9-11/official/reports/NIST

Overview

The NIST's report on 9/11 has received widespread criticism for its apparent deep flaws.

This page is a seed article. You can help Issuepedia water it: make a request to expand a given page and/or donate to help give us more writing-hours!

Quotes About

• Fire Engineering magazine editor calls the NIST investigation "half-baked farce"... "a full-force, full-throttle investigation is necessary"

Objections

• did not mention WTC7 at all
• only addresses sequence of events up to the initiation of collapse, does not attempt to explain the collapse itself (how is this useful?)
  • the collapse itself is waved away as "inevitable", regardless of any historical precedent
• UL investigator Kevin Ryan pointed out that tests NIST hired UL to do heated (something) to 2000° for up to 2 hours and only resulted in sag of 4 inches, but NIST used a sag of 42 inches in their simulation
• NIST refuses to allow access to their simulations or data, despite the triviality of the expense and the fact that the information should all be in the public domain since it was produced by government employees on the job and is not classified (there is a law about this somewhere...) This was supposed to be a public investigation, and yet the details have been kept secret.
• The report does not address any of the evidence of controlled demolition, even to dismiss it.

Links

Analysis

• 2005-12-08 (v1.0) Building a Better Mirage "NIST's 3-Year $20,000,000 Cover-Up of the Crime of the Century" by Jim Hoffman