It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: hellobruce
It was passed on Oct 17 2001 and it limits what has to be let out with foia due to national security.
Couldn't manage to link cause
Your refusal to name this non existent EO explains a lot!
This may allow agencies to withhold information - although I can't find where it says that.
originally posted by: hgfbob
a reply to: JuniorDisco
This may allow agencies to withhold information - although I can't find where it says that.
of course not....you're a duhbunker here to hide the facts.....not point to them.
How mature. As I've said to you before, your approach is having no effect at all on the 9/11 debate
failing to put your arguments into the mainstream, makes you look silly
originally posted by: hgfbob
oh no mr duhbunker....it is SHOWING a pattern with YOU!
this is my intent.
the E.O. gives ANY agency the right to withhold ANY info it deems necessary with any ties to 9-11...and in 2009, the NIST invoke it to NOT have to prove their hypothesized claims of brand new physics phenomenon" occurring ONLY on 9-11.
I am a 'truther' asking questions and DEMANDING the supporting evidence of the ALREADY in-place claims pushed as truth.....HOW does that make ME look silly?
I am not the one responding with this NONSENSE rather than PROVIDING supporting evidence of what I push.
play time is over.......
in the wake of what you consider to be a vast conspiracy by the US government to mass murder and pillage your concern is... me?
You keep saying this. But you have yet to show that this is true.
But you're not providing supporting evidence
Truthers have failed to advance beyond a ridiculed fringe
failed to make any meaningful change to policy
failed to get an indictment
failed even to get an investigation.
Sept. 02 2010
Dear Mr. Bob
This letter serves a the final response to your Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request (Log#10-194) to the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), in which you requested
in connection with its investigation for the technical cause of the collapse of the World Trade Center Tower and World Trade Center Building 7 on September 1,200I:
'1. All input and results files of the ANSYS 16 story collapse initiation model with detailed connection models that were used to analyze the structural response to thermal loads, break element source code, ANSYS script files for the break element s, custom executable ANSYS file, and all Excel spreadsheets and other supporting calculations used to develop floor connection failure modes and capacities.
2. All input files with connection material properties and all results flies of the LS-DYNA 47-story global collapse model that were used to simulate sequential structural failures leading to collapse and all Excel spreadsheets and other supporting calculations used to develop floor connection failure modes and capacities."
NIST is withholding sixty-eight thousand, two hundred and forty-six (68,246) file. These records are currently exempt from disclosure under section (b)(3) of the FOlA., 5 .S.C § 552 (b)(3). Exemption (b)(3) permits an agency to withhold records in an agency's possession which are records that are "specifically exempted from disclosure by statute (other than 5 .S.C552(b», provided that such statute (A) requires that the matters be withheld from the public in such a manner as to leave no discretion on the issue, or (B) establishes particular criteria for
withholding or refers to particular types of matters to be ...withheld."
The statute underlying the (b)(3) exemption in this case is the at National Construction Safety Team (1 C T) Act, 15 .S.. § 7301 et seq_ Section 12 of the CST Act (ISS_C § 7311) provides that it applies to the activities of 1ST in response to the attacks of September I ), 200 I. Section 7(d) of the NIST Act (15 U.S.C § 7306(d», exempts from disclosure. information received by 1ST in the course of investigations regarding building failures if the Director finds that the disclosure of the information might jeopardize public safety. On July 9 2009 the Director of NIST determined that release of the withheld information might' jeopardize public safety. Therefore, these records are being withheld.
NlST
You have the right to appeal this determination. Such an appeal must be made in writing and received within 30 calendar days of the date on this letter addressed to:
Assistant General Counsel for Administration (Office)
Room 5898-C
U.S. Department of Commerce
14th and Constitution Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20230
Your appeal should include a copy of you original request,a copy of this determination,and a statement of the reason(s) you believe this determination to be in error and why these records should be made fully available 10 you. Both your letter and the envelope in which it is mailed should be prominently marked "Freedom of Information Act Appeal.!!
Sincerely,
~:/_/~~A/
( Catherine S. Fletcher Freedom of Information Act Officer
......uhm....tell me what 'code' changes occurred as a result of 9-11????
.....NONE within this Country.....so WHOM failed to make ANY meaningful 'policy' change as a result of these disasters?
originally posted by: hgfbob
lol...don't flatter yourself...your not that important.
sure I did....a few posts up from here.....directly from the E.O Archives.
what evidence do I need to ask questions and demand the supporting evidence of the already in-place claims pushed as truth....that is your job....and a bang up job yer doing so far!
....not.
yes, an imaginary state of mind put there by.....people like you.
more like the OS has stalled in it's tracks.....why do you avoid referencing the official claim of a brand new never before seen physics phenomenon falling WTC7 105 vertical feet equal to g. within the first 1/3 of it's 6.5 second collapse????
they are on video stating that FACT....well, not the FACT of NEW physics but the FACT they said..."new physics"....lol!
they refuse to prove the claim of new physics....so why don't you.....
......uhm....tell me what 'code' changes occurred as a result of 9-11????
.....NONE within this Country.....so WHOM failed to make ANY meaningful 'policy' change as a result of these disasters?
well gee mr duhbunker, lets drag the NIST 08 complicity crew in and find out......lets go!...
uhm......2005 NIST scientific investigation bestowed by an act of Congress found NO scientific reason for collapse x3 on 9-11.....2008 NIST hypothesis crew claims NEW SCIENCE fell these buildings on 9-11......
why can't they prove it?
why do they refuse to prove it?
Sept. 02 2010
Dear Mr. Bob
This letter serves a the final response to your Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request (Log#10-194) to the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), in which you requested
in connection with its investigation for the technical cause of the collapse of the World Trade Center Tower and World Trade Center Building 7 on September 1,200I:
'1. All input and results files of the ANSYS 16 story collapse initiation model with detailed connection models that were used to analyze the structural response to thermal loads, break element source code, ANSYS script files for the break element s, custom executable ANSYS file, and all Excel spreadsheets and other supporting calculations used to develop floor connection failure modes and capacities.
2. All input files with connection material properties and all results flies of the LS-DYNA 47-story global collapse model that were used to simulate sequential structural failures leading to collapse and all Excel spreadsheets and other supporting calculations used to develop floor connection failure modes and capacities."
NIST is withholding sixty-eight thousand, two hundred and forty-six (68,246) file. These records are currently exempt from disclosure under section (b)(3) of the FOlA., 5 .S.C § 552 (b)(3). Exemption (b)(3) permits an agency to withhold records in an agency's possession which are records that are "specifically exempted from disclosure by statute (other than 5 .S.C552(b», provided that such statute (A) requires that the matters be withheld from the public in such a manner as to leave no discretion on the issue, or (B) establishes particular criteria for
withholding or refers to particular types of matters to be ...withheld."
The statute underlying the (b)(3) exemption in this case is the at National Construction Safety Team (1 C T) Act, 15 .S.. § 7301 et seq_ Section 12 of the CST Act (ISS_C § 7311) provides that it applies to the activities of 1ST in response to the attacks of September I ), 200 I. Section 7(d) of the NIST Act (15 U.S.C § 7306(d», exempts from disclosure. information received by 1ST in the course of investigations regarding building failures if the Director finds that the disclosure of the information might jeopardize public safety. On July 9 2009 the Director of NIST determined that release of the withheld information might' jeopardize public safety. Therefore, these records are being withheld.
NlST
You have the right to appeal this determination. Such an appeal must be made in writing and received within 30 calendar days of the date on this letter addressed to:
Assistant General Counsel for Administration (Office)
Room 5898-C
U.S. Department of Commerce
14th and Constitution Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20230
Your appeal should include a copy of you original request,a copy of this determination,and a statement of the reason(s) you believe this determination to be in error and why these records should be made fully available 10 you. Both your letter and the envelope in which it is mailed should be prominently marked "Freedom of Information Act Appeal.!!
Sincerely,
~:/_/~~A/
( Catherine S. Fletcher Freedom of Information Act Officer
To be clear, you are claiming that a directive exists which Sunder invoked in order to not withhold information about Bldg 7. Nothing you have written above shows this.
in which it is mailed should be prominently marked "Freedom of Information Act Appeal.!!
Sincerely,
Catherine S. Fletcher Freedom of Information Act Officer
You don't have to provide anything. I'm just pointing out that so far you've got nowhere,
Because I don't care and I think you're probably talking rubbish.
There were a variety of code changes based on 9/11
the world will continue to agree with me and operate as though I'm right.
That's my point. You will NEVER DO THIS.
That was four years ago. What did your follow-up appeal bring?
originally posted by: hgfbob
a reply to: JuniorDisco
lol....oh lookie at all those starz.......
To be clear, you are claiming that a directive exists which Sunder invoked in order to not withhold information about Bldg 7. Nothing you have written above shows this.
in which it is mailed should be prominently marked "Freedom of Information Act Appeal.!!
Sincerely,
Catherine S. Fletcher Freedom of Information Act Officer
other than posting facts......my only purpose here.....where are yours?
and so far, yer doing a bang up job 'contradicting' my posting......'WHY'gning get ya no where mr duhbunker.
therein lies your problem....you.
NOTHING load bearing.....what does 'wider stairways' do for the structural support ability?
other Countries.....this was great for international codes....they were plenty messed up anyway..but not here...we already have strict codes.
oh, and learn how to insert a URL ok.....
no duhbunker...right or wrong.....it just goes on......
are ya done 'WHY'gning yet???
me personally....DUH!..... we the people will.
as soon as the masses know of the FACT they claim new science they refuse to prove through science.....
with ALL the actual science I leave, this is what you reply back with.....BEGGING....
except for the NIST refusal letter denying, citing "public safety" as a reason for .
the E.O gives ANY Gov.agency, for what ever reason, the right to withhold data if it concerned anything related to 9-11.
and Sunder was not responsible.....
except for the NIST refusal letter denying, citing "public safety" as a reason for .
the E.O gives ANY Gov.agency, for what ever reason, the right to withhold data if it concerned anything related to 9-11.
and Sunder was not responsible.....
"the phenomenon that we saw on 9/11 that brought this particular building down was really thermal expansion, which occurs at lower temperatures."
NCSTAR 1A 3.6] "This free fall drop continues for approximately 8 stories, the distance traveled between t=1.75s and t=4.0s...constant, downward acceleration during this time interval. This acceleration was *9.8m/s^2*, equivalent to the acceleration of gravity."
NICSTAR 1A 4.3.4] Global Collapse..."The entire building above the buckled column region moved downward in a single unit, as observed, completing the global collapse"
NCSTAR1A p.39/130
"the damage from the debris from WTC 1 had little effect on initiating the collapse of WTC 7."