Why no mention of WTC Building 7 in 911 Commission Report?

[William Seger]

5. You shouldn't ask questions if you can't handle the answers

Rational people consider the entire WTC complex to be collateral damage from the 9/11 attack. Just because conspiracy hucksters have found that many gullible people fall for controlled demolition theories about WTC7 doesn't mean that everyone is required to take them seriously. That's never gonna happen when their argument is that 47-story steel-framed highrises are magically impervious to 7 hours of fire, so WTC7 must have been brought down by magical silent explosives. Even though it seems this theory can only be substantiated by people who don't know what they're talking about using imaginary physics and ignoring any contrary evidence, some conspiracists are willing to convince themselves that these magical explosives which produced no supersonic shock waves and left no sign of cut columns were somehow planted all over the 24x7-occupied building by black ops magicians, for no apparent reason.

You accept that theory? So what? Are you trying to convince yourself that there aren't rational reasons why rational people don't accept this nonsense? How's it coming?