http://www.9-11commission.gov/
http://www.nist.gov/el/disasterstudies/wtc/
The perps are either dead... crushed to a fiery death when flying into buildings or into the ground, taken care of by SEAL Team Six, or they are in jail awaiting their trial.
Bell,
Absent an explanation from you, I do not fully understand your reliance on the 9/11 Commission Report and/or the NIST report? Certainly, most posters on this board know full well that neither of those reports made any determination at all as to what destroyed the WTC complex.
NIST openly, specifically and unequivocally confirms they did no such thing. Instead, their investigation ceased as of the time the towers underwent their annhilation.
NIST states this, in an around about way as follows:
"2
The focus of the Investigation was on the sequence of events from the instant of aircraft impact to the initiation of collapse for each tower. For brevity in this report, this sequence is referred to as the “probable collapse sequence,” although it includes little analysis of the structural behavior of the tower after the conditions for collapse initiation were reached and collapse became inevitable." NCSTAR1 pg xxxvii (39 of 298).
At most, the statement by NIST, of what it did and of what it did not do, as quoted above, might provide a fig leaf for those who have a need not to question the common storyline of 9/11, or for a way to form a belief, akin to the way in which one forms religious affiliation, for example. But, the language of the NIST report itself clearly confirms the accuracy of my statement that there exists no governmental determination of what destroyed the WTC complex on 9/11.
The only saving grace here is that Judy Wood challenged NIST and did cause to be filed with NIST the state-of-the-art proof, as it existed circa 2007, on what destroyed the WTC Complex. This, too, is published at NIST:
http://ocio.os.doc.gov/ITPolicyandPrograms/Information_Quality/PROD01_002619
Request for Correction from Dr. Judy Wood dated March 16, 2007
- Supplement #1 (March 29, 2007) to Request for Correction
- Supplement #2 (April 20, 2007) to Request for Correction
- Extension (June 29, 2007) of NIST review
- Response (July 27, 2007) to Dr. Judy Wood Request for Correction
- Appeal by Dr. Wood of NIST Initial Denial dated August 22, 2007
- NIST Extension to Wood Amendment to Appeal
- Amendment to Appeal dated August 23, 2007
- Response (Jan. 10, 2008) to Wood Amendment to Appeal
For those of you who might be tempted to create a fig leaf out of NIST's statement that "although it includes little analysis of the structural behavior of the tower after the conditions for collapse initiation were reached " as meaning they at least did
some investigation of the destruction of the WTC complex, don't bother.
In one of the documents mentioned above as a part of Dr. Wood's NIST challenge (Response July 27, 2007), NIST admitted to Dr. Wood that the words "little analysis" meant none at all. NIST stated in that response as follows:
"As stated in NCSTAR 1, NIST only investigated the factors leading to the initiation of the collapses of the WTC towers, not the collapses themselves."
As to the 9/11 Commission Report, I am again surprised it is being touted. In earlier posts, I have mentioned three books that are thought to be important to the debunker community; although they are not selling nearly as well as Dr. Wood's book is at this time. They were:
Without Precedent
Ground Truth
Touching History
A common thread in all three of them was that the 9/11 Commission Report was flawed, at best, largely useless and incomplete.
One example of that incompleteness is that for howsoever large the investigation may have been, it did not even determine who or how the common storyline version of events was even financed.
So, once again, Bell, I am not questioning your beliefs. You can choose to believe 9/11 has been investigated. Fine. You can choose to believe the cause of the destruction of the WTC complex has been governmentally determined, if you want. But, your doing so runs afoul of the facts of the matter.
