Why 2,300 Architects & Engineers Demand Independent Investigation

INTRODUCTION

Editor's Note: This fascinating and provocative technical piece on NIST’s manipulation of the WTC 7 evidence is broken down into a series of six articles. The first installment (below) is the INTRODUCTION to the whole series. Stand by for the next five installments in subsequent articles, to be published monthly.

The United States government's official investigator of the destruction of the three skyscrapers on September 11, 2001, is the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), an arm of the Department of Commerce. The agency became highly politicized during a Clinton-era restructuring. "In essence," recalls a NIST whistleblower, "we lost our scientific independence, and became little more than 'hired guns.'"

NIST has made many false written and oral statements about the collapses of the three World Trade Center buildings on 9/11 — statements that have now caused 2,300 architects and engineers to question the government investigator's credibility and veracity. One of its most implausible claims is that a high-rise steel structure in New York City was destroyed by fire alone.

Figure 1. NIST's final report states that random office fires alone brought down Building 7. However, the collapse of WTC 7 compared, side by side, with an acknowledged professional controlled demolition reveals an entirely different story. Only a handful of companies have the ability to neatly implode a steel-framed skyscraper into its own footprint like this. Click on this video to see WTC 7 fall next to three acknowledged professional CDs.

Indeed, the fall of World Trade Center Building 7 is the third of the three only known "global collapses" of high-rise, steel-framed buildings ever recorded, and all three incredibly took place in one day: September 11, 2001.

NIST contends that the Twin Towers were brought down by the impact damage and consequent fires from the large airliner jets that hit them. But no jet struck WTC 7, and NIST claims that office fires alone demolished that building. The agency does admit that, if true, this would be the first and only time that an office fire brought down a steel skyscraper.

Ultimately, we are asked to accept on faith NIST's ever-changing, remarkable, and, frankly, suspect explanations for WTC 7's destruction.

AE911Truth's Report to the Public

Cyrus Vance, Jr., Manhattan D.A.For eight years, Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth has sought an impartial, subpoena-powered investigation into the destruction of the Twin Towers and Building 7 at the World Trade Center in New York City on September 11, 2001.

On February 14, 2013, AE911Truth petitioned the office of Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., district attorney in and for New York County, asking Vance for a confidential meeting with him and/or with any members of his staff he chose to designate. Our purpose in requesting this meeting was to discuss the appointment of a special prosecutor, and the calling of a grand jury, to investigate the explosive 12-second destruction of each of the Twin Towers, and the unprecedented free-fall "collapse" of Building 7 on 9/11.

We made a formal offer of proof based on the evidence — forensic evidence that overwhelmingly and irrefutably shows, by itemization of the key facts and by supplemental video of important witnesses, that the three skyscrapers at the World Trade Center were destroyed on 9/11 as a result of professionally engineered controlled demolition, not by office fires and/or aircraft collision.

A White Paper on NIST's Omissions, Distortions, and Fraud

Editor's Note: In recent years, various members of the AE911Truth team have been working on a white paper titled “Areas of Specific Concern in the NIST WTC Reports.” Last month they finally completed the document. Its 25 concise points offer the most convincing proof that the reports produced by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) on the September 11, 2001, destruction of the three World Trade Center buildings were unscientific and fraudulent. The authors of "The 25 Points" designed the document to provide material that would compel the convening of a grand jury. Whether or not a grand jury is ever impaneled in any jurisdiction, though, readers of this white paper have the duty and privilege of acting as a virtual grand jury in all jurisdictions. After weighing the evidence meticulously laid out in "The 25 Points," readers can, by their resulting actions, help determine whether there will one day be a new, fully funded, truly independent, wholly transparent, and unimpeachably honest investigation of 9/11.

Areas of Specific Concern in the NIST WTC Reports

Below is a series of twenty-five provable points which clearly demonstrate that the reports produced by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) on the destruction of the World Trade Center (WTC) were unscientific and fraudulent. Therefore NIST itself – including its lead authors, Shyam Sunder and John Gross - should be investigated.

Part 12: Signal Detection Theory

© by Frances T. Shure, 2014

Editor’s Note: Frances Shure, M.A., L.P.C., has performed an in-depth analysis addressing a key issue of our time: “Why Do Good People Become Silent—or Worse—About 9/11?” The resulting essay, being presented here as a series, is a synthesis of both academic research and clinical observations.

In answering the question in the title of this essay, the two October segments — Part 10: Terror Management Theory, and Part 11: Systems Justification Theory — examined, respectively, how the fear of our own death, and the need to feel good about the cultural system in which we live, can create resistance to the evidence indicating that the official story about 9/11 is a lie. Research shows that even though the educational efforts of 9/11 skeptics may be resisted, there is a delayed impact upon the listener, resulting in later attitude shifts in favor of the facts about 9/11.

We continue Ms. Shure's analysis in November with Part 12: Signal Detection Theory, which reports on whether or not people perceive information amid external and internal distractions, and how this perception may effect their receptivity to the educational efforts of 9/11 skeptics.

The study of how acutely individuals discriminate when making decisions, including psychological factors that bias those decisions, has resulted in the Signal Detection Theory.¹

Nearly all human decisions are made in an environment of uncertainty. All of the stimuli, both external and internal, that create this uncertainty are called “noise.” To perceive reality accurately, we must be able to detect a “signal” amid the distracting noise. The more noise there is, the harder it is to detect the signal.

Example: You are looking for a person (signal) in a crowded room. If there are 100 people (external noise) in the room, your likelihood of spotting her is much greater than if there are 1,000 people (more external noise) in the room. If you are exhausted (internal noise) or you view the person as disagreeable (internal noise), you will have a harder time finding her.

How does this theory apply to why people are silent, or worse, about the information provided to them by 9/11 skeptics?

Let's assume you're a believer in the official 9/11 story. You meet a friend at a crowded party. The music is loud. Over the din, he tells you he thinks 9/11 was a false flag operation. He pulls his smart phone from his pocket and shows you World Trade Center Building 7 falling into its own footprint. He tells you that 2.25 seconds of this collapse (eight floors’ worth) was at free-fall acceleration, and that this can only be explained if explosives cut through the steel columns. You like and respect this friend, so you are open to his signal. But can you hear it clearly enough to make a decision about reality?

Editor's Note: Our September newsletter introduced readers to Australian 9/11 blogger Dahlia Mae Lachlan, who, in this AE911Truth article republished from her blog site GumshoeNews.com, called on Sir Isaac Newton's scientific discoveries to make the case that the three toppled towers were subjected not to gravitational collapses but to controlled demolitions.

In one of her more recent blogs, Lachlan wishes she could tap the skills of a modern-day scientist — forensic anthropologist Dr. Temperance Brennan of the TV crime show "Bones" — to prove that the bone fragments found on World Trade Center neighbor Deutsche Bank in the days and years after 9/11 indicate pre-planted explosives. To see how this evidence is "the smoking gun — the bullet that blasts holes right through the official story" — read on.

BONES — The Forensic Evidence of Explosives

You know Bones — the American television crime series? It is a pity they didn't do an episode where Dr. "Bones" Brennan investigates "Cold Case — Deutsche Bank 9/11." Anyway, it would be too easily solved. Because the abundance of bone fragments from the World Trade Center's Twin Towers on 9/11 is the smoking gun — the bullet that blasts holes right through the official story.

You see, just like the impossibility of Building 7 being brought down by fires — a fire has never caused the total destruction of a steel skyscraper (as discussed on ae911truth.org) — so is it equally impossible that fires and collapsing buildings have ever pulverized people like those who were killed in the Twin Towers. EVER. Those who try to confuse the 9/11 Truth Movement with bunkum about structural abnormalities, no planes, whistle-blowers on meds, or who twist words and theories to suit the official theory — go ahead. It doesn't count here. Supported by evidence of Nano-thermite, people were turned to dust — pieces 1/16-inch small, thousands of pieces — including firefighters (most likely inside stairwells). The forensic logic of the "9/11 bone fragments" is the DNA bullet in the official story, making a mockery of NIST's document. These bone fragments from the firefighters burn any official theory to ash — and make the entire concealment of all the other evidence a fraud.

Read more...

Huge Video Billboard Shows Thousands the Demolition of World Trade Center Building 7

The idea of having a 9/11 Truth billboard in Times Square was once just “pie in the sky,” says Les Jamieson, New York City's point man for Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth. But today it’s a reality that Jamieson believes is bigger and more significant than anyone could have predicted.

“It’s unbelievably dramatic when you see it and read it,” he marvels. “The whole message is powerful.

“In the past two years we’ve thought, ‘Wouldn’t it be fantastic if we made a billboard in Times Square where there’s all this commercialism, showing the collapse of Building 7, never thinking it could ever happen.’”

The 89-foot-wide and 45-foot-high video screen in Times Square will show passersby — both pedestrians and motorists — the 9/11 demolition of World Trade Center 7 every three minutes from now through early October. AE911Truth raised the funds from hundreds of supporters to pay for the ad space. The advertising agent estimates that 100,000 people will see it each day. That's a total of 3 million between the September 8 start date and the October 8 end date. The ambitious project is a continuation of last year's Rethink911 campaign, with its massive billboards and other public ad formats in cities all around the world.