Another truther story about WTC7 demolition countdown

[Bell]

That's the last time they're getting any of my blood!

That's allright because they have allready implanted the mindcontrol chip last time you gave blood.

 

[Dr Harry Rein]

That's allright because they have allready implanted the mindcontrol chip last time you gave blood.

That explains a lot about my recent behavior. I have this pathological urge to defend the official story and to ridicule conspiracy theories. Obviously, the NWO is directing me to do this using the mind control chip.

 

[Cl1mh4224rd]

The "evidence" for the countdown is even weaker than the "evidence" for Flight 77 passing the CITGO station on the north side. At least Lyte Trip managed to get three or four people to support his claim, and it still didn't go over well, even with other truthers.

 

[CHF]

At least Lyte Trip managed to get three or four people to support his claim...

...up until the point where the plane slammed into the Pentagon.

 

[Digest]

my points on this i raised at LCF with no response of course

It sounds like there is implications to me - (my bolding)
some questions i have- which i doubt a propagandist like AJ will ever answer.

Former Air Force Special Operations for Search and Rescue expert, Kevin McPadden traveled to ground zero completely of his own accord

If i remember right there are two special ops branches in the air force - Combat Control and ParaRescue which one of these is he? and why doesnt he use the correct desingnation? I think someone here already rasied this point

"While we were on the right side, there was firefighters getting ready, they were bussing them back and forth, and a couple of vets that were there - they got the vibe that something was coming down," said McPadden.

So the FF were getting ready for the bombs? Thats not accusation? Can someone clarify if you dont think that is the case.

"We started asking questions, everybody started asking questions, and the next thing you know there was a Red Cross representative pacing back and forth in front of the crowd holding his hand over the radio - I couldn't hear what it was saying but it was like pulsed - whatever the speech was on there it was pulsed - and that means to me most likely it was a countdown."

So why would the Evil All Knowing NWO include the red cross in their nefarious plan? Or is the red cross in on it too? and here McPadden states he didnt hear what was said on the radio - he assumes it was a countdown -- you know what happens when you assume?

McPadden then describes the frantic attempts to escape as the building began to collapse.

So where exactly was McPadden? Who else was around him?

"But he took his hand off at the last three seconds and he gave this heartfelt look - like just run for your life - because he didn't want to bring it on his conscience - he didn't want to go to his grave with that - and then we had a couple of seconds to put our heads together," said McPadden.

What would be on his conscience? the death of all these people? doesnt that mean he would be complicent to the attack if he would feel guilty because of the act? so this means the Red Cross was in on it? Also make note of where McFadden states the Red Cross guy took his hand off the radio at the 3 sec mark

In a taped interview with us after the event, McPadden made it clear that he and onlookers clearly heard "three, two, one" from the radio before the building collapsed. We will be releasing that tape over the next week. We also talked to other first responders who verified the story.

Wait a sec here? didnt he just say he didnt hear exactly what was said? He is contridicting himself?
And how was this heard over the radio since the Red Cross representive had removed his hand from the radio?

 

[Disbelief]

If i remember right there are two special ops branches in the air force - Combat Control and ParaRescue which one of these is he? and why doesnt he use the correct desingnation? I think someone here already rasied this point

Because saying he is with search and rescue operations, which to someone who does not know sounds impressive, makes it look like he is there to help rescue people in this type of situation. Of course, that is not what pararescue does.

And I agree with Disbelief, the description of the man's "job" is completely wrong. Special Operations Search and Rescue? Um. No. Pararescueman, Air Combat Controller, or Special Forces Weather Controller. They're the three jobs. All belonging to 720th Special Tactics Group.

I find it hard to believe a PJ would allow themself to be referred to as anything other than a Pararescueman, Pararescue Jumper, or ParaJumper. Those names are a badge of honour, a mark of truly having gonads of steel.

That'd be like a Ranger allowing themself to be referred to as an infantryman.

I also decided to try for pararescue when I was in basic, but I decided I did not want the extra 2 year commitment. I did know the First Sergeant for the CC's at my base (he was not CC) and knew a few of those guys. They were proud of what they did and wouold not hide behind some obscure reference to them. I would assume that Pararescue guys would be cut from the same cloth.

 

[mjd1982]

So after six years, this guy finally comes out with his version of the story? A story, by the way, completely contradicts the NYFD's testimony?

Alex Jones and Dylan really to steal the hero spotlight from the NYPD and NYFD.

Oh boy... this is stupidity that makes me want to cry!

Tell me how this contradicts FDNY testimony. I have gone through this with many of you kooky colleagues, your next.

 

[mjd1982]

Is no one actually going to deal with his testimony coherently?

I broached this in my WTC7 testimonies thread, no one had any inclination to do so. His testimony is supported by many others; and contradicted by none.
How can you look at this, and the other testimonies, and not conclude that there is a need for independent investigation into this? Please tell me!

 

[CHF]

Is no one actually going to deal with his testimony coherently?

OK....he says someone from the Red Cross was listening to a demolition "countdown" that he didn't actually hear.

What would you like us to do with this testimony?

 

[The Big Dog]

"Tell me how this contradicts FDNY testimony. I have gone through this with many of you kooky colleagues, your next."

Wait, are you saying that you have testimony from the FDNY confirming a countdown to the planned demolition of WTC7 and the Red Cross was in on it. Gosh, i'd love to see that!

/It does not bother you that he clearly embellished his story about being in the path of the debris?
//it is "you're" not "your" next.

 

[SDC]

Is no one actually going to deal with his testimony coherently?

I broached this in my WTC7 testimonies thread, no one had any inclination to do so. His testimony is supported by many others; and contradicted by none.
How can you look at this, and the other testimonies, and not conclude that there is a need for independent investigation into this? Please tell me!

Okay, what have we got. One witness says "X," but no other trusted witness either says "no X" or in fact refers to "X" at all; "X" being an event (a countdown, for example), or the presence of a person or group (Red Cross). If one applies the purest methods of sophistry, one can argue that the fact that no one directly says "no X" means that the original witness (who said "X") is not contradicted. But that has no place in ordinary life, in a courtroom (going, as always, by my jury experiences, the only times I have been in courtrooms), or I suspect in formal debate.

Sophistry (dictionary): 1. Plausible but fallacious argumentation.
2. A plausible but misleading or fallacious argument.
hm();Sources=Sources | 2;
Or: (thesaurus):1. a deliberately invalid argument displaying ingenuity in reasoning in the hope of deceiving someone , or, -- a misconception resulting from incorrect reasoning
hm();Sources=Sources | 2;
I would argue that the lack of confirmation is, effectively, the same point as at least implicit denial. Is there anyone out there with extensive experience in formal debate, or formal logic? As opposed to ordinary, street-corner arguments.

 

[SDC]

M, a quick request, which actually I've made before. Could you come up with some snappier and more entertaining insults, particularly with regard to the intelligence of others? Perhaps you could try that Shakespearean insult generator I referred to. Sigh. I wish.

 

[pomeroo]

There has to be a site somewhere that keeps track of the fake veterans and the ones in disgrace for reasons aside from post- 9/11 actions.

Hackworth used to have a site to verify service records, but I haven't been able to find it since he passed away.

Maybe some of our active-duty people might have some ideas. It would be a useful adjunct to a debunking site to have such a data base, don't you think?

B.G. Burkett's Stolen Valor site offers some tips:

http://www.stolenvalor.com/


Henry Mark Holzer's book, Fake Warriors: Identifying, Exposing, and Punishing Those Who Falsify Their Military Service, addresses this subject and is available on Amazon.

 

[pomeroo]

Is no one actually going to deal with his testimony coherently?

I broached this in my WTC7 testimonies thread, no one had any inclination to do so. His testimony is supported by many others; and contradicted by none.
How can you look at this, and the other testimonies, and not conclude that there is a need for independent investigation into this? Please tell me!

Tell us why your imaginary, mathematically-impossible conspiracy blew up an obscure building seven hours after the jihadist attacks. Please attempt to fit the collapse of WTC 7 into a coherent plan to conquer the world for Halliburton, or whatever.

 

[mjd1982]

OK....he says someone from the Red Cross was listening to a demolition "countdown" that he didn't actually hear.

What would you like us to do with this testimony?

Hmmmm.... Maybe listen to the testimony again, perhaps with your ears open this time

 

[mjd1982]

Tell us why your imaginary, mathematically-impossible conspiracy blew up an obscure building seven hours after the jihadist attacks. Please attempt to fit the collapse of WTC 7 into a coherent plan to conquer the world for Halliburton, or whatever.

Err... Though I appreciate you illustraing my point, I did ask my question first, courtesy before kookery please

Is no one actually going to deal with his testimony coherently?

I broached this in my WTC7 testimonies thread, no one had any inclination to do so. His testimony is supported by many others; and contradicted by none.
How can you look at this, and the other testimonies, and not conclude that there is a need for independent investigation into this? Please tell me!

 

[slyjoe]

"We started asking questions, everybody started asking questions, and the next thing you know there was a Red Cross representative pacing back and forth in front of the crowd holding his hand over the radio - I couldn't hear what it was saying but it was like pulsed - whatever the speech was on there it was pulsed - and that means to me most likely it was a countdown."

To me it means the squelch needed adjusted.

 

[mjd1982]

"Tell me how this contradicts FDNY testimony. I have gone through this with many of you kooky colleagues, your next."

Wait, are you saying that you have testimony from the FDNY confirming a countdown to the planned demolition of WTC7 and the Red Cross was in on it. Gosh, i'd love to see that!

/It does not bother you that he clearly embellished his story about being in the path of the debris?
//it is "you're" not "your" next.

No, read the question again. Tell me how this contradicts FDNY testimony. I have shown many times how it doesnt, go ahead and show me why you think it doesnt.

 

[nicepants]

No doubt this whole thing is just a desperate attempt by Alex Jones to breathe more life into the truth movement long enough for he and Dylan to sell their new videos.

Like the execs of Enron..they see the writing on the walls, and know that the ship is going down..the only goal now is to get out of it as much benefit as they can before it collapses around them.

I wonder if it struck alex to ask this guy why this guy has kept quiet for 6 years? And let me also be the first to call BS on alex's claim that there are "others who corroborate this story". If there were, he would have listed them out.

So ridiculous.

BTW...I saw a light at the top of a television tower "pulsing" last night...must have been a countdown for something.....

 

[mjd1982]

Okay, what have we got. One witness says "X," but no other trusted witness either says "no X" or in fact refers to "X" at all; "X" being an event (a countdown, for example), or the presence of a person or group (Red Cross). If one applies the purest methods of sophistry, one can argue that the fact that no one directly says "no X" means that the original witness (who said "X") is not contradicted. But that has no place in ordinary life, in a courtroom (going, as always, by my jury experiences, the only times I have been in courtrooms), or I suspect in formal debate.

Sophistry (dictionary): 1. Plausible but fallacious argumentation.
2. A plausible but misleading or fallacious argument.
hm();Sources=Sources | 2;
Or: (thesaurus):1. a deliberately invalid argument displaying ingenuity in reasoning in the hope of deceiving someone , or, -- a misconception resulting from incorrect reasoning
hm();Sources=Sources | 2;
I would argue that the lack of confirmation is, effectively, the same point as at least implicit denial. Is there anyone out there with extensive experience in formal debate, or formal logic? As opposed to ordinary, street-corner arguments.

The first line of your post is instantly wrong. You need to go and read more of my threads. When you have done this, come back.