The case against the NIST WTC 7 collapse initiation analysis

[Tony Szamboti]

Just thought I would share something going to lawyers in the near future. See the attached.

[Magda Hassan]

What lawyers Anthony? What is the story behind that?

[Tony Szamboti]

What lawyers Anthony? What is the story behind that?

Magda,

The WTC 7 drawings were released in November 2011 and review of them showed there were serious omissions from the WTC 7 analyses that when included would have made the claims impossible. A number of FOIAs have attempted to get explanations and revision, but have not been fully successful. There was only one erratum issued which corrected the seat width. Stiffeners and beam stubs were also omitted and NIST has admitted the stiffeners were omitted now but say they were since they didn't matter. They certainly did and the evidence is clear. Legal activity seems to be the only way to force the issue and an attempt to get that going is in process.

[Magda Hassan]

Okay. Thanks Tony. The usual Freedom From Information going on. Good luck. I hope they are pro bono.

[Peter Lemkin]

What lawyers Anthony? What is the story behind that?

Magda,

The WTC 7 drawings were released in November 2011 and review of them showed there were serious omissions from the WTC 7 analyses that when included would have made the claims impossible. A number of FOIAs have attempted to get explanations and revision, but have not been fully successful. There was only one erratum issued which corrected the seat width. Stiffeners and beam stubs were also omitted and NIST has admitted the stiffeners were omitted now but say they were since they didn't matter. They certainly did and the evidence is clear. Legal activity seems to be the only way to force the issue and an attempt to get that going is in process.

Great news! Rather ironic that stiffeners could be the 'pea' that makes the 'Princess' finally feel that there is something wrong in the 'bed' they have made!....poor analogy, I know...but whatever gets things moving and stops the madness and the lies!!!

We need our Country back. It was stolen on 9-11-01 under the cover of Big Lies!!!....from stiffeners to our Constitutional Rights and more!

Of course there have been other refusals of information reasonably asked for re: 9-11-01. The list is rather long. Their attitude is 'we are the government', 'just trust us -don't question us' AND 'we really don't have to tell you anything about what REALLY happened on 9-11.'
Ha!:tampfeet:: Sue the lying treasonous bastards!

[Jeffrey Orling]

Column 79 failing was not the cause of the collapse of 7WTC. Column 79 collapsed when the structures UNDER it failed. So NIST was wrong, but that does not mean the collapse was a result of CD. But sure.. knock yourselves out showing NIST made errors. They did with the twin towers as well. But there too errors in their explanation does not mean that the destruction was a controlled demolition. NIST, it turns out is hardly any different in their precision / engineering / science than any number of other people who have suggested various explanations such as DEWs or mini nukes or nano thermite... column79 or sagging trusses... not to mention CD... All flawed, but all match some of the observations.... but not all.

You can't prove something by disproving or falsifying something else.