|
|
911 Conspiracy
|
"In the case of WTC 7 [.], for 100 feet of free fall to take place, they had to completely remove 8 floors of structural support, uniformly across the entire width of the building, simultaneously, to within a fraction of a second. This cannot happen naturally. It is a clear smoking gun for controlled demolition. .Conclusion: On the first round, NIST falsified measurements in order to deny free-fall. It then turned around and admitted free-fall but denied its significance. .Free-fall requires that explosives had to be used. Planting explosives in WTC7 would require time and high-level access to this very secure building well before 9/11. Whoever rigged WTC7 was clearly complicit in the entire 9/11 operation. Given that NIST knows what they are doing, we can be justified in calling their methodology 'fraudulent'. Fraudulent behavior in this context constitutes participation in a criminal cover-up." -- David Chandler, high school Physics teacher, at the 2009 annual meeting of the American Society of Criminology. |
NIST has become party to the 9/11 cover-up, falsifying information, cooking the data, and otherwise acting in disregard to the ethics of science it is supposed to not only uphold but epitomize as the official body for the United States establishing standards of measurement. NIST is supposed to be the final word on measurement accuracy, but in the case of 9/11, they have prostituted themselves at the hands of their Federal masters who are likewise involved in the cover-up. They have thus become another tool in helping to establish a world socialist dictatorship under the control of a sinister, insider elite.
On Aug. 2008, NIST published their findings that the World Trade Center
buildings came down "due to fire alone."
Contrary to the Federal Government official story supported by the NIST
report, many facts point to controlled demolition being the cause of the
collapse of the World Trade Center buildings 1, 2 and 7:
None of the characteristics of destruction by fire were present:
Volumes of evidence and commentary on each of the above points are found throughout the web, but are presented concisely on the home page of http://ae911truth.org in the right hand column with links to supporting evidence.
Here's a brief TV snippet interview with a key spokesman of the 9/11 Truth Movement.
|
Here's an excellent compilation of facts versus NIST blatant lies.
(YouTube; February 15, 2010) |
- - - -
Here's a video of John Gross, lead engineer of the NIST report, saying that there were no witnesses whatsoever of molten metal, compared to the evidence
of a plethora of eyewitnesses, photos, and video of molten metal provided by Richard Gage to the contrary:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eo8nJHciHQ8#t=5m43s
John Gross says: "First of all, let's go back to your basic premise that
there was a pool of molten steel. I know of absolutely nobody, no
eyewitnesses who said so, nobody who's produced it."
Molten metal, more than a month after the attack, is probably the most
obvious smoking gun of pre-planted explosives of demolition charges.
Thermite or thermate continue to react with metal, and that is why there was
molten metal so long afterward.
That John Gross would make such a blatant lie about something so well-proven,
shows the degree to which NIST is going in covering up this crime.
NIST's lead investigator into the WTC attacks, John Gross, is caught lying, saying that he has not seen nor knows of anyone who has seen liquefied metal in the WTC rubble. This video shows the many contradictions to his assertion. (''YouTube''; July 09, 2009) |
* * * *
In this three-part series, physicist David Chandler, on behalf of Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth,
documents the "dry labbing" done by NIST regarding World Trade Center
building 7, in which measurements are falsified to support a pre-determined
outcome.
Here's a synopsis of the data, followed by the video presentation by David
Chandler.
David Chandler's data from video analysis |
NIST's data from video analysis |
|
The above graph by NIST shows rounded beginnings and ends, before and after the free-fall Phase II, to save face from earlier pronouncements of a total fall time in excess of 5.6 seconds, in support of their theory of downward resistance by an in-tact building, as opposed to free-fall dropping which would imply pre-placement of demolition charges, and conspiracy, and cover-up. The analysis shown at the left, in contrast to the curves shown by NASA above, shows a sudden change from stationary to free-fall. As you visually inspect building 7 falling, does it not look like a classic case of planned demolition? |
"I think the 2.25-second period of actual free-fall acceleration (over 100 feet) admitted to by NIST is indeed compelling evidence for explosives use: what else could have moved hundred of thousands of tons of steel support columns and concrete out of the way to permit fall with no resistance?" -- Dr. Steven E. Jones, Sept. 11, 2009, close friend of David W. Allan
(Part I) |
(Part II) |
(Part III) |
See also the presentation by David Chandler at the 2009 annual meeting of the American Society of Criminology in a session entitled "Power Crimes." Posted Nov. 7, 2009.
* * * *
In the 2008 edition of this multimedia presentation, filmed professionally in a studio before a live audience, San Francisco Bay Area architect, Richard Gage, AIA, provides the myth-shattering scientific forensic evidence of the explosive controlled demolition of all 3 WTC high-rise buildings on September 11, 2001. Gage is the founder and key spokesman for the Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, which now has more than 800 distinguished members. Below is embedded his 13-part presentation.
* * * *
In December, 2009, Duane Deets, former NASA engineering executive, was interviewed on Jackalope 105FM. Deets is also a distinguished member of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth. Parts 2 and 3 of this 6-part YouTube video address the official story's obvious violations of the laws of physics and NIST's obfuscation of the facts regarding 911.
* * * *
Here are some resources contradicting the "official report" supported by the NIST report, that WTC7 came down by fire alone.
Dr. James Quintiere, Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division calls for an independent investigation: "Let's look at real alternatives that might have been the cause of the collapse of the World Trade Towers." See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pt6YOwZS4Zs#t=4m51s
(These YouTube urls point to the exact time stamp of relevance.)
Kevin Ryan of NIST was fired because he pointed out that NIST fudged in their usage of the Underwriter Lab tests of the modeling, which had concluded that "the buildings should have easily withstood the thermal stress caused byburning jet fuel [and office materials]." See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pt6YOwZS4Zs#t=5m08s
|
|
Page posted by SDA
Sept. 11, 2009
Last updated September 10, 2015
www.PatriotSaints.com Home
• Mission Statement
• Branches • Calendar
• Activity •
• Contact Greater Things • Free Energy News • Inter-Continental Congress |