WTC 7 (Building 7)

[Oxymoron]

Everyone in the world forced to parrot the World Government's official story?

Only if you want a degree.

I think you should try talking to some experts. They are real honest people. This isn't 1984.

The experts publish their papers, I, and many others find them suspect.

Now it could be argued 'You are not a structural engineer, therefore you are incapable of assessing the validity', but I would contend there are plenty of structural engineers out there who are not afraid to contest the theories and actually do so. Also just because someone is not qualified in a particular discipline, does not necessarily mean they cannot analyse data and theories. Many people do that all the time, inc world leaders, ministers, congress members, captains of industry, right the way down to the man in the street.

 

[F4Jock]

Well I think we have looked long and hard on the collapse of WTC 7.
NIST's unwillingness to scientifically investigate this event coupled with the steel that was 'gone'...coupled with the uniqueness of it's collapse due to fire at the
same day as the other towers is raising substantial well founded suspicions.

Of course the fact that much of what NIST "failed" to investigate, like the dust you've mentioned, was done later and essentially changed nothing from the initial investigation is being ignored or, engenders another CT such is the one Oxymoron proposed above about degrees being contingent upon some sort of subservience to the government.

The the "conspiracy" widens with each post and the logic is fast approaching terminal velocity.

 

[Mick West]

Only if you want a degree.

So you think it's incomprehensible, so must be controlled demolition, and 99% of the experts in the entire world were immediately strong-armed into not saying anything about it?

Is controlled demolition really than more comprehensible than collapse from fire?

If you were to be in a gambling mood and had to put odds on it being one of the other, then what probability would you give controlled demolition? 90%? 100%?

 

[hiper]

Which have reasonable explanations.

NIST's unwillingness to scientifically investigate the WTC 7 dust for evidence of a blast event... this is incriminating...not much to reason about.

NIST unable to scientifically investigate the WTC 7 steel for evidence of a blast event because the steel was gone...this is incriminating... not much to reason about.

NIST's refusal to release parameters of the 3D model for WTC 7... further raises questions... not much to reason about.

NIST admitting free fall was in play in the WTC 7 collapse coupled with the collapse caused by fire makes this a highly unique event... which raises questions that NIST in the previous points fails to answer.

Not much to argue here... this merits a new independent investigation.

 

[F4Jock]

NIST's unwillingness to scientifically investigate the WTC 7 dust for evidence of a blast event... this is incriminating...not much to reason about.

NIST unable to scientifically investigate the WTC 7 steel for evidence of a blast event because the steel was gone...this is incriminating... not much to reason about.

NIST's refusal to release parameters of the 3D model for WTC 7... further raises questions... not much to reason about.

NIST admitting free fall was in play in the WTC 7 collapse coupled with the collapse caused by fire makes this a highly unique event... which raises questions that NIST in the previous points fails to answer.

Not much to argue here... this merits a new independent investigation.

All of this as been addressed but nice I have the updated 2011 summary of the NIST so-called "Free Fall" report handy, allow me to show you that you are incorrect.

In a video, it appears that WTC 7 is descending in free fall, something that would not occur in the structural collapse that you describe. How can you ignore basic laws of physics?
In the draft WTC 7 report (released Aug. 21, 2008; available at http://wtc.nist.gov/media/NIST_NCSTAR_1A_for_public_comment.pdf), NIST stated that the north face of the building descended 18 stories (the portion of the collapse visible in the video) in 5.4 seconds, based on video analysis of the building collapse. This time period is 40 percent longer than the 3.9 seconds this process would have taken if the north face of the building had descended solely under free fall conditions. During the public comment period on the draft report, NIST was asked to confirm this time difference and define the reasons for it in greater detail.
To further clarify the descent of the north face, NIST recorded the downward displacement of a point near the center of the roofline from first movement until the north face was no longer visible in the video. Numerical analyses were conducted to calculate the velocity and acceleration of the roofline point from the time-dependent displacement data. The instant at which vertical motion of the roofline first occurred was determined by tracking the numerical value of the brightness of a pixel (a single element in the video image) at the roofline. This pixel became brighter as the roofline began to descend because the color of the pixel started to change from that of the building façade to the lighter color of the sky.
The approach taken by NIST is summarized in Section 3.6 of the final summary report, NCSTAR 1A (released Nov. 20, 2008; available at http://wtc.nist.gov/NCSTAR1/PDF/NCSTAR 1A.pdf) and detailed in Section 12.5.3 of NIST NCSTAR 1-9 (available at http://wtc.nist.gov/NCSTAR1/PDF/NCSTAR 1-9 Vol 2.pdf).
The analyses of the video (both the estimation of the instant the roofline began to descend and the calculated velocity and acceleration of a point on the roofline) revealed three distinct stages characterizing the 5.4 seconds of collapse:
Stage 1 (0 to 1.75 seconds): acceleration less than that of gravity (i.e., slower than free fall).
Stage 2 (1.75 to 4.0 seconds): gravitational acceleration (free fall)
Stage 3 (4.0 to 5.4 seconds): decreased acceleration, again less than that of gravity


This analysis showed that the 40 percent longer descent time—compared to the 3.9 second free fall time—was due primarily to Stage 1, which corresponded to the buckling of the exterior columns in the lower stories of the north face. During Stage 2, the north face descended essentially in free fall, indicating negligible support from the structure below. This is consistent with the structural analysis model which showed the exterior columns buckling and losing their capacity to support the loads from the structure above. In Stage 3, the acceleration decreased as the upper portion of the north face encountered increased resistance from the collapsed structure and the debris pile below.

Content from External Source

 

[Oxymoron]

So you think it's incomprehensible, so must be controlled demolition,

Given the unprecedented nature of the collapses, the prevailing politics of the time, the lack of transparency and many other factors... then yes, that is my view.

and 99% of the experts in the entire world were immediately strong-armed into not saying anything about it?

Most simply complied with the sentiment and official 'rulings'. Let's face it... when you hear statements such as 'You are either with us or you are with the terrorists', it is a compelling reason not to rock the boat.

Is controlled demolition really than more comprehensible than collapse from fire?

Sadly, I think it is.

If you were to be in a gambling mood and had to put odds on it being one of the other, then what probability would you give controlled demolition? 90%? 100%?

I am loath to put a figure on it but if I had to bet one way or the other, (payable on definitive proof, however far in the future that may be), I would bet on demolition, the 'controlled' aspect being a relative term.

 

[Cairenn]

Then please explain how the charges were set and how they and the wires to them endured hours of fires. Then explain how someone could have known exactly where the fires would break out.

I notice a lot of discussion how it could not have happened in the manner that the report says it does, but almost NONE on how the alternative methods could have been set up.

 

[Oxymoron]

The sprinklers would come on and they would get wet.

As opposed to 'the sprinklers would come on and put the fire out before it managed to become a raging inferno'?

Seems a retarded sprinkler system design to me.

Because they weren't wholly long span beam slender column buildings standing on bridge beams.

So why continue building wholly long span beam slender column buildings standing on bridge beams? Why are they not banned?

Not when you've seen the questions and their answers as many times as you have, and you ask them again.

Perhaps if the responses were more convincing, I would stop. In fact... there is no 'perhaps' about it. Not only that I would say, "Thank you very much for the explanation... I now see that I was in error".

 

[F4Jock]

Then please explain how the charges were set and how they and the wires to them endured hours of fires. Then explain how someone could have known exactly where the fires would break out.

I notice a lot of discussion how it could not have happened in the manner that the report says it does, but almost NONE on how the alternative methods could have been set up.

There is an obvious and fatal flaw in your question; it requires the acceptance of logical, reasonable and fact-based conclusions over speculation to reach a reasonable conclusion. Looking back on this thread you can see that there is a demonstrated lack of this indicating that, as with those preceding, your answer will not be forthcoming.

 

[Oxymoron]

Then please explain how the charges were set and how they and the wires to them endured hours of fires. Then explain how someone could have known exactly where the fires would break out.

I notice a lot of discussion how it could not have happened in the manner that the report says it does, but almost NONE on how the alternative methods could have been set up.

As posted previously:https://www.metabunk.org/posts/39445

Security suspension allowed key support columns and beams to be weakened and or thermitic like substance to be attached.

And I repeat... Can you prove it could not be done?

 

[hiper]

All of this as been addressed but nice I have the updated 2011 summary of the NIST so-called "Free Fall" report handy, allow me to show you that you are incorrect.

NIST addressed none of the dust for investigation.
NIST addressed none of the steel for investigation.
NIST does not release the parameters of their model.

So much for a scientific investigation F4Jock. As I said not much to reason about.

 

[F4Jock]

NIST addressed none of the dust for investigation.
NIST addressed none of the steel for investigation.
NIST does not release the parameters of their model.

So much for a scientific investigation F4Jock. As I said not much to reason about.

But haven't you said that NIST was a government-controlled agency? I'd think that since other scientific investigations were done by independent entities and that they essentially ended up as a push, you'd be far happier accepting those than fixating on the fact that an entity you don't trust didn't do them. The only reason I can see for unhappiness is that independent testing didn't invalidate the NIST investigation and ultimately didn't support further investigation.

 

[Cairenn]

So in ONE weekend, they removed many panels of wallboard, inserted the charges ( remember thermite is NOT an option here) then they reinstalled them and retaped and bedded them and repainted them and the paint fumes were gone by Mon morning.

How MANY folks would it take to do that? Let's see, we need a demolition team and we need a BUNCH of folks to do the drywall removal and replacement. And NONE of those folks have ever mentioned doing this.

Impossible, no, but HIGHLY improbable and NO evidence that that happened.

 

[F4Jock]

So in ONE weekend, they removed many panels of wallboard, inserted the charges ( remember thermite is NOT an option here) then they reinstalled them and retaped and bedded them and repainted them and the paint fumes were gone by Mon morning.

How MANY folks would it take to do that? Let's see, we need a demolition team and we need a BUNCH of folks to do the drywall removal and replacement. And NONE of those folks have ever mentioned doing this.

Impossible, no, but HIGHLY improbable and NO evidence that that happened.

And more interesting is that of all the people it would have taken to do this in a fraction of the time it would normally take a trained building demo crew, not ONE has come forth and blabbed! Oh and notice that your query as to the mechanism of detonation was ignored.

Also notice that you were asked to provide hard evidence where others feel that speculation is enough to give credence to their theories.

 

[Oxymoron]

So in ONE weekend, they removed many panels of wallboard, inserted the charges ( remember thermite is NOT an option here) then they reinstalled them and retaped and bedded them and repainted them and the paint fumes were gone by Mon morning.

How MANY folks would it take to do that? Let's see, we need a demolition team and we need a BUNCH of folks to do the drywall removal and replacement. And NONE of those folks have ever mentioned doing this.

Impossible, no, but HIGHLY improbable and NO evidence that that happened.

There were many areas which were untenanted, also many areas which are access and maintenance only. There is evidence that it happened, it may not be conclusive but there is evidence none the less. whether you choose to recognise that or not is up to you.

All I am saying, is if you look dispassionately, (and I do recognise that is hard to do), there is motive and opportunity for ruthless people with an 'end justifies the means' attitude, to do it.

And would you please clarify why you feel thermitic substances are 'not an option'

 

[Cairenn]

The KEY columns would be the ones around the central elevator shafts. That is a VERY public area. In a highrise, service areas are LIMITED since they provide no revenue. When you rent by the sq ft, that is important.

Again, to do what you are implying was done, would have taken a couple of hundred workers and LOTS of supplies. From the explosives to the paint and wallboard --and the the removed wallboard would have had to be disposed of.

Tell us HOW that could have been done with NO trail leading to it.

Start with the small number of qualified folks to set the charges.

 

[Oxymoron]

The KEY columns would be the ones around the central elevator shafts. That is a VERY public area. In a highrise, service areas are LIMITED since they provide no revenue. When you rent by the sq ft, that is important.

Again, to do what you are implying was done, would have taken a couple of hundred workers and LOTS of supplies. From the explosives to the paint and wallboard --and the the removed wallboard would have had to be disposed of.

Tell us HOW that could have been done with NO trail leading to it.

Start with the small number of qualified folks to set the charges.

Cairen, you will believe what you want to believe, because it makes you feel safe or happy or whatever, like you believe in pagan gods etc. I cannot prove it... but i belive it based on the evidence even though I disturbs me. I just will not put my head in the sand for some peace of mind, (although I am aware that is a myth, it is still a valid saying). So we all deal with the world in our own way and we will have to agree to disagree.

 

[F4Jock]

There were many areas which were untenanted, also many areas which are access and maintenance only. There is evidence that it happened, it may not be conclusive but there is evidence none the less. whether you choose to recognise that or not is up to you.

All I am saying, is if you look dispassionately, (and I do recognise that is hard to do), there is motive and opportunity for ruthless people with an 'end justifies the means' attitude, to do it.

And would you please clarify why you feel thermitic substances are 'not an option'

Naturally after the 1993 bombing some tenants were lost, however by 1998 the fear had dissipated and they were experiencing an increase in occupancy, so much so that they were approaching the maximum. Over the next few years they got even better; to the point where the Port Authority issued a press release stating "only 250,000 of the 10.4 million square feet of office space in the trade center remains vacant. And the legal center has an occupancy rate of over 99 percent."[4].

Content from External Source

WTC 7 had 1,868,000 sq feet of office space. 99% occupancy equals 1,849,597 sq ft occupied. That equals 18,403 sq ft unoccupied. Given that this was not all on one floor, hardly enough to conduct the covert operations needed for the alleged demolition activities.

 

[hiper]

But haven't you said that NIST was a government-controlled agency? I'd think that since other scientific investigations were done by independent entities

If NIST had done their job scientifically there would not have been the need for independent entities investigating anything.

fixating on the fact that an entity you don't trust didn't do them.

I am focussing on NIST because it is the official government institution charged with investigation of this mess.
I am fixating on NIST because it did not scientifically investigate the events.

The only reason I can see for unhappiness is that independent testing didn't invalidate the NIST investigation and ultimately didn't support further investigation.

There is unhappiness because there was no real scientific NIST investigation in the first place.

 

[Cairenn]

Thermite is not an explosive, It would have taken over an hundred pounds of it to BURN through each column.

I do not have my 'head in the sand'. I LOOK at FACTS, and not opinions. I LOOK at what is REASONABLE, not what is improbable I look at the simplest answer that will explain something, rather than the most complex and complicated one.

If someone wants to do something in secret, the LEAST number of people involved is the best. The least number of trails is best. That was the 'beauty' of the 9/11 plot. Four men in the US that knew the entire plot, 16 others that knew they were hijacking planes. Instead of that, you have one with HUNDREDS of folks that would have afterwards realized that they had done something odd and not normal, after the buildings fell. And yet NONE of them have come forth and mentioned it.

 

[Grieves]

lol, 'over a hundred pounds!' why, that's more than one man could carry in a single trip(maybe)..!! How could anyone possibly work out the logistics of such an overwhelming feat as transporting over a HUNDRED pounds of something..! Where are you getting this figure anyway?

also, this stuff:

Again, to do what you are implying was done, would have taken a couple of hundred workers and LOTS of supplies. From the explosives to the paint and wallboard --and the the removed wallboard would have had to be disposed of.

of all the people it would have taken to do this in a fraction of the time it would normally take a trained building demo crew,

, would have taken a couple of hundred workers and LOTS of supplies.

Is silly. Demo-teams aren't 100-man operations. To suggest a demolition crew wouldn't have enough of an understanding of drywall to put some up/take some down is also pretty silly. Demolition is a profession requiring expert skills and specified education. Drywalling aint.

​
I highly recommend y'all take a look at this.

 

[Cairenn]

Now WHEN and why would a demo team learn how to install drywall? They are not TRAINED to take it down carefully.

I have replaced drywall sections and it not easy to take an area out, without damaging a larger area, then replace it, and tape and bed it and repaint it so it matches.

Thermite doesn't explode, it burns. It would have taken a lot LONGER to burn through those columns. If it's purpose was to just weaken them, then we are back to FIRE alone being able to do it.

Where did this demo team come from? The setting of charges for a building 'implosion' is a specialty.

 

[F4Jock]

If NIST had done their job scientifically there would not have been the need for independent entities investigating anything.



I am focussing on NIST because it is the official government institution charged with investigation of this mess.
I am fixating on NIST because it did not scientifically investigate the events.



There is unhappiness because there was no real scientific NIST investigation in the first place.

Do you think as a reasonable person your beef with the NIST justifies ignoring the fact that taken as a whole, independent sources were unable to conclusively prove them wrong?

 

[Grieves]

Now WHEN and why would a demo team learn how to install drywall? They are not TRAINED to take it down carefully.

I'd think anyone skilled/knowledgeable enough to understand demolition could wrap their head around drywalling with 45 minutes of instruction, if it wasn't already something they'd learned growing up as a great many construction-minded people do. Taking down drywall doesn't take a lot of care. That's why it's often done with sledgehammers.

I have replaced drywall sections and it not easy to take an area out, without damaging a larger area, then replace it, and tape and bed it and repaint it so it matches.

It's not "easy", but you did it. Presumably with no training / construction background. So not hard either. I've done a bit of drywalling myself in my time, and I'm as inept a PoS where handy-manning is concerned as any.

Where did this demo team come from? The setting of charges for a building 'implosion' is a specialty.

Certain private military contractors are a potential suspect. There are a great many suspicious connections between the administration at the time and private military contractors who've made an absolute killing (pardon the pun) since the events of 9/11. They'd have the knowledge, personnel, and resources to pull it off, as well the monetary motivation, mercenary mindset and discipline necessary to maintain secrecy... as well as the connections necessary to attain 'false' clearance for a persistent presence in building 7. These are the sorts of companies which have not only a well documented history of evil, evil shit, but who also have a history of trying to cover that shit up.

Do you think as a reasonable person your beef with the NIST justifies ignoring the fact that taken as a whole, independent sources were unable to conclusively prove them wrong?

Several independent investigations have turned up evidence which directly contradicts the NIST take on events. One such investigation is detailed in the above documentary, as well as the effort made to discredit a scientific investigation with emotion and dogma.

 

[hiper]

Do you think as a reasonable person your beef with the NIST justifies ignoring the fact that taken as a whole, independent sources were unable to conclusively prove them wrong?

There was nothing that could be proven wrong because NIST did not test the dust nor the steel.

 

[F4Jock]

There was nothing that could be proven wrong because NIST did not test the dust nor the steel.

But doesn't that indicate that the NIST was ultimately correct in choosing not to do so because independent tests indicated nothing conclusive that would warrant revisiting the situation?

Do you think the NIST would have found anything different?

You don't seem to trust them so if they found no explosive residue would you have believed them?

 

[Grieves]

Other independent investigations DID find explosives residue in the dust NIST refused (I say refused because it was asked of them) to test.

 

[hiper]

But doesn't that indicate that the NIST was ultimately correct in choosing not to do so because independent tests indicated nothing conclusive that would warrant revisiting the situation?

There was nothing for NIST to choose in the first place... genuine scientific research has fixed steps to follow when acquiring evidence.

Do you think the NIST would have found anything different?

NIST should have been the first to do test tests. It did not.

You don't seem to trust them so if they found no explosive residue would you have believed them?

If they would have scientifically investigated the dust and the steel there wouldn't be much anyone could say about it.

They didn't. I have a problem with that.

 

[F4Jock]

Other independent investigations DID find explosives residue in the dust NIST refused (I say refused because it was asked of them) to test.

Not quite the case. SOME independent investigations found constituents of what COULD have been present in explosives. Others did not. Those constituents were also shown to be present in the make up of various components of the building and its contents. The conclusion: No smoking gun. This validates the NIST position.

 

[F4Jock]

There was nothing for NIST to choose in the first place... genuine scientific research has fixed steps to follow when acquiring evidence.



NIST should have been the first to do test tests. It did not.



If they would have scientifically investigated the dust and the steel there wouldn't be much anyone could say about it.

They didn't. I have a problem with that.

So despite all other testing done you contend that since NIST didn't test the rest is meaningless?

I can understand your contention that the NIST should have tested no matter what. I fail to understand how that negates everything else done.

 

[Grieves]

Thermite doesn't explode, it burns. It would have taken a lot LONGER to burn through those columns.

I think you misunderstand how thermite burns. The reaction really is quite rapid, and a great deal of energy is released in a way that could easily be described as 'explosive'.

​

So despite all other testing done you contend that since NIST didn't test the rest is meaningless?

When one reaches a solid conclusion while failing to consider all the pertinent data/evidence, it's entirely reasonable, if not necessary, to question that conclusion.

 

[Oxymoron]

lol, 'over a hundred pounds!' why, that's more than one man could carry in a single trip(maybe)..!! How could anyone possibly work out the logistics of such an overwhelming feat as transporting over a HUNDRED pounds of something..! Where are you getting this figure anyway?

It's from here :https://www.metabunk.org/threads/1094-WTC...ll=1#post39445

​
I highly recommend y'all take a look at this.

That is some video. Thanks.

"Value of silence"
'Offered grants to shut up'
'21 year career wrecked by refusal'
At least he hasn't been incarcerated or killed!

 

[hiper]

So despite all other testing done you contend that since NIST didn't test the rest is meaningless?

Yes the rest is de facto meaningless because NIST was/is the official institution charged with the official investigation.

I can understand your contention that the NIST should have tested no matter what. I fail to understand how that negates everything else done.

It negates everything else because NIST's behaviour merits a new official independent investigation.

 

[Grieves]

It's from here :https://www.metabunk.org/threads/1094-WTC...ll=1#post39445

I worked as a kitchen-bitch at a sports-bar/restaurant for a few years. When they needed a cook, I was a cook, but when the didn't, I was absolutely everything else... bus boy, dish washer, prep-cook, janitor, ect. ect. ect.
Every Thursday the booze would come in, and it was my job (the reason I quit in fact, as my back simply couldn't take it anymore) to transport it to the various fridges, one downstairs for the dance-club in the bar's basement. Some days, such as preceding St. Patty's or the Superbowl, we'd receive nearly 2 tonnes of kegs/24packs/liquor. I'd sometimes have to take the booze due to be downstairs, on a freight elevator with a maximum capacity of 700 pounds, in 2 or 3 trips. On a bad day like that, it'd take me about 3 or 4 hours to get it all put away. That's why I get a laugh out of the idea moving 'hundreds of pounds' of equipment/materials around an office building would somehow be too logistically difficult or suspicious. It would have required all the manpower and technology of a few guys, or even just one guy, with a dolly and cardboard boxes.

 

[Oxymoron]

Oh well, there goes the thermite theory. The U.S Government would never be able to manufacture and use something so complicated.

​

 

[F4Jock]

Yes the rest is de facto meaningless because NIST was/is the official institution charged with the official investigation.



It negates everything else because NIST's behaviour merits a new official independent investigation.

FACT: Right or wrong the NIST did not test for explosives residue. FACT: That omission has no bearing on the validity of subsequent testing that in sum was found to be at best, inconclusive. What you seem to be asking for is that testing and investigation be continued until you get the result you want.

I suggest that your not inconsiderable energies and intellect might better be used to prevent future government "plots" by changing things at their core, by voting, lobbying, promoting more governmental openness..... Yeah, you called me "naive" when I proposed this before.....

 

[F4Jock]

I worked as a kitchen-bitch at a sports-bar/restaurant for a few years. When they needed a cook, I was a cook, but when the didn't, I was absolutely everything else... bus boy, dish washer, prep-cook, janitor, ect. ect. ect.
Every Thursday the booze would come in, and it was my job (the reason I quit in fact, as my back simply couldn't take it anymore) to transport it to the various fridges, one downstairs for the dance-club in the bar's basement. Some days, such as preceding St. Patty's or the Superbowl, we'd receive nearly 2 tonnes of kegs/24packs/liquor. I'd sometimes have to take the booze due to be downstairs, on a freight elevator with a maximum capacity of 700 pounds, in 2 or 3 trips. On a bad day like that, it'd take me about 3 or 4 hours to get it all put away. That's why I get a laugh out of the idea moving 'hundreds of pounds' of equipment/materials around an office building would somehow be too logistically difficult or suspicious. It would have required all the manpower and technology of a few guys, or even just one guy, with a dolly and cardboard boxes.

Lots different between lugging the crap around and placing it properly, covering up their tracks in and out. Gives new meaning to the word "improbable."

 

[Oxymoron]

Then there is this...But this is waaay too complex for the black ops guys...

​

Thermite demos from about 5mins

The difference between 'physical science' and 'political science'.

But then some people are not interested in the former.

 

[Grieves]

I suggest that your not inconsiderable energies and intellect might better be used to prevent future government "plots" by changing things at their core, by voting, lobbying, promoting more governmental openness..... Yeah, you called me "naive" when I proposed this before.....

For so long as it continues to seem the full weight of the crime committed on 9/11 has gone deliberately unmeasured, many millions will not be able to 'move on' in the way that you suggest. Until the full scope of the crimes committed are thoroughly investigated, and those at home who were either complicit in the attacks or who alternatively failed spectacularly in their duties only to then quite intentionally benefit from that failure are held accountable for either their crimes or their criminal neglect, these issues will continue to come up, and quite appropriately so.

 

[George B]

For so long as it continues to seem the full weight of the crime committed on 9/11 has gone deliberately unmeasured, many millions will not be able to 'move on' in the way that you suggest. Until the full scope of the crimes committed are thoroughly investigated, and those at home who were either complicit in the attacks or who alternatively failed spectacularly in their duties only to then quite intentionally benefit from that failure are held accountable for either their crimes or their criminal neglect, these issues will continue to come up, and quite appropriately so.

Grieves. . . I completely agree. . . an event which changed this country and the world for the worse deserves much more attention to detail and due diligence than it received . . . no matter what would eventually be discovered or confirmed. . . it is my hope some day that I could again be able to trust my government. . .