Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Prelude To A Lawsuit Against NIST?!
#1
[TABLE="class: contentpaneopen"]
[TR]
[TD="class: contentheading"]William Pepper, Attorney at Law, Pursuing NIST via OIG Re: Fraudulent WTC 7 Report[/TD]
[TD="class: buttonheading, width: 100%, align: right"][Image: printButton.png] [/TD]
[TD="class: buttonheading, width: 100%, align: right"][Image: emailButton.png] [/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
[TABLE="class: contentpaneopen"]
[TR]
[TD]Written by Dennis P. McMahon, Esq. [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="class: createdate"]Friday, 14 February 2014 20:25 [/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]


Investigation Demanded Based on FOIA Release Info

[Image: Pepper_ReThink_NYC.jpg]Dr. William Pepper speaking for AE911Truth and ReThink911 in Times Square on September 11, 2013On behalf of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, esteemed human rights attorney William F. Pepper has written to the U.S. Department of Commerce's Office of the Inspector General (OIG) demanding that the National Institute of Standards and Technology ("NIST," a non-regulatory agency within the Commerce Department), for which OIG has oversight responsibility, "be directed to produce a corrected analysis and report on the collapse of World Trade Center Building 7."
The demand was triggered by the discovery that the official steel fabrication drawings of Building 7's construction, released in response to a FOIA request, reveal critical structural features that were inexplicably missing from consideration in the NIST report on the collapse of Building 7. Specifically, as explained in the recent article "MaladmiNISTration" by David Cole, upon close examination of the depiction, in Frankel shop drawing #9114, of the connection between Column 79 and the adjacent girdera connection that NIST claimed had failedone can see another steel element in the drawing that NIST had never mentioned, i.e. "stiffener plates," that were specified at the end of the girder and welded in place to both sides of the web and to the bottom flange.
[Image: col79-elev-view_group.jpg]Actual views of the girder connection to Column 79 from Frankel drawing #9114[Image: col79_Frankel_1985.png]Depiction of girder connection to Column 79 in the NIST WTC 7 Report
Pepper noted that if a satisfactory response is not received in a timely manner, he will be calling the Inspector General personally. The OIG responded to Pepper by referring the matter to NIST. Of course, referring the matter to the agency accused of the fraudulent omissions in the first place is clearly unacceptable.
If headway is not made there, litigation could follow. Tony Szamboti, a mechanical engineer involved in structural design in his professional work, and an AE911Truth petition signatory, has stated that he is asking people to forward the initial letter from Bill Pepper and the response from the Department of Commerce to all members of Congress asking that they ensure that NIST is responsive in an open and transparent way.
This is the political component that Mr. Pepper said would be important in order to apply enough pressure to ensure an appropriate response when we first discussed sending the letter to the Inspector General.
[Image: tony_szamboti.jpg]Tony Szamboti on Fox News with Geraldo RiveraPreviously, Szamboti had noted that "The discovery of the girder stiffener plates in drawing #9114 is a game changer, because this drawing covers the exact location where NIST says the collapse initiated and the stiffeners on the girder would make the NIST alleged collapse mechanism impossible."
As Cole has written in his article, "NIST's failure to show these stiffeners or take them into account in its analysis is yet another area where the omissions and incorrect statements are so egregious, anyone who understands these issues must by now begin to question NIST's motives."
Feeling strongly that the stiffeners revelation is the strongest evidence yet of fraudulent omissions by NIST, Szamboti, Cole, and other professionals at AE911Truth began asking what could be done from a legal perspective. Szamboti reached out to his contacts in the 9/11 Truth community, and Bill Pepper stepped forward. Eventually, a strategy was developed with the ultimate goal of forcing a whole new and independent examination into the collapse of Building 7 by either NIST itself or, better yet, an independent group.
As Pepper put it in the letter that he sent to the Inspector General on December 12, 2013, "Avoidance through stonewalling and prolonged silence will no longer suffice. This will not go away...Silence from your office or a rejection of this reasonable request may prompt my clients to seek legal recourse and to raise this issue with their colleagues in Europe where a number of government officials and professionals have long been critical of the official U.S. Government's position and explanation of the destruction of the WTC on 9/11."
Included in Bill Pepper's letter to the Inspector General was the DVD by AE911Truth: "9/11: Explosive Evidence Experts Speak Out."
It should be noted that the OIG pledges publically, "to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the Department of Commerce's programs and operations. The OIG also endeavors to detect and deter waste, fraud, and abuse. OIG monitors and tracks the use of taxpayer dollars through audits, inspections, evaluations, and investigations. The Inspector General keeps the Secretary of Commerce and Congress fully and currently informed about problems and deficiencies relating to Commerce's activities and the need for corrective action." [Emphases added.]
In consideration, especially, of the stiffeners issue, our desired outcome is that the OIG will consider Pepper's letter, evaluate the analysis provided in the letter, detect that NIST's report on the unprecedented collapse of Building 7 is fundamentally flawed, if not fraudulent, and declare that the corrective action needed is a true and honest investigation into the free-fall collapse of Building 7 based on all the evidence, including the missing stiffeners and also the evidence for explosive demolition. Will the OIG take its mandate seriously? Is such a scenario feasible, or even possible? With your participation in our upcoming campaign, we think that it is. Stay tuned for the Action Alerts.
As legal and other strategies are being weighed, the issue has picked up steam on the internet. Most prominently, OpEdNews, a U.S. based alternative news website, has published an objective, unbiased article discussing the controversial official account of the destruction of WTC 7 on September 11, 2001. In the article, OpEdNews contributor Andrew Mills focuses on the letter sent by Pepper to the OIG and concludes that "[T]his is court-room level evidence of impropriety involving the preparation of the WTC 7 report, and will clearly be an embarrassment to NIST. It shows that the demand for a new WTC 7 investigation by those skeptical of the Report's conclusions was in order all along. Even if nothing else is re-investigated about 9/11, the collapse of Building 7 richly deserves a thorough investigation."



[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
"Let me issue and control a nation's money and I care not who writes the laws. - Mayer Rothschild
"Civil disobedience is not our problem. Our problem is civil obedience! People are obedient in the face of poverty, starvation, stupidity, war, and cruelty. Our problem is that grand thieves are running the country. That's our problem!" - Howard Zinn
"If there is no struggle there is no progress. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and never will" - Frederick Douglass
Reply
#2
Peter, I really don't understand the stiffener issue. Do you understand it and mind explaining it to those of us who don't?
"We'll know our disinformation campaign is complete when everything the American public believes is false." --William J. Casey, D.C.I

"We will lead every revolution against us." --Theodore Herzl
Reply
#3
Lauren Johnson Wrote:Peter, I really don't understand the stiffener issue. Do you understand it and mind explaining it to those of us who don't?

It is a bit technical, but in its simplest form, NIST ignored that the vertical and horizontal pieces of steel were CONNECTED and well-connected with stiffeners. NIST made up a fairy tale that heat from the 'inferno fires' caused the horizontal pieces to bend and slide off the vertical pieces - as if they were not connected - only resting unconnected upon the support beams. In fact, these pieces were welded together and with stiffener plates that were rigorous. So, it was not so easy to initiate collapse of even one floor - let alone a cascade collapse, and much more energy [or much greater temperatures] was needed - but most know this for many other reasons, as well. It is a small point, and far from the ONLY error NIST made accidentally on purpose - but a good 'hook' to expose the rest of the lies. Tony S. did a technical paper on this if you want the details. NIST just made up facts and physics, and ignored other other facts and laws of physics.....they made their 'conclusions' and 'science' to FIT the 'official story'....rather than to fit the facts/evidence/laws of physics - exactly as what happened with the JFK Assassination 'investigations'. The engineers and scientists at NIST are well trained and must know that what they came up with is not true...but they went with it anyway [and lots of other things than just this...they were going to ignore WTC 7, for example] under political pressure, no doubt, to prove the 'official' fiction as fact. America is just a Potemkin Village - a false facade of untruths/doublespeak/newspeak/lies coming out of the propaganda/official orifices. :Toilet: The full list of things NIST got wrong is very long and IMHO includes almost everything except the day of the event [good going, they got that correct!]....the rest, they fudged it for fascism!
"Let me issue and control a nation's money and I care not who writes the laws. - Mayer Rothschild
"Civil disobedience is not our problem. Our problem is civil obedience! People are obedient in the face of poverty, starvation, stupidity, war, and cruelty. Our problem is that grand thieves are running the country. That's our problem!" - Howard Zinn
"If there is no struggle there is no progress. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and never will" - Frederick Douglass
Reply
#4
Lauren Johnson Wrote:Peter, I really don't understand the stiffener issue. Do you understand it and mind explaining it to those of us who don't?

Hi Lauren and Peter,

I was just bouncing around on the Internet to see how much play the NIST omissions issue has gotten and saw Peter's thread here and Lauren's question.

The stiffeners are vertical plates on the girder which are welded to both the web and flanges. NIST claimed that when the girder web was pushed past its seat at the column connection that the load was too much for the .855" thick flange to take and that it would fail by bending upward. That would be true if it was only the flange involved and that is what the figures in the NIST report show.

However, the drawings for WTC 7 were finally released due to a FOIA request about three years after the WTC 7 report and when they were reviewed it was found that the girder had these 18" high x 3/4" thick web to flange stiffeners. The stiffeners make the flange about 58 times stronger in bending and make the NIST collapse initiation hypothesis impossible. The stiffened flange makes it so they can't push the girder far enough to get it to fall off the seat by causing the flange to fail.

The interesting thing is that they did not release all of the drawings and the actual girder fabrication drawing was not released. However, there was an assembly drawing which showed the girder to column connection from the side and it contained the stiffeners. David Cole found them and notified several of us about it asking if it would make a difference. I immediately knew it would and the structural engineer (Ron Brookman) who got the drawings released sent NIST a letter about it. They ignored the stiffener issue for almost two years but Cole finally got them to admit they left them out which they claimed they did as they were for web crippling and that their analysis said web crippling wasn't an issue. Of course, that is circular reasoning and they cannot get around the fact that these stiffeners strengthen the flange enormously. They will have to redo their analysis with the omitted features included. This somewhat invalidates the NIST WTC 7 report as they no longer have an initiating mechanism and they will not be able to make bare assertions any longer without review after this hit to their credibility.
Reply
#5
Tony, Hi ya'll. Thanks for checking in.

These guy are going to have to send out for lots of donuts and coffee. Lots of late hours. And then they'll have to go to confession after every day they go to work. Hang in there!! --L
"We'll know our disinformation campaign is complete when everything the American public believes is false." --William J. Casey, D.C.I

"We will lead every revolution against us." --Theodore Herzl
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  New lawsuit.....if they get enough money to file.... Peter Lemkin 1 3,974 15-04-2019, 05:28 AM
Last Post: Peter Lemkin
  Great New 911 Film - NIST insider speaks out about the obvious lies. Peter Lemkin 0 4,669 14-03-2017, 07:25 AM
Last Post: Peter Lemkin
  NIST overlooked NSA's cryptography 'back door' Peter Lemkin 0 3,214 28-11-2014, 08:59 AM
Last Post: Peter Lemkin
  Tony Szamboti's 25 Points of Contention with NIST Lauren Johnson 0 3,597 08-11-2014, 06:36 AM
Last Post: Lauren Johnson
  Tony Szamboti on NIST Lauren Johnson 0 2,793 08-11-2014, 06:36 AM
Last Post: Lauren Johnson
  More BS: an alternative to the NIST fairytale Martin White 4 7,057 04-11-2014, 10:13 AM
Last Post: Martin White
  The case against the NIST WTC 7 collapse initiation analysis Tony Szamboti 4 4,069 04-11-2013, 07:11 AM
Last Post: Peter Lemkin
  9/11 Lawsuit Against Saudis Discussed on MSNBC Lauren Johnson 6 5,775 14-03-2012, 02:35 AM
Last Post: Lauren Johnson
  Int'l Center for 9/11 Studies - NIST Cumulus Video Database Released Ed Jewett 10 7,561 09-11-2010, 09:54 PM
Last Post: Peter Lemkin
  NIST photos and videos released Ed Jewett 2 4,289 02-09-2010, 08:55 PM
Last Post: Peter Lemkin

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)