Split Thread WTC7 collapse (again) - split from: How did you rule out that 911 was an insid

[Pardalis]

FDNY did NOT say WTC7 would collapse, Chiefs Fellini and Hayden did not know for sure. Chief Norman did not think WTC7 would collapse.

http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/eyewitnessaccountsofthewithdrawalfromwtc

 

[pomeroo]

FDNY did NOT say WTC7 would collapse, Chiefs Fellini and Hayden did not know for sure. Chief Norman did not think WTC7 would collapse.

It seems impossible to find a conspiracy liar willing to peddle his snake oil about WTC 7 on a show featuring Arthur Scheuerman, retired FDNY battalion chief, and Mark Roberts. Can you suggest anyone?

 

[CHF]

'Full of crap' came out of your head.
I say he didn't recognize the Towers were CD's because they were top down explosions.

OK then, perhaps "uninformed" would be a better term?

My point remains the same: you refer to Jowenko's demolition experience to bolster your claims on WTC7 but then you insist that this very same demolition expert doesn't know as much as you do about 2/3 of the alleged 9/11 demolitions!

Why cite an expert who you disagree with 67% of the time?

1) It's not his problem.

So in other words, Jowenko is the same as all other 9/11 "truthseekers" in that he has earth-shattering information but isn't willing to do anything productive with it. I figured as much.

2) MSM trashes anyone who says anything that conflicts with the OT.

When did the MSM trash Jowenko?

And why would some trashing from the media matter so much to those seeking to expose a supposedly obvious 9/11 demolition? Surely it can't be that easy to throw you people off.

Over the years journalists/witnesses/experts/whistleblowers have braved death threats and assassination attempts in order to expose truth!

But according to you Jowenko hasn't said anything further on WTC7 because he doesn't want to be "trashed" in the media. Do you even buy that pathetic excuse?

 

[CHF]

FDNY did NOT say WTC7 would collapse, Chiefs Fellini and Hayden did not know for sure. Chief Norman did not think WTC7 would collapse.

Chief of operations Daniel Nigro pulled his men back from the area around WTC7 because he feared collapse. Many other FDNY are on record as saying they also thought the building would collapse.

Reconcile that with your demolition theory.

 

[Pardalis]

The point i'm making at the moment is: WTC7 looks like a CD.

snip

Will you acknowledge that WTC 7 looks like a CD?

It's been a while...

Chris, you've been at it for so long, you should know better.

 

[CptColumbo]

Jowenko said it was a CD. [he noted that the bottom floors went first]

So he didn't see the penthouse fall in first?

Whatever he saw, it was enough for him to say:
Jowenko:This is controlled demolition.
Interviewer: You sure?
Jowenko: Absolutely, it’s been imploded.
This is a hired job. A team of experts did this.

So, the fact that he didn't see all the evidence, including a point (that you pointed out) that seems to lead directly to the conclusion that it was a CD, is irrelevant to you. Another "twoofer" who wants a new investigation into everything, except the parts that reinforce their beliefs.

 

[Pardalis]

It's so troubling that Chris has been at it for more than a year, and after all this time he can't find anything better than: "it looks like a CD".

 

[Christopher7]

The sound of CD charges has been edited out of videos???? Wow, that's pretty desperate even by twoofer standards.

I suppose the noise was also edited out of people's ears that day as well given how no one claims to have heard this

Craig said "I think I know an explosion when i hear one"
The part when Daryl heard what could have been an explosion has been edited out of the only 2 videos with sound.

You are assuming all CD's are the same.
On the contrary, every situation is unique.
The secondary charges could have happened within a second of the 'clap of thunder' and would account for the 'shock wave ripping through the building"

 

[Christopher7]

It's so troubling that Chris has been at it for more than a year, and after all this time he can't find anything better than: "it looks like a CD".

One step at a time.

Do you agree that the implosion of WTC7 looks like a CD or do you think the owner of a CD company doesn't know an implosion when he sees one?

 

[Pardalis]

Sure a building that falls down looks like a building that falls down.

 

[Christopher7]

So, the fact that he didn't see all the evidence, including a point (that you pointed out) that seems to lead directly to the conclusion that it was a CD, is irrelevant to you.

He saw all the evidence he needed to see.
He is an expert.
This an easy one.
WTC7 imploded.
Building implosion is a fine art.
It cannot happen by chance.
Jowenko knows this.

I'm just asking you to acknowledge that WTC7 looks like a CD, not that it is a CD.

 

[Pardalis]

He saw all the evidence he needed to see.

How do you know?

 

[Christopher7]

Sure a building that falls down looks like a building that falls down.

Implode is a very special kind of 'falls down'.

Can you admit that WTC7 LOOKS LIKE a CD?

 

[CptColumbo]

He saw all the evidence he needed to see.

Yet he got the order in which parts of the building collapsed wrong. Maybe he should have seen more. When a person is looking to build a case or support a hypothesis, he/she doesn't stop once the evidence supporting their hypothesis has been collected. They keep looking to solidify it into a theory.

He is an expert.

Who wasn't shown all the evidence. What did the interviewer have to hide? What are you so afraid of that you don't see the contradiction in your own statements.

 

[Christopher7]

How do you know?

He knows
J: Yes, the rest implodes. This is controlled demolition.
I: You sure?
J: Absolutely, it’s been imploded.
This is a hired job. A team of experts did this.

 

[Pardalis]

He knows
J: Yes, the rest implodes. This is controlled demolition.
I: You sure?
J: Absolutely, it’s been imploded.
This is a hired job. A team of experts did this.

How do you know he was shown all the evidence?

 

[Pardalis]

Was he shown the firefighters testimonies, different angles of the tower in flames, was he shown these videos?:

 

[Christopher7]

Yet he got the order in which parts of the building collapsed wrong. Maybe he should have seen more.
Who wasn't shown all the evidence. What did the interviewer have to hide? What are you so afraid of that you don't see the contradiction in your own statements.

This is an easy one.
Building implosions are very distinctive, unmistakable.
FEMA acknowledged that WTC7 imploded [Ch5 pg30&31].

Can you admit that WTC7 looks like a CD?

 

[Christopher7]

Was he shown the firefighters testimonies, different angles of the tower in flames, was he shown these videos?:

He is an expert.
He saw enough to say that WTC7 was "absolutely" a CD.

Can you admit that WTC7 looks like a CD?

 

[CptColumbo]

This is an easy one.
Building implosions are very distinctive, unmistakable.

How many have you seen? How many were due to CD and how many were due to a fire?