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

[bio]

False.
There are eyewitnesses who think there were bombs.

at the beginning sure. But then the eyewitnesses got a "special treatment".

Firefighter Terence Rivera:
QUOTE
As I got off the back -- the back step, there were a few individuals that were civilians that were outside that were burnt. There was a -- he wasn't a regular security guard. He had a weapon on him. I don't know if he was FBI or Secret Service and he was trying to put the pants out on one individual that was conscious. His pants were still smoldering. I took the can, fire extinguisher off the truck and then sprayed down the pants on the person that was still conscious.

At that time, I had asked him where did this individual come from. He told me when the plane had hit, a fire ball had shot down the elevator shaft and had blown people out of the lobby. (Source)


How is this possible, that in the middle of the chaos some FBI or Secret Service could give such explanations? How could it be, in a time when it was unclear if this was a small plane or a jet-airliner.
"At that moment many thought of bombs in the basement, even the FBI. Did the Secret Service man think that this was an airplane accident and hence there could be no bombs in the basement? Certainly not, if we follow Rivera's account, who was heading to get a supply line to work:"

QUOTE

„Sometime while we were doing that, that same individual that was -- when we first got there, that was trying to put the pants out, he came over and he is saying to us that it's a terrorist attack. You guys are too close. It's a terrorist attack.“


The question then would be how the Secret Service man knew that there couldn't be bombs in the basement if they were under attack by terrorists."

from
http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=18745&st=0

 

[funk de fino]

The question then would be how the Secret Service man knew that there couldn't be bombs in the basement if they were under attack by terrorists."

I'm sorry, could you show me where he says he knows there are no bombs in the basement?

 

[mrbaracuda]

So there explosive sounds all over, reports of bombs in buildings from firefighters, eyewitnesses talking bombs, explosives.
And you failed to explain it and chose to ignore it. Typical response -nonsense.

No, I'm not ignoring anything. I'm just - unlike you apparently - sane and can comprehend everything in its proper frame or at least accept help from people who do and make more sense than something a delusional tard wrote up on a blog for insane people.

 

[phunk]

at the beginning sure. But then the eyewitnesses got a "special treatment".

Firefighter Terence Rivera:
QUOTE
As I got off the back -- the back step, there were a few individuals that were civilians that were outside that were burnt. There was a -- he wasn't a regular security guard. He had a weapon on him. I don't know if he was FBI or Secret Service and he was trying to put the pants out on one individual that was conscious. His pants were still smoldering. I took the can, fire extinguisher off the truck and then sprayed down the pants on the person that was still conscious.

At that time, I had asked him where did this individual come from. He told me when the plane had hit, a fire ball had shot down the elevator shaft and had blown people out of the lobby. (Source)


How is this possible, that in the middle of the chaos some FBI or Secret Service could give such explanations? How could it be, in a time when it was unclear if this was a small plane or a jet-airliner.
"At that moment many thought of bombs in the basement, even the FBI. Did the Secret Service man think that this was an airplane accident and hence there could be no bombs in the basement? Certainly not, if we follow Rivera's account, who was heading to get a supply line to work:"

QUOTE

„Sometime while we were doing that, that same individual that was -- when we first got there, that was trying to put the pants out, he came over and he is saying to us that it's a terrorist attack. You guys are too close. It's a terrorist attack.“


The question then would be how the Secret Service man knew that there couldn't be bombs in the basement if they were under attack by terrorists."

from
http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=18745&st=0

Where did he say there were no bombs?

A plane hit the building, and a fireball came out of the elevator shaft a few seconds later. It's not unreasonable to assume one caused the other.

By the way, explosives don't create fireballs in real life, they only do that in movie special effects.

 

[WildCat]

The question then would be how the Secret Service man knew that there couldn't be bombs in the basement if they were under attack by terrorists."

Maybe you'll be the first truther to answer this question! What type of bomb is capable of causing severe burns to people yet doesn't blow them to smithereens?

 

[abenja1]

Where did I made the claim? Do you willfully accuse others?

Well I guess what I'm trying to ask is that since truthers know so much that this guy was "in on it" and that's a direct quote from the title of this thread, obviously they must know what this rescue worker got in return for following the evil gov'ts plan. I would be asking the theauthor but he's too much of a coward and ignores every question I ask him.

 

[WildCat]

I would be asking the theauthor but he's too much of a coward and ignores every question I ask him.

Besides that, it says "banned" under his name now.

But maybe his latest sock will answer you.

 

[RedIbis]

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.

First you say the above then later you say this?

I know Mr. Rodriguez didn't see bombs. I know he didn't claim to see bombs, either. [...]

How about saying that you made an error, you misspoke? I swear I won't call you a liar.

In an attempt to be charitable, I'd even be faintly interested in everyone who thinks there were bombs, at any time (1993 doesn't count!), in any structure. As far as I know, the population of this group is one -- Mr. Rodriguez. I could be wrong, there could be one or two other confused folks out there. Or maybe even someone credible. Surprise me.

So, what have you got

Now, this is just a shameless and transparent attempt to minimize any eyewitness account which might not support your side of the argument.

 

[R.Mackey]

First you say the above then later you say this?


How about saying that you made an error, you misspoke? I swear I won't call you a liar.

My original was imprecise. Perhaps I should have said "excepting Mr. Rodriguez who claimed to see effects of a bomb". Instead, I assumed nobody would bother when the intent was so clear. Apparently that was a bad assumption.

Now, this is just a shameless and transparent attempt to minimize any eyewitness account which might not support your side of the argument.

How can I minimize that which does not, to the best of my knowledge, exist? I've asked you for examples of such accounts, and I've gotten none. I also remind you, I wasn't the one who claimed they existed in the first place.

It's your turn. Take it or forfeit, makes no difference to me.

 

[funk de fino]

How about saying that you made an error, you misspoke? I swear I won't call you a liar.

Did Willie say he saw a hijacker? If so, do you think he misspoke?

 

[bio]

Where did he say there were no bombs?

A plane hit the building, and a fireball came out of the elevator shaft a few seconds later. It's not unreasonable to assume one caused the other.

By the way, explosives don't create fireballs in real life, they only do that in movie special effects.

well - when you say the explosion comes from kerosine, than you say indirectly, that the explosion does not come from a bomb ...

 

[RedIbis]

My original was imprecise. Perhaps I should have said "excepting Mr. Rodriguez who claimed to see effects of a bomb". Instead, I assumed nobody would bother when the intent was so clear. Apparently that was a bad assumption.



How can I minimize that which does not, to the best of my knowledge, exist? I've asked you for examples of such accounts, and I've gotten none. I also remind you, I wasn't the one who claimed they existed in the first place.

It's your turn. Take it or forfeit, makes no difference to me.

Battalion Chief Brian Dixon
Deputy Commissioner Thomas Fitzpatrick
Assistent Commissioner Stephen Gregory
FF Timothy Julian
FF Joseph Meola
FF William Reynolds
FF Kenneth Rogers
Cpt Dennis Tardio

Do you want me to keep going?

 

[RedIbis]

Did Willie say he saw a hijacker? If so, do you think he misspoke?

Feel free to quote, source and put your question in context. I'm only vaguely aware of Willie possibly recognizing a hijacker a few days before the attacks, but I could be wrong.

 

[R.Mackey]

Battalion Chief Brian Dixon
Deputy Commissioner Thomas Fitzpatrick
Assistent Commissioner Stephen Gregory
FF Timothy Julian
FF Joseph Meola
FF William Reynolds
FF Kenneth Rogers
Cpt Dennis Tardio

Do you want me to keep going?

No, I don't want you to keep going quoting people who don't claim to see a bomb, or effects thereof. I want you to quote people who do.

For example, Stephen Gregory. Here's his quote:

[Gregory] No. I know I was with an officer from Ladder 146, a Lieutenant Evangelista, who ultimately called me up a couple of days later just to find out how I was. We both for whatever reason -- again, I don't know how valid this is with everything that was going on at that particular point in time, but for some reason I thought that when I looked in the direction of the Trade Center before it came down, before No. 2 came down, that I saw low-level flashes. In my conversation with Lieutenant Evangelista, never mentioning this to him, he questioned me and asked me if I saw low-level flashes in front of the building, and I agreed with him because I thought -- at that time I didn't know what it was. I mean, it could have been as a result of the building collapsing, things exploding, but I saw a flash flash flash and then it looked like the building came down.

[Interviewer] Was that on the lower level of the building or up where the fire was?

[Gregory] No, the lower level of the building. You know like when they demolish a building, how when they blow up a building, when it falls down? That's what I thought I saw. And I didn't broach the topic to him, but he asked me. He said I don't know if I'm crazy, but I just wanted to ask you because you were standing right next to me. He said did you see anything by the building? And I said what do you mean by see anything? He said did you see any flashes? I said, yes, well, I thought it was just me. He said no, I saw them, too. I don't know if that means anything. I mean, I equate it to the building coming down and pushing things down, it could have been electrical explosions, it could have been whatever. But it's just strange that two people sort of say the same thing and neither one of us talked to each other about it. I mean, I don't know this guy from a hole in the wall. I was just standing next to him. I never met the man before in my life. He knew who I was I guess by my name on my coat and he called me up, you know, how are you doing? How's everything? And, oh, by the way did you ... It was just a little strange.

Source (Emphasis added)

This is not someone who even believes, himself, that what he saw was evidence of explosives. As I suspected, you've got nothing at all.

 

[WildCat]

Do you want me to keep going?

You have to, because none of those people think there were bombs in the building. Apparently you and Dylan Avery share an ignorance of similes.

 

[Jonnyclueless]

What exactly do the sounds of a building collapsing, burning, debris dropping, steel cracking,jet fuel erupting, etc sounds like for real since that day consisted only of bomb explosions?

 

[RedIbis]

No, I don't want you to keep going quoting people who don't claim to see a bomb, or effects thereof. I want you to quote people who do.

For example, Stephen Gregory. Here's his quote:


Source (Emphasis added)

This is not someone who even believes, himself, that what he saw was evidence of explosives. As I suspected, you've got nothing at all.

I didn't say he thought it was evidence of explosives. He says he saw "low level flashes" which is consistent with CD. Also on this list of accounts are people who heard, yes heard the sounds of explosions.

Sure, weeks, months, maybe years later, these people were informed of what the source of their initial descriptions were, but as any detective worth his/her salt knows, it's always the first interview which is most important. How people choose to interpret their experience later on is often of little consequence compared to the value of that first, unadulturated account.

I wonder why you didn't finish Gregory's quote, which states,

"You know like when they demolish a building, how when they blow up a building, when it falls down? That's what I thought I saw."

 

[Arus808]

and you have problems comprehending. a whole "thought" and "like" is in that sentence

 

[lapman]

I didn't say he thought it was evidence of explosives. He says he saw "low level flashes" which is consistent with CD.

The "low level flashes" are not consistent with anything especially since the collapse did NOT initiate from that location. Most importantly, there are no sounds associated with said flashes.

Also on this list of accounts are people who heard, yes heard the sounds of explosions.

There were people who said they heard, yes heard the sounds of trains, yep, trains. So, what's your point? What nobody states is that they heard, yes heard the sound of the distinct sequence of explosions that always, repeat, ALWAYS accompanies a CD. Add to that the fact that any such sound would have been recorded, yes, actually recorded by the many audio recording devices that were recording that day, yes, during the actual time of said flashes and "explosions." Why do twoofers always have such a huge problem with that?

 

[pomeroo]

You failed to attack the message I posted on the 1993 WTC bombing. Typical response by a biased skeptic.

Well, you failed to acknowledge that your lie about the Gulf of Tonkin was exposed. So, nyah-nyah.

Let me respond to your message about the 1993 WTC bombing: Nonsense.