Also, just because 9/11 is an inside job...does NOT IMPLY I am saying certain people and/or organizations know about it. I don't even understand how you imply that I'm saying NIST is in on it.
You imply that the NIST report is a fabrication or a product of a government cover-up, and you have NEVER stated your opinion that the scientists were innocent in the matter.
They might just be taking orders from above...
So, you are accusing them of removing their scientific ethics in order to support the largest terrorist plot in US history. You believe that there are some 500 people sitting in their offices right now who don't feel in the least bit guilty for assisting the government in murdering their fellow citizens. You believe that scientists are all a bunch of orders following sheep who will produce any theory and any report with no basis on evidence just because their superiors tell them to. You believe NIST scientists are cowards, sycophantic patsys who will do anything to keep their job including breaking every known principle of ethics and participating in a lie. You believe they do all this so that they can keep their jobs.
Is this what you believe?
NO, I don't think they were actively involved in planning 9/11...but, just say that some people in NIST have reason to believe it is an inside job
No, let's not make a wild, baseless assumption that proves your point. Let's assume that all NIST scientists are brilliant, upstanding citizens with the highest standards of morality and ethics. Now, let's work on that assumption.
...what do they have to benefit from speaking out?
They no longer have to live with the horrible guilt of lies and deceit of the American people. For a moral person, this is all the benefit they need.
Do you really think it will make a difference?
Yes, an earth shatteringly huge difference. You conspiracy theorists would jump up to make him/her ruler of the entire operation. It would be a big deal.
The only thing that will happen is this person will be painted as a traitor...an idiot...a CTer...unpatriotic etc etc.
Unless he was able to provide documentation and proof of coercion. That, of course, is the difference between a conspiracy theorist and a whistle blower: Whistle blowers produce hard evidence, and then they go to the press. Conspiracy theorists go to the press with the promise of finding the truth, once they get enough attention, that is.
Not to mention the fact, that he will be blacklisted from an entire industry of jobs. Is the picture getting any clearer?
What industry is NIST in? What do they do?
In addition: do we even know the names of all the experts from around the world who were involved in the NIST?
Yes. Their names are listed on the first pages of the NIST NCSTAR1 report.
And, if so...do any of them have their own individual reports?
Yes, many published companion or individual reports detailing their involvement, some were able to publish seperate technique reports.
Has anyone taken the time to see if any of these experts have spoken out about the NIST?
Yes, none of them have. If one did, you can bet the CTists would be the first to report it.
See, the thing you may be overlooking is the fact that although you say there are hundreds involved in the NIST...THERE IS BUT ONE REPORT!
So hundreds of different people should all publish separate reports detailing individual aspects of the investigation, but no one should ever think to gather all of the information and put it in one, easily accessible source and make it available to the public? Do you have any idea how much it costs to get reprints of different reports from different journals? The cost alone would make obtaining the NIST report impossible for the general public.
I've already stated at how the NIST is government funded.
And I've already shown how this is a poisoning the well fallacy.
..so how easy do you think it would be for them (the government) to HOMOGENIZE this ONE report...down into whatever they want it to be?
So, let me get this straight. A lot of scientists and industry collaborators all get together and produce a report that they believe to be correct and hand it to their administrators. The administrators proceed to change the report however they see fit and then publish the finished report. None of the scientists ever read the finished report (NIST released two reports, one draft for comment and one final report), because if they did, they might notice that the report said the opposite of what their data did. Is that what you believe?
(Distorting reality is a very simple process...the american media do it every day...
And they get away with it because people don't fact check. A scientist would fact check his and others work.
and they don't even need to lie...being disingenuous will work just fine.
And which is a greater breach of ethics? Disingenuous? How is that any different from lying?
All they do is omit certain facts and/or details...
Please show what facts and details were omitted from the NIST report. I would love to see this.
From what I know...the NIST doesn't even consider planted explosives into their calculations.
Because they found no evidence of explosives being used.
Ug, I'll finish this debunking later, and since you seem to have no time to address any of my points, I'll do it for my own edification.
