Who Disrespects NYPD & NYFD - Page 3

Gravy · 27th October 2006, 10:41 PM

Originally Posted by LashL

"The guy" is wrong.

Dr W. Gene Corley, head of the building performance assessment team, in his testimony to the House of Representatives:

"There has been some concern expressed by others that the work of the team has been hampered because debris was removed from the site and has subsequently been processed for recycling. This is not the case. The team has had full access to the scrap yards and to the site and has been able to obtain numerous samples. At this point there is no indication that having access to each piece of steel from the World Trade Center would make a significant difference to understanding the performance of the structures."

I believe he was speaking about the towers. I'm sure the investigators into WTC 7's collapse would have wanted more steel from that building to be available. Again: context, people! Building 7 was not the main concern, and had you been in New York at the time, you would know that virtually everyone wanted the site cleaned up ASAP, especially where human remains were less likely to be found. 

jessicarabbit · 27th October 2006, 10:43 PM

Originally Posted by Gravy

It's important to remember that Bill Manning's anger had nothing to do with CT claims that the steel was removed to hide an "inside job" CD. Manning has never believed or supported 9/11 conspiracy theorists or their claims.

His quote from Fire Engineering is, as usual, taken out of context. Manning was justifiably angry that more steel was not preserved, because he wanted fire safety engineers like himself to be able to study it in order to better answer these questions:

"Can the fire service really handle high rise fires adequately? What part did lightweight steel trusses, some reported to have been in excess of 50 feet long, play in the collapse? How effective was the modern sprayed-on steel "fireproofing" employed at the WTC? How relevant to today's fires are the criteria established for the ASTM E-119 fire resistance test developed in the 1920's? When should the defend-in-place strategy for the WTC be used and not used for large high-rise fires? What can be done to make communication by radio possible in high-rise buildings?" (Fire Engineer, February, 2002)

Please keep these quotes in context, CTs.

I know that, he was the one on Penn and Teller calling the theories ********. Why did he write the article if the steel wasn't being shipped off?

Kent1 · 27th October 2006, 10:45 PM

Originally Posted by Russell Pickering

Thank you. That is a very interesting report. They did use the tradtional terms for the fire service of evacuate and abandon as I suspected.

No problem Russell.
And feel free to e-mail me whenever. My line is always open.

Usual Suspect · 27th October 2006, 10:45 PM

While talking about the collapse please don't forget Craig says the Truth Movement is not disrespectful to the NYPD/FD and the families. Infact I believe he says the official lie is what's disrespectful.

Russ why do you waste your time here?? You went to DC, you are doing real research yet your allowing yourself to be questioned by people who haven't done one ounce of research.

jessicarabbit · 27th October 2006, 10:46 PM

Originally Posted by Gravy

Dr W. Gene Corley, head of the building performance assessment team, in his testimony to the House of Representatives:

"There has been some concern expressed by others that the work of the team has been hampered because debris was removed from the site and has subsequently been processed for recycling. This is not the case. The team has had full access to the scrap yards and to the site and has been able to obtain numerous samples. At this point there is no indication that having access to each piece of steel from the World Trade Center would make a significant difference to understanding the performance of the structures."

I believe he was speaking about the towers. I'm sure the investigators into WTC 7's collapse would have wanted more steel from that building to be available. Again: context, people! Building 7 was not the main concern, and had you been in New York at the time, you would know that virtually everyone wanted the site cleaned up ASAP, especially where human remains were less likely to be found. 

I understand what you are saying, that they didn't need all the steel to understand a collapse but how can any CT find evidence of explosives if they don't have the steel to look at?

Moving On · 27th October 2006, 10:48 PM

Originally Posted by Kent1

No problem Russell.
And feel free to e-mail me whenever. My line is always open.

I have been reading your site and you have a lot of great points there.

Thank you.

Pardalis · 27th October 2006, 10:48 PM

Originally Posted by Usual Suspect

Russ why do you waste your time here?? You went to DC, you are doing real research yet your allowing yourself to be questioned by people who haven't done one ounce of research.

Actually, if I'm not mistaken, his research lead him to believe that flight 77 did hit the Pentagon, right Russell?

BTW, what did you do exactly there? *no sarcasm

Usual Suspect · 27th October 2006, 10:48 PM

Originally Posted by Gravy

It's important to remember that Bill Manning's anger had nothing to do with CT claims that the steel was removed to hide an "inside job" CD. Manning has never believed or supported 9/11 conspiracy theorists or their claims.

His quote from Fire Engineering is, as usual, taken out of context. Manning was justifiably angry that more steel was not preserved, because he wanted fire safety engineers like himself to be able to study it in order to better answer these questions:

"Can the fire service really handle high rise fires adequately? What part did lightweight steel trusses, some reported to have been in excess of 50 feet long, play in the collapse? How effective was the modern sprayed-on steel "fireproofing" employed at the WTC? How relevant to today's fires are the criteria established for the ASTM E-119 fire resistance test developed in the 1920's? When should the defend-in-place strategy for the WTC be used and not used for large high-rise fires? What can be done to make communication by radio possible in high-rise buildings?" (Fire Engineer, February, 2002)

Please keep these quotes in context, CTs.

They reconstructed Flight 800 out at Calverton Airforce base on Long Island but scraped most of the WTC from the biggest crime scene ever before any investigation was done into "the worse day in American history". That makes sense.

jessicarabbit · 27th October 2006, 10:51 PM

Originally Posted by Usual Suspect

They reconstructed Flight 800 out at Calverton Airforce base on Long Island but scraped most of the WTC from the biggest crime scene ever before any investigation was done into "the worse day in American history". That makes sense.

That craig makes the point that the FBI barged into Ground Zero and made a big deal about it being the biggest crime scene in history but then treated it as anything other than a crimes scene.

Kent1 · 27th October 2006, 10:52 PM

Originally Posted by Russell Pickering

I have been reading your site and you have a lot of great points there.

Thank you.

Its not really my site. I do a lot of the research and help out. But the site owner does most of the writing. If I had my way I'd change a few things and lessen the tone.

Moving On · 27th October 2006, 10:52 PM

Originally Posted by Usual Suspect

While talking about the collapse please don't forget Craig says the Truth Movement is not disrespectful to the NYPD/FD and the families. Infact I believe he says the official lie is what's disrespectful.

Russ why do you waste your time here?? You went to DC, you are doing real research yet your allowing yourself to be questioned by people who haven't done one ounce of research.

Usual Suspect,

I subject myself to this for learning.

The CTers were actually a little meaner.

This is just how I learn. I am planning a major revision of my site. I want to get beat up over ideas so my beliefs are informed.

I am going to talk a little more about WTC on a couple of pages so this has been good for myth busting since I have relied on second hand information for the most part.

Dispelled some things and confirmed some things.

It is worth it!

Thank you for the compliment.

Russell

gumboot · 27th October 2006, 10:53 PM

Originally Posted by Usual Suspect

They reconstructed Flight 800 out at Calverton Airforce base on Long Island but scraped most of the WTC from the biggest crime scene ever before any investigation was done into "the worse day in American history". That makes sense.

Are you obsessed with lying. Did you ignore all of the points above where it was made clear the debris from the WTC was NOT scrapped before an investigation could be undertaken?

-Gumboot

Pardalis · 27th October 2006, 10:54 PM

Originally Posted by jessicarabbit

That craig makes the point that the FBI barged into Ground Zero and made a big deal about it being the biggest crime scene in history but then treated it as anything other than a crimes scene.

But is it Craig's point, or the point of the guys of "Louder than Words"?

Moving On · 27th October 2006, 10:54 PM

Originally Posted by Kent1

Its not really my site. I do a lot of the research and help out. But the site owner does most of the writing. If I had my way I'd change a few things and lessen the tone.

I am anxious for the Doubletree video to come out. I want to see it bad.

Moving On · 27th October 2006, 10:55 PM

Originally Posted by Pardalis

But is it Craig's point, or the point of the guys of "Louder than Words"?

Louder Than Words is Loose Change.

Kent1 · 27th October 2006, 10:56 PM

Originally Posted by Russell Pickering

I am anxious for the Doubletree video to come out. I want to see it bad.

I suspect nothing. But I hope Im wrong. There was one TV reporter that stated it was rumored to show the plane in flight.

jessicarabbit · 27th October 2006, 10:56 PM

Originally Posted by Pardalis

But is it Craig's point, or the point of the guys of "Louder than Words"?

Its craigs point. The loose change people weren't at ground zero.

Pardalis · 27th October 2006, 10:56 PM

Originally Posted by Russell Pickering

Louder Than Words is Loose Change.

I know, and they are the ones interviewing him (putting words in his mouth).

gumboot · 27th October 2006, 10:57 PM

Originally Posted by jessicarabbit

Its craigs point. The loose change people weren't at ground zero.

That doesn't seem to stop them having "points".

-Gumboot

Pardalis · 27th October 2006, 10:58 PM

Originally Posted by jessicarabbit

Its craigs point. The loose change people weren't at ground zero.

Jessica, are you aware that Craig Bartmer is suffering from traumatic stress disorder?

Moving On · 27th October 2006, 10:59 PM

Originally Posted by Kent1

I suspect nothing. But I hope Im wrong. There was one TV reporter that stated it was rumored to show the plane in flight.

It may be the one that the employees watched in "shock and horror". It was implied to be possible by an employee when I was there.

Moving On · 27th October 2006, 11:09 PM

Originally Posted by jessicarabbit

Its craigs point. The loose change people weren't at ground zero.

Jessica,

Here are the observations I have made so far.

The government in general is just a lumbering, clumsy conglomeration. It made a few innocent mistakes in regards to 9/11. A little cover up is justified just so they don't look bad. All of the reports are to be trusted 100% even though the president himself refused to testify under oath and tried to prevent a 9/11 Commission. The reports and stuff are just delayed because some of this is just not important. Physics is irrelevant and words can mean anything.

There is NO possibility of a small subversive element within the harmless, friendly giant. Don't suggest it.

They have evidence and we don't. We're just unpatriotic kooks.

Some people here defend the government at all costs and will instead attack you even though you have done nothing wrong and are simply trying to find answers the friendly giant refuses to provide.

Meanwhile 9/11 is used to justify everything from the evisceration of the Constitution to the daily deaths of human beings.

So just relax and get indoctrinated!

Russell

Pardalis · 27th October 2006, 11:10 PM

Russell, I thought you were here to learn.

jessicarabbit · 27th October 2006, 11:10 PM

Originally Posted by Kent1

I suspect nothing. But I hope Im wrong. There was one TV reporter that stated it was rumored to show the plane in flight.

Can I make a depressing prediction?

If the new pentagon video shows a plane in flight, within 24 hours (or minutes) 911tvfakery.com and the like will be claiming the tape was faked. Totally unhelpful to the cause

Moving On · 27th October 2006, 11:11 PM

Originally Posted by Pardalis

Russell, I thought you were here to learn.

I just shared some of what I have learned.

jessicarabbit · 27th October 2006, 11:12 PM

Originally Posted by Pardalis

Jessica, are you aware that Craig Bartmer is suffering from traumatic stress disorder?

Yes so are lots of the first responders. Thats an evil tactic by the way.

Moving On · 27th October 2006, 11:12 PM

Originally Posted by jessicarabbit

Can I make a depressing prediction?

If the new pentagon video shows a plane in flight, within 24 hours (or minutes) 911tvfakery.com and the like will be claiming the tape was faked. Totally unhelpful to the cause

24 seconds. Actually it's already being claimed. It's like when you put instant coffee in the microwave and go back in time.

jessicarabbit · 27th October 2006, 11:13 PM

Originally Posted by Russell Pickering

Jessica,

Here are the observations I have made so far.

The government in general is just a lumbering, clumsy conglomeration. It made a few innocent mistakes in regards to 9/11. A little cover up is justified just so they don't look bad. All of the reports are to be trusted 100% even though the president himself refused to testify under oath and tried to prevent a 9/11 Commission. The reports and stuff are just delayed because some of this is just not important. Physics is irrelevant and words can mean anything.

There is NO possibility of a small subversive element within the harmless, friendly giant. Don't suggest it.

They have evidence and we don't. We're just unpatriotic kooks.

Some people here defend the government at all costs and will instead attack you even though you have done nothing wrong and are simply trying to find answers the friendly giant refuses to provide.

Meanwhile 9/11 is used to justify everything from the evisceration of the Constitution to the daily deaths of human beings.

So just relax and get indoctrinated!

Russell

Your a very intelligent man. I understand resistance is futile. Whats your site BTW?

Pardalis · 27th October 2006, 11:14 PM

Originally Posted by jessicarabbit

Yes so are lots of the first responders. Thats an evil tactic by the way.

I was just saying that the interviewers are using his fragile mental state to suggest ideas to him. That is what is sick.

gumboot · 27th October 2006, 11:15 PM

I'm amazed my generation even believe any world events pre-1894 happened, considering there is no motion-picture evidence to prove it.

The faith and emphasis my generation put on video evidence is quite disturbing.

-Gumboot

Usual Suspect · 27th October 2006, 11:20 PM

Originally Posted by gumboot

Are you obsessed with lying. Did you ignore all of the points above where it was made clear the debris from the WTC was NOT scrapped before an investigation could be undertaken?

-Gumboot

There was a criminal investigation?? WOW!! You think something like that would have made news. You got some good inside source huh??

Gravy · 27th October 2006, 11:21 PM

Originally Posted by Russell Pickering

I can answer the question

ESPECIALLY in light of the day, if any commander thought there was any possibility of structural collapse from the physical damage they would NOT risk another firefighter's life for an unoccupied building in my opinion.

Yet another straw man. Are you aware of a single report that the FDNY believed the building was in danger of collapse from the debris damage alone? I'm not.

jessicarabbit · 27th October 2006, 11:22 PM

Originally Posted by Pardalis

I was just saying that the interviewers are using his fragile mental state to suggest ideas to him. That is what is sick.

If he had PTSD and was saying that wtc7 fell from damage and fire you would conveniently forget that he was in a fragile mental state and happily accept what he said. How many responders who believe the official story have PTSD.

Gravy · 27th October 2006, 11:23 PM

Originally Posted by Usual Suspect

There was a criminal investigation?? WOW!! You think something like that would have made news. You got some good inside source huh??

Quiz for Usual Suspect:

How many FBI Evidence Response Teams worked at Ground Zero and Fresh Kills?

jessicarabbit · 27th October 2006, 11:23 PM

Originally Posted by gumboot

I'm amazed my generation even believe any world events pre-1894 happened, considering there is no motion-picture evidence to prove it.

The faith and emphasis my generation put on video evidence is quite disturbing.

-Gumboot

Do you include the Osama admission video in that?

Pardalis · 27th October 2006, 11:24 PM

Originally Posted by jessicarabbit

If he had PTSD and was saying that wtc7 fell from damage and fire you would conveniently forget that he was in a fragile mental state and happily accept what he said. How many responders who believe the official story have PTSD.

You don't understand my point. This particular one, on which you rest your case, is being manipulated by LTW.

jessicarabbit · 27th October 2006, 11:24 PM

Originally Posted by Gravy

Quiz for Usual Suspect:

How many FBI Evidence Response Teams worked at Ground Zero and Fresh Kills?

I believe it was 55

jessicarabbit · 27th October 2006, 11:26 PM

Originally Posted by Pardalis

You don't understand my point. This particular one, on which you rest your case, is being manipulated by LTW.

No I do take your point and I would prefer if this Craig wasn't connected to LTW.

Gravy · 27th October 2006, 11:26 PM

Originally Posted by Usual Suspect

They reconstructed Flight 800 out at Calverton Airforce base on Long Island but scraped most of the WTC from the biggest crime scene ever before any investigation was done into "the worse day in American history". That makes sense.

Your evidence?

Pardalis · 27th October 2006, 11:26 PM

I just finished listening to the 9/11 Fire Engeneering podcast. No mention of criticism of the NIST or FEMA reports.

27th October 2006, 10:41 PM	#81
Gravy Downsitting Citizen Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: In the argyle Posts: 17,136	Originally Posted by LashL "The guy" is wrong. Dr W. Gene Corley, head of the building performance assessment team, in his testimony to the House of Representatives: "There has been some concern expressed by others that the work of the team has been hampered because debris was removed from the site and has subsequently been processed for recycling. This is not the case. The team has had full access to the scrap yards and to the site and has been able to obtain numerous samples. At this point there is no indication that having access to each piece of steel from the World Trade Center would make a significant difference to understanding the performance of the structures." I believe he was speaking about the towers. I'm sure the investigators into WTC 7's collapse would have wanted more steel from that building to be available. Again: context, people! Building 7 was not the main concern, and had you been in New York at the time, you would know that virtually everyone wanted the site cleaned up ASAP, especially where human remains were less likely to be found.
	__________________ "Please, keep your chops cool and don’t overblow.” –Freddie Hubbard What's the Harm?........Stop Sylvia Browne........My 9/11 links

27th October 2006, 10:43 PM	#82
jessicarabbit Banned Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 555	Originally Posted by Gravy It's important to remember that Bill Manning's anger had nothing to do with CT claims that the steel was removed to hide an "inside job" CD. Manning has never believed or supported 9/11 conspiracy theorists or their claims. His quote from Fire Engineering is, as usual, taken out of context. Manning was justifiably angry that more steel was not preserved, because he wanted fire safety engineers like himself to be able to study it in order to better answer these questions: "Can the fire service really handle high rise fires adequately? What part did lightweight steel trusses, some reported to have been in excess of 50 feet long, play in the collapse? How effective was the modern sprayed-on steel "fireproofing" employed at the WTC? How relevant to today's fires are the criteria established for the ASTM E-119 fire resistance test developed in the 1920's? When should the defend-in-place strategy for the WTC be used and not used for large high-rise fires? What can be done to make communication by radio possible in high-rise buildings?" (Fire Engineer, February, 2002) Please keep these quotes in context, CTs. I know that, he was the one on Penn and Teller calling the theories ********. Why did he write the article if the steel wasn't being shipped off?
jessicarabbit Banned Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 555

27th October 2006, 10:45 PM	#83
Kent1 Graduate Poster Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 1,177	Originally Posted by Russell Pickering Thank you. That is a very interesting report. They did use the tradtional terms for the fire service of evacuate and abandon as I suspected. No problem Russell. And feel free to e-mail me whenever. My line is always open.
Kent1 Graduate Poster Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 1,177

27th October 2006, 10:45 PM	#84
Usual Suspect Guest Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 228	While talking about the collapse please don't forget Craig says the Truth Movement is not disrespectful to the NYPD/FD and the families. Infact I believe he says the official lie is what's disrespectful. Russ why do you waste your time here?? You went to DC, you are doing real research yet your allowing yourself to be questioned by people who haven't done one ounce of research.
Usual Suspect Guest Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 228

27th October 2006, 10:46 PM	#85
jessicarabbit Banned Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 555	Originally Posted by Gravy Dr W. Gene Corley, head of the building performance assessment team, in his testimony to the House of Representatives: "There has been some concern expressed by others that the work of the team has been hampered because debris was removed from the site and has subsequently been processed for recycling. This is not the case. The team has had full access to the scrap yards and to the site and has been able to obtain numerous samples. At this point there is no indication that having access to each piece of steel from the World Trade Center would make a significant difference to understanding the performance of the structures." I believe he was speaking about the towers. I'm sure the investigators into WTC 7's collapse would have wanted more steel from that building to be available. Again: context, people! Building 7 was not the main concern, and had you been in New York at the time, you would know that virtually everyone wanted the site cleaned up ASAP, especially where human remains were less likely to be found.  I understand what you are saying, that they didn't need all the steel to understand a collapse but how can any CT find evidence of explosives if they don't have the steel to look at?
jessicarabbit Banned Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 555

27th October 2006, 10:48 PM	#86
Moving On Guest Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 914	Originally Posted by Kent1 No problem Russell. And feel free to e-mail me whenever. My line is always open. I have been reading your site and you have a lot of great points there. Thank you.
Moving On Guest Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 914

27th October 2006, 10:48 PM	#87
Pardalis Banned Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Montréal Posts: 25,831	Originally Posted by Usual Suspect Russ why do you waste your time here?? You went to DC, you are doing real research yet your allowing yourself to be questioned by people who haven't done one ounce of research. Actually, if I'm not mistaken, his research lead him to believe that flight 77 did hit the Pentagon, right Russell? BTW, what did you do exactly there? *no sarcasm

27th October 2006, 10:51 PM	#89
jessicarabbit Banned Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 555	Originally Posted by Usual Suspect They reconstructed Flight 800 out at Calverton Airforce base on Long Island but scraped most of the WTC from the biggest crime scene ever before any investigation was done into "the worse day in American history". That makes sense. That craig makes the point that the FBI barged into Ground Zero and made a big deal about it being the biggest crime scene in history but then treated it as anything other than a crimes scene.
jessicarabbit Banned Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 555

27th October 2006, 10:52 PM	#90
Kent1 Graduate Poster Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 1,177	Originally Posted by Russell Pickering I have been reading your site and you have a lot of great points there. Thank you. Its not really my site. I do a lot of the research and help out. But the site owner does most of the writing. If I had my way I'd change a few things and lessen the tone.
Kent1 Graduate Poster Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 1,177

27th October 2006, 10:53 PM	#92
gumboot lorcutus.tolere Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: New Zealand Posts: 23,097	Originally Posted by Usual Suspect They reconstructed Flight 800 out at Calverton Airforce base on Long Island but scraped most of the WTC from the biggest crime scene ever before any investigation was done into "the worse day in American history". That makes sense. Are you obsessed with lying. Did you ignore all of the points above where it was made clear the debris from the WTC was NOT scrapped before an investigation could be undertaken? -Gumboot
	__________________ O xein', angellein Lakedaimoniois hoti têde keimetha tois keinon rhémasi peithomenoi. A fan of fantasy? Check out Project Dreamforge.

27th October 2006, 10:54 PM	#93
Pardalis Banned Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Montréal Posts: 25,831	Originally Posted by jessicarabbit That craig makes the point that the FBI barged into Ground Zero and made a big deal about it being the biggest crime scene in history but then treated it as anything other than a crimes scene. But is it Craig's point, or the point of the guys of "Louder than Words"?

27th October 2006, 10:54 PM	#94
Moving On Guest Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 914	Originally Posted by Kent1 Its not really my site. I do a lot of the research and help out. But the site owner does most of the writing. If I had my way I'd change a few things and lessen the tone. I am anxious for the Doubletree video to come out. I want to see it bad.
Moving On Guest Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 914

27th October 2006, 10:55 PM	#95
Moving On Guest Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 914	Originally Posted by Pardalis But is it Craig's point, or the point of the guys of "Louder than Words"? Louder Than Words is Loose Change.
Moving On Guest Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 914

27th October 2006, 10:56 PM	#96
Kent1 Graduate Poster Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 1,177	Originally Posted by Russell Pickering I am anxious for the Doubletree video to come out. I want to see it bad. I suspect nothing. But I hope Im wrong. There was one TV reporter that stated it was rumored to show the plane in flight.
Kent1 Graduate Poster Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 1,177

27th October 2006, 10:57 PM	#99
gumboot lorcutus.tolere Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: New Zealand Posts: 23,097	Originally Posted by jessicarabbit Its craigs point. The loose change people weren't at ground zero. That doesn't seem to stop them having "points". -Gumboot
	__________________ O xein', angellein Lakedaimoniois hoti têde keimetha tois keinon rhémasi peithomenoi. A fan of fantasy? Check out Project Dreamforge.

27th October 2006, 10:58 PM	#100
Pardalis Banned Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Montréal Posts: 25,831	Originally Posted by jessicarabbit Its craigs point. The loose change people weren't at ground zero. Jessica, are you aware that Craig Bartmer is suffering from traumatic stress disorder?

27th October 2006, 10:59 PM	#101
Moving On Guest Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 914	Originally Posted by Kent1 I suspect nothing. But I hope Im wrong. There was one TV reporter that stated it was rumored to show the plane in flight. It may be the one that the employees watched in "shock and horror". It was implied to be possible by an employee when I was there.
Moving On Guest Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 914

27th October 2006, 11:09 PM	#102
Moving On Guest Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 914	Originally Posted by jessicarabbit Its craigs point. The loose change people weren't at ground zero. Jessica, Here are the observations I have made so far. The government in general is just a lumbering, clumsy conglomeration. It made a few innocent mistakes in regards to 9/11. A little cover up is justified just so they don't look bad. All of the reports are to be trusted 100% even though the president himself refused to testify under oath and tried to prevent a 9/11 Commission. The reports and stuff are just delayed because some of this is just not important. Physics is irrelevant and words can mean anything. There is NO possibility of a small subversive element within the harmless, friendly giant. Don't suggest it. They have evidence and we don't. We're just unpatriotic kooks. Some people here defend the government at all costs and will instead attack you even though you have done nothing wrong and are simply trying to find answers the friendly giant refuses to provide. Meanwhile 9/11 is used to justify everything from the evisceration of the Constitution to the daily deaths of human beings. So just relax and get indoctrinated! Russell
Moving On Guest Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 914

27th October 2006, 11:10 PM	#103
Pardalis Banned Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Montréal Posts: 25,831	Russell, I thought you were here to learn.

27th October 2006, 11:10 PM	#104
jessicarabbit Banned Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 555	Originally Posted by Kent1 I suspect nothing. But I hope Im wrong. There was one TV reporter that stated it was rumored to show the plane in flight. Can I make a depressing prediction? If the new pentagon video shows a plane in flight, within 24 hours (or minutes) 911tvfakery.com and the like will be claiming the tape was faked. Totally unhelpful to the cause
jessicarabbit Banned Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 555

27th October 2006, 11:11 PM	#105
Moving On Guest Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 914	Originally Posted by Pardalis Russell, I thought you were here to learn. I just shared some of what I have learned.
Moving On Guest Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 914

27th October 2006, 11:12 PM	#106
jessicarabbit Banned Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 555	Originally Posted by Pardalis Jessica, are you aware that Craig Bartmer is suffering from traumatic stress disorder? Yes so are lots of the first responders. Thats an evil tactic by the way.
jessicarabbit Banned Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 555

27th October 2006, 11:12 PM	#107
Moving On Guest Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 914	Originally Posted by jessicarabbit Can I make a depressing prediction? If the new pentagon video shows a plane in flight, within 24 hours (or minutes) 911tvfakery.com and the like will be claiming the tape was faked. Totally unhelpful to the cause 24 seconds. Actually it's already being claimed. It's like when you put instant coffee in the microwave and go back in time.
Moving On Guest Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 914

27th October 2006, 11:13 PM	#108
jessicarabbit Banned Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 555	Originally Posted by Russell Pickering Jessica, Here are the observations I have made so far. The government in general is just a lumbering, clumsy conglomeration. It made a few innocent mistakes in regards to 9/11. A little cover up is justified just so they don't look bad. All of the reports are to be trusted 100% even though the president himself refused to testify under oath and tried to prevent a 9/11 Commission. The reports and stuff are just delayed because some of this is just not important. Physics is irrelevant and words can mean anything. There is NO possibility of a small subversive element within the harmless, friendly giant. Don't suggest it. They have evidence and we don't. We're just unpatriotic kooks. Some people here defend the government at all costs and will instead attack you even though you have done nothing wrong and are simply trying to find answers the friendly giant refuses to provide. Meanwhile 9/11 is used to justify everything from the evisceration of the Constitution to the daily deaths of human beings. So just relax and get indoctrinated! Russell Your a very intelligent man. I understand resistance is futile. Whats your site BTW?
jessicarabbit Banned Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 555

27th October 2006, 11:14 PM	#109
Pardalis Banned Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Montréal Posts: 25,831	Originally Posted by jessicarabbit Yes so are lots of the first responders. Thats an evil tactic by the way. I was just saying that the interviewers are using his fragile mental state to suggest ideas to him. That is what is sick.

27th October 2006, 11:15 PM	#110
gumboot lorcutus.tolere Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: New Zealand Posts: 23,097	I'm amazed my generation even believe any world events pre-1894 happened, considering there is no motion-picture evidence to prove it. The faith and emphasis my generation put on video evidence is quite disturbing. -Gumboot
	__________________ O xein', angellein Lakedaimoniois hoti têde keimetha tois keinon rhémasi peithomenoi. A fan of fantasy? Check out Project Dreamforge.

27th October 2006, 11:20 PM	#111
Usual Suspect Guest Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 228	Originally Posted by gumboot Are you obsessed with lying. Did you ignore all of the points above where it was made clear the debris from the WTC was NOT scrapped before an investigation could be undertaken? -Gumboot There was a criminal investigation?? WOW!! You think something like that would have made news. You got some good inside source huh??
Usual Suspect Guest Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 228

27th October 2006, 11:21 PM	#112
Gravy Downsitting Citizen Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: In the argyle Posts: 17,136	Originally Posted by Russell Pickering I can answer the question ESPECIALLY in light of the day, if any commander thought there was any possibility of structural collapse from the physical damage they would NOT risk another firefighter's life for an unoccupied building in my opinion. Yet another straw man. Are you aware of a single report that the FDNY believed the building was in danger of collapse from the debris damage alone? I'm not.
	__________________ "Please, keep your chops cool and don’t overblow.” –Freddie Hubbard What's the Harm?........Stop Sylvia Browne........My 9/11 links

27th October 2006, 11:22 PM	#113
jessicarabbit Banned Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 555	Originally Posted by Pardalis I was just saying that the interviewers are using his fragile mental state to suggest ideas to him. That is what is sick. If he had PTSD and was saying that wtc7 fell from damage and fire you would conveniently forget that he was in a fragile mental state and happily accept what he said. How many responders who believe the official story have PTSD.
jessicarabbit Banned Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 555

27th October 2006, 11:23 PM	#114
Gravy Downsitting Citizen Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: In the argyle Posts: 17,136	Originally Posted by Usual Suspect There was a criminal investigation?? WOW!! You think something like that would have made news. You got some good inside source huh?? Quiz for Usual Suspect: How many FBI Evidence Response Teams worked at Ground Zero and Fresh Kills?
	__________________ "Please, keep your chops cool and don’t overblow.” –Freddie Hubbard What's the Harm?........Stop Sylvia Browne........My 9/11 links

27th October 2006, 11:23 PM	#115
jessicarabbit Banned Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 555	Originally Posted by gumboot I'm amazed my generation even believe any world events pre-1894 happened, considering there is no motion-picture evidence to prove it. The faith and emphasis my generation put on video evidence is quite disturbing. -Gumboot Do you include the Osama admission video in that?
jessicarabbit Banned Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 555

27th October 2006, 11:24 PM	#116
Pardalis Banned Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Montréal Posts: 25,831	Originally Posted by jessicarabbit If he had PTSD and was saying that wtc7 fell from damage and fire you would conveniently forget that he was in a fragile mental state and happily accept what he said. How many responders who believe the official story have PTSD. You don't understand my point. This particular one, on which you rest your case, is being manipulated by LTW.

27th October 2006, 11:24 PM	#117
jessicarabbit Banned Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 555	Originally Posted by Gravy Quiz for Usual Suspect: How many FBI Evidence Response Teams worked at Ground Zero and Fresh Kills? I believe it was 55
jessicarabbit Banned Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 555

27th October 2006, 11:26 PM	#118
jessicarabbit Banned Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 555	Originally Posted by Pardalis You don't understand my point. This particular one, on which you rest your case, is being manipulated by LTW. No I do take your point and I would prefer if this Craig wasn't connected to LTW.
jessicarabbit Banned Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 555

27th October 2006, 11:26 PM	#119
Gravy Downsitting Citizen Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: In the argyle Posts: 17,136	Originally Posted by Usual Suspect They reconstructed Flight 800 out at Calverton Airforce base on Long Island but scraped most of the WTC from the biggest crime scene ever before any investigation was done into "the worse day in American history". That makes sense. Your evidence?
	__________________ "Please, keep your chops cool and don’t overblow.” –Freddie Hubbard What's the Harm?........Stop Sylvia Browne........My 9/11 links