View Single Post
Old 10-06-2012, 07:22   #205
Senior Member
Ragnar's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Sometimes here, sometimes there
Posts: 11,720

Now I know that you're completely clueless.

Originally Posted by Peace Warrior View Post

There is no such caveat to sentence #3 in the report. Unless they pulled a switch-a-roo after all the FOIA requests. Hmmmm... if they did, that's telling the truth to the American People huh?

Anyway, NIST cannot get away with such a change, IF you are to be believed in the first place, as numerous sites have already captured the page before the change,.

Here's just one I had bookmarked.

ETA: None of the pages I have show anything like you are asserting. Guess you are wrong again.

For instance, below is from NIST NCSTAR 1-2, WTC Investigation, Page 302, paragraph number 3; additionally, I've included the ending and beginning excerpts, of paragraphs 2 and 4 respectively. No where in it does it have the sentence you claim to have found.

"[2.] ... extremely high velocity gusts.

3. The buildings have been investigated and found to be safe in an assumed collision with a large jet airliner (Boeing 707 - DC 8) traveling at 600 miles per hour. Analysis indicates that such collision would result in only local damage which could not cause collapse or substantial damage to the building and would not endanger the lives and safety of occupants not in the immediate area of impact.

4. Because of its..."

^ Emphasis mine.
Page 302 of the document YOU linked to at

does not say that. The above that you have quoted is from page 305.

You've been using a DRAFT document on a whackjob site as evidence. Amateur mistake.

is using a DRAFT document and you fell for it.

You claim to be a writer, a journalist, and you can't even perform basic research and fact-checking of your work.

Last edited by Ragnar; 10-06-2012 at 07:40..
Ragnar is offline