![]() |
|
|
September 14, 2008 at 10:20:36
by Gene Cappa Page 1 of 1 page(s) |
|
|
Willie had a day off on 9/11 but his supervisor called him and asked him to come in because no one else was available. So Willie said OK, but he'd be a little late. So instead of reporting to work at 8AM and heading up to the 44th floor for a free breakfast, he reports at 8:30AM and goes to his company's offices in the basement levels of the North Tower. Within 15 to 20 minutes he hears a big explosion coming from the floors below, "9/11 Attacks on the World Trade Center", Link CLICK HERE http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=william+rodriguez&hl=en&emb=0&aq=0&oq=william+rodrig#
Take action -- click here to contact your local newspaper or congress people:
Support An Independent 9/11 Investigation
Click here to see the most recent messages sent to congressional reps and local newspapers
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
Contact Author |
Contact Editor |
View Authors' Articles |
|
| 270 comments |
|
A real Hero
I saw William Rodriguez speak in Nanaimo BC last year - he has a powerful presence and his story is truly amazing: by CasaZaza (10 articles, 0 quicklinks, 7 diaries, 202 comments [15 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Sunday, Sep 14, 2008 at 12:03:44 PM
|
|
A witness to 9/11 truth
Willie witnessed the truth on 9/11 as he describes the multiple explosive demolitions in the B-1 to B-6 sub-level basement floors even before the plane hit the 82nd floor of the WTC North Tower. A hero of 9/11 with almost overwhelming grief that he was not able to go higher than the 42nd floor, on orders from the fire fighters, with his master key to rescue more of his dear friends who he knew were at the higher floor levels. Willie, with sincerest humility, does not brag about, or even show any slides of his successful world tour with his dear friend and fellow truthseeker extraordinairre, Philanthropist Jimmy Walter, who dared to produce a stunning, revealing, scientific 911 video during the most popular days of Bush, a time during which telling the truth was a revoluntionary act, and who's $1,000,000 reward to anyone who can prove to him that explosives were NOT used to bring down the Towers, remains unclaimed, "Confronting The Evidence" click here by Gene Cappa (43 articles, 28 quicklinks, 113 diaries, 347 comments [33 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Sunday, Sep 14, 2008 at 3:00:18 PM
|
|
Reply: What a comedy of errors
Rodriguez was not the last man out of the North Tower, there were 16 survivors in stairwell B, including FDNY personnel also rescuing people, who came out well after he did. He was definitely a hero on 9/11, and has been cited several times for his bravery, but that doesn't give him license to distort the truth and file frivolous lawsuits against the US government, based on outright lies and no evidence. If there had been "multiple explosive demolitions" in the basement levels of the North Tower before the plane hit, which is what you and he are claiming, then why did it stand for more than 102 minutes before collapsing? Why did the collapse initiate near the floor where the plane hit, which wasn't even close to these alleged explosives? Why were the lower floors the last to collapse, and why did the lower part of the core stand for 10-20 seconds after the main collapse was over? Why does no one even a few floors above where he was corroborate his story about these explosions, especially the timing of them relative to the plane impact? How does he know what was happening 100 floors above where he was, since there weren't even windows down there? Explosives powerful enough to have damaged the structure at that level, where some of the column steel was 7" thick, would not only have deafened everyone on or around those floor levels, they would have killed all of them, and been heard for miles. In 1993, a deadly bomb that was the equivalent of a ton of TNT went off in an underground garage, and it didn't take out one column. And what would he have done with his master key, since people were trying to get into the emergency stairwells, not out of them and into locked office spaces? What he heard was falling debris, exploding transformers, and other very explainable loud noises having nothing to do with a controlled demolition, but he's made himself wealthy and famous by touring the world and lying. And btw, Flight 11 did not hit the 82nd floor of the North Tower, it hit the 96th. by albury smith (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 813 comments) on Sunday, Sep 14, 2008 at 6:03:46 PM
|
|
Reply: Why are you so convinced
there were no demolitions? How about "dozens" of other firemen who heard explosions around the time of the plane crash? What reason do these people have for lying? Rodriguez was quoted initially on the morning of 9/11. He had no reason to "lie" at that time. He wasn't trying to be famous. He was simply telling it as he saw it. And for this his observations seem most candid. Would you not agree? Why was his report ignored by the Commission? Why would an interview with him by the 9/11 commission occur behind closed doors? What was there to hide? I would say to the contrary that your comments questioning Rodriguez appear to be defending the commission's report like "My country right or wrong," like "my government can do no wrong." Well who the hell wants a government that's wrong? Or worse yet, possibly murderous? Let's investigate it further, don't you think enough evidence has been brought forward to at least warrant an investigation or would you like to simply assume these things are just not true? I would say hope for the best (that they are untrue) but expect the worst, the government was involved, and in the meantime DEMAND another, "outside" Impartial" investigation. Are you afraid of what the truth might be? by Nick van Nes (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 596 comments [150 recommended, 1 rejected]) on Sunday, Sep 14, 2008 at 9:10:28 PM
|
|
Reply: There have already been plenty of investigations
The WTC debris took eight months to remove, and there were engineers all over the site the entire time. I'm "so convinced" because no evidence of explosives was discovered at GZ, and that would be impossible if multiple structural members had been severed with them or incendiaries. It just simply would not have been missed by the 40,000 people who worked there at one time or another during the cleanup. Not unlikely; impossible. There was also no evidence of them prior to any collapse. by albury smith (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 813 comments) on Monday, Sep 15, 2008 at 1:30:36 PM
|
|
Reply: I disagree
Richard Gage and Stephen Jones have evidence of explosives. by Cheri Roberts (16 articles, 15 quicklinks, 10 diaries, 435 comments) on Friday, Sep 19, 2008 at 3:44:35 PM
|
|
Reply: Gage and Jones
have "theories," and no evidence for any of them, which would have been found by people who were actually at GZ in late 2001 if there had been any. Gage claims that explosives turned 90,000 tons of steel and 400,000 yards of concrete to dust, and Jones says that incendiaries melted the steel and caused the collapses. There were no reported shortages of steel when it was scrapped, the two towers combined had less than 100,000 yards of concrete above ground level, and Jones could "find" thermate residue in a ham sandwich using his methodologies. These two "researchers" are competing to see who can make the nuttiest claims, but my vote goes to the so-called engineer in Gage's group who says explosives collapsed the towers before the planes hit them. Second prize goes to the one who said they were nuked. There's something wrong with anyone who takes either of these guys or their followers seriously. by albury smith (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 813 comments) on Friday, Sep 19, 2008 at 7:15:20 PM
|
|
Reply: Why would there be...
a shortage of steel if explosives or incendiaries were used? This is a red heiring. Matter doesn't disappear, as you're implying. Again, physics 101. by Bob Smith (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 270 comments) on Thursday, Sep 25, 2008 at 4:22:37 PM
|
|
Reply: "He's made himself wealthy"?
Talk about distorting the truth. If by wealthy you mean he makes more than $35,000 a year, which is about what a paid spook like Albury Smith makes, then yes he's wealthy. by Albvry Smith (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 74 comments) on Wednesday, Sep 24, 2008 at 11:40:20 PM
|
|
Reply: He was a janitor,
now he's a hero of the "truth movement" who's traveling all over the world collecting speaking fees for lying about 9/11. He's wealthy by his former standards. by albury smith (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 813 comments) on Thursday, Sep 25, 2008 at 7:53:41 AM
|
|
Reply: He saved a lot of people's lives....
and has something to say about the event. Yes, I believe he qualifies as a HERO. by Bob Smith (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 270 comments) on Thursday, Sep 25, 2008 at 5:13:34 PM
|
|
William Rodriguez
A true hero. And a very moving video. Highly recommended! by B (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 1 comments) on Sunday, Sep 14, 2008 at 6:24:02 PM
|
|
Big reward for Albury?
Sorry, it's too late now for Albury to claim his $1,000,000 reward by proving that explosives were not used to bring the Towers down. Keep in mind that no one has claimed this reward in all those years after 9/11, proving, without a doubt, to everybody and anybody, that all 3 WTC buildings were indeed brought down by explosive demolitions on 9/11 "This site remains up for those who want to know. I have given up. I no longer answer email, give away DVD’s, or support the $1,000,000 challenge (which no NIST, FEMA, or other credible engineer or scientist has dared to accept). Good luck to all. It will not be a good night. Regrettably, by Gene Cappa (43 articles, 28 quicklinks, 113 diaries, 347 comments [33 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Sunday, Sep 14, 2008 at 7:59:00 PM
|
|
Reply: Proving it is no problem,
but getting the guy to pay is. As a reminder, you wrote "and who's [sic] $1,000,000 reward to anyone who can prove TO HIM that explosives were NOT used to bring down the Towers." 230+ NIST scientists and engineers, and 40,000 people at Ground Zero during the cleanup proved it to any rational person beyond any doubt at all, but "Jimmy Walker" apparently knows more than all of them, and won't accept irrefutable proof. When are you going to explain how explosives in the basement of a hi-rise at or before 8:46 AM triggered a collapse ~100 floors above there around 10:28 AM? And feel free to tell me why no severed columns or other signs of explosives were found in the debris. I previously asked you a number of other questions about the lies of Willie Rodriguez, but you seem to be a little short on answers. by albury smith (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 813 comments) on Sunday, Sep 14, 2008 at 8:27:57 PM
|
|
Reply: Great Question!!!
When are you going to explain how explosives in the basement of a hi-rise at or before 8:46 AM triggered a collapse ~100 floors above there around 10:28 AM? Accept no one is actually saying the basement explosions caused the collapse. What a stupid spook! As for the question "why did the onset of the towers collapse originate at the impact zone"? Is it really difficult to grasp that the demo started at the point of impact? Like that's some technological feat that couldn't easily be accomplished. Jesus A. Smith is a douche!!! by Albvry Smith (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 74 comments) on Wednesday, Sep 17, 2008 at 5:30:34 PM
|
|
Reply: If you were capable
of posting anything worthwhile, I wouldn't mind discussing this with you, but since all you can do is change your user name and stalk me, directing all of the 34 posts under your new identity at me with nothing but childish insults and name calling, why don't you just go back to being "Dave Rogers" and get lost? by albury smith (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 813 comments) on Wednesday, Sep 17, 2008 at 7:32:54 PM
|
|
Reply: Get Lost!!!
Ms. Smith, how totally feminine of you. If I was your shill supervisor, I would walk thru a remedial course on how not to give away your age and gender while blogging on behalf of the Stormtroopers that write your checks. Seriously, you're sloppy! That's why your colleagues had to go back and pull your old opednews bio off of the shelf. I mean stating that you have 40 plus years in construction management experience on your bio, which then puts your age as being in the mid 60's range is a major F@#k up, but then using language that befits someone in their early 20's......well that's pretty irresponsible on your end. You created alot of work for your IT Department, with them having to delete the links to your old opednews bio throughout the worldwide web. I own a software company, so I know that's no small feat. I would have thought a quality institution like RICE would have produced someone better prepared to be a professional spook. In the end, I was wrong. Ohh and if you feel as though I'm stalking you, I would be flattered. Because I've seen the student body at RICE and lets just say that you working for the government and sitting in a cube, away from the general public, is the best place for you. I mean that in the nicest way possible. by Albvry Smith (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 74 comments) on Thursday, Sep 25, 2008 at 1:20:28 AM
|
|
Willie is an opportunist - like a bottom feeding crab
Where Willie is far from a new subject, I'm reposting an exchange I had with Munich in February 2008 - click here . He never explained Willie's confusing and ever-expanding recollections - can you, Mr. Cappa? ---------- I was hoping you weren't going to reference Willy, but you did. It's these parts, München, that I have difficulty comprehending: September 11, 2001 - "And at that terrible day when I took people out of the office, one of them totally burned because he was standing in front of the freight elevator and the ball of fire came down the duct of the elevator itself, I put him on the ambulance," - http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0209/11/se.48.html . September 12, 2001 - "We heard a loud rumble, then all of a sudden we heard another rumble like someone moving a whole lot of furniture," Rodriguez said. "And then the elevator opened and a man came into our office and all of his skin was off," - http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/09/11/new.york.terror/ . February 12, 2004 (at the NIST hearing): "W. Rodriguez: The fire, the ball of fire, for example, I was in the basement when the first plane hit the building. And at that moment, I thought it was an electrical generator that blew up at that moment. A person comes running into the office saying 'explosion, explosion, explosion.' When I look at this guy; has all his skin pulled off of his body. Hanging from the top of his fingertips like it was a glove. And I said, what happened? He said the elevators. What happened was the ball of fire went down with such a force down the elevator shaft on the 58th [50A] – freight elevator, the biggest freight elevator that we have in the North Tower, it went out with such a force that it broke the cables. It went down, I think seven flights. The person survived because he was pulled from the B3 Level. But this person, being in front of the doors waiting for the elevator, practically got his skin vaporized... "Dr. Hill: William, we obviously need to talk to you. You have some very valuable information. I have a note here that we attempted to contact you and weren't successful. Could you stay around afterwards so we could talk to you a little bit? "W. Rodriguez: Sure. I would be glad to. Okay, thank you very much," - http://wtc.nist.gov/media/Public%20Transcript%20021204%20Final1_withlinks.pdf . October 22, 2004 - "Now this native of Puerto Rico and remarkable American hero is taking his 9-11 activism to an even higher level. He has commenced, as Plaintiff, a federal court lawsuit against George W. Bush, Richard B. Cheney, Donald H. Rumsfeld and others alleging that they and others were complicit in the 9-11 attacks, and either planned the attacks, or had foreknowledge of the attacks and permitted them to succeed, in order to exploit a "New Pearl Harbor" to launch wars against Afghanistan and Iraq... "The 9-11 Commission, a suspect collection of government and intelligence insiders, restated without question or examination all essential elements of the 'Official Story' of the actual events of 9-11. It failed almost completely to refute, or even to mention, the great body of evidence that suggests the 'Official Story' cannot be true..." - http://www.911forthetruth.com/pages/Press%20ReleaseRod.htm . June 25, 2006 (at American Scholars Symposium) - "It's been five years of my life dedicated to this... the truth about 9/11... "I'm in the basement [B1 Level]...as I was talking to a supervisor at 8:46, we're like chit-chatting, and all of a sudden we hear "BAH"...ah...very strong "BOOM" - an explosion so hard that push us upwards - upwards. Now, 20 years in the building, remember that, and it came from the basement between the B2 Level and the B3 Level. And at that moment I thought it was the Mechanical Room where they have all the pumps and the generators for the building that maybe a generator just blew up in the basement. "Now, 20 years in the building you know something that comes from the bottom and something that comes from the top. at that moment everybody started screaming. And it was - I mean - the explosion was so hard that all the walls cracked, the false ceiling fell on top of us, the sprinkler system got activated and when I went to verbalize that it was a generator we hear "BOOM" all the way on the top, the impact of the plane on the top. "Two different events; two different times. Later on I thought that they probably didn't synchronize it well. Because that came out in the investigation that probably that this explosion was to weaken the base and foundation of the building to be synchronized with the hit on the top so that it will fall automatically, which it didn't," - http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4380137365762802294&q=william+rodriguez+9%2F11&hl=en . Sooo, what I can't comprehend is that when Willy testified before NIST in early 2004, not once did he mention any "BAHs" or "BOOMs" spearate of the top BOOM and fireball like he does in 2006. Why - what changed in the intervening months (aside from his story)? NIST had even been trying to contact him because of his intimate knowledge of the poor condition of the stairwells (Willy was responsible for cleaning the stairs and had taken pictures of their poor conditions). And yet, Willy never stayed around after the hearing to answer their questions. But by late 2004, Willy is claiming in a lawsuit (which was later dismissed and not withdrawn as he alleges), that officials investigating 9/11, the attacks, and WTC events never considered his and others testimony about... what? Oh yeah, being accused of not cleaning stairwells, taking some pictures, and right, witnessing a man who's skin was burnt because he was impacted by a fireball while stading in front of the elevator. And... you have no problem comprehending such inconsistences, München? Well, "God love ya," is all I can say if you don't. Willy is "squealing" for the noterity and money; one look at his web site will confirm this motivation - http://www.william911.com/store.html . Thank you to 911stories.com for supplying the evidence that paints the true potraits of "Willy Gone Wild" - http://911stories.googlepages.com/home . by Tom Murphy (3 articles, 3 quicklinks, 9 diaries, 1603 comments) on Wednesday, February 27, 2008 at 9:29:38 AM ---------- Willie is nothing more than an opportunist who plays to the Truther sympathy because it brings him the things he wants. If this is the poster child offered up by the Movement, then - I trust - it knows the dire straits that it is in... by Tom Murphy (3 articles, 5 quicklinks, 16 diaries, 2100 comments [55 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Sunday, Sep 14, 2008 at 8:35:51 PM
|
|
Reply: Hmmm
Still siting the bogus NIST report I see.... by Cheri Roberts (16 articles, 15 quicklinks, 10 diaries, 435 comments) on Friday, Sep 19, 2008 at 3:46:19 PM
|
|
Reply: re: "hmmm"
Hmmm Still siting [sic] the bogus NIST report I see.... Only because it was written by qualified people who studied every aspect of the collapses for several years, and it makes sense. Are you a structural engineer, scientist, or fire safety expert? Or do you just read conspiracy web sites and agree with anything that isn't consistent with the official account of 9/11? by albury smith (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 813 comments) on Friday, Sep 19, 2008 at 7:22:40 PM
|
|
Reply: Uh not really....
"who studied every aspect of the collapses for several years" They never investigated the case for Demolition. Instead, they were told why it callapsed and were told to prove that it happened that way. I guess you don't believe in the scientific method, eh? There was no real investigation. by Bob Smith (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 270 comments) on Monday, Sep 22, 2008 at 10:38:39 AM
|
|
Reply: There was no case for controlled demolition
by albury smith (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 813 comments) on Monday, Sep 22, 2008 at 11:36:10 AM
|
|
Reply: Oh great....
"It couldn't have been controlled demolition because we were told that it couldn't have happened that way" Brilliant by Bob Smith (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 270 comments) on Thursday, Sep 25, 2008 at 5:05:58 PM
|
|
William Rodriguez in the film - Zero
watch it here: Zero - An Investigation Into 9/11 by CasaZaza (10 articles, 0 quicklinks, 7 diaries, 202 comments [15 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Sunday, Sep 14, 2008 at 9:15:44 PM
|
|
Re: 9/11-Last Man Out
William Rodriguez, who I might add is a brave man, who did infact help save the lives of many people on 9/11, the explosions he heard were timed to go off before the jet hit the Tower. They needed to begin taking out the core columns to make room for the buildings debris. "Willie is an opportunist - like a bottom feeding crab?" Say it to his face, Murphy! If and when OpEdNews does incorporate an ignore feature, you'll be the first added. by Munich (1 articles, 86 quicklinks, 14 diaries, 1125 comments [86 recommended, 1 rejected]) on Monday, Sep 15, 2008 at 1:27:01 AM
|
|
Reply: Why do you want to ignore people who make sense?
No one has ever said that Rodriguez wasn't brave on 9/11, but his claims are ludicrous and his activities after the attacks have been reprehensible. There were no explosions reported anywhere in the North Tower prior to the plane crash except by him, and any that were powerful enough to have affected the structure would have been witnessed by many thousands of people, both inside the tower and for miles in any direction. He is an opportunist and a liar, and he surrounds himself with "believers" like you and won't face legitimate scrutiny, so even politely questioning his nonsense in any of his chosen venues would be hazardous to any sane person's health. In his lawsuit, naming all of these people as defendants: George Herbert Walker Bush, George Walker Bush, John “Jeb” Bush, Neil Mallon Bush, Marvin Bush, Richard Cheney, Donald H. Rumsfeld, Dov Zakheim, Colin Powell, Richard Armitage, Condoleeza Rice, John Ashcroft, Robert S. Mueller III, David Frasca, George J. Tenet, Porter Goss, Norman Y. Mineta, Larry K. Arnold, Tom Ridge, Mark Racicot, The Republican National Committee, Inc., Alan Greenspan, Thomas A. Kean, Jamie S. Gorelick, Phillip D. Zelikow, John F. Lehman, Fred F. Fielding, Karl Rove, Thomas Delay, Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Myers, Ralph E. Eberhart, Kenneth R. Feinberg, Halliburton Company, Kellog Brown & Root Services, The Project For The New American Century, Inc., Election Systems & Software, Diebold Voting Systems, Inc., Walden O’Dell, Sequoia Voting Systems, Inc. Chuck Hagel, Saxby Chambliss, New Bridge Strategies, LLC, Joe M. Allbaugh, James A. Baker III, John Sweeney, Matthew Schlapp, Thomas Pyle, Michael Murphy, Garry Malphrus, Charles Royal, Kevin Smith, The United States Of America, The Federal Emergency Management Agency, and “DOE #1 Through DOE #100.” he claims that the US government bombed the WTC as an excuse to invade Iraq (but doesn't explain why Iraqis weren't used as hijackers), that the FDNY destroyed WTC 7 on orders from Larry Silverstein (but when asked about it, called the firefighters "heroes"), and even suggests that Flight 93 was shot down with a “high-powered microwave weapon.” After this ridiculous 237-page pile of crap was thrown out of court, he falsely claimed that he withdrew it voluntarily, and when questioned about some of the more absurd allegations in it, blamed them on his lawyer, saying that he didn't read it carefully enough. You're following in his tradition if you think "They needed to begin taking out the core columns to make room for the buildings [sic] debris." If the core columns had been "taken out" more than 102 minutes before the collapse, what held the core up for all of that time, why did the lower part of it still remain standing for 10 seconds or more after the main collapse was over, and why was no evidence of these "taken out" core columns found in the debris? Do you have a lawyer to blame for your blatant absurdities, or are you going to try to explain them yourself? by albury smith (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 813 comments) on Monday, Sep 15, 2008 at 7:33:44 AM
|
|
Reply: Munich... at the school playground
"'Willie is an opportunist - like a bottom feeding crab?' Say it to his face, Murphy!" Why are you acting like you're on the school playground, Munich? "Oh yeah! I double dog dear you to say it to his face!" If I ever had the pleasure meeting Willie, I would certainly share my opinion of him and his actions since 9/11 (aka benthic-like). He has been an opportunist that has milked his 15 minutes of fame far beyond where it existed in the reality of the 9/11 attacks. Why? Well, you Truthers have pumped him into a cream-puff of sorts - delecious to behold but all air and little substance once you bite into it. You, Munich, are more than welcome to recommend Willie for canonization in the Truther Hall of Saints and Heros. Idol worship, though, is often misplaced and non-constructive to a fulfilled life. by Tom Murphy (3 articles, 5 quicklinks, 16 diaries, 2100 comments [55 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Monday, Sep 15, 2008 at 2:32:40 PM
|
|
Traitors
Notice the traitors can spin the most fantastic stories about George Bush's and Dick Cheney's 911. by tjb (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 255 comments [9 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Monday, Sep 15, 2008 at 5:57:01 AM
|
|
Reply: re: Traitors
They tour foreign countries spewing unsubstantiated nonsense for notoriety and profit, exonerate Islamic terrorists for the atrocities they committed on 9/11, and accuse their own government of murdering its people, with no evidence at all to back it up. What's incredible to me is that anyone would call that patriotic, or even rational. by albury smith (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 813 comments) on Monday, Sep 15, 2008 at 7:45:05 AM
|
|
Reply: Mr. Smith Goes to Washington
Grandstanding, ad hominem, and purporting rational logical thinking wilts into it's own preposterousness when selling and conflating the ?theory? that "19 Arab/Muslim guys with boxcutters" overcame the United States systems of defense. This Fallacy is hideously offensive and certainly un-patriotic. It flings "stupidity" and "witlessness" upon "incompetent" and "fools", insulting Americans and those individuals with brains, instincts, and commonsense. This BS "construct" doesn't fly in the face of preponderance of evidence. It is idiotic to continue to use fear, demonization of Truthers, et al. to attempt to obfuscate the obvious. Children would see what you're selling. by boomerang (0 articles, 7 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 556 comments [215 recommended, 1 rejected]) on Monday, Sep 15, 2008 at 8:14:44 AM
|
|
Reply: Why don't you stick to the issues?
Yet you and the other 9/11 deniers here haven't addressed even one of the objections I raised in my first response to the article glorifying Rodriguez for his irrational, dishonest claims and his blatantly anti-American activities. You don't have any evidence at all that explosives were detonated in Tower 1 before the plane hit, let alone a "preponderance of evidence" for your witless "theories," and there were no ad hominems in any of my responses, so that's just another lie to add to the list. If your "goes to Washington" remark means that your only argument is that I'm blindly supporting the official account of what happened because I like the present administration or can't come up with a good reason, then you're not only guilty of ad hominem, you're also wrong, and incapable of arguing intelligently. by albury smith (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 813 comments) on Monday, Sep 15, 2008 at 9:13:47 AM
|
|
geez you morons ....
I don't know what all the fuss is about. I used to be a conspiracy theorist, but now I have seen the light. It is perfectly obvious that these two buildings - are on ther verge of collapsing into their own footprints within minutes - it's a miracle they're still standing, really , with those horrendous fires all through them. Only a moron would think otherwise, right al? by siamdave (4 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 85 comments [3 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Monday, Sep 15, 2008 at 9:47:27 AM
|
|
Reply: You finally got something right, Dave
by albury smith (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 813 comments) on Monday, Sep 15, 2008 at 1:22:21 PM
|
|
You don't want proof. You want to believe the lie
OK you pinheads. There is clear proof of demolition in the images of the cleanup. The support beams sticking out of the ground cut at the exact angle used in controlled demolition. I suppose it's just a coincidence. by arlen custer (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 7 diaries, 466 comments [68 recommended, 1 rejected]) on Monday, Sep 15, 2008 at 10:02:11 AM
|
|
Reply: Your "coincidence"
Do you really believe that union ironworkers who were cutting up the steel with acetylene torches wouldn't have noticed stuff that was already cut by something that didn't leave the same slag and other evidence behind? Cuts from incendiaries or explosives look nothing like torch cuts, and the torch cuts were on an angle for the same reason that C/Ds cut columns on an angle. Find an ironworker who was there and ask him why they do it that way. by albury smith (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 813 comments) on Monday, Sep 15, 2008 at 1:37:05 PM
|
|
Reply: Two things:
1> Clean up crews cut the metal at 90 degrees, the shortest distance through the metal, not at 45 degrees 2> Demolitions clean up crews reported molten pools of STEEL. You think they would know. by Bob Smith (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 270 comments) on Monday, Sep 15, 2008 at 2:35:03 PM
|
|
Reply: Two more things
Ironworkers clearly angled their cuts on some of the columns, or there wouldn't be photos of them at GZ with two tanks on a cart right next to them, a torch in their hands, and columns nearby that were obviuosly cut by those torches, and not at 90 degrees. Steven Jones made a fool of himself presenting pictures like that as evidence of thermite, apparently assuming that not only are his readers all stupid, but so are the guys in the picture, who never reported steel cut by thermite when they uncovered it in the debris. If you've ever seen what steel looks like after being subjected to thermite, you'd know that it couldn't possibly be mistaken for an oxygen and gas torch cut. And assuming that there were pools of molten steel in the debris, which is doubtful, although I believe that there was molten METAL found, what would that prove, except that there were very hot fires burning under the debris piles for months after 9/11? Without a continuous, slow-burning fuel source, all of it would have cooled in a few days, and incendiaries are spent within 5 minutes at the most and then start cooling. NIST has explained how much thermite it would take just to melt a pound of steel, so why do you think more than the minimum would have been planted, and why would it still be giving off heat 100 or so days later? These are not some of the better arguments of the "truth movement," but I haven't seen any that make much sense. by albury smith (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 813 comments) on Monday, Sep 15, 2008 at 5:44:45 PM
|
|
Reply: No....
"Ironworkers clearly angled their cuts on some of the columns, or there wouldn't be photos of them at GZ with two tanks on a cart right next to them, a torch in their hands, and columns nearby that were obviuosly cut by those torches, and not at 90 degrees." Show me a picture of them cutting beems at 45 degrees please. If you don't have it, it's circumstantial, not proof of anything. by Bob Smith (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 270 comments) on Monday, Sep 15, 2008 at 6:27:29 PM
|
|
Reply: Oh, yes!
Bob Smith, this has been discussed at length before... if only you take the time to research the issues rather than regurgitate the Truther bile. Here's a series of posts between Mac McKinney and myself from December 2007 - http://www.opednews.com/maxwrite/diarypage.php?did=5091 . Mr. McKinney (being the dutiful Truther) was non-plussed, though, he tried to explain away the glaring obviousness of empirical fact by declaring "linear thermites cutting charge", which was also proved to be non-existent later in the thread, made the angled cuts. No, they didn't, but Mac got an "A" for effort. ---------- Eyes wide shut This wasn't a decommissioned ship sold for scrap; therefore, don't expect your methods of scrapping a ship to necessarily apply to scrapping the WTC. This is a presumption that needs further support to verify that the same techniques were employed (e.g., oxygen cutting - which has been around for decades and is nothing new Please count the numbers of compressed gas cylinders in the image - here . Two oxygen and one flammable. Hmmm... But clearly this is a fake, right? Just like this one - http://www.toad.com/fucknyccensors/wtc100301/wtc064.jpg . None of the workers used extended torches, just "standard" torches because you "know" - http://www.melbourne.indymedia.org/uploads/1344.jpg . An oxy thermic torch (a/k/a - super thermal torch developed in secret by government) in action - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QfFYyBWB3HY&feature=related . Just curious, have you ever heard of a thermic lance? Now, THAT'S a super thermal torch! Here are core column in situ that have been cut - http://www.topflange.com/images/WTC130.jpg . Some are perpendicular; some are diagonal. Why? The were trying to direct the portion above the cut to fall in a particular manner - similar to cutting a notch in a tree for felling. Another site with images of diagonal cuts on perimeter and core columns (and some were even "messy" cuts) - http://home.hiwaay.net/~langford/wtc/ . Here's some more information on your perfect cuts that no human would ever create at anything other than perpendicular to the worked piece - http://www.debunking911.com/thermite.htm . This IS a "gotchya", but you and the other lemmings prefer to see the moose in the inksplots when they are only inksplots. So, go right ahead. "Real knowledge is to know the extent of one's ignorance," - Confucius. by Tom Murphy (3 articles, 3 quicklinks, 9 diaries, 1609 comments) on Friday, December 7, 2007 at 5:40:16 AM And some more links here within the same thread: More deflections I'm aware of shape charges and their properties. If you read my bio, you'd know I spent some time in the military. I've also observed countless blasting and demolition operations given my safety background. I've even played with welding carts and operations. Each one of the examples you linked, though, were of "high velocity" explosives used as linear cutter charges. Thermite is a low velocity explosive and operates by deflagration and not the explosion of a high velocity pressure wave. It's the heat of the reaction that results in thermite's ability to cut through metal easily. However, any casing that would be used to shape or direct the thermite along a "line" would be consumed in the reaction. That's why you only see thermite being used or applied in the vertical and not the horizontal. See the video's below and tell me if these reactions are in the horizontal - http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7231843493488769585 and ttp://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=261014432083397724 . They aren't because you can't - at least not with today's technology. That's why I asked if you could show me an example of one, given that you claim they were used on the WTC structures. While the shape charge tutorials were instructive, none of them used a thermite cutter charge. "It is a standard practice to have several oxygen bottles stowed together in an area, so you don't have to go retrieve another bottle everytime one runs out." I agree that you would store or nest compressed gas cylinders in one area for better storage and management of the gases. But the examples I showed were cutting or cylinder carts and cages. You don't store the gases in multiples on them - unless there is a need for them in the cutting process - http://www.vestilmfg.com/products/mhequip/welding_cylinder_cart.htm , http://www2.northerntool.com/product/200317971.htm , and http://www.uniweld.com/catalog/oxyacetylene/rollin_roughneck/rollin_roughneck.htm . "I have seen no photo evidence of any crews severing a column diagonally and letting it rip. That would break every safety regulation I have ever been taught." I did include a photo of a diagonal cut by a worker at the WTC in one of the past posts here. Here's a couple more on other projects - Michigan - http://www.michigan.gov/images/12-05_demo_9th_floor_cutting_steel_breaking_beams_149782_7.JPG and North Carolina - http://oldcooperriverbridge.org/small/sep_20_0649_remove.jpg . OSHA has no problem pulling in the horizontal in neither the General Industry (29 CFR 1910) or (more applicable) Construction (29 CFR 1926)standards. Obviously, you should not shock load a crane or other pulling mechanism and (ideally) should make use of block and tackle to better position any cables. And you should ensure safe clearance if using a hydraulic claw or excavator. Bulldozers are clearly a no-no. And yes, sometimes they pull down sections that have been cut, understanding that the area surrounding the piece has been cleared of personnel - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eJI6YvK_TK0 , http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AiT0G9ZQ97o , http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2b4gxZKVI8A (more of a push than pull) , and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ca__TFeXqC8 . I'm glad your reviews went well. But I'll presume that what was lacked for with intelligence was matched in passion. by Tom Murphy (3 articles, 3 quicklinks, 9 diaries, 1609 comments) on Friday, December 7, 2007 at 10:12:52 PM Sorry, Bob Smith, but the empirical evidence btter supports NIST and not the Truther-offered silliness. by Tom Murphy (3 articles, 5 quicklinks, 16 diaries, 2100 comments [55 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Monday, Sep 15, 2008 at 7:21:18 PM
|
|
Reply: Photographic proof
by albury smith (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 813 comments) on Monday, Sep 15, 2008 at 8:00:05 PM
|
|
Reply: He showed a bunch...
of jagged hand cut beams. I image you've seen pics of the perfect 45 degree cuts in the steel beams too (don't need to post more links)? Although this is circumstantial at best, it's still suspicious. by Bob Smith (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 270 comments) on Tuesday, Sep 16, 2008 at 10:15:57 AM
|
|
Reply: More suspicions
What's suspicious to me is that the ironworkers at GZ aren't corroborating your "theory," which is only taken seriously by people who weren't even there during the 8-month cleanup, and that the collapse progressed toward the points in these heavy columns where you claim they were severed by explosives at such a low elevation in the building. I can only conclude that skyhooks were holding up the lower floors while the collapse zone approached them, and that all of the ironworkers there were in on the conspiracy, or at least part of the cover-up. by albury smith (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 813 comments) on Tuesday, Sep 16, 2008 at 10:41:42 AM
|
|
Reply: So....
it was exploded from the top down, just as our eyes tell us? by Bob Smith (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 270 comments) on Tuesday, Sep 16, 2008 at 11:34:29 AM
|
|
Reply: My eyes tell me
that it collapsed from the top down, but whatever you want to think it did, you still haven't explained how explosives set off in the basement could have been a factor in a collapse which started 102 minutes later and roughly 100 floors above there. Neither tower had all of its intact floors below the collapse zone falling simultaneously, as would be expected if the columns were severed in the basement. Neither even had multiple intact floors dropping at the same time. That makes me wonder what you think those loud sounds that Rodriguez heard actually did. by albury smith (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 813 comments) on Tuesday, Sep 16, 2008 at 1:48:19 PM
|
|
Reply: Here's your "hand cut"...
piece of steel. I believe whoever made this PERFECT cut should be awarded for their steady hand and creative abilities. We all know how important it was to get it sooooo straight and clean. by Bob Smith (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 270 comments) on Tuesday, Sep 16, 2008 at 1:33:58 PM
|
|
Reply: Hilarious
Do you REALLY think explosives leave slag around the cut? That's frickin' priceless. And if that's supposed to be evidence of thermite, then you've never seen steel after it's been melted by an incendiary. The slag isn't gray, and the cut sure as hell isn't straight. That may have been done free-hand with an oxy-acetylene (or other flammable gas) torch, or a straight edge was clamped on, not to make a straight cut, but to give the guy something to rest his torch on while he was cutting. That's only evidence of a C/D to people who don't know any better or are lying. by albury smith (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 813 comments) on Tuesday, Sep 16, 2008 at 2:14:35 PM
|
|
Reply: Actually....
here's a whole gallery of evidence: http://www.ae911truth.org/twintowers.php by Bob Smith (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 270 comments) on Tuesday, Sep 16, 2008 at 2:19:22 PM
|
|
Reply: AE911"truth"
Did you find the page where you get to send Gage $911/mo to become an"AE911TruthHero," Bob? by albury smith (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 813 comments) on Tuesday, Sep 16, 2008 at 6:34:39 PM
|
|
Reply: I don't donate...
to anyone. by Bob Smith (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 270 comments) on Thursday, Sep 18, 2008 at 11:03:46 AM
|
|
Reply: Traitor
You should be donating to Richard Gage on a regular basis, Bob. How else are we all going to learn the "truth" about 9/11? Alex Jones has DVDs and some really nifty "9/11 Was an Inside Job" tee shirts on his web sites, InfoWars, and PrisonPlanet, and the proceeds also go to a great cause. If you're not supporting this "research," you're as big a traitor as I am. by albury smith (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 813 comments) on Friday, Sep 19, 2008 at 8:34:20 AM
|
|
Reply: Look at the torch marks across the column's thickness!
The column was hand cut and noting more. Bob Smith, you need to reconcile the FACT that no such thermite-based linear cutting charge exists on 9/1101 or even today for that matter - NONE. No evidence existed of their being used at the WTC complex. You and others points to angles cuts as proof that such charges exist because they appear "perfect"? For real? Mac McKinney thought something similar, as well - http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_mike_whi_050921_no_exit__descending_.htm ---------- When good minds go bad This is truly sad - the manner in which you form the conclusion first and then handpick the distortions you want to support the conclusion. Look at this zoom of your image and tell me - seriously - that you don't see the torch marks that cut diagonally across the column's thickness - http://www.debunking911.com/cut3.jpg . This was a torch - pure and simple. For this reason alone I question who good of an iron worker you were. If you're even remotely interested in an alternative theory, read here - http://www.debunking911.com/thermite.htm . by Tom Murphy (3 articles, 3 quicklinks, 9 diaries, 1614 comments) on Saturday, December 8, 2007 at 9:22:56 PM And Mr. McKinney finally conceded later on in the thread that the ONLY patent holder on such a cutting charge has NEVER produced a product. Imagine that! In Mr. McKinney's own words, "I finally talked to a representative of Spectre Enterprises this Friday, December 14 as regards US Patent 6183569, Cutting Torch and Associated Methods, and the rep told me they never actually manufactured this prototype. They are a leading edge thermite delivery system designer and have developed other patents, but he also said that they haven't developed any patent meant to cut thick steel of the column size indicated in the column in this article." Being a good Truther, what was Mr. McKinney's reply? Well, it doesn't mean that the government hasn't created such a cutting charge; more research is needed. Baloney! Until you can produce evidence that demonstrates thermite-based linear cutting charges existed on 9/11, you cannot speculate their exists. If you do, then you might as well use alien death beams because they have the same logical validity. by Tom Murphy (3 articles, 5 quicklinks, 16 diaries, 2100 comments [55 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Tuesday, Sep 16, 2008 at 3:10:13 PM
|
|
Reply: It's true....
as I stated before. I think it's suspicious, yet it's only circumstantial at best. (in my opinion) by Bob Smith (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 270 comments) on Tuesday, Sep 16, 2008 at 4:43:04 PM
|
|
Reply: What, then, do you have that better supports the evidence?
OK... then what do you have to offer as "circumstantial" for the use of thermite-based linear cutting charges having made those diagonal cuts? And please don't claim that thermite residue and reaction by products were found in the dust samples by Dr. Jones. I'll post a whole host of past comments and articles here at OpEdNews.com that flush that one down the toilet. But seriously... you're offered visual evidence, a type of evidence that Truthers' claim is essential and final, that the cuts were made by a thermal cutting torch, which you dismiss as "circumsatntial". Then what empirical evidence to you have to show that better supports the claim of low-veloccity explosives over the use of thermal cutting torches? by Tom Murphy (3 articles, 5 quicklinks, 16 diaries, 2100 comments [55 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Tuesday, Sep 16, 2008 at 6:16:00 PM
|
|
Reply: Just....
a plethra of audio, video, and testimony of firefighters supporting "bombs" going off. When they corroborate each other, it is called "evidence". by Bob Smith (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 270 comments) on Thursday, Sep 18, 2008 at 12:13:00 PM
|
|
Reply: Just... always... just
Once again, the senses can be deceived. Tell me, is there even one report of bomb casings being found in any of the debris at the WTC complex? Even one? You are aware, I presume, that even though a bomb explodes, casing fragments are always left behind. Where there were a plethora of these "bombs", according to you NYFD buddies and yourself, I'd expect a plethora of frgaments to have been generated. Now, are you going to include the NYFD in the official conspiracy because they found and disposed of these fragments? by Tom Murphy (3 articles, 5 quicklinks, 16 diaries, 2100 comments [55 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Friday, Sep 19, 2008 at 1:44:10 PM
|
|
Reply: Tom's link
You didn't click on Tom's link because you're sitting next to him in a cube and will see him in the breakroom later. That's because your both paid shills that post on all 9/11 related comment boards. If you two dipshits have so much faith in the official conspiracy theory, then why defend it around the clock? Answer: because you're both spooks and the OCT needs to be defended around the clock because it's an obvious joke. Kind of like Albury Smith's fake opednews bio. by Albvry Smith (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 74 comments) on Monday, Sep 22, 2008 at 8:25:17 PM
|
|
Reply: It figures
You didn't click on Tom's link because you're sitting next to him in a cube and will see him in the breakroom later. That's because your [sic] both paid shills that post on all 9/11 related comment boards. It stands to reason that someone stupid enough to believe silly conspiracy crap would also believe that anyone would pay people to argue with one or two others about an OEN article that's more than a week old and no longer being actively discussed. Do you just go to my profile and look at my comments so you can stalk me? by albury smith (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 813 comments) on Monday, Sep 22, 2008 at 8:43:50 PM
|
|
Reply: Alburara as Boris Becker
Alburara has had another alias here at OEN - Boris Becker. That nickname has a decidedly male persona. So, it's anyone's guess as to who Alburara is - other than someone filled with fear, anger, and resentment. And I suspect, but have not you gained full confidence, that Alburara may have another active profile here. Now, a person that knowingly changes their gender and nickname, and possibly keeps another account open, is someone to be watched as COINTELPRO. Who knows, Alburara could be sitting in the cubicle next to me... by Tom Murphy (3 articles, 5 quicklinks, 16 diaries, 2100 comments [55 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Wednesday, Sep 24, 2008 at 8:46:23 PM
|
|
Reply: "Alburara"
directs all of its posts at me, or at least mentions me in them, and showed up right after "Dave Rogers," which did the same thing, disappeared. It also posts with the same colors, makes the same spelling errors, uses the same tiresome insults and profanity as "Dave Rogers," and seems to be just about as all-around stupid as "Dave Rogers." It even believes the planes on 9/11 were faked. I hope there aren't two of them. by albury smith (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 813 comments) on Thursday, Sep 25, 2008 at 7:47:06 AM
|
|
Reply: Yes... Alburara = boris = Dave
Yes. Dave's the other nickname that I thought was associated with Alburara. I find it interesting that person has accused you (and me previously) of being not just shills - but female shills. I think it's fetish-related thing of the poster. Whatever work for them! by Tom Murphy (3 articles, 5 quicklinks, 16 diaries, 2100 comments [55 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Thursday, Sep 25, 2008 at 9:48:14 AM
|
|
Reply: Speaking of fetishes...
I know how you ARMY guys and gals like to operate and lets just say you guys can get a little kinky. Tom, is this you with the gloves on. No it couldn't be because he's not wearing an ultra cool beret. This must be Ms. Smith's ex boyfriend. Tom was away on patrol looking for another Iraqi family to ice! by Albvry Smith (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 74 comments) on Thursday, Sep 25, 2008 at 11:46:12 AM
|
|
What more do you want?
USS Liberty, Gulf of Tonkin, lack of video evidence of actual plane hitting most secure building in the world. It would be simple to shut everyone up. Show us the video of an actual plane hitting the Pentagon! It's simple!!!! by Hal Smith (4 articles, 1 quicklinks, 6 diaries, 67 comments [1 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Monday, Sep 15, 2008 at 10:57:17 AM
|
|
Let's read what the firefighters have to say.....
http://www.911lies.org/fire_fighters_911_wtc_tapes.html by Bob Smith (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 270 comments) on Monday, Sep 15, 2008 at 11:21:46 AM
|
|
Hey everyone....
THIS IS CALLED CORROBORATING EVIDENCE: by Bob Smith (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 270 comments) on Monday, Sep 15, 2008 at 11:25:36 AM
|
|
Reply: Psychic cop
Let's just call him a conspirator, since you find his figure of speech so damning. When huge buildings collapse, stuff flies everywhere, and he was just trying to get people as far away from it as possible. by albury smith (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 813 comments) on Monday, Sep 15, 2008 at 1:48:52 PM
|
|
Reply: It's so great....
that we have psychics to predict such devestation before it actually happens. Don't you think? Again, A. Smith: Just because someone repeats something they heard doesn't mean they are conspirators to anything. This is your nonsense remark, not mine. by Bob Smith (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 270 comments) on Monday, Sep 15, 2008 at 2:33:03 PM
|
|
Reply: Nonsense remark
Yours is trying to turn that figure of speech into proof that the buildings were brought down by planted explosives. Are that cop and all of his buddies part of the "truth movement" now, or could he just have meant that all hell was about to break loose and three blocks wouldn't be far enough away for safety? by albury smith (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 813 comments) on Monday, Sep 15, 2008 at 5:51:14 PM
|
|
Reply: I think he was pretty clear...
in the video what he meant. In fact he repeated "explode" and "it's coming down" several times. Maybe you should watch it again? by Bob Smith (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 270 comments) on Monday, Sep 15, 2008 at 6:30:30 PM
|
|
Reply: IN FACT....
There's another nice BOOM right before it collapsed. Another transformer, right A. Smith? by Bob Smith (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 270 comments) on Monday, Sep 15, 2008 at 6:32:30 PM
|
|
9/11 ground zero logic
AS HARD as the culprits tried to cover their tracks and commit a perfect crime on 9/11 by immediately desecrating the crime scene and quickly removing the evidence without a careful examination, then impeding any investigations for more than a year, the tell tale signs of explosive demolitions remain as evidence, with thermite molten slag and sulfidised residue left on the massive steel core columns that were cut precisely into 30 foot sections for easy transport on flat bed trucks (photo link attached), indicating an extensive use of explosive thermite cutter charges and is the only known method of slicing construction grade steel of the strength and volume in the alloted times Link CLICK HERE http://www.vic911truth.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=487 by Gene Cappa (43 articles, 28 quicklinks, 113 diaries, 347 comments [33 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Monday, Sep 15, 2008 at 12:47:44 PM
|
|
Reply: Common sense...
Think about this: how did the so called terrorists know how to get to the Pentagon and the Twin Towers? They were 30,000 ft in the air traveling at 500 MPH and they had no help from air traffic control. Did they look out the windows at landmarks??? I know, maybe they were navigating using the starts. LOL. It is impossible to know where you are going without help from people on the ground. by Bob Smith (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 270 comments) on Monday, Sep 15, 2008 at 1:12:05 PM
|
|
Reply: They had FAA commercial pilot certificates
for starters. Do airline pilots with coordinates for their destination need help from the ground too? This was a simple navigation exercise, and all of the targets were large buildings that were highly visible from miles away. by albury smith (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 813 comments) on Monday, Sep 15, 2008 at 1:43:03 PM
|
|
Reply: HAHAHAHAHA
Have you ever been on a passenger jet before? You believe you can see landmarks from 30,000 feet? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA by Bob Smith (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 270 comments) on Monday, Sep 15, 2008 at 2:27:31 PM
|
|
Reply: I know, let's talk about those "cell phone" calls...
Although totally impossible at 30,000 feet, the content makes me laugh even harder: "Hello Mom this is your son, Mark Bingham, you know me mom" HEHEHEHEHE H HAH HA HAH AH AHHAHAA Someone talks to their mom like that???????? You believed really bought that one too???? HAHAHAHAHA by Bob Smith (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 270 comments) on Monday, Sep 15, 2008 at 3:01:34 PM
|
|
Reply: You are fast becoming... odious
Bob Smith, you are the image of the typical Truther, boldly displaying not just you rignorance but intellectual laziness for all the readers to witness. This too has been discussed previously here with Stephen Demetriou - http://www.opednews.com/maxwrite/diarypage.php?did=6594 . Mr. Demetriou had no response to this response. Perhaps once you're done laughing, you can enlighten us with your knowledge of cell-based telecommunications in 2001. Until then, please read. ---------- Wrong again... you need to "phone a friend", buddy "The FBI has admitted the Olsen calls did not take place. A record shows one attempt, zero minutes." by Tom Murphy (3 articles, 3 quicklinks, 9 diaries, 1611 comments) on Monday, March 17, 2008 at 9:46:06 PM You need better talking point, Bob Smith. Otherwise, you're fast becoming odious. by Tom Murphy (3 articles, 5 quicklinks, 16 diaries, 2100 comments [55 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Monday, Sep 15, 2008 at 8:10:28 PM
|
|
Reply: You're absolutely right....
spot on here Murphey. However I think it's still a VERY ODD thing to say to your mother. Just another oddity from that day perhaps? by Bob Smith (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 270 comments) on Tuesday, Sep 16, 2008 at 10:19:51 AM
|
|
Reply: There is nothing odd about the man's call
The aircraft had been hijacked; there may have been public death(s) on the flight; and yet, the hijackers did not appear to prevent anyone from calling out - whether on their cell phones or via the airfones. That is what I find ODD. Those events combined, I think, would have placed me in an abnormal state of mind. Perhaps even to the point of announcing my own name to my mother. by Tom Murphy (3 articles, 5 quicklinks, 16 diaries, 2100 comments [55 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Tuesday, Sep 16, 2008 at 3:19:54 PM
|
|
Reply: You're easily amused
Have you ever been on a passenger jet before? You believe you can see landmarks from 30,000 feet? I believe that they did what any other pilot would do, and got within 20 miles or so of their destinations and then steered toward them without instruments, and had both eyes firmly fixed on the sides of large buildings when they prepared to meet "Allah." Has the "truth movement" now determined that runway lights are just as useless as fireproofing on steel? They weren't at 30,000 feet for the whole ride, or even for most of it, and obviously not for the last 10-20 minutes. by albury smith (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 813 comments) on Monday, Sep 15, 2008 at 6:03:35 PM
|
|
Reply: I'm impressed Albury Smith
First you can spot a 3 story building from cruising altitude and then you go back and change your old profile to cover up your mistakes. WOW!! well take solice in the fact that I picked your little profile apart. Don't feel bad that I made you look like the douche that you are. You can't help. When you have your ass kicked everyday in High School like you did, the next logical move is to become a subhuman parasite that posts on all 9/11 related comment boards. by Albvry Smith (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 74 comments) on Monday, Sep 22, 2008 at 8:44:03 PM
|
|
Reply: Traitor, scum, whatever you may be ...
Maybe you're just confused? Maybe you're a psych-ops wannabe Tom Murphy? Maybe you're just stupid? Maybe you're worse? But there comes a time when a line is crossed. You see if it were just 1, 2 or even 3 inconsistencies, coincidences, oddities, and out-right lies of the events of that day, I'd be right there with you calling Truthers what you call us, but its not. There are hundreds, if not thousands of questions that need attending to, and it this shear number that exposes you. By this you are condemned. By this you are either labeled a tool or a fool, for you can't be anything elsie. Rodriguez arrived late to work, his testimony aligns with seismic-graph readings of an underground disturbance. You know about seismic-graphs, don't you? I know how adverse your ilk is to science. http://www.studyof911.com/articles/mirrored/craigfurlong/ Of course there is other collaborating evidence for anyone to gleam with a few taps of ones keyboard to get to the truth. You know about "truth"? I'm also aware of how your ilk avoids that too. There is something Native American Indians do when faced with a fool, they remain silent. Their reasoning being good breath would be wasted trying to reason with a fool. I have already wasted too much. by Mr M (8 articles, 0 quicklinks, 66 diaries, 2845 comments [654 recommended, 27 rejected]) on Monday, Sep 15, 2008 at 3:04:26 PM
|
|
Reply: No Mr. M....
Your comments are more than welcomed. The shills and fools try to get you down, but really they only help advertise your comments. Now others who happen to "drop by" will get a wealth of knowledge and you might accidentally awaken others. So you see, your efforts are not in vein. by Bob Smith (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 270 comments) on Monday, Sep 15, 2008 at 3:43:03 PM
|
|
Reply: Mr.M
Spot on you are... and Yeh, you probably wasted too much breath. A. Smith and T.M. are merely exhibiting the fetid fruit of their day jobs here. This is what they do for a living. I've pretty much ceased paying much attention to what they do or 'say' .... not only because so little of it makes any sense but more, because they exemplify much of what's wrong with the power structure of this hapless, disappearing Republic. Unfortunately, when the 'bad breath' of shill-disinfo lingers, the best thing to do is to spray some Lysol about or simply leave the room. I don't believe even Listerine could help A.S. or T.M. Maybe bleach would work. If it can kill the disease organisms designed by our germ warfare industry, maybe it could help here. by richard (0 articles, 5 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 1359 comments [399 recommended, 8 rejected]) on Monday, Sep 15, 2008 at 7:23:56 PM
|
|
Reply: Instead of all of the name-calling and ad hominem,
why don't you, Bob, and Mr. M go up to my "What a comedy of errors" post and address some of the questions I raised in it? The article we're discussing is grossly inaccurate, and the claims made in it are completely absurd. You're all wasting your breath, as the M-meister has just lamented, if you can't do anything but insult people for being rational and pointing out facts to you. by albury smith (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 813 comments) on Monday, Sep 15, 2008 at 7:40:05 PM
|
|
Reply: Stay in the driveway - please!
Very eloquent, as always, Mr M and richard, at depicting the vile "Faithers" as the fetid scum they are. Give the rhetoric a break, kids; you sound like a couple of evil villains "monologuing" from a bad episode of Batman the TV series. You carelessly throw around accusations of shilling for any who "dare" take a perspective that is not sanctioned by the 9/11 Truth Movement. Where I come from and when you attempt to malign someone by false labeling, it's called slander and libel, kids - for you are acting like children here. What slays me the most, though, is the pomposity that you two attempt to evoke with regard to your intellects. You, Mr M and richard, are the wannabes when it comes to the attacks of 9/11. You lack reputable sources to support your baseless accusations (a YouTube video from an idiot is not a reputable source); you parrot the self-proclaimed "intellects" of the Movement (e.g., the good Drs. Jones and Griffins) as if they were demi-gods; you label events as "too coincidental" yet show no statistical analyses to demonstrate the actuality of that convenience; you place all trust in the human senses (sight and sound), which quite easily are deceived multiple times daily; you selectively discard data that fails to fit your Land of Truth and False Flag Dreams; etc... In short, you're wannabes. When you kids grow up, you can petition the adults to take your training wheels off your bicycles. Until then, stay in the driveway - please and for your own safety. by Tom Murphy (3 articles, 5 quicklinks, 16 diaries, 2100 comments [55 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Monday, Sep 15, 2008 at 7:51:57 PM
|
|
Reply: They had FAA Commercial Pilot Certificates?
What a complete load of sh*t. I mean who would really try to pass that off as truth. If this all out campaign of deception isn't proof that Albury Smith is a spook, and a really stupid one at that, I don't what is. First of all, the flight school in Vero Beach is a well known CIA Front for Brittania Aviation. The owner Rudi Dekkers, was arrested for fraud. Second, A commerical certificate only allows you to fly during daylight hours, and would allow you to be compensated for the following: banner towing, agricultural applications, and photography Beyond that, only three (3) of the 19 hijackers had commerical certification, as if that means anything. Hanjour couldn't fly a Cessna, per his Arizona flight school instructor, yet the commission says he had his commerical certification? I guess I'm stating the obvious when I say the certificates were a fraud. On flight 93 Ziad Jarrah didn't possess a commercial certificate or a mutil engine certificate. In the end, their commerical cerification, which doesn't amout to sh*t, isn't really relevant, since there isn't one single piece of evidence that they actually boarded the flights. Their names aren't even on the flight manifests and the only video footage that was produced could have been my uncle flying to Des Moines. The video quality is absolutely laughable. So I say to Ms. Smith. Produce one piece of evidence that they actually even boarded the flights. Christ you're a stupid b#$ch! Here's some quotes about Hanjours flight skills: Hanjour attended CRM Airline Training Center in Scottsdale, Ariz. Duncan Hastie, the owner of CRM, said Hanjour attended the school the last three months of 1996. Then Hanjour "sort of disappeared," he said, returning in December 1997. So Hanjour received his certificate, but couldn't fly per his flight school instructor, but then he majically has his commercial-multi engine certification at the end of 1999, but we don't know where from? If it sounds like they made this sh*t up as they went along, that's because they did. Again, all totally irrelevant as there is no proof of their existence on the flights. The reason being of course, that they purchsed the tickets within 24 hours of the planes departure, so their names didn't appear. WOW!!! that is some spectacular bullshit. by Albvry Smith (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 74 comments) on Thursday, Sep 25, 2008 at 12:57:11 AM
|
|
Reply: No-planers
are a complete waste of time. by albury smith (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 813 comments) on Thursday, Sep 25, 2008 at 9:07:32 AM
|
|
Reply: Great answer Ms. Smith
and I do mean Ms., because lets face it, no one is going to marry a butch military gal like yourself. Planes, maybe. Hijackers? absolutley no proof. Lets see the flight manifests little lady? by Albvry Smith (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 74 comments) on Thursday, Sep 25, 2008 at 11:36:41 AM
|
|
Reply: You're right, Dave.
The four planes just crashed all by themselves. The FAA issues commercial pilot's certificates to anyone, and the people who claimed that they talked to passengers on the four planes were all part of the plot. There's just no fooling a deep thinker like you. by albury smith (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 813 comments) on Saturday, Sep 27, 2008 at 2:12:38 PM
|
|
Reply: All of the targets were large buildings?
You mean two of the four don't you Darwin? by Albvry Smith (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 74 comments) on Thursday, Sep 25, 2008 at 12:59:04 AM
|
|
Reply: A clarification for those who need it
All of the targets were large buildings? You mean two of the four don't you Darwin? Towers I & II, the Pentagon, and whatever Flight 93 was intended to hit were all large buildings. You may have thought there were two, but I counted four. by albury smith (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 813 comments) on Thursday, Sep 25, 2008 at 8:25:42 AM
|
|
Reply: So this represents a 4th
"and whatever Flight 93 was intended to hit were all large buildings." WOW you're really retarded. The target that flight 93 intended to hit was a large building? You make me laugh little lady. Actually, you wouldn't be able to easily identify the Pentagon from cruising altitude and D.C. itself doesn't have a lot of tall building like Houston, so i would say you're a f*cking moron. By the way, I fly at least once a week and I'm still trying to get my cell phone to connect mid flight. I must have tried over 100 times by now. It's almost as if you can't make a cell call while on a plane. Ohh well, i'll keep trying. by Albvry Smith (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 74 comments) on Thursday, Sep 25, 2008 at 5:05:08 PM
|
|
Reply: I haven't yet....
been able to make a call either. Oh well... by Bob Smith (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 270 comments) on Thursday, Sep 25, 2008 at 5:26:27 PM
|
|
Reply: Have you been able
to fake phone calls to close relatives yet? Why doesn't the "truth movement" give us a demonstration of that? by albury smith (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 813 comments) on Sunday, Sep 28, 2008 at 9:21:30 AM
|
|
Foisting the Logic of Debunkers
A+B=C Right? A) Guys who take flight lessons in small one engine planes “might be” called “pilots”. B) Pilots fly planes C) These guys are experts (better than military or commercial pilots who stated they could not execute these maneuvers), and hit 3 of 3 targets, except for outside interference on the PA flight. sh*t, A.S. Convenient Assumptions Implied: Assuming no difference between “guys who could barely fly a Cessna” and commercial pilots cleared for VFR (Visual Flight Rules) and Instrument rated (IR) for flying a cross-country solely by instrumentation, AND the 1000’s of hours required for Commercial Pilot ratings, AND 1000s of hours for flying JETS and heavy-bodied aircraft which operate wholly different with regards to aeronautics, AND the exceedingly more sophisticated avionics and specific understanding required for the specific plane flown, + the FAA protocols and procedural AND military fail-safe systems to conquer and fool to pull off this escapade…WOW…and vector and target and successfully strike 3 targets (WTC 1,2, Pentagon) WITHOUT INTERCEPT OF ANY KIND – is…NOT POSSIBLE. Addendum: REAL pilots with Top Gun and commercial experience have stated “they could NOT execute these maneuvers”. Of course, you can micro-examine the collosal implications of my posit, but that would be mental and take up entirely too muh time and energy. So, why not sit in your own flambe? A) Fire is hot. It burns stuff up. It can melt stuff that has a lesser melting point than the fire itself. B) Kerosene and office item fires in upper floors of reinforced Steel Buildings got REALLY HOT --and simultaneously weakened and caused to collapse ALL STRUCTURALLY SUPPORTING BEAMS AT THE SAME TIME to cause a catastrophic failure of 3 such buildings in under 2 hours burn time. Collapsed into their footprints. Never happened before. Same DAY. WTC 7 was NOT struck by a plane. Small Fires. Fell Down into it’s footprint. Housed the Control Center for all Emergency Ops. Giuliani’s special catbird seat. Last to collapse straight down. Pulled. Unfortunate loss. Big Insurance claim and payout to guy who insured against “terrorism” two weeks before. Just lucky I guess. 1 MORE for U: A) I dissected a frog when I was a kid B) I’m a “surgeon” C) I’m going to remove your Gall Bladder now. You’ll be fine. While I’m “IN” I should fix your hernia and remove your prostate. It’s definitely enlarged. I don’t think you’ll need any anesthetic – you’re already THERE. Willie? He was there. He "knows". You do NOT. by boomerang (0 articles, 7 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 556 comments [215 recommended, 1 rejected]) on Monday, Sep 15, 2008 at 7:52:50 PM
|
|
Reply: Don't become a professional apologist
"Willie? He was there. He 'knows'. You do NOT." by Tom Murphy (3 articles, 5 quicklinks, 16 diaries, 2100 comments [55 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Monday, Sep 15, 2008 at 8:51:08 PM
|
|
HAHAHAHA! tm and as, you foolios are hilarious and pitiable
STEPPING OUT in YOUR ARROGANT ATTIRE only diminishes yourselves to the puny fascistic organisms you portray! YOU call THOSE WHO DEMAND THE TRUTH "kids"?! While you petulantly insult those possessing the intelligence to question YOUR LIES?! tm -- your beret'd picture has always reminded me of John Larroquette's immature and singularly insouciant bravado in the classic movie -- STRIPES, with Bill Murray as your foil. Jutting out your chin like an 8yr old and calling ADULTS children is ... well, I guess it's just you soldier. Get some help. You and your ilk are missing the traits of empathy and civility and commonsense. I'm sorry for your loss. If you pay attention to the ADULTS who squish your hogwash you might see the paradigm that eludes you. Snap out of it! You are embarrassing yourself. by boomerang (0 articles, 7 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 556 comments [215 recommended, 1 rejected]) on Monday, Sep 15, 2008 at 8:17:28 PM
|
|
Reply: More of your logic?
"STEPPING OUT in YOUR ARROGANT ATTIRE only diminishes yourselves to the puny fascistic organisms you portray!" Why does Willie's story become more and more... embellished as time progresses? Why didn't Willie aid the Commission as he indicated he would? Why does Willie have an online 9/11 store? What does Willie charge for speaking fees? Why do you support "Roudy the Magician's Assistant" as if you've been his drinking buddy since he first started exposing faith healers? Even Wikipedia can't attest to the validity of the man's biography because it's become so fantastical - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Rodriguez . by Tom Murphy (3 articles, 5 quicklinks, 16 diaries, 2100 comments [55 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Monday, Sep 15, 2008 at 9:24:04 PM
|
|
my oh my....
My dearest TM, I don’t recall, from earlier battles, that you ever ‘won’ an argument. I recall a couple of draws. I recall reams of ad hominem from you, tediously expressed. There was never an occasion that I didn’t believe you were simply a troll. Nice hat, maybe, but not much else. I still believe, and I acknowledge it is simply a belief, that you find your sustenance through the Pentagon’s ‘Operation Information Roadmap’ gruel. It didn’t matter whether the topic was 9/11, DU, the behavior of the ‘Empire’ or whatever. You always took the side of the hegemony. You always take the side of the Empire. (Although I am sure you wouldn’t agree with the characterization of the U.S. as an ‘Empire’ in spite of the many authors from both sides of the false right-left paradigm who do.) And it is an Empire characterized by murder, the overthrow of democratically elected leaders, Wars based on lies and false flag events, millions dead, insurrection and assassination, death squads, dishonor, and support of corporate greed. Your support for the Empire puts your moral compass 180 degrees off from mine. Frankly, I’m glad I am not ‘wherever it is’ you are. To the ‘Batman’ Empire, you are simply a miniscule robin. An amazingly arrogant, self-righteous and self-aggrandizing fowl … but still just a robin. by richard (0 articles, 5 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 1359 comments [399 recommended, 8 rejected]) on Monday, Sep 15, 2008 at 9:01:33 PM
|
|
Reply: Still waiting, Richard
When is one of you ultra-patriotic 9/11 "researchers" going to answer the questions I raised in my first response to the article here? Please explain these delayed-reaction "demolition explosives" that blow up the bottom of a building so that it can collapse from the top 102 or more minutes later, and that don't leave severed columns scattered throughout the debris. And why is Rodriguez the only one in the North Tower who claims that explosions were heard before the plane hit? Like the rest of your truther crap, that makes no sense at all, and anything powerful enough to have damaged basement columns which had 7" steel sections would have been heard down in Atlantic City. by albury smith (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 813 comments) on Monday, Sep 15, 2008 at 9:28:25 PM
|
|
Reply: Can you prove that:
"anything powerful enough to have damaged basement columns which had 7" steel sections would have been heard down in Atlantic City." I still believe that thermate with explosives would have softened steel enough to allow it to "pop" with relative ease. Besides, if you swear by the official explanation then you can't have it both ways. Either intense heat softens steel, or it does not. by Bob Smith (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 270 comments) on Tuesday, Sep 16, 2008 at 1:25:48 PM
|
|
Reply: So what?
I don't want it both ways. Intense heat of even 1000 F causes steel to lose roughly half of its room temperature strength, and a hydrogen bomb could have "softened steel enough to allow it to "pop" with relative ease." Does that mean that it did? by albury smith (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 813 comments) on Tuesday, Sep 16, 2008 at 8:08:38 PM
|
|
Reply: Can you prove that:
"anything powerful enough to have damaged basement columns which had 7" steel sections would have been heard down in Atlantic City." ? by Bob Smith (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 270 comments) on Wednesday, Sep 17, 2008 at 3:19:35 PM
|
|
Reply: I can try
by albury smith (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 813 comments) on Wednesday, Sep 17, 2008 at 5:38:02 PM
|
|
Reply: Anybody....
challenging the powers that be IS NEVER a waste. Unchalleged authority leads to corruption. by Bob Smith (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 270 comments) on Thursday, Sep 18, 2008 at 11:34:27 AM
|
|
De-baiting the trolls...
...is a waste of time. Come on guys, keep in mind a troll is just another ugly fixture under a bridge. Their entire ploy is to bait you into debate. If you refuse to play their game, they'll go away eventually. Remember they are only bottom feeders, not truth seekers. Just maggots consumming decaying flesh. And that's a compliment. After all flies have only one purpose in life - laying eggs to create more maggots. I'll wager every one is either a paid shill or an absolute idiot. Maybe both. Create your own rules, don't play their game. by Cinderfella (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 248 comments [95 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Tuesday, Sep 16, 2008 at 2:52:01 AM
|
|
Reply: You have created your own rules, Cinderfella...
just as you suggested in your comments. You've called me a "troll," "ugly fixture under a bridge," "bottom feeder, not truth seeker," "maggot consumming [sic] decaying flesh," "paid shill," and "absolute idiot" without addressing even one of the issues raised in the article, or any of the valid criticisms of it that have been posted by Tom and me. You "don't play their game," you waste everyone's time on here and then run away, just as you do on every other 9/11 article you comment on. What's even more amusing is that most of your fellow truthers have done just about the same thing here, and one of them even complained that I was using ad hominems. You guys are priceless. by albury smith (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 813 comments) on Tuesday, Sep 16, 2008 at 8:43:49 AM
|
|
Reply: Defensive?
Mr. Albury Smith: I never called you any names, but obviously you must be one of the trolls to take my comments so seriously. Poor boy, did someone beat you up in the sandbox this morning at kindergarten? The problem with your logic circuits is they are shorted out. Either that, or the closest thing you have to a brain is a chip on your shoulder. by Cinderfella (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 248 comments [95 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Tuesday, Sep 16, 2008 at 7:06:20 PM
|
|
Reply: OK, I'll bite
Whom were you referring to in your previous post? You pulled this same crap the last time we both commented on an article, and you still haven't addressed any of my criticisms of this one. Can you do anything but call names and then lie about the people you're targeting with them? by albury smith (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 813 comments) on Tuesday, Sep 16, 2008 at 8:39:09 PM
|
|
Reply: Exposed!
You admit you and TM are trolls. Well, ok, I agree with you. You said it, not me. It just shows your ignorance and how unwilling you are to seek truth, but deny it. I don't debate shills and trolls, because bottom feeders are only good for one thing - cleaning bottoms. Good luck with your nonsense elsewhere. I wish I could make the same money placing honest posts. How much does the RNC or the pentagon pay you? No one else would waste their time spouting such gutter logic. by Cinderfella (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 248 comments [95 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Wednesday, Sep 17, 2008 at 2:57:47 AM
|
|
Reply: Admit it
You don't debate anyone because you're not bright enough to do anything but insult people and call them names. You've posted three times on here and have yet to address one comment I've made about the article, and your "truther" buddies haven't done much better. Get back to me when you can discuss this subject intelligently, because the name-calling and insults are just getting tiresome. by albury smith (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 813 comments) on Wednesday, Sep 17, 2008 at 5:33:54 AM
|
|
Reply: Well, at least I'm getting results!
Poor boy, sorry your charade has become so tiresome for you. Isn't it about time for your nap? Maybe then you might have a fresh approach. You don't get it. Real people don't debate boors, they simply let them go about their business of being, well, boorish. If you were a little more open minded, debate would occur naturally. As is, it's futile to debate brick walls, or even blockheads for that matter. Maybe truth just isn't your game. I know, how about a spelling contest? Or even a tug of war - no intelligence required whatsoever. You might have a chance then. Until then, my sub cranial rectal insertion friend, enjoy your evening with your head in a place where it might be recharged with more gas for tomorrow. Meanwhile, I'll light a candle and pray for your enlightenment. On the other hand, life would be quite boring without you and your admitted friend, TM. Maybe if you're as smart as you think you are, you might find other topics to voice your opines, and not on just one subject like you do. That's the sign of a true troll. At least you admit it. by Cinderfella (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 248 comments [95 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Wednesday, Sep 17, 2008 at 6:26:15 AM
|
|
Reply: Your FOURTH post on here,
and still not one attempt to explain or even address the obvious fallacies I pointed out in the article, just more insults and name-calling. You need to take up a new hobby, sport. by albury smith (2 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 813 comments) on Wednesday, Sep 17, 2008 at 6:46:02 AM
|