QUOTE(Tamacracker @ Sep 5 2006, 4:02 PM)

1. Why has the government not released any videos that clearly show American 77 crashing into the Pentagon?
Please give citations to evidence that they exist in the first place.
Ontop of that, how is this unusual? Is it not natural for videos of crime scenes and private investigations to be confiscated and generally
not realeased to the public.
Argumentum a silentio isn't going to prove a conspiracy here.
If not an American 77, what do you propose crashed into the Pentagon?
QUOTE(Tamacracker @ Sep 5 2006, 4:02 PM)

2. Why was all the steel from the Twin Towers and building 7 immediately sold to scrap metal vendors and shipped overseas and melted down to be reused without ever being tested?
Immediately? Let's be more specific. And, how about some sources and citations? Should I just take your word for it? In fact, I don't believe you at all. Funny thing, a large part of many of the conspiracy theories I have heard surrounding the debris itself actually rely on the debris from the site
not being immediately salvaged and sold away. Further, some of them require that at least
some testing and press coverage was done.
So, are we going to have our cake and eat it too? Or?
Most of the debris from the WTC, insofar as I know, reside in Statan Island landfills (Not over seas) and dedicated testing fields nearby. The New York Department of Sanatation took care of a large majority of the clean-up. They were watched closely by over 50 (Often 100) police officers assigned to scout for clues. Hell, to date, over 7,000 pieces of evidence have been collected due to the NYDS and NYPD's joint effort.
Although private contractors were hired to help the effort, NYDS was the first on site cleaning up. After the NYPD and NYFD gave them the go ahead, they were in. The FBI, Secret Service, NYPD, The National Guard, and many others searched through the debris for evidence and clues. [
1]
NASA has done some studies on site. [
2] Other independent and government bodies have investigated and studied remains of the WTC.
Why don't you ever cite your sources?
Hmmm. Alright. So, what?
QUOTE(Tamacracker @ Sep 5 2006, 4:02 PM)

3. Why isn't the collapse of building 7 mentioned anywhere in the 9/11 Commission Report?
Why should it have to be?
What exactly do you suggest its omission implies?
The 9/11 Commission Report was largely a counter-terrorism manual. It was more an investigation of the events leading up to 9/11 rather than the day itself and the subsequent short-comings. WTC 7 isn't exactly the most relevant. Granted also that the official explanation of its collapse is due to an indirect damaging. Many more buildings were destoryed than just the WTC 7 Sure, it would have been nice to include it, but WTC 7 isn't the only building that fell to the ground and didn't get mentioned in the Commission Report.
In fact, several other buildings (including those of the WTC) were destroyed. Should they be mentioned in the Commission Report as well?
Your question is loaded. It assumes that the collapse of building 7 was of immediate concern to the intentions of the Commission Report. Well, it really wasn't, and that's largely why it was not included. It has little to no relavency to the picture the report was trying to paint. An expository and cautionary work focusing on preparedness and immediate counter-terrorism response needn't mention building 7.
I've decided that I'm just going to take your questions three at a time. If you care to respond, I'll continue. Otherwise, no luck. Your questions are just busy work. Mostly baseless assumptions, fallacies, irrelevancies, and flat out lies. But, if you respond interestingly enough, and do some homework, I may play your game.