Was Dick Oliver confused about what he heard on 9/11

[Oystein]

Precisely, sheeplesnshills. Don't waste time asking simple questions and don't expect me to participate in your little 20 question drills.

If posting up building dimensions is important to a point you want to make, then come right out and scream it!

The old dodging technique "20 questions are evil": Refuse to say out loud facts that are directly contradicting your claims. It is an absolutely essential tactic for jammonius to keep his mind closed and free from all enlightment. Ok, I'll scream it:

The openings in both towers coincide perfectly in shape, size and other characteristics with the shape and size of Boeing 767s. Right?

A simple "yes" will suffice - no word salad ordered

 

[Oystein]

Cut the crap and post up a size claim if you think doing so will advance some point you, and you alone everybody here except me, might like to make.

Fixed that for you

I characteristically, habitually, and consistently do not play in other posters' 20 questions drills as that drill is childish, stupid and unworthy of reasoned, mature discussion.

I will continue to search for the way to say the above until the simple-minded rhetoric ceases to be posted.

Do we have a smiley that stuffs fingers into its ears and says "LALALA"? We could label it :jammo: and save him the effort of tossing that word salad of evasion again and again.

 

[sheeplesnshills]

I think I've probably answered this one already, but now that I've had a couple days of R&R, there's something else that needs to be reported to our posters and our lurkers about the above.

In a prior response, I don't think I called attention to the desperation that comes through in AJM's post.

Consider this part:



Lurkers and Posters, alike, it is now very clear that the common storyline requiring you to accept the claim a Boeing 767 hit the North Tower at close to 500mph on 9/11 has been reduced to assertions of proof based on the weak, inconclusive and tentative claims that a few people smelled jet fuel. Almost no one reliably reported seeing it, even fewer reliably reported hearing it, so AJM has just moved on and found a few people who claimed to have smelled it.

While, posters and lurkers, isn't that a .... rhymes with "rich"?

That weak claim does not come anywhere near to the level of refuting all those eye and ear witnesses that have been confirmed to exist in the Dick Oliver videos and in the PAPD witness reports, not to mention in the 503 Task Force official witness statements, that confirm it was "jist an explosion" as Our David Stollick(sp) had said at 8:46 when it happened.

So, come to think of it, we need definitely to add Our David Stollick(sp) to our list of valid candidates for the title of FIRST NO PLANER, for, indeed, it was;

"...jist an explosion..."

http://vinteeage.com/product-images...rt-review-cotton-factory-cotton-factory-1.gif

Edited by LashL: 

Please do not "hotlink" images. See Rule 5.

 

[jammonius]

jammonius, no matter how much you twist, turn, shimmy, shake, backpeddle, twirl, shuffle and jive the reality of what those pictures shows will not change.

Obviously the large pic gives the best detail, regardless of hue, of the impact site which clearly shows that something entered the building. This is obvious because the material at the impact site is clearly bent inward. Trying to claim a blurry screenshot from a youtube video shows the best detail is disingenuous at best.

I've been lurking here for a while and have reached one conclusion, if word salad had nutritional content your posts in this thread alone would solve world hunger.

DEW'd, leave the damned horse alone!

Would you be willing to repost the pictures for sake of comparison. I challenge your assertion the large one gives the best detail. I also challenge the assertion you can make a reasoned statement that the big one clearly shows something entered into, rather than exited from, the building.

Furthermore, in the main, you are not really arguing with me, are you?

Our Jim Ryan is, afterall, the candidate for FIRST NO PLANER who gave us the analytic assertion that no plane could be seen in the video imagery he relied on, namely, that of Dick Oliver's camera when that image was seen right next to the long shot that was opaque, vague, indeterminate and obscure.

You do realize you are disagreeing, not with me, but with Our Jim Ryan, right?

You also understand that Our Jim Ryan's statement was made honestly and without the influence of the 9/11 psyop, let alone all of the post-9/11 social pressure to conform, right?

Our Jim Ryan is an honest, unfiltered, preserved account that places high on the list of candidates for First No Planer.

 

[sheeplesnshills]

Lurkers, it has been my assumption that most people have an average capacity for inductive and deductive reasoning and for drawing reasonable conclusions from information presented to them. In this instance, we are talking solely about two similar, but not identical, statements written down by one Sgt. DeVona, who witnessed the explosion at the North Tower from the vantage point of outside of WTC 5, that is to say, from right in front of the site of the explosion. He did not report seeing a widebody jetliner and he did not report hearing a widebody jetliner.

As such, he is entirely consistent with the point I have made that there is a clear and direct correlation between closeness to the actual site of the event and the report that what happened was "jist an explosion."

That is what almost all who were close say.

Now, back to the quoted part. It is very clear that Sgt. DeVona based his 11/21/01, witness report on logs from reports of telephone calls, dispatches, in-house fire station reports and radio transmissions, etc. There was no need for AJM to have missed that. It can only be assumed, therefore, that the apparent "denseness" demonstrated in the post is brought on by an emotional need to protect the ability to believe in the common storyline.



I have already addressed the desperation of seeking to support the common storyline after reliance upon eye witnesses and upon ear witnesses has failed and failed utterly, with witnesses relying on the sense of smell. In the above, I tried to help out a bit by at least giving AJM the benefit of K-9s that, after all, have a far, far superior sense of smell compared to humans, and AJM looked my gift horse in the mouth.

sheesh




AJM has a lot of nerve

http://images-eu.amazon.com/images/P/190543006X.jpg

Edited by LashL: 

Please do not "hotlink" images. See Rule 5.

 

[jammonius]

It's not as if we have to rely on either of these 2 pictures alone for information on the condition and scale of the hole:

http://thewebfairy.com/911/edna/index.htm#

As much as I deplore these people, they do have a lot of compiled data.

Hey Lurkers,

Not only are we on a new page, requiring a reminder to lurkers to do their thing, we have, in the above, a dim but recognizable hint of dawning realization in the above post.

No plane claims are, indeed, based upon "...a lot of compiled data..."

Keep on coming, Sylvan, you're getting warm...

 

[sheeplesnshills]

Precisely, sheeplesnshills. Don't waste time asking simple questions and don't expect me to participate in your little 20 question drills.

If posting up building dimensions is important to a point you want to make, then come right out and scream it!

Jammo you made the assertion that the hole was too small to have been a 767.
To make that assertion one needs to know the size of the building and the size of a 767. Since you apparently know neither, your assertion has no basis.

keep flogging


http://downloads1.vampirefreaks.com/c/cr/cru/crunchpod/albums/602.jpg

Edited by LashL: 

Please do not hotlink images. See Rule 5.

 

[Oystein]

Hey Lurkers,

Not only are we on a new page, requiring a reminder to lurkers to do their thing, we have, in the above, a dim but recognizable hint of dawning realization in the above post.

No plane claims are, indeed, based upon "...a lot of compiled data..."

Keep on coming, Sylvan, you're getting warm...

Did you open that link and read about "Edna Cintron standing in the plane shape hole"?

 

[jammonius]

Well...since Jam is AFK...and I'm a little drunk..I'll try to sit proxy for him.

Beachnut:

Your radar data is irrelevant and does not forward this discussion and is a classic example of a gotcha question...basically because I haven't come up with anything to repute it.

DMG:

Explosions sound like explosions. If you review the 4 witnesses statements from the Oliver video..it is clear they only heard the sound of pyrotechnical devices going off...either that or the the sounds of subways..I haven't decided yet.

Lapman:

I refuse to engage in futher discussion with you because you obviously don't know the meaning of a "gotcha" question. These are questions that I have no answer for..and therefore will not answer...I also don't play "20 questions" which are like "gotcha" questions...except there are more of them...please try harder.

Ah, Macgyver, I will make the following assumptions:

1--You don't get drunk very often; but,

2--When you do get drunk, your capacity for reason does get seriously compromised; and,

3--When you re-read your post when sober you will recognize the need to drink a bit less

 

[sheeplesnshills]

Cut the crap and post up a size claim if you think doing so will advance some point you, and you alone, might like to make. I characteristically, habitually, and consistently do not play in other posters' 20 questions drills as that drill is childish, stupid and unworthy of reasoned, mature discussion.

I will continue to search for the way to say the above until the simple-minded rhetoric ceases to be posted.

The only way to stop any simple minded rhetoric in this thread is for you to stop post excrement.

But no doubt you'll keep flogging away........


http://www.spirit-of-metal.com/les%20goupes/D/Dog%20Fashion%20Disco/Beating%20A%20Dead%20Horse,%20To%20Death...Again/Beating%20A%20Dead%20Horse,%20To%20Death...Again.jpg

Edited by LashL: 

Please do not "hotlink" images. See Rule 5.

 

[Oystein]

...
Our Jim Ryan is, afterall, the candidate for FIRST NO PLANER who gave us the analytic assertion that no plane could be seen in the video imagery he relied on, namely, that of Dick Oliver's camera when that image was seen right next to the long shot that was opaque, vague, indeterminate and obscure.

You do realize you are disagreeing, not with me, but with Our Jim Ryan, right?

You also understand that Our Jim Ryan's statement was made honestly and without the influence of the 9/11 psyop, let alone all of the post-9/11 social pressure to conform, right?

Our Jim Ryan is an honest, unfiltered, preserved account that places high on the list of candidates for First No Planer.

1. Suppose a 767 DID hit the tower at 450mph. Where would YOU assume to find and SEE it afterwards?
Provide reasons for your assumptions!
2. Was any of the cameras that Jim Ryan had access to in a position to see a plane, if there had been one?
3. Please kindly draw conclusions from your answers to 1. and 2. with regard to what Jim Ryan did not see.

These are only 3 questions, not 20, but I guarantee you: If you answer them honestly, or at all, you will understand something

 

[dafydd]

Ah, Macgyver, I will make the following assumptions:

1--You don't get drunk very often; but,

2--When you do get drunk, your capacity for reason does get seriously compromised; and,

3--When you re-read your post when sober you will recognize the need to drink a bit less

If you re-read your own posts you will see the need to think a bit more.We could think you under the table,

 

[Oystein]

Ah, Macgyver, I will make the following assumptions:

1--You don't get drunk very often; but,

2--When you do get drunk, your capacity for reason does get seriously compromised; and,

3--When you re-read your post when sober you will recognize the need to drink a bit less

2. is actually the reason why he did a good job at substituting you

 

[BigAl]

Would you be willing to repost the pictures for sake of comparison. I challenge your assertion the large one gives the best detail. I also challenge the assertion you can make a reasoned statement that the big one clearly shows something entered into, rather than exited from, the building.
.

What did your "hologram thingy" blob whatever do ? Take the elevator up and leave by a window?

All the claims you make are either wrong on the facts, irrelevant or incoherent. None of your claims in any way address any of the massive amount of evidence and of eyewitnesses that support the basic story of 9/11, that 19 Arab Islamists hijacked 4 757/767 jets on 9/11 and crashed two of them into the WTC towers which caused them to burn and collapse.

 

[W.D.Clinger]

Lurkers and Posters, alike, it is now very clear that jammonius wants you to think the common storyline requiring you to accept the claim a Boeing 767 hit the North Tower at close to 500mph on 9/11 has been reduced to assertions of proof based on the weak, inconclusive and tentative claims that a few people smelled jet fuel.

Fixed that by adding the blue text.

While, posters and lurkers, isn't that a .... rhymes with "rich"?

If posting up building dimensions is important to a point you want to make, then come right out and scream it!

Screaming: recommended by jammonius. Works for him.

Cut the crap and post up a size claim if you think doing so will advance some point you, and you alone, might like to make. I characteristically, habitually, and consistently do not play in other posters' 20 questions drills as that drill is childish, stupid and unworthy of reasoned, mature discussion.

I will continue to search for the way to say the above until the simple-minded rhetoric ceases to be posted.

So jammonius promises to continue in this vein until he stops.

 

[jammonius]

I'm laying in a new supply of expired equines just in case he goes back to his usual practice of hand wave, lies and repetition. I wonder if he will even manage to answer my "how wide were the WTC towers and what is the wingspan of a 767 question. Its hard to conceive how they could be construed as gotchas but then I lack his dazzling insight into the subject

Well, I must say, the new supply are all abstract horses, rather than actual depictions of real horses, so that, at least, shows some respect for our fellow sentient creatures of the equine variety.

Well done, Sheeplesnshills and others


ps

Wait a minute, stop the presses!

I posted the above apparently just as post # 610 was being posted. In it, the depiction is borderline close on to a real horse that might be said to be shown suffering.

Watch it Sheeplesnshills, even if you can't post up actual refutation, that is no excuse to get too carried away...

OK, posters, more later, I'm on a 6 hour break.

 

[sheeplesnshills]

Ah, Macgyver, I will make the following assumptions:

1--You don't get drunk very often; but,

2--When you do get drunk, your capacity for reason does get seriously compromised; and,

3--When you re-read your post when sober you will recognize the need to drink a bit less

 

[HawksFan]

And yet again you managed to dance around and never touch the questions he posed to you.

 

[sheeplesnshills]

And yet again you managed to dance around and never touch the questions he posed to you.

It appears he simply has not the intellect to be able to research even the simplest subjects. How easy it would have been to have found out the width of the towers and the plane show that the plane was the same size as the hole or not. Simple high school geometry...........

 

[I Ratant]

Hey Lurkers,

Not only are we on a new page, requiring a reminder to lurkers to do their thing, we have, in the above, a dim but recognizable hint of dawning realization in the above post.

No plane claims are, indeed, based upon "...a lot of compiled data..."

Keep on coming, Sylvan, you're getting warm...

.
The crap you posted today has the long sought-for "merit" you claimed would be the content of these posts?
Once again, you do not know what the words you use mean.