Trade Towers and how that relates to the official cause and what's the significance of one cause versus another.”

Dr. Quintiere, one of the world’s leading fire science researchers and safety engineers, also encouraged his audience of fellow researchers and engineers to scientifically re-examine the WTC collapses. “I hope to convince you to perhaps become 'Conspiracy Theorists', but in a proper way

OpEdNews - Article: Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation

Typically you post half the story and we both know why:

Although Dr. Quintiere [*who left NIST in 1989] was strongly critical of NIST’s conclusions and its investigatory process, he made it clear he was not a supporter of theories that the Twin Towers were brought down by pre-planted explosives.

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...9MEE0s3hXjS46WpdOniTt0w&bvm=bv.43148975,d.dmg

he made it clear blah blah is an editorial comment just let the man speak for himself...
.

“If you go to World Trade Center One, nine minutes before its collapse, there was a line of smoke that puffed out. This is one of the basis of the ‘conspiracy theories’ that says the smoke puffing out all around the building is due to somebody setting off an explosive charge. Well, I think, more likely, it’s one of the floors falling down.”

OpEdNews - Article: Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation

So you think that means there were explosives? BTW, Quintierre's prob with the NIST findings is his belief it relies on the impact as the destructor while he believes it was the fire and he was not a contributor to the study but rather an observer.

 

[PredFan]

Go to Youtube and search for building demolition. You will see how buildings look in the nanoseconds before they fall. You will see the explosions, the flames and the destruction. You will also notice that the buildings that are demolished purposefully, either collpse all at once or from the bottom up. NEVER in succession like the towers fell.

 

[paulitician]

Hey, it happened exactly the way Big Brother said. And if you believe otherwise, you're clearly a baby-hating, puppy-murdering, America-Hating Terrorist. So just STFU and stop asking questions!...Or else.

 

[PredFan]

Hey, it happened exactly the way Big Brother said. And if you believe otherwise, you're clearly a baby-hating, puppy-murdering, America-Hating Terrorist. So just STFU and stop asking questions!...Or else.

I don't believe it happened exactly the way the government said. I do believe that the government's version is the closest to the truth.

The fact that the NIST's report has flaws proves to me that it is truth and not fabrication. If the government was involved in it they would have made a story that covered all the bases, dotted all the "i's" and crossed all the "t's". They didn't. that's because they are trying to piece together a scenario from scratch, AFTER the fact.