Who Disrespects NYPD & NYFD

Russell Pickering said:
"Here are the observations I have made so far" is how I started that post.

Observations are personal and don't require evidence.
Click to expand...
Sorry, I left out a phrase.

Russell Pickering said:
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.
Click to expand...
Name a single person here who you have observed demonstrating these beliefs.

There is NO possibility of a small subversive element within the harmless, friendly giant. Don't suggest it.
Click to expand...
Name a single person here who you have observed demonstrating that belief.

They have evidence and we don't. We're just unpatriotic kooks.
Click to expand...
Name a single person here who you have observed demonstrating that belief.

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.
Click to expand...
Name a single person here who you have observed demonstrating that behavior.

I assume your "observations" are of events in the real world. You've made specific statements about the beliefs and behavior of JREF members. If your observations are valid, you will be able to provide evidence of such beliefs and behaviors being displayed.

If you cannot provide such evidence, your observations are not based on reality, and you should retract your statements, as any adult would do.

This is a forum that promotes critical thinking. I shouldn't have to explain to you, again, that your beliefs won't sway anyone here. Your evidence will. So provide it. Just pick one of your statements above and show that it's valid.
 
R.Mackey said:
They evacuated the area hours before it fell. (I do know the answer, by the way -- it was on fire, could not be fought, and was visibly leaning.
Click to expand...

BTW, in the Bartmer interview, he says that he got caught by surprise by the collapse and ran away as it fell, which can't possibly be true because as you said, they had evacuated the vecinity.

It's obvious he's talking about the WTC towers, not WTC7, but the interview is misleading.
 
jessicarabbit said:
Nobody wants to acknowledge the above fact hmm...
Click to expand...

That's how they do it Jessica. They blame CT's for nitpicking evidence and quotes and yet they do the samething. I started this thread by asking if this NYPD officer felt disrespected by the truth movement. That gets ignored and everyone goes into his comments on building 7 and talk like they would know better since they weren't there and he was. When I bring up the disrespect again they decide it would be best to further disrespect this hero who will die young due to lies of the EPA/Gov't, by saying he was fed his words and doesn't have mind of his own. That's the respect he gets from those who support the lie.

No one here will admit Gov't sponsored terrorism has happened before cause then they need to question 9/11. "Has a plan involved the deaths of 1,000 Americans??" WTF is that?? A lot of service men died on the USS Liberity (look it up) and it doesn't matter if it's the death of 1 American or 1,000, it's still the death of an American by their own gov't.

You want a gov't plan that involved the deaths of 1,000 of Americans?? The EPA/Gov't lie about the air quality in lower Manhattan. That is and will cause the deaths of 100's if not 1,000's.
 
R.Mackey said:
Irrelevant. All that matters is that they did. They evacuated the area hours before it fell. (I do know the answer, by the way -- it was on fire, could not be fought, and was visibly leaning. This has been widely published in interviews, I have found it before and can again, and so can you.)

So you say it was a lucky guess? Is that your answer?

Why is it so hard to answer my very, very simple question?
Click to expand...

I heard it was FEMA told the FDNY. This is the FEMA that arrived in New York the day before for a drill, to be held on 9/11, the day of the largest concentration of drills in history.
 
jessicarabbit said:
Please answer the question then. What information led to the FDNY thinking it would collapse when even the experts still dont know why it collapsed and no skyscraper before that day had collapsed?
Click to expand...


For starters firefighters were using transits to determine whether there was any movement in the structure. It was moving.
 
Usual Suspect said:
That's how they do it Jessica. They blame CT's for nitpicking evidence and quotes and yet they do the samething. I started this thread by asking if this NYPD officer felt disrespected by the truth movement. That gets ignored and everyone goes into his comments on building 7 and talk like they would know better since they weren't there and he was. When I bring up the disrespect again they decide it would be best to further disrespect this hero who will die young due to lies of the EPA/Gov't, by saying he was fed his words and doesn't have mind of his own. That's the respect he gets from those who support the lie.
Click to expand...
Nope.

Now you're putting words in our mouths.

It's very simple. If this all happened the way you said it did, you must have some reason why you believe that. What you believe would have left physical traces. It's irrelevant what happened on USS Liberty, what Douglas Feith wanted to do in Iraq, etc. unless you can show a causal link. And you haven't.

Now, I asked a very simple question. FDNY knew WTC 7 was coming down hours before it did. How did they know that? Explain. I've given you four choices that I believe span the entire set of possibilities, although you should feel free to invent another.

So far none of you has even attempted to answer. Why is that?
 
Russell Pickering said:
So, even though there was an event at the WTC in 1993 where terrorists were known to have used explosives, you feel it should not be considered?

Have you heard of a "secondary device"? Some of the firefighters did because they mentioned it in the oral histories.

Timothy Burke -- [SIZE=-1]Firefigter (F.D.N.Y.) [Engine 202][/SIZE] Then the building popped, lower than the fire, which I learned was I guess, the aviation fuel fell into the pit, and whatever floor it fell on heated up really bad and that's why it popped at that floor. That's the rumor I heard. But it seemed like I was going oh, my god, there is a secondary device because the way the building popped. I thought it was an explosion.

That is because it is part of firefighter terrorist training.

"Secondary explosive devices are bombs placed at the scene of an ongoing emergency response that are intended to cause casualties among responders. Secondary explosive devices are designed to explode after a primary explosion or other major emergency response event has attracted large numbers of responders to the scene to inflict additional injury, damage, and fear.?

http://www.osha.gov/SLTC/emergencypreparedness/guides/secondary.html

So if the steel was destroyed and not tested for explosives, then how do we know that a proven tactic of terrorists was not employed?

Not a very complete investigation in my opinion.
Click to expand...
As you know, many of the firefighters mentioned having the possibility of secondary devices on their minds when approaching the WTC, because their training drilled this idea in. Does it not make sense, then, that they would have this on their mind when the buildings came down? Many people didn't know that the buildings had collapsed completely, and at first thought it was a huge explosion. It wasn't.

Can you name a single firefighter who believes there were explosives in the buildings?
 
Pardalis said:
Numbers.

Conspiring to kill one man is one thing, but to kill thousands of people makes a heck of a difference.
Click to expand...

The EPA/Gov't lie about air quality in lower Manhattan will result in the deaths of 100's if not 1,000's. There's your numbers. Next.
 
Usual Suspect said:
But of course. Watch it and tell me that interview isn't off. Unless you're afraid that interview could have you questioning your own beliefs.
Click to expand...

give me a couple of days to get up for it again, watched it and I was hurting just thinking about how dumb it was

but I like the accent and voice, excellent voice, poor ideas

Give me some time, I have to work up for things like watching CT stuff. I wish there was something new, it is getting old watching more made up stuff.

I can not remember the part, but I think I would rather watch an old movie a few times over and over before watching illogical CT stuff.

I will try to remember. Thanks
 
Usual Suspect said:
The EPA/Gov't lie about air quality in lower Manhattan will result in the deaths of 100's if not 1,000's. There's your numbers. Next.
Click to expand...

Why would the government connive into killing its own citicenz by air polluting? Months and years after the events?

What possible benefit would come from this?
 
jessicarabbit said:
I heard it was FEMA told the FDNY. This is the FEMA that arrived in New York the day before
Click to expand...
False. That entire misconception is based on an exhausted FEMA supervisor saying, on Thursday, that he had arrived in the city on Monday. He hadn't. He got there on 9/11, after hearing about the disaster.

for a drill, to be held on 9/11,
Click to expand...
False. The drill was scheduled for the 12th.

the day of the largest concentration of drills in history.
Click to expand...
Huh?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom