Creative Speculation
Related: About this forumWhy no mention of WTC Building 7 in 911 Commission Report?
Yet another huge smoking gun. Why is it called a report when they fail to report, or even just acknowledge, such a significant event as the total collapse of a 47 story skyscraper on 9/11? I don't expect them to go into all the nuts and bolts or technical engineering details as to why it collapsed, but it's called the 9/11 commission REPORT, so surely it must report what actually happened in full on that day, as its mandate requires. Or at the bare minimum, simply acknowledge the occurrence of a very significant event as the total collapse of a 47-story skyscraper on 9/11. But they didn't even do that. Not one word about it.
The National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (also known as the 9-11 Commission), an independent, bipartisan commission created by congressional legislation and the signature of President George W. Bush in late 2002, is chartered to prepare a full and complete account of the circumstances surrounding the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, including preparedness for and the immediate response to the attacks. The Commission is also mandated to provide recommendations designed to guard against future attacks.
http://www.9-11commission.gov/
A full and complete account? What a joke.
More accurate title would be Omission Cover-Up Report.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
nationalize the fed
(2,169 posts)The biggest crime in centuries and King Georgie and his Dick Cheney didn't want to investigate. Really that's all anyone needs to demand a new investigation when it gets right down to it.
The 911
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/911_commission
Henry K "leading" the 911 investigation. What a hoot.
gyroscope
(1,443 posts)- 9/11 commission budget? $3 million dollars to investigate the greatest terror attack and mass murder in US history.
- One-third what it cost the county of Los Angeles to prosecute the OJ Simpson trial at $9 million. Simpson's defense bill alone was an additional $6 million.
- Congress spent $60 million on the investigation of the Monica Lewinsky/Clinton sex scandal
As the commission co-chairs stated, they didn't have enough money and were set up to fail.
I also love how the commission report describes the north and south towers as a hollow shaft, when they were not hollow at all but were each composed of 47 massive central steel columns within their respective cores. Epic fail. It just goes on and on. Not just omissions but filled with outright distortions.
wildbilln864
(13,382 posts)It succeeded probably better than they expected! They have gotten away with murder, and fraud. They got to get their war on and they got to take away our rights and they made a killing doing it! The report fooled the public. Most anyway. How can that be called a failure?
William Seger
(11,448 posts)You are directly accusing the 9/11 Commission members -- who happen to be real people, not actors in the movie playing in your head -- of being accessories to mass murder, and when pressed to justify that accusation, you demonstrate over and over that not only do you not have any credible evidence of that, but you are not the least bit interested in evidence or evidence-based reasoning if you can't torture it into confessing to the story you so desperately want to hear. The "truth movement" is a weird cult that has no gods but instead spends all its time accusing the wrong people of being devils.
wildbilln864
(13,382 posts)At least some of them. They did nothing but help to cover up one of the most heinous crimes of the century! Zelicow!
zappaman
(20,620 posts)I guess they were paid enough not to care that their friends and co-workers were killed, eh?
wildbilln864
(13,382 posts)again! 
zappaman
(20,620 posts)They were there, weren't they?
So they saw nothing fishy?
Ok then.
wildbilln864
(13,382 posts)the fire fighters attempted to expose what happened before the official whitewash coverup.
zappaman
(20,620 posts)I must have missed that press conference.
Can you link to it?
Thanks in advance.
wildbilln864
(13,382 posts)no one said there was a press conference. But there was eyewitness testimony.
zappaman
(20,620 posts)So why did they not have a press conference?
Who silenced them to not talk about the deaths of their friends and colleagues?
How much were they given to shut up?
wildbilln864
(13,382 posts)I do not communicate with them but I'd guess some tried and were ignored and some are afraid of retribution. And many are dead!
zappaman
(20,620 posts)Sorry, but you seem to take a rather dim view of NY firefighters.
It's a brotherhood and if even one firefighter thought there was more to the story, they would stop at nothing to get it out.
Oh, there is FIREFIGHTERS FOR 911 TRUTH!
Let's see what actual firefighters have to say about it...
http://www.firehouse.com/forums/t107457/
I especially like "I dare you to walk into an FDNY firehouse and spew this vile nonsense."
Make sure you read all 11 pages.
wildbilln864
(13,382 posts)what vile nonsense do you speak of?
zappaman
(20,620 posts)You said "I do not communicate with them but I'd guess some tried and were ignored and some are afraid of retribution. And many are dead!"
So according to you, NY firefighters could be scared of retribution.
Why haven't you asked them why they aren't speaking out?
wildbilln864
(13,382 posts)in their vicinity in the north.
gyroscope
(1,443 posts)in the success of the 9/11 coverup. they failed to ask any questions.
you could say the crime of the century was aided and abetted in large part by the mainstream media.
and why was the 9/11 investigation run by a bunch of politicians, which is what the 9/11 commission was composed of? why was 9/11 not professionally prosecuted in a proper court of law by real prosecutors and judges who have decades of legal experience in prosecuting complex criminal cases? Congressmen are not qualified to do that. whenever you see a bunch of politicians running an investigation of anything you know from the start its going to be a political dog and pony show. whenever you see something with the word "commission" in it, run far away.
superbeachnut
(381 posts)The FBI is not a bunch of politicians, but then 911 truth is anti-government, anti-science, good 911 truth followers googled their claims up, thinking they are asking questions, when 911 truth is based on the ignorance of it's follower so they think they are doing good, asking questions out of ignornace, based on rabid political bias. Dumb questions, for a dumbed down movement in the 13th year of failure. A fake movement,unable to take action on the dumbed down opinions of a fringe few.
Do you have something original, all your 911 truth stuff is old rotten BS.
gyroscope
(1,443 posts)Can you name them? Oh, that's right. No members of the 9/11 commission were from the FBI. Fail.
The executive director of the 9/11 commission worked for the Bush administration.
The co-chairs were House member Lee Hamilton and NJ state governor Thomas Kean,
and even they called it a failure.
911 commission member Max Cleland, Senator from Georgia, resigned the commission in September 2003, stating the Bush "White House has played cover-up."
John Farmer, Jr., senior counsel to the 911 Commission stated that the Commission "discovered that...what government and military officials had told Congress, the Commission, the media, and the public about who knew what when — was almost entirely, and inexplicably, untrue." Farmer continues: "At some level of the government, at some point in time … there was a decision not to tell the truth about what happened...The (NORAD) tapes told a radically different story from what had been told to us and the public."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9/11_Commission#Members
Hmm. So several members and co-chairs of the 911 Commission themselves have publicly stated it was a failure, lie and coverup. At this point why would anyone in their right mind believe the official story?
superbeachnut
(381 posts)Max Cleland, let me guess, a democrat? lol, you fall for the show and fail to understand the FBI did the criminal investigation, and thus you missed it was 19 terrorists in 4 aircraft in NYC, DC and PA. Where have you been, googling 911 and finding woo.
lol, you found out the NORAD guys who testified had the wrong numbers? times? lol, guess who set them up, their peers. When you get higher in rank your peers become your buddies who are trying to rise in rank, and leave their peers at LtCol and Col - I bet the NORAD guys were set up by their peers or fellow officers - but the NORAD testifying errors don't make a difference or help your fantasy version of 911. The fantasy version of 911 you can't define, explain or support with facts.
You found politics and can't explain how it helps your inside job failed claims and fantasy version of 911 -given 13 years.
13 years and repeating nonsense that means nothing for your fantasy - you need evidence, not party politics and BS.
Congress does money, not crime - and if they want to say they failed, what is new. I can't believe those nuts claim failure, thus they are saying they failed. Irony, or stupidity, our congress in action, or inaction - like 911 truth; but 911 truth has 13 solid years of failure, with no end insight, a lock on eternal failure - keep up the good work.
gyroscope
(1,443 posts)Fail again.
Thomas Kean, Republican co-chair of the 9/11 commission said it was a failure.
What other nonsense will you come up with?
superbeachnut
(381 posts)LOL, this is funny, 911 truth followers, and super duper silent explosives experts have no clue WTC 7 was not a target of the terrorist attack.
BINGO
gyroscope
(1,443 posts)keep up the good work.
William Seger
(11,448 posts)Rational people consider the entire WTC complex to be collateral damage from the 9/11 attack. Just because conspiracy hucksters have found that many gullible people fall for controlled demolition theories about WTC7 doesn't mean that everyone is required to take them seriously. That's never gonna happen when their argument is that 47-story steel-framed highrises are magically impervious to 7 hours of fire, so WTC7 must have been brought down by magical silent explosives. Even though it seems this theory can only be substantiated by people who don't know what they're talking about using imaginary physics and ignoring any contrary evidence, some conspiracists are willing to convince themselves that these magical explosives which produced no supersonic shock waves and left no sign of cut columns were somehow planted all over the 24x7-occupied building by black ops magicians, for no apparent reason.
You accept that theory? So what? Are you trying to convince yourself that there aren't rational reasons why rational people don't accept this nonsense? How's it coming?
gyroscope
(1,443 posts)Can't get much more clear and straightforward than that.
Are you having any trouble grasping it?
In even simpler terms, The Commission Report = Epic failure.
William Seger
(11,448 posts)Hamilton and Kean are quite "clear and straightforward" about what they meant by that statement, and it was certainly not what you are so disingenuously trying to imply by taking it out of context. They both believe that, despite being given too little time and not enough money, the Commission basically got it right, and it's certainly stood up well to the sorry sack of bullshit that "truthers" have thrown at it.
But I don't blame you for trying to duck out on supporting your magical silent explosives theory.
nationalize the fed
(2,169 posts)The probem, Seger, is that a steel framed building has never before in history collapsed due to fire.
That's what your NIST report says:
Why did WTC 7 collapse, while no other known building in history has collapsed due to fires alone?
The collapse of WTC 7 is the first known instance of a tall building brought down primarily by uncontrolled fires. The fires in WTC 7 were similar to those that have occurred in several tall buildings where the automatic sprinklers did not function or were not present. These other buildings, including Philadelphia's One Meridian Plaza, a 38-story skyscraper that burned for 18 hours in 1991, did not collapse due to differences in the design of the structural system (see the answer to Question 9).
http://www.nist.gov/el/disasterstudies/wtc/faqs_wtc7.cfm
One Meridian Plaza: 18 hours of fire
MORE:
In October 2004 in Caracas, Venezuela, a fire in a 56-story office tower burned for more 17 hours and spread over 26 floors. Two floors collapsed, but the underlying floors did not, and the building remained standing. See http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/10/18/world/main649824.shtml
Also in February 2005 the 32-story Windsor Building in Madrid, Spain, caught fire and burned for two days. The building was completely engulfed in flames at one point. Several top floors collapsed onto lower ones, yet the building remained standing. See news.http://bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4263667.stm
The still-uncompleted Beijing Television Cultural Center, containing the Mandarin Oriental Hotel, caught fire on 9 February 2009 (due to uncontrolled use of fireworks at Chinese New Year). 140,000 tons of steel was used in its construction. It burned for five hours, but it did not collapse. See http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/10/world/asia/10beijing.html
"You can fool some people some times but you couldn't fool all the people all the time" -Hon. Robert N. Marley O.M.
AZCat
(8,345 posts)Engineers and scientists are quite capable of analyzing and understanding first occurrences. See, for example, the Tacoma Narrows Bridge collapse.
nationalize the fed
(2,169 posts)See: Architects and Engineers for 9/11 truth
http://www.ae911truth.org/
Believe what you want. The first time in history a steel framed building collapses is odd. When it happens amidst a bunch of other "coincidences" it's more than odd.
Shame on anyone that would not question a Bush Cheney "commission" that the Chairman says was "set up to fail". You can stand back and watch your liberties sacrificed for 19 Arabs with box cutters but you should be proud of those who demand more. Instead you mock and scorn them. As soon as I can figure out how to get out of this New Roman Empire filled with apologists and sycophants I'm out.
AZCat
(8,345 posts)It's trivial to point out the mistakes made in the arguments put forth by AE911Truth, but those wedded to that particular set of conclusions just aren't listening.
This isn't about belief - it's about science and engineering. The behavior of the Tacoma Narrows Bridge was "odd", yet we figured it out anyhow.
It's interesting that you conflate the rejection of crappy engineering arguments with the kind of behavior described in your paragraph here:
That's exactly the sort of poor logic that makes AE911Truth look like a bunch of ignorant amateurs.
superbeachnut
(381 posts)Night time fires look bad.
One Meridian Plaza, fires fought, yet One Meridian Plaza never used again, like WTC 7. oops
Your photo of One Meridian Plaza shows what WTC 7 never got - water - why do you debunk yourself?
Makes zero sense to post One Meridian Plaza, the building suffered massive damage, and the "thermal explansion", oh man.
Why post BS when you are debunking yourself.
http://www.usfa.fema.gov/downloads/pdf/publications/tr-049.pdf
Oops, never used again, totaled by fires fought - does not help your fantasy.
I love this photo, as it shows what office fires do, even office fires fought.
WTC 7 fires not fought, known before it collapsed, it would never be used again. Fire destroys buildings, 911 truth can't comprehend fire science. 13 years of BS, top off with being stuck in Creative Speculation because fantasy is not news.
Then you show Windsor Building in Spain, where the steel only part failed in an hour or two - OOPS
Windsor fire, was fought, and it stood because it had a concrete core - the WTC 7 has more concrete in it's core; lessons learned.
Once again you post a building never used again.
Got any highrise fires not fought?
William Seger
(11,448 posts)> The probem, Seger, is that a steel framed building has never before in history collapsed due to fire.
Why is your fuzzy thinking my problem? In the first place, you need to say that no "tall" steel building has ever collapsed "completely" due to fire, so you need to specify at what height they acquire the magic invulnerability and what percentage of collapse is acceptable.
In the second place, no building constructed like WTC7 has ever undergone a 7-hour unfought fire. According to NIST's hypothesis, the problem with the WTC7 design was that long-span floor beams framed into a long girder at two different angles, and that girder itself framed into column 79 at an angle, yet all the connections to interior columns were designed only to carry the gravity loads, not the thermal expansion of this asymmetric framing. Those "shear" connections also explain why the collapse propagated: When one end of a beam dropped, the other end easily broke free, leaving that column unrestrained laterally so it could also buckle and fail.
Why should I be impressed that "truthers" who don't even understand that hypothesis, much less have a credible refutation, offer arguments that begin with the belief that all steel buildings are designed the same, and don't understand why comparisons to other fires is invalid? Why should I not laugh when such people try to tell me that their theories are "scientific?"
But the real problem is that your argument boils down to: "This never happened before, therefore magical silent explosives is a better explanation." It's funny that you would even offer that argument but then ignore that magical silent explosives have never brought down a building, either. If the topic is why rational people don't take WTC7 controlled demolition theories seriously, then you aren't helping your cause.
gyroscope
(1,443 posts)High-rises collapse all the time due to fire, according to Seger.
And yet he can't name one that has before or after 9/11.
He can't because in reality no high-rise has ever collapsed from a fire. Period.
William Seger
(11,448 posts)Guess we'll never know.
hack89
(39,181 posts)caused by debris from WTC 1. They saw and monitored a bulge in the side of WTC 7 for several hours before the collapse.
It was combination of structural fire and large un-fought fires that caused WTC 7 to collapse. It was certainly not a mystery to the FDNY.
Response to gyroscope (Original post)
Post removed
Response to Post removed (Reply #26)
gyroscope This message was self-deleted by its author.