::::::::
Open letter to Senator Kerry,
RE: On proper, investigative protocol
Dear Senator Kerry,
You claim you read your constituent's comments "diligently". After numerous attempts, with e-mails and by telephone, I have yet to receive any kind of official response from your office regarding my complaints about the 911 Commission which admitted, ADMITTED, it never looked for nor considered any evidence of controlled demolitions in the destruction and ultimate collapse of WTC Building #7. As more people are becoming alarmingly aware, this was the 50 story, steel building never even hit by a plane yet fell in a mere 6.8 seconds, in tact, in perfect, quintessential, controlled demolition fashion (see youtube.com) into its own footprint following the demise of WTC #1 and #2.
The Commission's reasoning for this blatant, intentional failure is even more bizarre: it did not consider evidence of explosives because it was "highly improbable" that the Islamic Fundamentalists had either access to or the technological wherewithal to transport, plant and detonate such devices.
Fine. Maybe someone else did it? But such evidence can never dismiss itself. Because the evidence will always be there, in digital video, laughing at us and crying for us. What's affected by the evidence and should be brought into question is the foregone conclusion, not the intractable evidence.
My question to you is this: Since when does any thorough and authentic investigation NOT consider any and all evidence simply because it cannot be corroborated by a forgone conclusion, determined in this case, most criminally, by coerced confessions of illegally held and tortured (water boarded) suspects which, by the way, were inaccessible to those conducting the 911 investigation? (A joint letter, signed by - at the time - Vice President Chenney, Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld and Attorney General Ashcroft, prohibited questioning by the 911 Commission of detainees as it would "compromise National Security and on-going interrogations".) Torture, we must remember, is criminally outlawed around the world (except here and now in the great USA) because it is not only inhumane but unreliable in establishing the truth.
So, it appears, the the 911 Commission learns not from its own investigating and planned interrogations but through another, separate source, (CIA), what the conclusion is and, starting with that conclusion, (no matter how arrived at), determines what evidence should be allowed or dismissed to complete its report.
How backwards and morally incomprehensible is this? It is the difference, sadly, between a government "report" (such as the Warren Commission Report and the 911 Commission Report), demonstrating a government's inability to investigate itself, and a pure, unbiased, independent investigation; one unable to ask the tough questions that a real prosecutor would ask in chasing down contradictory testimony under oath to find out under threat of severe consequences who is lying and why.
One doesn't have to be a demolition expert, trained as I was by the Navy, to know the difference between a building collapsing or a building exploding (or imploding). Ask your local fire chief how a building on fire collapses. They don't go down in tact, with smooth acceleration, uniformly. And last time I checked, steel doesn't catch fire by office furniture. Go watch "Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid" or any number of old westerns where the bad guys blow up the bank (or train car) to get the money. You were in the Navy yourself. You know what an explosion looks like. Construction materials fly up and out, away from the explosion in all directions, rather than falling straight down with gravity. How else can one explain multi-ton steel girders impaled in adjacent buildings, across the street, 600 feet away from rather than at the base of the supposedly "collapsed" building? Do your own homework. Google, "Barry Jennings WTC#7".
Indulge us, please, Senator. Hypothetically, if a young, six year old girl is murdered with plenty of evidence at the crime scene, (DNA, finger prints, blood type, etc.), strongly implicating the mother's guilt, can you imagine an investigation actually DISMISSING such evidence on the grounds that it would be "highly improbable" that any mother would want to murder her own daughter and therefore all evidence indicating such could not be considered?
At issue is not a lack of patriotism or lunatic conspiracy theory or the need to "move on". At issue are good, valid, intuitive, scientific questions, put forth by a growing number of concerned, recognized, scholars and professionals, fellow Americans, that are being stonewalled by our representatives, questions afraid of being asked by a less than curious, monopolistic and complicit mainstream media. At issue are the carefully evolved principles of what makes for standard and proper investigative protocol upon which our laws and system of justice are based. What's needed are answers to questions raised by and asked of the 911 Commission Report, not ad hominem attacks on those who would have the courage to ask them. If you were in our shoes, is this the way you would like and expect your representatives to act? Our politicians are fooling no one but themselves. The People know that those who are most afraid to investigate and who hamper proper investigation have the most to fear by the truth. No politician wants to be the last one to see the light. Ultimately, any and all discourse on any number of important issues facing us and the world, be it our oxymoronic "War on Terrorism, the environment, energy, the economy, healthcare, education" is meaningless without proper representation and a responsive government in which we can trust.
ã
