In response to the report recently presented by National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) concerning the destruction of the WTC 7 buildings, a group of scientists, scholars, architects and engineers have written the following to the NIST:
I am writing on behalf of a group of scientists, scholars, engineers and building professionals who are dedicated to scientific research regarding the destruction of all three high-rise buildings (WTC 1, 2 and 7) on September 11, 2001. We have examined the draft reports recently released by NIST purporting to explain the demise of WTC Building 7. We have found many areas that need to be revised and re-examined by NIST personnel before they release a final report on this matter. We have provided our names and affiliations at the end of this document, in accordance with the guidelines for submittal of comments promulgated by NIST at (http://wtc.nist.gov/media/comments2008.html).
The names of those who think the agency’s report is seriously flawed includes: James R. Gourley (Chemical Engineer); Tony Szamboti (Mechanical Engineer); Richard Gage (AIA Architect); Dr. Steven Jones (Ph.D. in Physics); Kevin Ryan (Chemist); Dr. Niels Harrit (Ph.D. Chemistry, University of Copenhagen); Ron Brookman (Structural Engineer); Scott Grainger, PE (Forensic Engineer) and several others.
(WTC7 was a 47-story building that was not hit by an airplane or by any significant debris from either WTC1 or WTC2. Buildings 3, 4, 5, and 6 were struck by massive amounts of debris from the collapsing TwinTowers, yet none collapsed, despite their thin-gauge steel supports. WTC7 was the farthest of the buildings from WTC1 and WTC2. It happened to contain the New York City Office of Emergency Management (OEM), a facility that was, according to testimony to the 9-11 Commission, one of the most sophisticated Emergency Command Centers on the planet. But shortly after 5:20 pm on Sept. 11, as the horrific day was coming to a close, WTC7 mysteriously imploded and fell to the ground in an astounding 6.5 seconds).
Jointly, the scholars point out so many inconsistencies, loopholes, omissions and commissions that reduce the 1000+ page report to little worthier than the time one would spend reading it. Most of their objections are technical, supported with computer simulations, charts and figures. It is difficult to ignore any of their objections, leave alone the several that they have placed for public view. For example:
NIST states “No steel was recovered from WTC 7” while FEMA section C.2 shows that at least one piece of WTC 7 steel was tested, with the results being alarming, considering the highly unusual formation of a liquid eutectic, intergranular melting, and erosion. Features not seen before, by the experienced investigators, in steel subject to common office fires.
The above was in reference to building 7 at the WorldTradeCenter in Manhattan. Building 1 and 2 were directly hit by two aircrafts, flying right through the middle of thousands of missiles ready to shoot down any infiltrator into the land of America. Dramatically, CNN was ready to photograph the dramatic event from roughly the same height at which the 2nd aircraft came in flying. The filming was perfect. The CNN also relayed a live film from Palestine showing the Palestinians celebrating the attack on America. But, when the Palestinians pointed that it was an old film shot on another occasion perhaps several years ago then CNN apologized and withdrew it. Out of tens of thousands of such films stacked in the CNN archive, it was this particular film that was at hand, to be relayed at the right moment.
The two aircrafts brought down the buildings: glass, alum, concrete and steel, all reduced to powder within hours. Iron originates in the core of stars. The temperature required to melt it is 2700 deg. F. The aircraft petrol supposedly melted the iron. It was the same petrol that does not melt iron parts within aircraft engines. It was the same petrol that does not melt the iron when an aircraft crashes and burns to ashes. Though a little charred, the iron parts remain whole after the crash. Did the same petrol melt down the steel structure of the buildings? No. It reduced much of the steel to powder! Another oddity was that the aircraft strike that reduced the buildings to dust, could not burn one of the Arab passports which was found in the heap during excavation.
But the greatest oddity was the major media covering the event live, predicting what would happen next. The scholars point out: “The BBC continued to announce that WTC 7 had collapsed, even when the building could be seen standing directly behind reporter Jane Standley, for about 17 minutes until the story was pulled abruptly.” And, “CNN’s Aaron Brown (said), one hour and ten minutes in advance of the collapse: ‘We are getting information now that one of the other buildings, Building 7, in the World Trade Center complex, is on fire and has either collapsed or is collapsing…’” (Michael Ruppert has called the Western Corporate Media “a lunatic organization.” But that is another matter. Maybe Ruppert is lunatic. Ref. fromthewilderness.com).
As is well known, within hours the administration knew who was behind the attack and consequently, war was immediately declared on Afghanistan and Iraq.
It is common knowledge among the historians (see e.g., Sherman Jackson, Islam in Transition, pp. 395-400) that tribes, nations and peoples have throughout history lived in a “state of war.” That is, it was understood throughout time, that if there was no treaty of peace and friendship between tribes, states and nations, then, they were in a “state of war” with each other. Any attack by one on another was presumed as “a thing expected to happen.” People had to be on guard against any attack any time, and, with failure to defend themselves, could lose their freedom, wealth, property, women and children. In the seventeenth century India, the British could expect attack by anybody: the French, Portuguese, or one of the Indian states. Contra wise, any Indian state could launch an attack on the British, or on other Indian states. In Europe of the last century, every state, unless in Treaty, could, and did attack another any time. Britain, France, Germany (Prussia), Poland, Russia, Italy, Spain, Portugal, and several others were all in a “state of war” with each other, both within Europe as well as abroad in places they had colonized or were in the process of it. People living on the border areas now belonged to this state, then, after a raid, paid taxes to another, and, after another fight, perhaps to a third state. It was sort of normal, and, although sick of the wars between states, there was little that the common men and women could do about it, except for offering their own services to one or the other army and get paid for fighting.
Then came World War 1. It was actually primarily a European War, but the Western historians wished not to have the stigma stuck on them. However, the devastations of the war and the loss of 15 million lives, due to the use of newly developed weapons of mass destruction led the leaders of Europe to the conclusion that if not reigned in, future wars fought with more destructive arms could annihilate a larger number of mankind. The League of Nations was created which placed curbs on nations’ instinct of war. But, old habits die hard. Armed to the teeth with newer technological weapons, Germany began to flex its muscles. Ultimately the whole of Europe, USA and Japan got involved resulting in the demise of 50 million people (5 crores). Europe lay in ruins. To further curb the instinct of wars and aggression, the newly created United Nations prohibited any aggression against any nation, anywhere in the world. Boundaries were declared sacred and occupation by an aggressor was mandated as illegal and unrecognizable. Nations had at last given humanity peace by declaring the borders inviolable. (Saddam Hussein believed in this pledge and paid with his life and the destruction of his country. He reckoned the USA would never ignore the mandate and enter into his country).
In any case, nations had at last signed to come out of the culture of the “state of war.” But not every nation was so convinced of the “no aggression” declarations: the most powerful, the USA (in the same position today as Germany before the Second World War) considers itself above any law. It had signed too, but half-heartedly. On the practical side, what was it to do with the thousands of tons of arms it was producing every year? It allowed its bastard child Israel to occupy Arab lands, and then itself went into Korea and devastated it; into Vietnam and devastated it, and is now in Iraq and Afghanistan, devastating them. The culture of the “state of war” is back.
The Sept. 11 attack was a fraud that was used as a pretext to officially usher the “state of war.” America has promised an endless war on “terrorism” which it says may last a hundred years. (Saddam Hussein’s brilliance led him to call it the “Mother of all wars”). Wars will not go away now. The culture is definitely going to spread. This century is going to be the century of wars. Unless the West can be forcefully restrained, every few years a nation will invade another. There is plenty of bloodshed ahead for mankind.
The Neocons, corporate bosses, fascists, tyrants, capitalists, democratically elected dictators, and others of their class, have a very different psyche. It is the psyche of the proud and greedy. It is this class, let lose, that brought the devastation on Europe, twice within a hundred years. It is this class that is now aiming its guns at Asia. This class believes it has the right to decide, not the fate of nations, but the fate of the entire globe. For this class, killing, wiping out millions, and demolishing whole towns, are like removing straws from the path. There are rumors that this class is of the belief that since the ecological damage is irreversible, their own people’s unproductivity and hedonism incorrigible, populations uncontrollable, and the resources irreplaceable, the only viable solution is to reduce the population of the world by a four-fifth. One-fifth of the present figure would be comfortable. This is a rumor. But the ease with which they have been killing since the start of this century, (at the rate of about 900 humans a day), and their desire to expand the conflict, are some indications that the rumor might have a basis and may prove true: if not now, then, perhaps in years ahead. The dismemberment of an Asian country, strategically placed (from the point of view of maximum turbulence to the states around), economic destruction of a huge population, leading to mass deaths through starvation could be the “first-trial” on the card after limited success in Iraq. If successful, operations here could loosen waves of millions spilling into the surrounding countries, destabilizing the economy and political setup of those countries, spreading anarchy and leading to wars between themselves.
Yet, things may not happen the way they envision. Iraq is a case in point. With its invasion and destruction, murder and mayhem, torture and humiliation, a curse seems to have descended upon the USA. Things haven’t gone the way they were designed. The war itself has cost the USA close to $ 3 trillion. The country has run into a massive national debt of 9 trillion (to creditors like: China, Japan, Germany and others). Unemployment is the highest in decades. Budget deficit may reach a trillion. Food prices have doubled and gas prices trebled. On top of it, Katarina and Ike rendered New Orleans like Fallujah and Texas like the Anbar province. And now, as these lines are being written, the “Shock and Awe” of Iraq and Afghanistan has descended on the financial markets of USA and its allies. The economic bubble has burst and a governmental bail out to the tune of three-fourth of a trillion promises higher taxes in near future (stifling economic growth) and rapid increase in budget deficits which will lead to cuts in social and public expenditures, causing social upheaval and increase in crime, lawlessness and financial corruption.
Coming few years will be crucial. Will the turmoil lead to fascist elements seizing power and complete control? Will the German experience repeated in the USA? Writes Peter Schwarz (WSWS: 22 September 2008):
In Germany the economic crisis of 1929, as is well known, led within the space of four years to the seizure of power by the Nazis. Hitler was able to succeed because of the abject failure of the workers’ parties. The SPD paralysed the working class by binding it to the impotent institutions of the WeimarRepublic while supporting Brüning’s emergency laws; and the German Communist Party paralysed the working class by hiding its fatalism behind left-wing phraseology, rejecting a united front to oppose the Nazis. The bourgeois parties all capitulated to the Nazis, even agreeing to their own disempowerment by voting for Hitler’s Enabling Act.
Quite a large number of people in Europe and United States are apprehensive of the repeat of the above scenario. But, so far, they have not been able to do anything about it. They have no plans about how to avoid their governments falling into the hands of the tyrants. Seeing that the American president has been able to act like a democratically elected dictator, their faith in the political system, (which in any case is falling across Europe into the hands of the right-wing politicians), has dwindled. Will they rally forth? Or, will the century that started with a bang end in a whimper?