We are at impasse. I also saw what was called "the pile" and I was taken in by that description.
You have never been in NYC. I doubt you have ever been in a big city, or been near a big Jet let alone on one.
I was perplexed that a long ladder was extended above it, pointed downward so as to conduct the dousing (of the effects of DEW) that went on day-in-and-day-out for several years (you read that correctly). In any event, one had to look down in order to see anything.
That photo is way off to the side of the pile and perspective makes the engine look larger and higher relative to whats behind it. Smoke also obscures the view. What chemical reaction or other reaction could the mythical DEW cause that would cause a pile of debris to stay hot for years that would not be simply be, gasp, a smouldering fire? What technology was this DEW now that you bring it up? Can you point us to the basic science behind it?
Here is a photo that shows the extended ladder with hose pointing DOWNWARD on 9/11 itself. That is both characteristic and symbolic that the pile had no height to it at all.
Characteristic and symbolic???? What grade level are you?
I know from experience that there is an emotional attachment to finding height at GZ where none exists. People argued 'til they were blue in the face that flat photos showed height; that missing height was accounted for by unseen and unproven underground collections, despite the fact the subbasements were all INTACT and largely undamaged and had no meaningful debris in them.
I saw it! there are hundreds of photos of it. The sub-basements were intact??? please show us how you know that??
When that LIDAR data proved, by its own scaling that almost all of GZ was <2 storys, there was a momentary shock of recognition amongst some posters, as I recall the GZ thread, but then denial and rationalization seemed to reginerate themselves. That, perhaps, was the most interesting development I observed in that thread.
Almost all.....ROTFLOL apart from two larger piles.....the remains of the two towers..........
Your claim you are being called a "liar" is, ironically, perhaps, incorrect, to put it no more harshly than that, at least not by me.
I saw the piles, they were not close to flat. You say they were....that is calling me a liar. I was there, you were not.
I don't know why people here think disagreement and the basing of disagreement on documentation, photographic, testimonial and otherwise, result in claims of "liar".
Because I SAW it. It was no in some blurry picture open to interpretation.
I saw it, you did not. If you challange what I say I saw you are calling me a liar.
Let me be clear I am not now and characteristically have not called anyone a liar. Sure, there may be some post here or there that may be interpreted that way, so, I won't say I've never done that; but, I will here say that I characteristically do not find it necessary to call people "liar." Disagreement with what someone posts is not the same as calling them a liar, imho. Furthermore, misinterpretation around here is rampant. People read into posts what they want to read into them, just as the eye sees what it wants to see.
You are lying again. I have made this point to you before. I saw it, you did not. The only misrepresentation around here is by you.
There are people who appear to be walking, talking "lie detectors" ever on the lookout for something to which they can attach that word. Posters, by and large, do not realize in the least that what they post says something about them and nothing whatever about any other poster. That is a basic, elementary fact; yet, few seem to know it; or, if they do, to realize the signficance of it.
Well its easy to point out your lies because they are so imcompetant. Do you want us to let you say whatever you please unchallenged?. You have been caught lying, cherry picking, and manipulating evidence multiple times.
9/11, and the attachment to the common storyline, have a strong emotional base. People do not like having to confront the possibility that their "belief" in the common storyline might be misplaced.
Why would we when there is zero evidence that it is??? How about you confronting the fact that your version is complete unprovable nonsense?
What I am doing is almost entirely centered in showing information, asking for people to post their experience, and calling attention to the plain fact that 9/11 was never properly investigated nor was a determination of what actually happened ever made in or by any sort of budgeted, staffed and duly authorized investigatory agency that the public could rely on, and point to as being reliable and accurate. Never.
People keep doing that and yet you either wave it away or twist it out of all recognition.
The entire 9/11 investigatory budget, such as it was, was only a fraction of what was spent on investigating what Bill and what Monica did to, for, with and about each other. Do you know what I am referring to?
Please provide proof for this assertion...........
Meanwhile, the financial sources for what happened on 9/11 have not ever been determined, let alone who did it. Only recently it has been disclosed, just as a reminder of what we knew anyway, that the 9/11 Commission was "told" not to probe too deeply--"the specter of NATIONAL SECURITY was invoked to keep the Commission at bay.
Rubbish, Osama bankrolled the 19 hijackers. Oasama got the money from many sources, some of which we needed the co-operation of to fight the war. Its called "Realpolitik". Grow up.
Please know that I am not calling you a liar. But, the picture posted above, showing the hose pointing downward, is also consistent with what I saw. GZ was flat.
