It is reported that police forensic investigators on the site of the Grenfell Tower disaster will turn to the forensic teams who worked on the 9/11 attacks because of similarities in scale of the events.
The forensic investigation into 9/11 reportedly cost $80 million. As New Scientist reported last year: "An estimated 2753 people were killed at the World Trade Center site. Just 293 bodies were found intact, and 21,900 pieces were recovered from the debris. Despite the most costly forensic investigation in US history ($80 million so far), the remains of 1113 people are unidentified."
As the New Scientist review of a book on the process of victim identification suggests - perhaps unconsciously - 9/11 investigators faced peculiar problems not just of scale - but due to the explosive collapse of the Twin Towers.
I don't think the following sentences will ever be written about Grenfell, since there was no "blast" and body parts are surely unlikely to ever be found on adjacent buildings. A normal fire - if you can call Grenfell normal, considering the criminal negligence that led to it - do not scatter remains so widely.
"We learn how some first responders tried to “reconstruct” bodies, often mingling remains from different people in one body bag. He tells how the blast meant that sometimes parts from one person ended up inside the body cavity of another. And how the different authorities failed to coordinate on the most basic levels, adding to the confusion.
"The inexperience of the New York Police Department in mass gathering of information and biological samples made the OCME’s job harder, because the collection of DNA samples was haphazard and didn’t follow protocols. And although initial recovery efforts focused on the 16-acre site of the World Trade Center, for years afterwards, body parts were still being found in vent shafts, roofs and on ledges of neighbouring buildings."
Clearly I am no scientist or forensic expert, but video footage of 9/11 shows that the collapse of the two towers was so violent that debris was spread far and wide. Despite fires at Grenfell burning at 1000 degrees centigrade for several hours there was no comparable collapse - or "blast" as the New Scientist writer put it, in a strangely revealing way.
For a more scientific review of the terrible events of 9/11, please see the interview with a former National Institute of Scientific Research (NIST) employee Peter Michael Ketcham, who raises profound questions about the nature of the events that puts them into a very different category than Grenfell.
NIST carried out the investigation into the collapse of WTC7 on 9/11, the third building to collapse that day. Ketcham questions their methodology, and confesses his own blindness to the nature of the events until recently. He no longer works for NIST.
The forensic investigation into 9/11 reportedly cost $80 million. As New Scientist reported last year: "An estimated 2753 people were killed at the World Trade Center site. Just 293 bodies were found intact, and 21,900 pieces were recovered from the debris. Despite the most costly forensic investigation in US history ($80 million so far), the remains of 1113 people are unidentified."
As the New Scientist review of a book on the process of victim identification suggests - perhaps unconsciously - 9/11 investigators faced peculiar problems not just of scale - but due to the explosive collapse of the Twin Towers.
I don't think the following sentences will ever be written about Grenfell, since there was no "blast" and body parts are surely unlikely to ever be found on adjacent buildings. A normal fire - if you can call Grenfell normal, considering the criminal negligence that led to it - do not scatter remains so widely.
"We learn how some first responders tried to “reconstruct” bodies, often mingling remains from different people in one body bag. He tells how the blast meant that sometimes parts from one person ended up inside the body cavity of another. And how the different authorities failed to coordinate on the most basic levels, adding to the confusion.
"The inexperience of the New York Police Department in mass gathering of information and biological samples made the OCME’s job harder, because the collection of DNA samples was haphazard and didn’t follow protocols. And although initial recovery efforts focused on the 16-acre site of the World Trade Center, for years afterwards, body parts were still being found in vent shafts, roofs and on ledges of neighbouring buildings."
Clearly I am no scientist or forensic expert, but video footage of 9/11 shows that the collapse of the two towers was so violent that debris was spread far and wide. Despite fires at Grenfell burning at 1000 degrees centigrade for several hours there was no comparable collapse - or "blast" as the New Scientist writer put it, in a strangely revealing way.
For a more scientific review of the terrible events of 9/11, please see the interview with a former National Institute of Scientific Research (NIST) employee Peter Michael Ketcham, who raises profound questions about the nature of the events that puts them into a very different category than Grenfell.
NIST carried out the investigation into the collapse of WTC7 on 9/11, the third building to collapse that day. Ketcham questions their methodology, and confesses his own blindness to the nature of the events until recently. He no longer works for NIST.
Ketcham says that the official narrative of 9/11 may be slowly collapsing. Perhaps it will undergo a rapid collapse like the Twin Towers did, much to the surprise of many news commentators on the day, who described the collapses as looking like a controlled demolition. That idea - of blasts and demolition - disappeared from the public discourse soon after and was forced into the territory of the so-called truth movement. Ketchum is not your classic truther and neither are the scores of scientists who do not accept the official story. Of course, they remain a minority. After 16 years of a bloody war on terror, what they say should be heard and more importantly, listened to.
