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.

 

Did NIST Edit WTC 7 Footage To Hide Evidence Of Implosion?

page: 1
88
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
+44 more 
posted on Sep, 2 2010 @ 02:43 PM
link   


After filing a lawsuit that prompted NIST to release more than 3 terabytes of photographs and videos from their investigation into the collapse of the twin towers and WTC 7 on 9/11, the International Center for 9/11 Studies has obtained evidence that suggests NIST edited several videos of the collapse of Building 7 in order to hide evidence of a controlled implosion. Fresh food that lasts from eFoods Direct (Ad) The Center filed a FOIA Request with NIST on January 26, 2009, seeking production of “all of the photographs and videos collected, reviewed, cited or in any other way used by NIST during its investigation of the World Trade Center building collapses.” Following several unsuccessful attempts to get NIST to even acknowledge receipt of the Request, the Center was forced to file a lawsuit on May 28, 2009. Shortly after the lawsuit was filed, the Request was assigned a reference number, and NIST began periodically releasing batches of responsive records. The Center has now begun posting some of those images and videos online, the first batch of which is from an external hard disk drive “NIST WTC Investigation Cumulus Video Clips.” In one of the clips, the video of which has been in the public domain for years, a loud, low-frequency boom can be heard just before the east penthouse of WTC 7 falls. Once the support columns that held up the penthouse are taken out, the rest of the building falls almost within its own footprint.


Just more to add to the never ending fire
cant wait to see more of this
what do you guys think
How do you Debunkers feel?

Link

www.infowars.com...




posted on Sep, 2 2010 @ 03:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by blankduck18
Just more to add to the never ending fire
cant wait to see more of this
what do you guys think
How do you Debunkers feel?


The supposedly "new" information is anything but new. The NIST report says that there had been an internal partial collapse of the structure, followed by complete collapse. We know this is the case becuase all the footage shows the Penthouse falling into the interior of the structire a few seconds before the collapse. Thsi is almost ceretainly the BOOM you're referring to.

Barking up the wrong tree is still barking up the wrong tree, regardless of how many lawsuits this bunch is filing in the hope that this make believe is true.



posted on Sep, 2 2010 @ 03:38 PM
link   
reply to post by blankduck18
 


Why would the penthouse be taken down first? And why could Mr. Hess not get out of an undamaged building? Also I've watched programs on building implosions and there seems to be alot of work involved with setting it up. Not one person witnessed the crews of the demolition teams rigging the buildings with explosives! Come on now.



posted on Sep, 2 2010 @ 04:55 PM
link   
reply to post by type0civ
 


Well there were reports that that the debris from the Tower impacted the WTC7. Now I am not sure as to whether that video was taken after the first or second collapse. Mr. Hess could have been blocked by fire, damaged areas, hell even pitch black hallways and stairways for all we know.


+60 more 
posted on Sep, 2 2010 @ 05:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
The supposedly "new" information is anything but new. The NIST report says that there had been an internal partial collapse of the structure, followed by complete collapse. We know this is the case [becuase] all the footage shows the Penthouse falling into the interior of the [structire] a few seconds before the collapse. [Thsi] is almost [ceretainly] the BOOM you're referring to.


Very convenient way to try to explain away a classic demolition implosion.

Unfortunately for you it also explains exactly how a controlled implosion works. The central columns drop first to allow a space for the outer walls to fall into.
Unfortunately for you this is impossible from an uncontrolled collapse. How does damage to one side cause the center of the building to fall perfectly timed before the outer walls, to allow them to fall ON TOP of the debris pile?

I have posted this link a few times now and you have yet to address it...

science.howstuffworks.com...

The gif., halfway down the page, explains exactly what happened to WTC 7. You can pretend that happened naturally if you wish, but anyone with a brain can see the obvious.

It doesn't matter how it fell, if it leaned to the west or not, or how long it took to collapse...



Outer walls sitting on top of the debris pile is impossible from a natural collapse. For the WTC 7 outer walls to be where they are the collapse had to be controlled, as per the link and gif above.

So Dave do you realise yet what a waste of time your long winded replies are? And no I did not get that from any 'damned fool conspiracy websites', thank you very much.

BTW you getting tired Dave? Your typing is getting extremely sloppy lately.


+31 more 
posted on Sep, 2 2010 @ 05:31 PM
link   
Great post, S&F.


Go figure that the reason NIST was not releasing all of this data for public scrutiny, was because they were manipulating it.


We all know the NIST reports were not peer reviewed, but while the "debunkers" are so hawkish on calling out "truthers" for this (even when they ARE peer-reviewed -- several times! -- they just start attacking the journals and reviewers), they have turned two blind eyes to the federal government. What brilliance these so-called "skeptics" have demonstrated. Not only is the massive work they most often cite not peer reviewed, the federal agency MANIPULATED the data and no one has had the ability to review it to expose the manipulation, this whole time!!


You can't trust the feds for anything.

All they know how to do is receive a bag of money with a smile on their face, and say whatever the boss wants them to say.


This FOIA request will show us what's what. Maybe they will finally even release their "simulation" parameters.


Calling all sheep: WAKE UP! Your almighty shepherd is a WOLF!


[edit on 2-9-2010 by VirginiaRisesYetAgain]


+16 more 
posted on Sep, 2 2010 @ 05:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
Thsi is almost ceretainly the BOOM you're referring to.


"almost certainly"




There was a NYPD officer named Craig Bartmer standing at the base of WTC7 the instant it began "collapsing."

He said the entire lobby ripped out in a massive explosion just before the rest of the building started free-falling down into it.

His opinion of the "fire did it" theory? BULL. He said he knows a bomb going off when it's in his face. I don't doubt it.


And if you want precedent for how someone could bring a bomb into such a tightly secured building, look no further than Oklahoma City. Murrah Federal Building. FEMA, DoD, Army and civilians ALL reported the removal of 2-3 undetonated bombs from WITHIN the building, attached to gas pipelines.


And people say "where is the evidence"... Well first of all let me ask you, where is your head? Because unless you put it back on your shoulders it's not going to do you much good.



posted on Sep, 2 2010 @ 06:01 PM
link   
reply to post by VirginiaRisesYetAgain
 


really? It exploded out into the street? Where does he say that?


"I saw, you know, there was definately fire in the building, you know, but ... um, I didn't hear any, and you know maybe this is movie crap, i didn't hear any creaking or i didn't hear any indication that it was going to come down, and all of a sudden the radios exploded and everybody started screaming, "Get away. Get away. Get away from it." and I was like a dear in the headlights. And I look up. "

It was that moment, you know, "Get away", and I looked up... and... it was nothing I would ever imagine seeing in my life. And all the things started peeling in on itself and... I mean, there was an umbrella of crap seven feet over my head that I just stared at. Somebody grabbed my shoulder and I started running and the [explitive]'s hitting the ground behind me and the whole time your hearing "thoom. thoom. thoom. thoom. thoom." So. I think I know an explosion when I hear it."


Ok, so let me see, He is standing right next to WTC7. And now according to his words, what gets his attention to look up? Was it a loud, KABOOM!!!! Boom booom boom boom!!!!!! going off prior to collapse? Or was it, "radio explodes with, 'Get away get away!!'" and what does he describe then? He looks up and see an umbrella of crap seven feet over his head (my my was it really seven feet over his head? A little indulgence, but understandable as its not every day you have a building coming down over you.) So he runs like hell. Debris lands behind him, he just makes it. Wait wait, what about the bolded part??

I didn't hear any indication that it was going to come down.
So, first there is no indication of it collapsing, he doesnt hear the creaking, then as he is standing next to it, the radios scream, get away! And THAT is when he looks up to see the building already collapsing on him?
Excuse me, but this contradicts the demo charges BS right there!!!

Ok, now review his words, and lets get down to good ol fashioned reading comprehension and critical thinking shall we? I'm sure we have all done this at one time or another at school with standardized testing.

According to his own words, what makes him "look up"?

(take your time, answer is below)




Now, had there been "demo charges" exploding in the WTC7 prior to collapse (as that is how an explosive controlled demolition works) why dont these grab his attention first, as he is standing RIGHT NEXT TO THE DARN THING????? Someone please explain how explosives can go off right next to a person in a building, and no one notices a thing, until someone screams, "GET AWAY!!" and THEN they look up and see the building's insides falling down and over?? I mean these must have been some super special silent explosives!

Now what else, oh! he says he hears "thoom thoom thoom" the whole time as the [expletive deleted] is hitting the ground. well gee, I'm pretty sure that will sound like explosions when you have debris and a 47 floor building collapsing all around you. Strange how he never mentions any detonations, or series of detonations prior to collapse.


[edit to add:]
My my my, the puppets.......... er I mean, cheerleaders are out in force for you today. Amazing all those stars, so little time!

[edit on 9/2/2010 by GenRadek]


+20 more 
posted on Sep, 2 2010 @ 06:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by GenRadek
My my my, the puppets.......... er I mean, cheerleaders are out in force for you today. Amazing all those stars, so little time!


Doesn't take long for people to understand the truth.

...And you just waffle on about explosives again, like it matters to anyone but you OSers.

Can you explain how the outer walls ended up ON TOP of the debris pile?
Didn't you attempt it once with your 'it leaned enough to the west for the walls to do that' reply, or was that one of your buddies?

C'mon you know if you can't explain this then trying to debunk people who heard explosives is pointless? People actually hearing explosives is the icing on the cake, without them we still have cake.

[edit on 9/2/2010 by ANOK]


+17 more 
posted on Sep, 2 2010 @ 06:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by GenRadek
reply to post by VirginiaRisesYetAgain
 


really? It exploded out into the street? Where does he say that?


Really? I said "exploded out into the street"? Where did I say that?




I'm not going to play the ego games you thrive on "Gen."

Here is the complete interview for everyone to watch for themselves:








There. No need to argue about it now. The man says what he means best himself and if you want to argue with that then go find another troll to have pointless bickering contests with.

I encourage everyone to watch the interview above and see what a real witness (not a nameless crowd) is describing as to what he personally experienced.



[edit to add:]
My my my, the puppets.......... er I mean, cheerleaders are out in force for you today. Amazing all those stars, so little time!


It tends to happen when a thread makes it to the ATS home page.

A puppet requires strings. What am I attached to? Steven Jones? Richard Gage? The thousands of other engineers and scientists?


I came to these conclusions myself and to no one else do I trust my judgment. That's the real difference between me and you. YOU are the puppet, of the federal government and everyone it pays off to lie to you. You never put a single skeptic thought to the "official story" and you continue to refuse to, to this day. Your whole outlook on whose responsibility it was to investigate that attack in the first place has been hopelessly warped by real snake-oils salesmen, the kind that the government pays.



posted on Sep, 2 2010 @ 07:20 PM
link   
reply to post by type0civ
 



Originally posted by type0civ
Not one person witnessed the crews of the demolition teams rigging the buildings with explosives! Come on now.


Come on now... After almost 9 years of debate of a 9/11 conspiracy, you never read about the theory that explosives could have been set BEFORE 9/11?

Either you live under a rock, or you purposely tried to make a half baked argument for reasons unknown.

You really have never heard about the stories of construction going on in the WTC's BEFORE 9/11, making people curious about the theory that explosives were set in place BEFORE 9/11, making people wonder about foreknowledge of 9/11?

I find it really hard to believe that you never heard of these theories and stories.


[edit on 2-9-2010 by Unst0ppable0ne]



posted on Sep, 2 2010 @ 07:27 PM
link   
-double post, sorry-


[edit on 2-9-2010 by illumin8ed]



posted on Sep, 2 2010 @ 07:29 PM
link   
-edit- Oops, made a mistake.

I just wanted to agree with you. I too find it hard to believe that he/she has never heard of that theory.



posted on Sep, 2 2010 @ 08:05 PM
link   
reply to post by VirginiaRisesYetAgain
 


Thanks for posting that interview I actually have never seen that one.

Ive come to the conclusion that regarding 9-11 there is really no convincing to be done. Those who need to be convinced will NOT be convinced, hell they wont even entertain the theories long enough to see them completely through.

The time for convincing people of the reality of 9-11 is probably obsolete at this point. I have had these discussions with about every person I can get a hold of and in the end most are too mentally lazy to even think about the implications. They just nod and say "ya" ..."who knows" or some other mindless drivel.

You could point out any of the numerous anomalies or contradictions in the OS to them and their next statement will STILL be built on the foundation that terrorists did 9-11. It's beyond infuriating.

S&F though for the honest effort.



posted on Sep, 2 2010 @ 08:08 PM
link   
reply to post by VirginiaRisesYetAgain
 


I apologize, as I was quickly reading through and it looked like that, but here was your quote:


the entire lobby ripped out in a massive explosion


Again, maybe you can give me the direct transcript of this? Because what I posted is exactly was I find everytime from this poor soul.

but once again, nice dodge at my initial questions. Will you or any of your pupp... erm I mean, cheerleader star posters, answer my challenge. Why does Craig only look up at the building, while standing next to it, after the radio crackles with "get away!"? Wouldnt the sound of the demo charges going off be heard first BEFORE the collapse begins? Answer me that and then continue, because this is an important question. Will you adress this conundrum or ignore it away because it does not jive with your preconcieved notions?

I mean come now, he would forget to mention hearing a loud series of explosions before he looks up to see the building already crumbling? I know you are smarter than this. use some common sense here. he contradicts himself right off the bat.



posted on Sep, 2 2010 @ 08:13 PM
link   
There's been hundreds of architects and engineers who have come out stating that those buildings can't free fall into their own footprint. The trade towers and building 7's foundation were not affected by planes crashing into the upper stories of the buildings. The pancake theory doesn't hold water due to the fact that the lower part of the buildings would have created resistance. The concrete elevator shafts would also have created resistance and concrete can't melt. A building can't collapse in free fall and into its own foot print unless the base of the building is pulled out from under it's own weight. All three building did this. This is way too much of a coincidence for all 3 buildings to collapse in the same way. The basic principle of physics "every action has an equal and opposite reaction." In other words, the energy of the top floors pushing down on the unaffected lower floors would be met with equal energy or in this case resistance." Not to mention the fact that airplane fuel doesn't burn above 1,500 degree Fahrenheit. To melt or weaken steel has to exceed 3,000 - 4,000 degree Fahrenheit. What does our government have to hide? If the official explanation of the collapse is correct, why not prove it in front of a panel of architects and engineers for the public to view? If they can publicly televise an investigation of a presidents infidelity and watergate, isn't a national tragedy like 911 worth a televised investigation?


+1 more 
posted on Sep, 2 2010 @ 08:27 PM
link   
Yup. I hear the boom right before the collapse of the penthouse. You can too if you turn the audio up a bit.



And that's the best resolution yet I have seen of that clip. Look at the way the penthouse at the top goes first, and then the rest of the building comes down after it. A symmetrical collapse just simply does not make sense here if that building went down by fire. That building was demolished. Game over.

And oh yeah. Flags people, let's go. To the top of ATS this thread goes please.

[edit on Thu Sep 2nd 2010 by TrueAmerican]



posted on Sep, 2 2010 @ 08:28 PM
link   
Reading through some of the official conspiracy theorists drivel, I am reminded of how I lost part of my family because of 911. I was told that I ought to be ashamed, by one who survived the zionist plot by accepting it as truth, for my thinking. It will hurt many years from now when I realize that this is one of many wedges that were driven between us, over time.

There's no convincing the frightened of anything, not even that they're frightened. There's really nothing in common after that. All I can think is that if the person who'd spoken thus to me was my wife, I'd erase her from my memory. The persons who support what the nwo did that day, and every day after it with televised media lies, are persons I never want to meet. Hell is too good for their wrechedness. A survival instinct that takes fear, and willingness to serve evil, and transforms it into accusations of mental instability and stupidity...priceless, for a rat.

Imagine what terror must fill their steps every time they enter a building. If a fire breaks out, coupled with a few gusts of wind, the whole thing could come down.



posted on Sep, 2 2010 @ 08:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by GenRadek
I apologize, as I was quickly reading through and it looked like that


Did you see any quotation marks? Ever seen quotation marks? (Look like this: " ") If it was a direct quote I would have used quotation marks.

I posted the whole interview above. Argue with Mr. Bartmer about what he experienced, not me. He would know better than either of us since he was actually there watching it happen. That's why I posted it. For everyone to watch. No need for immature, egotistical bickering to no end. No need for it at all.

Like I said last post, you'll have to find someone else to feed you now. No need to say the same thing 3 or 4 times in a row. At least no point in it for me.



Originally posted by davidmann
Reading through some of the official conspiracy theorists drivel, I am reminded of how I lost part of my family because of 911. I was told that I ought to be ashamed, by one who survived the zionist plot by accepting it as truth, for my thinking.


No need to be discouraged friend. In the future people will have greater clarity as to what has happened to all of us. Hindsight is 20/20, like Bush used to always tell us after he did something stupid. As sad as it is, if not for events like 9/11, no one would ever have been riled up enough to start taking dramatic action. But millions of individuals have been inspired to take responsibility into their own hands since that day, and they're only just getting warmed up. We will come out of Zionism in one piece and a few thousand-year-old disease will finally be dead forever. Those who died, even though it was lied about and is still being lied about, will not have died in vain when it's all over. For every person that died in those attacks, at least 10 people have woken up to what's going on because of them.



posted on Sep, 2 2010 @ 08:44 PM
link   
reply to post by type0civ
 


Hess and Jennings were trapped when North Tower came down and damaged stairways inside of building. FDNY members searching building
for people found them and escorted them from WTC 7.

Much of lower south side was heavily damaged including 2 elevator cars
dislodged from their shafts on 8/9 floors

Damage extended to the west face



After WTC 1 collapsed:

Heavy debris on Vesey Street and WTC 7 Promenade

No heavy debris observed in lobby area, white dust coating

SW Corner Damage -- floors 8 to 18

South face damage between two exterior columns - roof level down 5 to 10 floors, extent not known

South Face Damage

middle 1/4 - 1/3 width south face, 10th floor to ground

large debris hole near center around 14th floor

1/4 width south face, above 5th floor, atrium glass intact
8th/9th floor from inside, visible south wall gone with more damage to west, 2 elevator cars dislodged into elevator lobby




new topics

top topics



 
88
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join