Merged Silverstein on phone with insurance company about controlled demolition

16.5 said:
Say did RedIbis EVER support his claim that Larry "made out like a bandit"?

No? He didn't even try?
Click to expand...

Did any debunker ever prove Shapiro was lying? Did any debunker ever come up with any reason why Shapiro would lie about such a thing when he is one of their own in trying to debunk? Give it up. How pathetic can you sink? Go ahead turn on him. Makes you look good. Or typical.
 
Profanz said:
Did any debunker ever prove Shapiro was lying? Did any debunker ever come up with any reason why Shapiro would lie about such a thing when he is one of their own in trying to debunk? Give it up. How pathetic can you sink? Go ahead turn on him. Makes you look good. Or typical.
Click to expand...

You mean the Shapiro-quote "Shortly before the building collapsed, several [unidentified] NYPD officers and Con-Edison workers told me that Larry Silverstein, the property developer of One World Financial Center was on the phone with his insurance carrier to see if they would authorize the controlled demolition of the building -- since its foundation was already unstable and expected to fall."

No, he probably wasn't lying. Maybe he was erring. Maybe the unidentified people who related that hearsay to Shapiro erred.

However, if the entire story is true, and Silverstein did talk with his insurer about controlled demolition - so what? You don't honestly suppose that you could talk to your insurance shortly before the building collapsed, and then make a contract with a demolition specialist, and have the demolition carried out, while every hand was needed for search and rescue, and WTC7 was wildly on fire?

Profanz, really, in your mind, what is the probability that Larry had WTC7 demolished, judgingg from that conversation? More or less than 1%? 50%? Please please do not dodge this question but give us YOUR honest assessment!

Shapiro is quite clear on the possible purpose of demolishing WTC7: To minimize damage to neighbouring buildings. Was that purpose achieved?

Shapiro is also an record (see post #2) that he was threre, and that he distinctly remembers the collapse to have been amazingly silent - specifically no explosions, as you would expect from the kind of CD that demoltions experts actually do (with explosives).

Do you take ALL of what Shapiro says into account? Does Shapiro think his statements incriminates Silverstein? Honest answer, Profanz?


RedIbis however made a strong and libellous claim ("LS made out like a bandit"), and he dodges the request to back up his libellous claim with hard facts. He very obviously has none, or else he would not accept my calling his claim "libel".
 
Profanz said:
Did any debunker ever prove Shapiro was lying? Did any debunker ever come up with any reason why Shapiro would lie about such a thing when he is one of their own in trying to debunk? Give it up. How pathetic can you sink? Go ahead turn on him. Makes you look good. Or typical.
Click to expand...

You ignoring my response does not make you look good. Employing false dichotomies is worse, truther. "turn on him." Pull yourself together truther. Here is what I wrote and you ignored

"He is ignorant and irresponsible.

People, including debunkers, make mistakes, and when necessary they get called on it.

How is that Pod thing working out for you truther?

And no one said that he made it up. He was dumb and repeated street gossip."

Any other questions, truther?
 
Profanz said:
Did any debunker ever prove Shapiro was lying? Did any debunker ever come up with any reason why Shapiro would lie about such a thing when he is one of their own in trying to debunk? Give it up. How pathetic can you sink? Go ahead turn on him. Makes you look good. Or typical.
Click to expand...

who said he was lying? so in your little land of twoof hearsay is evidence?
 
Profanz said:
... got anything Thunder? Why would Scott Shapiro make it up? He was attempting to debunk. What was the motivation to say such a thing? Because it sounded like a slip to me.

And if such a conversion did take place what would you concede? That it's just another coincidence in a whole line of coincidence? I bet you would.
Click to expand...

There is the magic word.

There were hundreds of thousands of people that were caught in the horror in NYC on 9/11/2001. Some dying. Some working in maximum overdrive to save others.
Some running as fast as they could to get as far away as they could while others were running into that hell storm to try and help any way they could.
Out of all those people it is possible at least one was screaming "Oh my God! The space aliens are attacking! The space aliens are attacking!"

So if someone did scream that and if someone heard someone screaming that would you then concede that it's very possible that aliens from outer space and not your evil gubmit is to blame?

But then again you don't care about the tragic events that unfolded on 9/11/2001 do you?

To you it's just a fun internet game to play. A way to kill a little time.

The name of your game is "Get the debunker to concede to anything no matter how trivial".

If you can actually pick up some trivial concession from a debunker you use that to score points in your game by going to the truther sites and linking your kill.

Very very sad and quite pathetic.

Ever thought about WOW, COH or maybe a nice game of chess instead?
 
any info yet about these NYPD and Con Ed workers who overheard a private conversation between Silverstein and his insurers?
 
jshapiro@ufl.edu

I tried that email address but I didn't get an answer. I'm pretty sure it's him. If anyone else has any other contact info I'll ask him straight up to give me some names. Or you can do it yourself. But he'll probably just cower in the dark now that he opened his big mouth.
 
Profanz said:
jshapiro@ufl.edu

I tried that email address but I didn't get an answer. I'm pretty sure it's him. If anyone else has any other contact info I'll ask him straight up to give me some names. Or you can do it yourself. But he'll probably just cower in the dark now that he opened his big mouth.
Click to expand...

Pathetic.
 
Oystein said:
You mean the Shapiro-quote "Shortly before the building collapsed, several [unidentified] NYPD officers and Con-Edison workers told me that Larry Silverstein, the property developer of One World Financial Center was on the phone with his insurance carrier to see if they would authorize the controlled demolition of the building -- since its foundation was already unstable and expected to fall."

No, he probably wasn't lying. Maybe he was erring. Maybe the unidentified people who related that hearsay to Shapiro erred.

However, if the entire story is true, and Silverstein did talk with his insurer about controlled demolition - so what? You don't honestly suppose that you could talk to your insurance shortly before the building collapsed, and then make a contract with a demolition specialist, and have the demolition carried out, while every hand was needed for search and rescue, and WTC7 was wildly on fire?

Profanz, really, in your mind, what is the probability that Larry had WTC7 demolished, judgingg from that conversation? More or less than 1%? 50%? Please please do not dodge this question but give us YOUR honest assessment!

Shapiro is quite clear on the possible purpose of demolishing WTC7: To minimize damage to neighbouring buildings. Was that purpose achieved?

Shapiro is also an record (see post #2) that he was threre, and that he distinctly remembers the collapse to have been amazingly silent - specifically no explosions, as you would expect from the kind of CD that demoltions experts actually do (with explosives).

Do you take ALL of what Shapiro says into account? Does Shapiro think his statements incriminates Silverstein? Honest answer, Profanz?


RedIbis however made a strong and libellous claim ("LS made out like a bandit"), and he dodges the request to back up his libellous claim with hard facts. He very obviously has none, or else he would not accept my calling his claim "libel".
Click to expand...

I just KNEW Profanz would dodge my questions and avoid honest answers, so here, Profanz, this is bumping for you!
 
Oystein said:
I just KNEW Profanz would dodge my questions and avoid honest answers, so here, Profanz, this is bumping for you!
Click to expand...

Your whole post is "maybe". Good for you and your denial. He is a debunker. Tell me why he would make such a claim in the first place. Give me break. Pathetic.


PATHETIC.
 
Profanz said:
Your whole post is "maybe". Good for you and your denial. He is a debunker. Tell me why he would make such a claim in the first place. Give me break. Pathetic.


PATHETIC.
Click to expand...

any info yet about these NYPD and Con Ed workers who overheard a private conversation between Silverstein and his insurers?

thousand of Truthers, and NONE of you guys have any info?

who releases such a story..jumps up and down like its the Holy Grail..and fails to do ANY research to see if the story holds any weight???

oh..right. A Truther.
 
Quick question....where was LS when this phone call supposedly happened ? Home ? On the street in front of 7 ? I am very curious where this call took place.
 
Crazytimes said:
Quick question....where was LS when this phone call supposedly happened ? Home ? On the street in front of 7 ? I am very curious where this call took place.
Click to expand...

i do not believe it took place.

i think this is a big fat lie.
 
Let's just end this pretense that this is supposed to be a place of genuine inquiry and discourse.
Click to expand...
here here.
this is the only reason i occasionly come here. you guys still pretend to be balanced and it constantly suprises me.

the fact you have a section entitled 'resources for debunking 9/11 conspiracy theories' indicates you have made the decision that the official theory is 100% correct at any given moment (despite the official explanation changing periodically) and is based around the assumption that the mainstream media and western establishment in general, could never, ever, ever possibly be incorrect about this event.

close the forum .. or admit you just hate anyone questioning the official story for personal reasons.
 
Last edited:
timmyg said:
here here.
this is the only reason i occasionly come here. you guys still pretend to be balanced and it constantly suprises me.

the fact you have a section entitled 'resources for debunking 9/11 conspiracy theories' indicates you have made the decision that the official theory is 100% correct at any given moment (despite the official explanation changing periodically) and is based around the assumption that the mainstream media and western establishment in general, could never, ever, ever possibly be incorrect about this event.

close the forum .. or admit you just hate anyone questioning the official story for personal reasons.
Click to expand...

Beside everything that is wrong in your post, could you post 1 (one) piece of evidence that proofs 9/11 was an inside job? Once you have done that, I'll ask Terry to close this forum.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom