German researcher HerrKoenig recently discovered a forgery within the NIST CUMULUS Data-release, in the case of the WTC 1 collapse sound.
Listen yourself: This one was taken from the Naudet documentary DVD, by extrating the sequence to WAV and converting it into MP3-Layer3, 320kbps, 48.000 Hz with AVS Audio Converter 7.1.
This is from the NIST-release:
In an agency press release dated October 9, 2012 NIST , The National Institute of Standards and Technology has announced that one of its scientists, David J. Wineland, has been awarded the Nobel Prize in Physics. NIST is a branch of The Department of Commerce a Cabinet level department within the Executive Branch of the U.S. government. This years prize was divided between two recipients, the other is Frenchman Serge Haroche. Wineland is also a lecturer at the University of Colorado, Boulder. Says NIST of the award: “We’re so excited for Dave, along with his many colleagues and friends around the world, for this recognition of decades of world-leading research...”
By Josh Mitteldorf
Even among progressive news sources on the web, most sites will steer clear of 9/11 Truth. Huffington Post won't touch it. CommonDreams will occasionally flirt with the edges of "conspiracy theories"; Truthout has printed attacks on 9/11 Truth . OpEdNews is one of the few places where readers and authors who believe the outline of the Bush Administration's version of the events of 9/11 and those who think the Bush Administration was itself responsible for the attacks can hang out together and hold heated debates. (The Editorial Board here at OEN is also split. For disclosure, I've been the Board member leading the charge for more coverage.)
You may suspect the heavy hand of censorship, or you may think that these well-established liberal sources are sensibly avoiding speculation and superstition. But whatever your beliefs, you'd have to think that the Wall St Journal is the last place you'd look for revelations about a 9/11 cover-up.
In a surprising reversal the managers of the petition website Avaaz.org have restored a petition asking NIST, Congress and President Obama to acknowledge what the free fall descent of WTC Building 7 means. This was due to a poll of randomly selected Avaaz members, the majority saying they wanted the petition to be restored.
On May 7 I rewrote the petition and gave it a new title: "Revise the U.S. government final report on the collapse of Building 7".
844 people signed the petition by the evening of May 22. (One friend told me he had seen 883.) Avaaz did not help AT ALL with this petition. They never featured it or made it available on their website. Every one of those 844 individuals who signed it found out about it through a friend. Hundreds of people shared it via facebook, twitter or email.
MEDIA ROOTS – This is the re-release of a special 2 hour 20 minute episode of Media Roots Radio about 9/11, now fully sourced and transcribed below. In this edition, Abby and Robbie Martin introduce how their political awakenings were prompted by 9/11, and break apart the official government and corporate media narrative of the 9/11 attacks by discussing the foreknowledge, government complicity, and gross inconsistencies regarding every aspect of the events. The show then delves into the aftermath: the psychological manipulation of the American psyche and the significance that this event continues to have in our nation and world.
I made this video along with some other researchers from our 911 Truth chatroom. It addresses the issue of shear studs in WTC7 and NIST's denials and admissions of their existence. Comments/criticisms are welcome. I will include links and references in the description as soon as I can.
Milo is the host of Touch, a daily program from 5:00-6:00 PM Pacific on The Bridge, 95.1 FM in Guerneville. Milo has invited me (Brian Romanoff) to be a regular guest on his show to try to bring more light into the events of 9/11. I appreciate the opportunity and I hope you enjoy the show.
This week we discuss the big NIST lie of finding no evidence for explosions during the WTC collapse investigation.
Available as a live-stream every Monday 5:00-6:00 PM Pacific at the website provided below:
The World Trade Center Buildings were built to last. Plane impacts and fires alone could not have accounted for the destruction in New York at the WTC complex.
I was recently interviewed on a public access TV show called "Vermont Today" (for 90 minutes). We discuss an exchange of letters between four concerned citizens (including myself) and NIST. Credit for the revealing NIST correspondence goes especially to Wayne Coste of AE911Truth for drafting our letters for us, and to Jerry Carpenter for taking initiative locally.
The discussion may seem to start off a bit slow, as we were trying to get some legal analysis from a local prosecutor who is now running for Mayor of Burlington. He takes a very diplomatic position, and then excuses himself. In the later parts of the interview we discuss Cass Sunstein's paper and my critique of it, as well as "foiled terrorist plots" led by informants. Near the end I also discuss Barry Jennings. The most significant part--the only part where really new information is presented--is the discussion of NIST's response to our letters (which starts around minute 25). It is the particulars of NIST's evasions that I think are very telling.
by Ron Brookman, S.E.
Thank you to Mickey Huff and KPFA radio for hosting the Twin Towers debate on the tenth anniversary of September 11. Richard Gage and Niels Harrit described hard evidence for the controlled-demolition hypothesis; Dave Thomas and Richard Muller promoted the fire-induced collapse hypothesis. Listen to the entire debate at http://www.kpfa.org/archive/id/73245.
Richard Gage, AIA is a San Francisco Bay Area architect and founder of AE911Truth—a nonprofit organization with over 1,600 professional architects and engineers plus over 13,000 others who are calling for a science-based investigation of the destruction of the three high-rise buildings.1
Dr. Niels Harrit, associate professor emeritus of chemistry from the University of Copenhagen, has published over 60 peer-reviewed papers in scientific journals including ''Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe."2
This version in 6 parts has well synchronized audio - video.
The film features Richard Gage AIA, Dr. Stephen E. Jones, David Chandler and members of Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth, with original music courtesy of Eva James.
The presentation proves the world trade center buildings were demolished with explosives. It shows why a new scientific investigation and judicial inquiry is needed.
This edited compilation is presented under terms of "Fair Use". The intention of this creation is for non-profit, educational and personal use. Portions of copyrighted material may be included under Section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976. Allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching and research. Any other use may require that permission be obtained from the original copyright owner.
The Science of 9/11
This original compilation has a running time of 55 minutes.
If you would like a free DVD quality down link that does not have a problem with the video-audio synchronization, send an email to
Current download links include:
You Tube link
QuickTime .mov file
This film features Richard Gage AIA, Dr. Stephen E. Jones, David Chandler and members of Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth, with original music courtesy of Eva James.
The presentation shows why a new scientific investigation and judicial inquiry is needed.
See below for the download link to save the DVD ISO file (over 3.1 GB).
After it is saved on your computer or flash drive, you can burn it to a DVD using a program such as ImgBurn.
You can get this at http://ImgBurn.com
You can also download a MP4 file, using You Tube Downloader software, using this link:
Relics, Artifacts and Memories: A Year Spent With World Trade Center Steel
Truthout, Amanda Lin Costa, September 11, 2011
I didn’t set off to become an expert in World Trade Center (WTC) steel but recently it occurred to me I was becoming one. The thought first dawned on me about a month ago, after I spent the day filming at The National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST) as part of a documentary I have been working on about WTC steel.
I spent hours with Stephen W. Banovic, a materials research scientist in the Metallurgy Division of the Materials Science and Engineering Laboratory at NIST, and Michael E. Newman, senior communications officer at NIST. Both men had spent more than six years of their lives living and breathing the WTC steel during the intensive investigation into the collapse of the Twin Towers.
Editorial Introduction by Dick Zehnle
NIST likes to point out how many scientists and engineers worked on its WTC investigation, and how much time was spent. But the number of participants and the time and money spent does not guarantee a thorough investigation.
NIST’s investigation is not in line with the most basic requirements of the scientific method. This is demonstrated by a closer look at NIST’s examination of the steel, which was based on the premise that nothing other than airplane impact damage and the subsequent fires brought down the Twin Towers. The most relevant question – why did the strong steel frames below the impact area give way? – is ignored. NIST cannot justify its failure to adequately examine the steel with its published results; examining the evidence adequately is a step that needs to be done at the beginning of an investigation.
Newsletter not displaying correctly? View it on our website
|AE911Truth Blueprint Newsletter | Vol. XXIX | August 2011|
AE911Truth continues to ride the wave of media attention to the approaching 10th Anniversary of 9/11. Read about the Toronto Hearings and the inspiring Liberty Fest gathering where we will be speaking. Join us on the Pacifica radio network, the stage for the big debate with two physicists. Read about our featured high-rise architect, Les Young. Learn about NIST’s deception with the WTC steel testing. And who was Danny Jowenko? All right here – in The Blueprint.
Here's a new video in which The NIST World Trade Center report for the Twin Towers is examined and shown to be false and unscientific.
Uploaded by DK1Ryan on Aug 14, 2011
Some persons have dodged truth movement problems by exaggerating the amount of scientific expertise needed to ponder them. Even in relatively advanced truth movement products are problems (for the media and government) that are found via simple methods, e.g. just reading the official reports. Lets consider naming explicitly varied categories of problems according to how simple were the methods used to see them.
The crime of the century has gone overlooked for 10 years. It should be an insult to one’s intelligence that a national emergency occurred on 9/11, the date the same as the national number for emergency, 911. The branding of the September 11, 2001 attacks as “Nine-Eleven” alone should be suspicious enough, nevermind the fact that they were used for political gain by both Republican and Democrat administrations. 9/11 has been the catalyst for kicking the American Police State into high gear as well as the justification for offensive foreign policies, but perhaps even those aren’t enough reasons to convince some people that the subject needs further examination.
How can we honestly discuss science if we do not pay careful attention to logic?
Paradoxically, the logical fallacies get little attention, but they are among the most useful of tools for thinking clearly about 9/11.
For instance, the basic "appeal to unqualified authority" helps short-circuit NIST's injection of possibly false information into the debate.
A couple of videos that point out fallacies in NIST's reasoning:
Sunder on What Controlled Demolition Looks Like
We Have the Results and Only We Have the Results
HELP THIS STORY BREAK INTO THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA!
Thanks to James Gourley at the International Center for 9/11 Studies, the only individual to successfully sue NIST over a FOIA request for the entirety of the footage that’s been covered up for the past 10 years, we now have overwhelming evidence that disproves the official story of nine-eleven. Of the 5 terrabytes of data released, maybe 35% has been analyzed and posted on YouTube for the world to see. Even Gourley’s organization itself has not had the time to examine and post all of the new evidence and so other 9/11 researchers have taken up the task of downloading the raw data from the “NIST Cumulus Database” and posting the converted videos to YouTube and elsewhere all over the internet. We here at WeAreChangeNewJersey.COM will continue to post this new evidence until it is fully released.
Here are some of the best channels to get started investigating the new evidence:
HELP THIS STORY BREAK INTO THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA!
New Evidence Uncovers 9/11 Truth
2010 NIST 9/11 Footage Leaks Ignored
Media Admits To Having 9/11 Foreknowledge
9 Years Of Hidden Evidence Exposes Massive 9/11 Coverup
911Gate – Video Releases Disprove Official Story
WeAreChange New Jersey Releases 5th Cache Of New 9/11 Video Evidence
911Leaks: Meet James Gourley, The Real Julian Assange
On June 10, 2010, Dr. Fahim Sadek of NIST (email@example.com), an investigator who produced the Bush Administration's report on the WTC, gave a lecture at the Engineering College of Aarhus on the entire WTC Investigation. This is apparently the only time that NIST has given a detailed talk on their entire investigation.
It was expected that Sadek would take questions at the end of the lecture. However, nobody was allowed to ask any. Nevertheless, before Sadek left, Dr. Niels Harrit managed to catch him for a brief talk.
Three months before on February 28th, 2010, Dr. Niels Harrit gave a presentation on the collapse of World Trade Center 7 in Aarhus, Denmark, as well. Hundreds of invitations were sent to both journalists, city council members and various members of the scientific community. More than 300 people attended, among them several professors from the Engineering College of Aarhus.
Despite prohibiting filming or any other documentation of Sadek's presentation, over an hour of video the presentation was pieced together from several hidden video- and sound recorders. This is that presentation and the Sadek-Harrit exchange.
Does this give anyone any ideas? http://www.dump.com/2010/12/11/bullet-physics-engine-simulates-the-creat...
The area under the impact seems incredibly resistant to collapse, unlike WTC 1 & 2 ; (would've liked to see the ball hit higher up)
Someone contact these guys and get them to do a simulation of the WTC'ers!
Knowing that there is potential evidence of tampering with some of this FOIA video evidence NIST has released thus far, I find it suspicious that in the following video you only see the first two seconds or so of the first tower collapse before it cuts off and then after it comes back the smoke has already covered the area... (:39 seconds to :42 seconds in)
At first, I thought it may have been just a problem with the camera or maybe the operator needed to change batteries or something. Then, I noticed that the second time the video cuts out at 2:33 and comes back 2:37 you miss the entire collapse of the second tower.
That's not all I noticed though...
Thursday, December 9, 2010
Twin towers collapse eyewitness Paul Lemos clearly describes how he witnessed bombs take down the World Trade Center in yet another revealing piece of evidence that NIST was forced to release as part of a recent FOIA request. As we reported in our previous articles, is it really a coincidence that almost every video NIST sat on for years contained bombshell eyewitness testimony of explosives bringing down the towers and Building 7?
ORIGINAL SOURCE FOOTAGE:
9/11: WTC witness - NIST Release #25 - 42A0106 - G25D16
While everyone is focusing on WikiLeaks and Julian Assange, another important information dump is getting largely ignored since September 1, 2010 when James Gourley of the International Center For 9/11 Studies obtained nearly 5 terrabytes of videos and reports concerning the attacks on the WTC and Pentagon buildings.
Although some of the tapes have had some audio/video manipulation, it is clear why NIST did not want to release any of this material for the past 9 years. The 9/11 coverup demands that no evidence of explosions or bombs be included in the official story, and some of these videos have even been kept hidden simply for including the WORDS "bomb" or "explosion" in their contents.
On NIST’s current WTC 7 FAQ page, the headline reads: (emphasis mine)
Questions and Answers about the NIST WTC 7 Investigation (Updated 09/17/2010) 
In order to preempt further alterations, I cached this version. When I noticed the date of the update, I first tried to look for previous versions of the FAQ in the Wayback Machine.
I was in for a disappointment: previous versions of the page had curiously vanished from the archive. Normally this means game over: there are no cached versions. To my knowledge, there is no alternative for the Wayback Machine. I tried to look for alternatives nonetheless.