500 witnesses barred.....

[wildbilln864]

A new video presentation, created specifically for the Vancouver 9/11 Truth Conference featuring Prof. Graeme MacQueen of McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada, entitled:

"9/11 Commission Report bars 503 1st responder eyewitnesses"

video link here

:hi:

[seemslikeadream]

1. now why wouldn't they want to hear from eyewitness?

:shrug: :hi:

[wildbilln864]

2. damifino!

:shrug:

[seemslikeadream]

3. I guess we spent all the investigation money on Bill Clinton

how convenient

“Nemesis: The Last Days of the American Republic.”
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x1078166

[nebula]

5. "We need those billions for Iraq"

sorry, nothing left over for the 9/11 investigation.

[philb]

29. Here are the firemen's and NY Policemen statements- lots reported explosions before fall

Lots reported explosions, etc.

www.flcv.com/firemen.html

www.flcv.com/NYpolice.html

[nebula]

4. 500+ 1st responder witnesses were barred from testifying

The 9/11 Commission Report is a total sham.

[seemslikeadream]

6. wildbilln864 do you know where part two is?

[Make7]

34. Part Two:

 
EXPLOSIVE TESTIMONY!

- Make7

[LARED]

7. 10:23 seconds of my life was wasted watching that knucklehead

spout off the same ignorant nonsense as other unqualified theologians. He never even stated how 503 eyewitnesses were barred.

[nebula]

8. If you bothered to read

He never even stated how 503 eyewitnesses were barred.

....the caption beside the video, you would see how 1st responder witnesses were excluded from testifying:



"Within a month of 9/11, NYC fire commissioner Thomas Von Essen, a 30-year NYFD vet, set up interviews with fire, port authority police and EMT first responders to record their initial impressions of what they experienced on Sept 11.
The stories of 503 men and women ran to 12,000 pages. Graeme MacQueen, a recently retired religious studies professor, read them all. In addition to the heartrending nature of many of the stories, the consistent theme was of hearing, feeling and seeing explosions, a controlled demolition. Failure to officially acknowledge this evidence is further proof of an inside job. MacQueen (McMaster University, Ontario, Canada) narrowed down the testimony of 118 first responders as especially court-worthy testimony. But he notes the entire testimony was excluded by the 9/11 Commission, as well as the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). "

Part 1 of 2; Part 2: First Responders Testimony Video
prepared for the Vancouver 9/11 Truth Conference, June 22-24, 2007 / snowshoefilms

[LARED]

9. Seems to me the word "barred" is not used properly

This is hardly surprising in the CT world.

[nebula]

10. What do you call it then?

[LARED]

11. I would characterize it as "did not use"

Barred implies the verbal testimony was going to be included and someone prevented it from inclusion. You have no evidence that happened. There does not seem to be anything sinister about not including every word or piece of information transcribed. In fact it is quite normal to include only information germane to a reports scope.

[nebula]

13. How much of it was included in the report?

If any?? 200? 100? 10? 0?

One would think that the testimony of each and every one of these 1st responder witnesses was relevant to the investigation at hand. How were they not?

How was the New York Times able to publish all 12,000 pages of these witness interviews, but the Commission couldn't be bothered with them?

How many pages of witness testimony was used by Kenneth Starr to investigate Bill Clinton's penis? I'll tell you right now, it was much more than 12,000 pages.

[wildbilln864]

35. Of course you would.

No one expected anything else.

[mhatrw]

36. Tossed. n/t

[nebula]

12. Barred testimony released to public

in August 2005--all 12,000 pages were published by the New York Times.

Of course, the Times only decided to publish this information long after the official commission report was released. After all the publicity has died down. How very convenient for the commission!


http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/html/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/met_WTC_histories_full_01.html">Sept. 11 Oral histories

[jberryhill]

17. Then why did the 9/11 Commission Report Include Them?

Do you ever get the feeling someone isn't telling the "truth"?

http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report_Notes.htm

209. Based on more than 100 interviews we conducted and our review of 500 internal FDNY interview transcripts, we conclude that out of these 32 companies, all on-duty members of 19 companies are likely to have known to evacuate (Engine Companies 1, 4, 7, 9, 15, 16, 21, 24, 28, 33, 39, and 65; Ladder Companies 1, 5, 6, 8, 9, 110; and Rescue 1).We also conclude that at least some members of each of five companies knew to evacuate (two firefighters from Ladder Company 10; the officer of Ladder Company 20; all but the officer of Engine Company 10; at least two firefighters from Squad 18; and at least three firefighters from Engine 6).We do not know whether members of the eight other companies knew to evacuate (Engine Companies 55, 207, and 226; Rescue 2, 3, and 4; Hazmat 1; and Squad 1) because they all died, and we have come across no on-point eyewitness accounts related to their operations. It is very possible that at least some of these firefighters did hear the evacuation order but nevertheless failed to evacuate in the only 29-minute period between the collapse of the two towers. In addition, it is possible that several of the eight companies for which we have no record of their receiving evacuation instructions were in the South Tower and thus died in its earlier collapse.

[nebula]

20. Absolutely meaningless.

The commission didn't allow the 1st responder witnesses to testify in the actual hearings.

Gee, how nice of the Commission to 'review' some selected transcripts instead of allowing the 1st responder witnesses to state what they saw in their own words, while the hearings were aired on public television. And then only mentioning 'that they've been reviewed' in a footnote buried in the back of the report. Nice way to prevent the public from hearing what the witnesses had to say. What a farce.

[Carefulplease]

27. "[...] the entire testimony was excluded by [...] NIST"

Some things that had been performed by NIST by the time the second interim report had been made available for public comment and scrutiny:

First-person interviews of nearly 1,200 WTC occupants, first responders and families of victims to collect data on occupant behavior, evacuation and emergency response with some early results from analysis of that data.

A review of the New York City 9-1-1 tapes and logs and the transcripts of about 500 interviews with Fire Department of New York (FDNY) employees involved in WTC emergency response activities (the analysis of this material is still in progress).

Preliminary analysis of emergency responder communication tapes recorded by the Port Authority, including the high-rise radio repeater, and by the New York Police Department (NYPD), including internal department operations.

http://www.ansi.org/news_publications/news_story.aspx?menuid=7&articleid=706

[juno jones]

14. Thanks

I had not heard of this, and thanks for the link, Nebula.

[Make7]

15. "... our review of 500 internal FDNY interview transcripts..." - 9/11CR

From the description at that video's page at YouTube:

Within a month of 9/11, NYC fire commissioner Thomas Von Essen, a 30-year NYFD vet, set up interviews with fire, port authority police and EMT first responders to record their initial impressions of what they experienced on Sept 11.

The stories of 503 men and women ran to 12,000 pages. Graeme MacQueen, a recently retired religious studies professor, read them all. In addition to the heartrending nature of many of the stories, the consistent theme was of hearing, feeling and seeing explosions, a controlled demolition. Failure to officially acknowledge this evidence is further proof of an inside job. MacQueen (McMaster University, Ontario, Canada) narrowed down the testimony of 118 first responders as especially court-worthy testimony. But he notes the entire testimony was excluded by the 9/11 Commission, as well as the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IwQa5eokieY

From the notes of the 9/11 Commission Report (emphasis added; embedded links added):

9 Heroism and Horror

163. For evacuation instructions, our analysis is based on more than 100 interviews we conducted and our review of 500 internal FDNY interview transcripts. For three firefighters hearing "imminent collapse," see FDNY interview, transcript 20, Battalion 10, Jan. 10, 2002 (link); FDNY interview, transcript 23, Battalion 7, Jan. 21, 2002 (link); FDNY interview, transcript 21, Battalion 8, Jan. 9, 2002 (link).

209. Based on more than 100 interviews we conducted and our review of 500 internal FDNY interview transcripts, we conclude that out of these 32 companies, all on-duty members of 19 companies are likely to have known to evacuate (Engine Companies 1, 4, 7, 9, 15, 16, 21, 24, 28, 33, 39, and 65; Ladder Companies 1, 5, 6, 8, 9, 110; and Rescue 1).We also conclude that at least some members of each of five companies knew to evacuate (two firefighters from Ladder Company 10; the officer of Ladder Company 20; all but the officer of Engine Company 10; at least two firefighters from Squad 18; and at least three firefighters from Engine 6).We do not know whether members of the eight other companies knew to evacuate (Engine Companies 55, 207, and 226; Rescue 2, 3, and 4; Hazmat 1; and Squad 1) because they all died, and we have come across no on-point eyewitness accounts related to their operations. It is very possible that at least some of these firefighters did hear the evacuation order but nevertheless failed to evacuate in the only 29-minute period between the collapse of the two towers. In addition, it is possible that several of the eight companies for which we have no record of their receiving evacuation instructions were in the South Tower and thus died in its earlier collapse.

http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report_Notes.htm

- Make7

[LARED]

16. Interesting

Graeme MacQueen managed to real all 12,000 pages of the transcripts, but missed the footnote in the 9/11 report stating the transcripts had been reviewed.

Can anyone spell B... S...?

[nebula]

18. There's a big difference

Between 'reviewing' selective transcripts and allowing people to testify in person.

[LARED]

22. Are these people that wanted to testify, but were barred, or

are you just trying to make it sound like they were not allowed to testify?

[Make7]

24. I thought the video was referring to the FDNY interviews.

I thought the video was referring to the FDNY interviews published by the NY Times based on the text description that accompanied it on YouTube.

Within a month of 9/11, NYC fire commissioner Thomas Von Essen, a 30-year NYFD vet, set up interviews with fire, port authority police and EMT first responders to record their initial impressions of what they experienced on Sept 11.

The stories of 503 men and women ran to 12,000 pages. Graeme MacQueen, a recently retired religious studies professor, read them all. In addition to the heartrending nature of many of the stories, the consistent theme was of hearing, feeling and seeing explosions, a controlled demolition. Failure to officially acknowledge this evidence is further proof of an inside job. MacQueen (McMaster University, Ontario, Canada) narrowed down the testimony of 118 first responders as especially court-worthy testimony. But he notes the entire testimony was excluded by the 9/11 Commission...

From your previous posts I thought you were also referring to the FDNY interviews that were published by the New York Times.

nebula wrote:

How was the New York Times able to publish all 12,000 pages of these witness interviews, but the Commission couldn't be bothered with them?

nebula wrote:

Barred testimony released to public in August 2005--all 12,000 pages were published by the New York Times.

For some reason I thought the objection was that the testimony in the internal FDNY interviews was "barred" by the 9/11 Commission. So I replied merely to point out that the Commission had indeed reviewed that testimony.

Forgive me for saying so, but if the internal FDNY interviews were not what was being discussed, your prior posts in this thread make very little sense.

- Make7

[jberryhill]

28. By Gum, you are rigtht, WHY IS GRAEME MACQUEEEN SUPPRESSING THEIR TESTIMONY?

Graeme MacQueen, a recently retired religious studies professor, read them all.

He *read* them all. Why will he not let them speak?

[Name removed]

19. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[nebula]

21. Where does it say any of the 503 1st responder witnesses were allowed to TESTIFY?

[LARED]

23. Where does it say any were barred? (n/t)

[nebula]

25. Call it what you want, spin it any way you want

...but an investigation that bars...or, uhh ignores/excludes/omits (there, better?) the accounts of hundreds of material eyewitnesses, cannot call itself an investigation--what it is, is nothing but a sham.

[Grateful for Hope]

26. Aren't you one who has said that the MSM provides us with

adequate news?

Just sayin'.

[jberryhill]

30. Where does it say that any of them WANTED to? /nt

[Make7]

31. First-Person Interviews

 

First-Person Interviews

In October 2003, NIST entered into a three-party agreement between NIST, New York City (NYC), and the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (the 9/11 Commission). The agreement provided procedures under which NIST and the 9/11 Commission would interview a maximum of 125 NYC emergency responders, 100 from FDNY and 25 from NYPD.

In December 2003, NIST officially requested and the Port Authority agreed to interviews with twelve Port Authority personnel, including emergency responders, safety, security, and management personnel.

The first-person interviews were conducted beginning in December 2003 and were completed in June 2004.

The following represents the number of interviews conducted by NIST with each organization:

• FDNY = 68

Senior management and officers, mid-level officers, company officers, firefighters, emergency medical personnel, and dispatchers

• NYPD = 25

Senior management and officers, mid-level officers, emergency service unit personnel, aviation personnel, and dispatchers

• PANYNJ/PAPD = 15

Senior management personnel, facility safety personnel, building security personnel, facility communication personnel, building vertical transportation personnel, senior PAPD officers, midlevel PAPD officers, and PAPD officers

• OTHER = 8

Interviewees in this group contacted NIST directly or through third parties and indicated that they would like to be interviewed. Approximately half of these individuals were retired FDNY personnel. The group consisted of a building security guard, building engineers, a dispatcher, firefighters, and a fire safety director.

• Total Interviews = 116

http://wtc.nist.gov/NISTNCSTAR1-8.pdf

- Make7

[nebula]

32. Interviews are not testimonials

The interviewer gets to choose to print what he pleases, paraphrasing the witness statements and omitting from the record what he doesn't want to hear. This kind of reporting can be totally misleading.

We need to hear the responders' in their own words, not someone else's.

[LARED]

33. You know their own words were heard; you posted the the link

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/html/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/met_WTC_histories_full_01.html