• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

NIST Denies Access to WTC7 Data

Dave Rogers said:
Maybe, but who wouldn't want to see him representing the truth movement in court?

Dave
Click to expand...

That would be the biggest boost to Court TV's viewers ratings since the OJ trial. Or, Comedy Central maybe.:)
 
if I was NIST, or FEMA, or the FBI, or the DOD, I wouldn't give **** to any Truther "researcher".

these agencies are under no obligation to help those who accuse them of mass-murder.
 
9/11 Chewy Defense said:
Is there any evidence that NIST is refusing to release any data they have?

If in fact there is evidence, where is the source of the information?

If there isn't any evidence or source of information, then it's concluded that the information is false & that NIST has been able to release all the current data they have updated.
Click to expand...

Did you even bother to check the link in the OP?
 
T.A.M. said:
accept? from my perspective, with my lack of expertise, and their plethora of it...I would accept it.

As a paranoid, know it all truther, hell bent on slandering and crucifying anyone related to the investigations of the attacks...no, I would want (not that I would seriously accept any answer from them if I was a truther) clarification.

TAM:)
Click to expand...

Wow, now that's some real critical thinking going on there.
 
RedIbis said:
Wow, now that's some real critical thinking going on there.
Click to expand...

Red. I am not a structural engineer, or physicist. The scientists that work for NIST are just that. From my pov, they are reasonable experts in this area. If they feel it is best not to release the data for public safety reasons, the while curious, i would accept it.

TAM:)
 
T.A.M. said:
Red. I am not a structural engineer, or physicist. The scientists that work for NIST are just that. From my pov, they are reasonable experts in this area. If they feel it is best not to release the data for public safety reasons, the while curious, i would accept it.

TAM:)
Click to expand...

So you believe without question that the experts at NIST are telling the truth. But you believe without question that the experts (engineers and physicists) who question NIST are wrong? Either way you show you are in no way a skeptic but merely an apologist for the powers that be.
 
cmatrix said:
So you believe without question that the experts at NIST are telling the truth. But you believe without question that the experts (engineers and physicists) who question NIST are wrong? Either way you show you are in no way a skeptic but merely an apologist for the powers that be.
Click to expand...
I had a friend at WPI ask for them and they are available on a "need to know" basis.

(He's trying to get me a copy of the email but, the school system security keeps getting in the way)

Do you have a "need to know"?
 
DGM said:
I had a friend at WPI ask for them and they are available on a "need to know" basis.

(He's trying to get me a copy of the email but, the school system security keeps getting in the way)

Do you have a "need to know"?
Click to expand...

Why would the data be "need to know" unless it was sensitive. Why would it be sensitive unless it was completely fraudulent and would enrage the American people? They are protecting themselves not the US people.
 
"Sensitive" could also mean "information that could be used by bad actors to do bad things to buildings." I mean, after 1993 and 2001, why should we make the next terrorist attack on a high rise any easier by publishing a playbook?
 
carlitos said:
"Sensitive" could also mean "information that could be used by bad actors to do bad things to buildings." I mean, after 1993 and 2001, why should we make the next terrorist attack on a high rise any easier by publishing a playbook?
Click to expand...

So instead of having AE 9/11 truth sign some sort of non-disclosure agreement they would allow the world to entertain the obvious possibility that they are hiding a massive fraud? Call me a skeptic.

What on Earth would the sensitive information be? Where to set office fires to cause buildings to collapse? Unreal.
 
cmatrix said:
Why would the data be "need to know" unless it was sensitive. Why would it be sensitive unless it was completely fraudulent and would enrage the American people? They are protecting themselves not the US people.
Click to expand...
Do you think it would be wise to publish the vulnerabilities of building designs? Why don't you contact your local university and convince them to do a study based on your
'feelings"?
 
cmatrix said:
So instead of having AE 9/11 truth sign some sort of non-disclosure agreement...
Click to expand...


Perhaps they don't believe that AE 9/11 truth can be trusted to honor such an agreement.

Can't imagine why, though.

Oh, wait, ... ah, yes I can!

...they would allow the world to entertain the obvious possibility that they are hiding a massive fraud?
Click to expand...


Perhaps they believe that possibility to be not much of a concern.

Can't imagine why, though.

Oh, wait, ... ah, yes I can!

Respectfully,
Myriad
 
cmatrix said:
So instead of having AE 9/11 truth sign some sort of non-disclosure agreement they would allow the world to entertain the obvious possibility that they are hiding a massive fraud? Call me a skeptic.

What on Earth would the sensitive information be? Where to set office fires to cause buildings to collapse? Unreal.
Click to expand...

Why do you need the information? Will not change the fact fire destroyed WTC 7.

If you set fire to a structure after punching a few holes for air in it and disabling the fire systems, and no fire fighting is done, the building will be totaled if there is enough fuel, office contents. FACT

Why are you unable to grasp reality? 9 years of failure, what will you do next? I would take a few course in fire science so you understand fire.
 
Last edited:
cmatrix said:
So instead of having AE 9/11 truth sign some sort of non-disclosure agreement they would allow the world to entertain the obvious possibility that they are hiding a massive fraud? Call me a skeptic.

What on Earth would the sensitive information be? Where to set office fires to cause buildings to collapse? Unreal.
Click to expand...

Face Palm.

Here, cmatrix, hire a lawyer, or do it yourself, file a petition for judicial review seeking access to the materials.

Cmatrix must of course be aware that he and his hero have recourse to the Federal Courts. Federal courts have jurisdiction to "enjoin the agency from withholding agency records" 5 U.S.C. § 552(a)(4)(B).

"An agency seeking to withhold information under an exemption to FOIA has the burden of proving that the information falls under the claimed exemption." GC Micro Corp. v. Defense Logistics Agency, 33 F.3d 1109, 1113 (9th Cir. 1994); see also Lewis v. IRS, 823 F.2d 375, 378 (9th Cir.1987).

What is the staus of the litigation in the Federal Courts, truther?
 
Last edited:
cmatrix said:
Obviously NIST has nothing to hide:

http://911blogger.com/news/2010-07-12/nist-denies-access-wtc-collapse-data

Their crackpot physics-violating theory based solely on a computer model cannot have its data publicly scrutinized as it "might jeopardize public safety". Well millions of pitch fork wielding Americans could certainly jeopardize NIST's public safety.
Click to expand...

I don't own a pitchfork, but I do own several dinner and salad forks. Will those do? And do I need to actually march somewhere with them, or does the fact that I own them suffice? Your post isn't clear.
 
T.A.M. said:
lol...

2. Once again, you complain here continuously about the attacks and vitriol, yet you thrown in words and threats (to NIST, good honest men and women) like that above.

TAM:)
Click to expand...

hilite sounded a bit biased.
 
cmatrix said:
So you believe without question that the experts at NIST are telling the truth. But you believe without question that the experts (engineers and physicists) who question NIST are wrong? Either way you show you are in no way a skeptic but merely an apologist for the powers that be.
Click to expand...

No, what i said was, with regard to releasing the data for public safety reasons, i have no reason from my past reading or observations of their actions, behaviour, or otherwise, to doubt the their reason. As a result, unless someone can show me (forget it truthers, i have seen it all) a reasons to doubt them, i will trust that the good honest women and men at NIST would not lie about such a thing.

TAM:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom