Here is one rescue worker who was "in on it"

[pomeroo]

False.
Declassified National Security Agency Documents Show Analysts Made Signals Intelligence (SIGINT) fit the claim" of North Vietnamese Attack.
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB132/press20051201.htm

Liar. Absolutely none of LBJ's severest critics have ever contended that any attacks were faked. The "incident" arose when fatigued seamen in heavy seas reacted to blips on the radar screen.

The you havent researched enough.
FBI's Confidential Informant Emad Salem secretly tapes his conversation with FBI agent John Anticev
Salem admits a number of times to building, with the supervision of the FBI
http://freethoughtmanifesto.blogspot.com/2007/03/fbi-behind-wtc-bombing-1993.html
The above link has the audio too.

It was on news too.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=vPF2rnRJn3s

Nonsense.

Since when is confession a corroborative evidence?
DNA of the hijackers matched with____?

DNA at the crash sites matched DNA found in rooms and cars rented by the hijackers. Duh! We don't need another thread on this subject.

 

[Russ_Dalton]

So "eyewitnesses saw bombs that destroyed the WTC" has now, upon questioning, morphed into "a firefighter was captured on video referring to a bomb threat that not only didn't level anything but never materialized at all, that he heard of second-hand from a supervisor, somewhere in the neighborhood of the WTC."

I wouldn't bother replying, but there is nothing else at all going on in the Truth Movement at the moment. Fold your tents, guys.

Did you willfully chose to ignore other eyewitnesses who use the words bombs, detonations, explosives in the WTC?

 

[DGM]

So there were reports of bombs around WTC. And there were explosive sounds in the WTC complex.
Why doesn't that warrant an investigation?

It was investigated. How do you think they found out it was false?

 

[pomeroo]

The 4 examples I have given are proven known falsifications. You dont want to get into that trap. Id like to stick to this topic. Start the thread and invite me.

Your lies have been exposed and you simply ignore that fact. Typical twoofer. No wonder your evil movement failed.

 

[Drs_Res]

Another person who never heard of a simile.

We better go look for the trains and the thunder that brought the buildings down as well.

 

[R.Mackey]

Did you willfully chose to ignore other eyewitnesses who use the words bombs, detonations, explosives in the WTC?

So now your claim devolves not to seeing bombs or explosives, but merely using the words.

As in "it sounded like a bomb." This is not eyewitness evidence of a bomb.

Ergo, I did not willfully choose to ignore them. They are irrelevant.

I've told you before, excepting only Mr. Rodriguez whose case is well understood, there are no eyewitnesses who claim to have seen a bomb or explosives. Zero. Nada. Zip. Zilch. If I'm wrong, show me these people. You can't, and therefore you keep trying to change the ground rules.

 

[abenja1]

Did you willfully chose to ignore other eyewitnesses who use the words bombs, detonations, explosives in the WTC?

Do you willfully ignore my question? What did the rescue worker gain from being "in on it?"

 

[beachnut]

Please link to these reports of at least 20,000 people killed. I dont remember this. All the n ews media said they had no ida of numbers

If you do not show any signs of intelligence, you will be banned for not being conscience for the past 6 years.

 

[BigAl]

So there were reports of bombs around WTC. And there were explosive sounds in the WTC complex.
Why doesn't that warrant an investigation?

Because when the statements are read in their context, it is clear for 99% of them that the person is speaking of the noises of a building in the process of collapsing and for the other 1%, nobody heard the same noise, and small noises are not an indication of man-made demolition of a building that is, I believe, larger than any known man-made explosive demolition by a couple orders of magnitude.

 

[CptColumbo]

If you do not show any signs of intelligence, you will be banned for not being conscience for the past 6 years.

Too late. Guess who.

 

[Disbelief]

What makes you think he ever left? He may have posted in this thread already after he was banned. As a recent or new sock. Ron and I have believed for quite some time that theauthor was pdoh76.

My only question is if Zen is also PDoh. I joined after PDoh was gone, but I have lived through Zen and his various socks.

 

[tsig]

So a CD "expert" can be misled?
Shouldn't all CD experts agree on one opinion?

Why?

 

[mrbaracuda]

The point is the school is so close to the WTCs (you can see the reporter say it in the video) and they wanted to evacuate it.
The fireman wasn't sure where the bomb was, he says its in the area of the school and he was asked to evacuate the area.

Watch the video. Use of the word another bomb

Yes, very interesting "theory", Sherlock. Now tell me, why are they moving out of the immediate area of that high school where the first bomb threat was, instead of staying there, if it's supposed to be in the WTC?

Wait, don't even try to come up with something retarded. See below why! Ha!

Did you willfully ignore OTHER eyewitness accounts in my earlier link of people saying bombs, detonations, explosives, van with explosives?

No, I am willfully ignoring YOUR NONSENSE.

 

[SezMe]

I have a very minor request. Some of you apparently know each other in real life and use names like Ron, Brad, Ryan, etc. However, those of us on the periphery don't have that level of information so it would be helpful if you would stick to screen names that we all know. Thanks.

 

[Alt+F4]

Back to the video in the OP:

It's very manipulative. We hear a male voice saying off camera:

“This building is about to blow up, move it back.”

When the voice says, “This building is about to blow up…” we are seeing WTC 7. When the same voice continues, “move it back”, it’s a different shot – outside Stuyvesant High School. The next shot is back at WTC 7. It's trying to insinuate that all three shots are part of the same video, which they aren't. It's clear that the middle shot (Stuyvesant) isn't on the same street.

Look at the three shots with and without sound, note the light and shadows, they don't match.

Does anyone really think CNN put those clips together like that?

Even if this wasn't an amateurish attempt to deceive, no where in that video do we see the cop say "this building is about to blow up".

 

[Alt+F4]

As for the events at Stuyvesant High School, here are the facts. According to Principal Stanley Teitel, he decided to evacuate the school at about 9:55am because:

A federal official came to me and told me the north building was in danger of falling and it could hit us--which it couldn't. But the shock wave. If it came at us, could bring our building down.

As for the bomb scare:

Teitel said that Stuyvesant did not receive a bomb threat and that a bomb definitely never exploded near the school. However, down the street, a pipe had been ruptured. "Somebody heard a gas leak a few blocks away and now we have a bomb threat" Teitel said. "Ever play the game 'Telephone'?"

So what does this leave us with? A video in which cops and firefighters clearly believe there is a bomb either in or near the high school, which of course there was not. I find what they thought to be perfectly reasonable considering the panic of that morning.

The "truthers" however feel a cop or firefighter can never be mistaken, ever. The "truthers" should start asking the FDNY to pick their lottery numbers for them.

Linky: http://www.nytimes.com/learning/general/specials/terrorism/stuy.pdf?scp=1&sq=%22stuyvesant%20high%20school%22%20spectator&st=cse

One further note, from my personal experience, before 9/11 bomb threats at high schools in NYC were not unusual, now they rarely occur at all.

 

[~enigma~]

One further note, from my personal experience, before 9/11 bomb threats at high schools in NYC were not unusual, now they rarely occur at all.

Bomb threats. I went to Sheepshead Bay HS in the 70s (Brooklyn) and bomb threats were a mostly daily occurance but generally they were the "bad" kids trying to get out of school for the day so the "threats" pretty much were checked but the school not evacuated unless the "threat" was credible.

 

[Grizzly Bear]

So there were reports of bombs around WTC. And there were explosive sounds in the WTC complex.
Why doesn't that warrant an investigation?

Damage to the towers having other side effects... cars were being ignited by materials raining down from the impact areas... people described bodies hitting the ground as sounding like explosions... given the situation the possibilities of sounds coming from sources other than bombs is exceedingly high... Gas lines rupturing during the tower's collapse, water lines rupturing during the collapse... literally hundreds of sources of sounds.... Is that not relevant in any way to your interpretation of events?

 

[RedIbis]

So now your claim devolves not to seeing bombs or explosives, but merely using the words.

As in "it sounded like a bomb." This is not eyewitness evidence of a bomb.

Ergo, I did not willfully choose to ignore them. They are irrelevant.

I've told you before, excepting only Mr. Rodriguez whose case is well understood, there are no eyewitnesses who claim to have seen a bomb or explosives. Zero. Nada. Zip. Zilch. If I'm wrong, show me these people. You can't, and therefore you keep trying to change the ground rules.

Please quote Mr. Rodriguez claiming to see the actual bombs or explosives. He's claimed to see explosions, but I don't recall any instance where he claims to see the actual charges or bombs.

 

[Alt+F4]

Bomb threats. I went to Sheepshead Bay HS in the 70s (Brooklyn) and bomb threats were a mostly daily occurance but generally they were the "bad" kids trying to get out of school for the day so the "threats" pretty much were checked but the school not evacuated unless the "threat" was credible.

Pre-9/11 bomb threats in the high school in which I taught were so numerous that after awhile we simply ignored them and didn't evacuate. That would never happen today.

My main point is that prior to 9/11 an NYPD or FDNY report of a bomb in a public high school was not nearly as out of the ordinary as non-New Yorkers may realize.