30 seconds is not always enough time to grasp complex subjects.
Despite our addiction to sound bites, slogans, and witty one-liners, there is sometimes a need for a little more time to get properly to grips with some issues.
I was disturbed by many aspects of the “9/11 Commission Report” (download a copy here).
For a start:
- why on earth did it take 441 days to set up the Commission and get it going? The JFK and Pearl Harbour commissions were started within 7 days.
- a budget $15 million might seem like a lot of money to some of us, but over $60 million was spent investigating Clinton's affairs with Monica Lewinsky. By the Commission's own reckoning, 2,152 American citizens, excluding rescue workers, died in the towers that day. Surely this merited more investigation than a presidential dalliance!
- the very Chair of the Commission itself, Thomas Kean, and his Vice Chair Lee Hamilton are on record as saying that they felt that the inquiry was “Set up to fail” (Washington Post 2/8/06.)
- There are 33 references to elevators in the report, but not one mention of “elevator modernisation” or “elevator maintenance” which was taking place throughout the 9 months prior to the event by 85 Ace (no mentions) Elevator employees - none of whom were available on 9/11.
- There were 75 references to China in the report, but not one of them mentions the removal from the crime scene and mysterious shipment to that country, within days, of the rubble, steel, and debris left by the collapse of the Towers.
These are just a few questions which pop up in a quick cursory examination of some of the known facts. A look on line will list hundreds more, together with hundreds of whacky and variously improbable explanations. I've looked through quite a few but, with a certain amount of persistence, found one or two presentations to be very compelling. Not least are the various “for 9/11 Truth” videos from architects, engineers, pilots, firefighters, and others. But not everybody has the time or inclination to wade through all this footage.
Having done some wading (so that you don't have to) I find I can unreservedly recommend one in particular.
The “Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth” is one of the most reasoned, studiously neutral, and compelling videos I've seen. Some 1500 members of the American Institute of Architects and other prestigious and respected technical organisations have contributed to and/or supported the production of this video. They don't posit theories as to “who dunnit”. They merely address questions which, when answered carefully through empirical scientific method, raise further questions as to why the official Commission narrative comes up with different answers.
It is an hour long, but really, it is well worth setting aside some time to hear them out. We're not talking about a minor nuisance here. We're not swatting flies. We're talking about the largest loss of American lives in peace time. If there are reasonable explanations for all the points raised, these explanations should be readily forthcoming. There should be no hesitation whatsoever in addressing the legitimate concerns of legitimately concerned American citizens.
If there are reasonable explanations but government sources are unwilling to present them, what does that tell us about American governmental attitudes to its own citizens?
If there are no reasonable explanations to be had at all, what does that tell us about the forces at play within and without American government today?
By the same Author:
© 2016 Deacon Martin
Deacon Martin (author) from Bristol, UK on August 28, 2020:
Thanks for comments CJ. Always appreciated. Not entirely sure why you got riled up, but if that's part of having thought provoked I guess it's a good thing.
CJ Kelly from the PNW on August 27, 2020:
Mr. Martin, another hubber, Dan Demland (an architect and engineer), wrote an incredible piece disputing the WTC-Building 7 conspiracy theories. It's well researched, detailed and will answer a lot of questions people have. Sorry, I don't remember the exact title of the hub.
While I don't question the intentions of most the "Architects and Engineers" for truth, I dispute their reasoning. Sometimes the simplest answer is the truth. If they want to question why certain actions were taken after the attack or why some information has not been released, I support that. The $$ was not enough, and they did get of crime scene material too fast.
But the idea that anyone other than Bin Laden was responsible for the attack or that the buildings were intentionally brought down by the Feds, I find ridiculous.
Your hub is thought-provoking and it got me riled up! Good job. Hope all is well. Thx.