NIST and the delayed WTC7 Investigation

The controversy surrounding the WTC7 building has far from been forgotten by those made aware of it.

Although its story be preferably forgotten by those involved in its cover-up, the collapse of building
WTC7 is amongst premier physical evidence that September 11th, as defined both initially and up to
the present day by the predominant media, to be an outrageous mis–representation and manipulative
distortion of truth.

The official narrative states that on September 11th 2001 Islamic terrorists hijacked four passenger
Planes; AA (American Airlines) Flight 11, UA (United Airlines) Flight 175, AA Flight 77 and UA Flight 93.1

It states that Flights 11 and 175 departed from Boston, Flight 77 from Washington, and Flight 93 from
New Jersey.1

After stating that Flights 11 and 175 were hijacked, it explains that they were flown by the hijackers
towards Manhattan, New York, to be crash-exploded into each of the WTC Twin Tower buildings as suicide
plane–bombs. The eventual outcome for the Twin Towers, as is well known by everyone who witnessed it or
watched the video footage, is that the buildings collapsed.

According to selected “Experts”2, the collapse of the towers was a direct result of the weakening of their
structures, due to and in combination with the jet fuel explosions, and intense heat.

However, when the facts concerning the building known as WTC7 are presented to those not having previously discovered its circumstance, with its inclusion and context with the collapse of the Twin Towers and surrounding buildings, and the continued media silence in reporting of and showing the buildings collapse, an unusual situation is presented. The situation presented causes unsettling thoughts that force
questions and speculation on the official narrative of September 11th, who was responsible, and what the reason was for the collapse of the WTC buildings.

The collapse of WTC7, a 47 story building3, although widely known about due to the controversy surrounding its collapse circumstances, has yet to be given hardly any publicity by the predominant Media, and has been treated almost like it never existed.

The collapse of building WTC7 went unreported, with few notable exceptions4, and contrary to the fact that
numerous photos and video footage is available of the event, it is still unknown by many due to the predominant medias lack of publicity and investigation of it.

The collapse circumstance of WTC7 is controversial, as it was not hit by any plane, unlike the Twin Tower
buildings, yet at 5:20pm5 on September 11th 2001, the building mysteriously gave way to the force of gravity by collapsing, falling to the ground without resistance in mimicry of the collapse of both the WTC
Twin Tower buildings, leaving behind a huge cloud of dust and pollution. When the detail and outcome of WTC7 is presented, one is forced into asking questions regarding the official version of what caused the collapse of the Twin Towers, because if the reason for the Twin Towers collapsing, was as propagated in response to structural damage aquired by the impact of the planes and their explosions6, then what would have made WTC7 collapse in a way, very similar to the collapse of the Twin Towers, which much of its mass falling into its own foundations, when it is a physically different looking building, is of different dimensions with different structural design, was not hit by any planes, and as shown by photographic evidence, had few
visible fires?7 However, aside from this, also to be questioned is why the WTC7 collapse was not shown or discussed by the predominant media, despite photo and video evidence capturing it collapsing being widely available.

This is reason alone to be suspicious of the predominant media intention in keeping it silent. Also implicated is their involvement, as through these actions they have propagated an account that is selectively manipulated and deliberately deceiving.

Despite the coverup of the collapse of building WTC7, the predominant media amongst others has and is
continually subject to increasing pressure to finally let it be known why it deceived so many after having
kept the significance of WTC7 from September 11th history.

Although there has been an amount of speculation as to why building WTC7 collapsed, the most recent
investigation has been conducted by the NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology), which as they self-describe is “a non-regulatory agency of the Commerce Department’s Technology Administration.”8

In explaining the purpose of the investigation, NIST
states;

“the National Institute of Standards and Technology conducted a 3-year building and fire safety investigation to study the factors contributing to the probable cause (or causes) of post-impact collapse of
the WTC Towers (WTC 1 and 2) and WTC 7.”9

A draft report released by the investigation Oct 19 2004, states;

“The leading collapse hypothesis for each tower is
based on evaluations of the building’s innovative
structural system; the effects of the aircraft impact
and subsequent fire; the post-impact condition of the
fireproofing; the quality and properties of the
structural steel used in construction; and the
relative roles in the collapse scenario played by the
perimeter and core columns, and the composite floor
system (including connections).”10

It can be noted from the above quote that a purpose of the investigation, was in explaining a “collapse
hypothesis” based on the above “evaluations”. It is worth noting that these initial evaluations were
limited, in that they did not incorporate WTC7, as that was to be treated as a seperate study. The quote
from the investigation above demonstrates that any alternative “hypothesis” outside their set “evaluations”, is unlikely to be considered.

This stage of the investigation may be enough evidence to convince many of its “hypothesis”, which in doing
so, helps in further re-enforcing the official explanation for the collapse of the WTC buildings, yet those expecting an explanation for the collapse of WTC7 from NIST, have had to wait, and although NIST has released its final reports of the collapse of WTC 1 & 2, its WTC7 final report, although having been drafted has been delayed from it’s scheduled release of December 2005.11

The most recently released document at time of writing from NIST is its “Draft Statement of Work”, entitled
“Development of WTC 7 Structural Models and Collapse Hypotheses”12, in which it states that one of its
primary objectives is to determine “why and how the 47-story WTC 7 collapsed”.

Further explained in the document under its project 6, is that it shall seek “to determine the structural
response of the World Trade Center Building 7 (WTC 7) to impact by debris from the collapse of WTC 1, the
fire environment, and any other events that may have occurred, and to identify probable structural collapse
mechanisms.”13, and therefore, in stating so, is not looking at building 7 in isolation.

Under the documents “Objective, Scope of Work”, it is explained that it will be a “Contractor’s responsibility to conduct the work described in this SOW.”13 (Statement of Work), and that “NIST will arrange for third parties to conduct independent reviews before final approval.”– from NIST.13

As the NIST has commented that it “…has seen no evidence that the collapse of WTC 7 was caused by bombs, missiles, or controlled demolition.”13, it seems unlikely, in view of the final reports of WTC 1 & 2 having been released, that they would rethink their conclusions.

In an article debunking the theory proposed that the WTC7 collapsed by a “controlled demolition”14, NIST
are quoted as saying;

“The most important thing we found was that there was,
in fact, physical damage to the south face of Building
7,”14

“about a third of the face to the center and to the
bottom–approximately 10 stories–about
25 percent of the depth of the building was scooped
out.”14

Alongside this statement, there is corresponding photographic evidence of the damage15, yet these statements and corresponding image arguably fail to explain why WTC7 fell the way it did, into its foundations rather than falling to its side.

As explanation for this verticle collapse, NIST are quoted as saying;

“What our preliminary analysis has shown is that if
you take out just one column on one of the lower
floors,”…”it could cause a vertical progression of
collapse so that the entire section comes down.”15

Although this reason could be quite sufficient in treating the collapse of WTC7 in isolation, it fails to address the coincidental collapse nature of The Twin Towers and WTC7, and their entirely different circumstances yet almost identical verticle collapses.

Despite the continued excess of concern and objection raised in response to the collapse hypothesis proposed for the WTC Buildings, the NIST, on release of its final WTC7 report, will be at the apex of what many, see as a cover–up, and although this final report will conclude their investigation, many questions, in many minds, will remain.

Of the predominant media, and the given explanation for the collapse of the WTC buildings, far from being
sufficiently debunked, has been blatently ignored, as though it isn’t even an issue, yet on release of the NIST investigation, will the predominant media suddenly switch allegiance towards reporting of WTC7 and the NIST’s conclusions, or would they be releasing too much information by doing so.

Until the continued silence, if ever, is brought to the fore with a mockery of the ‘conspiracy theorist’,
as is often so elequently put, the WTC7 flaw in the official story remains a conspiracy of grandeur, and
although there could conceivably be a valid alternative explaination for the buildings collapse
rather than it being destroyed with explosions, charges or implosions, or like method, I for one, in the shadow of many others, remain unconvinced.

References:

1
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/in_depth/americas/2001/day_of_terror/the_four_hijacks/flight_11.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/in_depth/americas/2001/day_of_terror/the_four_hijacks/flight_175.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/in_depth/americas/2001/day_of_terror/the_four_hijacks/flight_77.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/in_depth/americas/2001/day_of_terror/the_four_hijacks/flight_93.stm

2
http://www.rense.com/general59/ul.htm

3
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/in_depth/americas/2001/day_of_terror/timeline/
http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/09/11/chronology.attack/
http://216.117.169.162/killtown/wtc7.html

4
For example: Dan Rather, CBS News (09/11/01)
http://thewebfairy.com/killtown/wtc7/collapse.html

5
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/in_depth/americas/2001/day_of_terror/timeline/

6
David Ray Griffin. The New Pearl Harbour, Disturbing
Questions about the Bush Administration and 9/11.
2004.Arris Books.
see Page 12: ‘The Collapse of The World Trade Center
Buildings’.

7
http://www.prisonplanet.com/011904wtc7.html
http://www.rense.com/general65/911m.htm
http://216.117.169.162/killtown/wtc7/fire.html

8
http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/factsheet/nist_investigation_911.htm

9
http://wtc.nist.gov/

10
http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/releases/wtc_latest_findings_1004.htm

11
http://villagevoice.com/news/0549,murphy,70685,6.html
http://www.911blogger.com/2006/01/wtc7-cover-up-in-action.html

12
http://wtc.nist.gov/media/WTC7_draftSOW.htm
http://wtc.nist.gov/media/archives.htm

13
WTC Part IIC - WTC 7 Collapse Final
http://wtc.nist.gov/media/archives.htm

14
http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html?page=5&c=y

15
WTC Part IIC - WTC 7 Collapse Final
http://wtc.nist.gov/media/archives.htm

By P Richardson