Sunday, 24 August 2008

How Old-fashioned: the Fairness Doctrine ... WTC7, NIST, and the Media Today

Once upon a time in America, the media would have presented the public with opposing views expressed by the professionals at Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth ( when an agency such as the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) exclaimed, after years of research, that simple office fires led to the unprecedented collapse of WTC 7. Circa 1949 - 1985, the media followed what was known as the fairness doctrine. Now reduced to nothing more than a propaganda slogan by Fox, there was a time when holders of broadcast licenses were required by the FCC to present fair and balanced coverage on controversial issues of public interest. After all, the airwaves are owned by the public. There once was a time when the media let the public evaluate controversial issues on the merits of the arguments presented. Twenty-one years after President Reagan vetoed Congress' attempt to codify the Fairness Doctrine, many Americans still assume this doctrine holds sway.

After reviewing some of the more than 400 mainstream media articles written yesterday about the NIST final report on the collapse of WTC 7, it is easy to get the impression that no credible alternative explanations exist. Why would any American question the NIST report? They have no exposure to opposing views expressed by professional engineers and architects. It is as if none exist if you rely on the mainstream media. Only two outlets quoted members of the professional organization, More outlets quoted me than reputable scientists. Go figure. While many of the reports mentioned that NIST dismissed the possibility that explosives were used, not one outlet reported that NIST failed to perform a single scientific test for explosive residue. NIST ruled out the use of explosives because "...the noise associated with such an explosion would have been ten times louder than being in front of the speakers at a rock concert...". There you have it--government funded science at its best. NIST also claimed that no loud noise was heard by witnesses. I guess they did not have access to the oral histories from the New York Fire Department made public after suit by the New York Times, the source for the quote by NIST that there were no witness reports of loud noises. There goes that liberal media again, always attacking the Bush administration at every possible turn.

Yesterday, while we were listening to the press conference hosted by, we received many calls from media outlets inquiring about our take on what the NIST presented. We provided these "journalists" with the number for the conference call and suggested they contact members of to get the perspective of professional, credentialed engineers and architects. After reviewing the media accounts of how the WTC 7 mystery is now solved, it is apparent that not one of these "journalists" chose to report what these professionals had to say. Based on the misquoted snippet from interviews on the subject, it is clear they neither listened to the press conference nor contacted any of the structural engineers or architects to whom they were referred.

Majority elements of the US mainstream media are actively suppressing evidence that proves there was inside involvement in the mass murders of 911. They are acting to cover up proof that utterly refutes the official explanation for the collapse of World Trade Centre 7.

It does not matter what NISTs says about HYPOTHETICAL collapse scenarios- there is evidence of MOLTEN STEEL and a THERMATE SIGNATURE that constitutes hard forensic proof that WTC 7 (and the Twin Towers) MUST have been brought down by explosives. The NIST report is a fraud and the media are acting complicitly in relation this fraud. What a disgrace !

[Posted at the SpookyWeather blog, August 24th, 2008.]

No comments: