{"content":[{"text":"Mick Harrison, Attorney at Law \n 520 S. Walnut St., #4711 \n Bloomington, IN 47402 \n Telephone: 812-361-6220 \n E-mail: mickharrisonesq@gmail.com","bbox":{"left":0.296328,"top":0.092606,"width":0.409251,"height":0.09474199999999999}},{"text":"July 2, 2021","bbox":{"left":0.118601,"top":0.22269,"width":0.09641200000000001,"height":0.01677899999999999}},{"text":"Preliminary Legal Assessment, for Public Consumption, of NIST’s Final Decision on \n Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth’s WTC 7 Request for Correction","bbox":{"left":0.148003,"top":0.257539,"width":0.705902,"height":0.034353999999999996}},{"text":"It is well known that on September 11, 2001 (9/11), on the morning of the terrorist \n attacks in New York City, the two World Trade Center (WTC) towers completely (and rapidly) \n collapsed, resulting in the tragic deaths of over two thousand people, including first responders \n and citizens working in and visiting the WTC, and exacerbating the already tragic loss of the \n passengers and crews on the hijacked aircraft. What is less known is that also on 9/11 a third \n WTC building, WTC 7, completely collapsed later in the day, without having been struck by an \n aircraft. WTC 7’s collapse was rapid, symmetrical, and in every respect appeared to be a \n controlled demolition. There were also reports on 9/11 from witnesses that there were explosions \n in WTC 7 prior to and at the time of its collapse.","bbox":{"left":0.118601,"top":0.309963,"width":0.761224,"height":0.156476}},{"text":"The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) was charged with \n investigating and reporting the cause of WTC 7’s collapse. NIST issued a report on WTC 7’s \n collapse in 2008. On April 15, 2020, Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth (AE), along with 88 \n architects and engineers and 10 members of the families of 9/11 victims, together referenced \n herein as the Requestors, filed a Request for Correction (RFC) pursuant to the Information \n Quality Act (IQA, aka Data Quality Act) with NIST. The RFC was filed because NIST’s \n conclusion that fires initiated by debris damage from the collapse of one of the towers, WTC 1, \n caused the collapse of WTC 7 was simply incompatible with the then-available scientific and \n witness evidence. NIST denied the Requestors’ RFC on August 28, 2020, without providing a \n detailed point-by-point response to the Requestors’ data quality arguments. The Requestors filed \n an appeal of this decision with NIST under the IQA on September 28, 2020.","bbox":{"left":0.118601,"top":0.476629,"width":0.7579670000000001,"height":0.1913249999999999}},{"text":"On June 30, 2021, seven months after its self-imposed two-month deadline, and only \n after being prompted by the Requestors’ June 1, 2020, Notice of Intent to Sue for unreasonable \n agency delay, NIST issued its long overdue decision on the Requestors’ IQA appeal. NIST’s \n response to the appeal is cursory, is only five pages, looks on its face as if it were rushed, and is \n clearly evasive. It is also clearly in violation of federal law.","bbox":{"left":0.118601,"top":0.678448,"width":0.7508880000000001,"height":0.08677899999999994}},{"text":"The Requestors’ Appeal clearly established that NIST’s denial of the RFC was \n demonstrably in error in concluding that the NIST WTC 7 Report did not violate the IQA and \n NIST’s own Information Quality Standards (IQS). The Appeal and RFC make an irrefutable \n case, using clear logic, established scientific principles, and careful documentation. The evidence \n presented by AE and the other Requestors is dispositive that the collapse of WTC 7 on 9/11 was \n not due to fires but rather due to a controlled demolition (use of explosives and incendiaries). \n The Requester’s Appeal and their RFC clearly establish that the NIST WTC 7 Report was","bbox":{"left":0.118601,"top":0.77572,"width":0.7627550000000001,"height":0.12132500000000002}},{"text":"1","bbox":{"left":0.496399,"top":0.921404,"width":0.009142999999999957,"height":0.01701600000000003}}],"images_bbox":[],"images_bbox_not_text_overlap":[]}