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.

 

Leaked NIST Docs: "Unusual" Event Before Collapse Of WTC 7

page: 1
10
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 25 2008 @ 09:33 AM
link   
www.prisonplanet.com...

NIST REPORT



"Just prior to the collapse of the building at 5:20:52 p.m. a jet of flames was pushed from windows in the same area. The event that caused this unusual behavior has not been identified."


Prison Planet has also got a link to the documents
www.infowars.net...

They want help in identifying anything else, and you can email them;at the bottom of the article is their email.


A leaked document admitting there was an 'unusual' event, if a building imploding wasn't unusual in and of itself. It seems, that some kind of explosion took place, the question of course about this, is why would an uncontrolled explosion lead to what looked like a controlled demolition!



[edit on 25-6-2008 by talisman]




posted on Jun, 25 2008 @ 12:11 PM
link   
Get ready for the: "It was air being pushed out from the interior collapsing" or something similar.

You know, like how air gets compressed and pushes out one window 50 stories below the collapse wave on the towers.



posted on Jun, 25 2008 @ 01:40 PM
link   
Well this is kind of promising, at least considering that the last I heard from NIST about WTC7 was that they gave up trying to explain how it happened and were just trying to discredit the CD hypothesis. That would make a hell of an explanatory report, wouldn't it? ...

I just posted Craig Bartmer's testimony in another thread. He was a NYPD officer who testifies to explosions ripping from the base of the building as it began collapsing.



posted on Jun, 25 2008 @ 06:20 PM
link   


Get ready for the: "It was air being pushed out from the interior collapsing" or something similar.


Geez Griff you finally got something right! You feeling Ok?

Seen this happen at fireground - an interior collapse of floor or partition
results in air blast pushing fire out of openings. Have to be careful of
flying sparks and embers igniting fires, can occur at considerable
distances.



posted on Jun, 25 2008 @ 06:39 PM
link   
Exclusive video of emergency official Barry Jennings discussing explosions inside WTC 7 before either of the twin towers had collapsed and having to step over dead bodies of victims as he attempted to vacate the building has been released for the first time.


www.prisonplanet.com...

I belive this man is telling the truth.
What dose he gain by lieing.



posted on Jun, 25 2008 @ 07:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by cashlink
I belive this man is telling the truth.
What dose he gain by lieing.

Attention.



posted on Jun, 25 2008 @ 08:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by thedman
Seen this happen at fireground - an interior collapse of floor or partition
results in air blast pushing fire out of openings. Have to be careful of
flying sparks and embers igniting fires, can occur at considerable
distances.


I calls it like I sees it. Could be either in my book. But, then again, I try not to be biased.



posted on Jun, 25 2008 @ 08:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kulturcidist

Originally posted by cashlink
I belive this man is telling the truth.
What dose he gain by lieing.

Attention.


And he wouldn't have gotten more fame from being a 9/11 hero?

Funny how all who ran away from the tragedy are considered heros by some...hmmm...Giuliani. But yet, those who fought for their lives and saved others ....Rodriguez...Jennings...are considered the bad guys? Funny ain't it?



posted on Jun, 25 2008 @ 08:57 PM
link   
hmmm interesting, great post!!! every little piece of info. we can get our hands on will help bring the truth to light....it WILL come out eventually, there is too much evidence to the contrary of the "official" version.



posted on Jun, 25 2008 @ 10:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Kulturcidist
 



Truth Hurts dosent it!

Would you care to prove him a lier!

Maybe You know something we dont.

care to share with us.



posted on Jun, 25 2008 @ 11:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Griff
Get ready for the: "It was air being pushed out from the interior collapsing" or something similar.

You know, like how air gets compressed and pushes out one window 50 stories below the collapse wave on the towers.


What I find interesting here with this, is the report called it an *UNUSUAL EVENT*.

Would that not eliminate some of the mundane explanations with compressed air?



posted on Jun, 26 2008 @ 08:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by talisman
What I find interesting here with this, is the report called it an *UNUSUAL EVENT*.

Would that not eliminate some of the mundane explanations with compressed air?


Very good point.

But, FEMA called the errosion/corrosion of the steel an "unusual event" that may have aided the collapses. And we still get people that say gypsum did it when gypsum is actually used as a fire retardant. And no one has backed up with empirical evidence that it can happen.

I'm just saying. The usual suspects will be here saying it's air being compressed. That's all.



posted on Jun, 26 2008 @ 10:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by Griff


But, FEMA called the errosion/corrosion of the steel an "unusual event" that may have aided the collapses. And we still get people that say gypsum did it when gypsum is actually used as a fire retardant. And no one has backed up with empirical evidence that it can happen.



You're aware that there were 2 pieces of steel that showed the intragranular melting, right? One from 7 and one from.... 2 I believe.

The piece from 2 WAS IN FACT addressed by NIST, and was found to have happened while it was in the pile.

So that "unusual event" has, in fact, been looked into. So I think we can lay off the gypsum thing now, right? Especially since, as you have previously stated, that that claim came from a message board and NOT from NIST, or FEMA, or any other guv agency.....



posted on Jun, 26 2008 @ 04:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seymour Butz
The piece from 2 WAS IN FACT addressed by NIST, and was found to have happened while it was in the pile.


And they know this how?


So that "unusual event" has, in fact, been looked into. So I think we can lay off the gypsum thing now, right? Especially since, as you have previously stated, that that claim came from a message board and NOT from NIST, or FEMA, or any other guv agency.....


It has not been looked at nor has it been addressed. Unless you'd like to point out in the NIST report where they came to a conclusion of what caused it.

At least the people on the message board claimed something. Unlike NIST who was taxed to find these answers yet never did.

Tell me. Do you feel safe in steel highrise buildings knowing that if a fire breaks out, that somehow maybe the steel will corrode/errode and may help in a collapse? If not, why aren't you asking for these answers also?

[edit on 6/26/2008 by Griff]



posted on Jun, 26 2008 @ 05:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Griff
 


They DID address it Griff.

wtc.nist.gov...

See chapter "Single Column K-16" on page 229 to page 233) (PDF page 279 -
283)

"Finally, as this piece was clearly in a prone position during the corrosive attack and was located no higher than the 53rd floor of the building, this degradation phenomenon had no bearing on the weakening of the steel structure or the collapse of the building ."

K-16 was a core column. Columns are vertically oriented.

NIST concluded that it underwent the corrosive attack while it was in a prone position.

Therefore, it was in the pile when it corroded.



posted on Jun, 26 2008 @ 08:10 PM
link   
Interesting.

So, again. Where's the answer? They didn't state much about an answer.



posted on Jun, 26 2008 @ 09:35 PM
link   
hmmm, this is interesting, indeed, every day there are more scientific documents and facts that point to an inside job linked to Israeli mossad agents

nanovapor


reply to post by talisman
 



posted on Jun, 26 2008 @ 10:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seymour Butz
NIST concluded that it underwent the corrosive attack while it was in a prone position.

Therefore, it was in the pile when it corroded.


I just want to point out that this logic has holes and the corrosion itself was never studied in any detail.

For example, consider for a moment that the corrosion could have had everything to do with the collapses and occurred during/slightly before the collapses. Where is this hypothesis refuted by any actual evidence of NIST's? (It isn't, and neither Seymour nor anyone else will find/post it, mostly because they never bothered to verify any of their critical hypotheses.) They only settle on the one they do because it already fits with their main hypothesis (again, not proven), just as they apparently settled on the "fact" that the buildings came down from planes and fire alone before they began their investigation, and Val showed in one of her own threads how this directly influenced the (pre-set) direction of the investigation.



posted on Jun, 26 2008 @ 11:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Griff
 


The answer to what?

I've been laughing at your statements that NIST has never investigated these 2 pieces. It's been amusing, really.

Now it's time to admit that you're wrong about that.



posted on Jun, 26 2008 @ 11:16 PM
link   
reply to post by bsbray11
 


I see that as usual, you have failed to read the link provided.

Please do so and then tell us all what your investigoogling has unearthed that can discredit it.



new topics

top topics



 
10
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join