Ed All 43 videos "Second Hit"" [Explosion]at WTC 2: Plane or No Plane?

[fitzgibbon]

 

[tuc0]

You are disgusting jam. Get medical help. Seriously. The only thing you've proven in this entire thread is your need for psychoanalysis and medication.

Don't be so hard on him. I like his posting style (all the dishonesty, rationalizations an cognitive dissonance coupled with his constant accusing that others are doing exactly that is, to me, very funny).

When reading any post by jammonius I get this mental image of a well dressed, seemingly polite and sane person that leans over to me in a bar and says, in a rational and grammaticaly correct way: "Just because there's a hotel in my foot doesn't make me a boogale moogale."

I suppose that can get old rather quickly if you do engage him and hope for a rational discussion. But from the sidelines it's pretty entertaining.

 

[Tinfoil Hater]

No, I will not stay away from the families of 9/11 victims. I here renew my call to lurkers to specifically include families of 9/11 victims. This is serious. We need to dialogue.

If you do choose to stalk 9/11 families, I hope they call the police.

 

[Oystein]

In the case of Zacharias Moussaoui, the exact answer is that the so-called evidence was allowed in by stipulation with Moussaoui on March 9, 2006 at 9:30AM, to be more or less exact.

It was done in the following manner:

" MR. SPENCER: They all have the -- they are all
2 Government Exhibit FO-5521.1, and they will range from .10, they
3 go all the way up to .70. But I am not going to go into all of
4 those, Your Honor. I am going to take a look at eight of those
5 only.
6 THE COURT: But are those the only ones that are going
7 to go into evidence to the jury?
8 MR. SPENCER: No, there are other ones that have gone in
9 by stipulation, Your Honor.
10 THE COURT: But we are going to look at just eight right
11 now?
12 MR. SPENCER: Correct.
13 MR. MAC MAHON: That's correct, Your Honor. We have
14 stipulated to the authenticity and admissibility of all those
15 documents."

Source: http://cryptome.quintessenz.at/mirror/usa-v-zm-030906-01.htm

If you have any questions, or find anything difficult to understand, let me know.

all the best

How about

http://cryptome.quintessenz.at/mirror/usa-v-zm-030606-02.htm

...
TRANSCRIPT OF JURY TRIAL
BEFORE THE HONORABLE LEONIE M. BRINKEMA
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
VOLUME I-A
APPEARANCES:
FOR THE GOVERNMENT: ROBERT A. SPENCER, AUSA
DAVID J. NOVAK, AUSA
DAVID RASKIN, AUSA
United States Attorney's Office
2100 Jamieson Avenue
Alexandria, VA 22314

FOR THE DEFENDANT: GERALD THOMAS ZERKIN
KENNETH P. TROCCOLI
Assistant Federal Public Defenders
Office of the Federal Public
Defender
1650 King Street
Alexandria, VA 22314
...
78
1 MR. SPENCER:
...
25 Your Honor, I now will offer for admission Government
84
1 Exhibit ST01, which is a large stipulation entered between defense
2 counsel, defendant, and the United States. I believe it's
3 stipulated, Your Honor. We're just going to enter it into the
4 record. I would like to read attachments A through F, which list
5 the number of victims at each site.
6 MR. MAC MAHON: Your Honor, if I may, with respect to
7 the stipulation, I'm not sure that we had understood that it was
8 going to be admitted along these ways. We weren't going to read
9 the names of the victims in this phase of the case. We stipulated
10 that the deaths occurred. There's no question about that.
11 MR. SPENCER: I'm not trying to read the names, Your
12 Honor. I want to read the number at each of the various
13 locations.
14 THE COURT: Just the number --
15 MR. SPENCER: Correct.
16 THE COURT: -- at each location?
17 MR. SPENCER: Yeah.
18 THE COURT: All right, I'll permit that.
19 MR. SPENCER: Thank you, Your Honor. From Flight 11, 87
20 victims; from United Flight 175, 60 victims; at the World Trade
21 Center, 2,601 victims; from American Airlines Flight 77, 59
22 victims; at the Pentagon, 125 victims; and from United Airlines
23 Flight 93, 40 victims.
24 THE COURT: All right.
25 MR. SPENCER: Has ST-1 been admitted into evidence, Your


85
1 Honor?
2 THE COURT: Is there an objection to it going in as a
3 package?
4 MR. ZERKIN: The entire stipulation, Your Honor, there
5 are stipulations that we have made as to certain matters being
6 authentic, for example, that we have not agreed to relevance, so I
7 don't think the entire thing can go in.
8 THE COURT: All right. Well, at this point, since
9 there's an objection, what I'm going to do is not admit it at this
10 point. Mr. Spencer, if there are particular stipulations within
11 it that you need in terms of questioning the next -- your first
12 witness, you'll need to identify the stipulation by number and
13 then we'll see whether there's going to be a problem or not.
14 MR. SPENCER: Your Honor, it was our understanding that
15 this had been stipulated to. I'm not quite sure I understand what
16 the objection is.
17 THE COURT: Well, can't we move on with the witness?
18 MR. SPENCER: Very well.
19 THE COURT: And then we will address that afterwards.
20 Are you ready to call your first witness?
21 MR. SPENCER: We are, Your Honor.

...

THE COURT: All right. Well, then let's, so we can
24 finish things up tonight in an orderly fashion, and these exhibit
25 numbers are going to drive us crazy. No old-fashioned one, two,


135
1 three, four, and five. We'll do it, but it's tough. Hold on one
2 second.
3 All right. So ST-01, there is no objection to that; is
4 that correct? That is the first package of stipulations.
5 MR. TROCCOLI: That is correct, Your Honor.
6 THE COURT: All right. So that is now in evidence.
7 (Government's Exhibit No. ST-01 was received in
8 evidence.)

So evidence was entered into court and accepted by all parties that lists the numbers of crash victims for four flights.

If you have any questions, or find anything difficult to understand, let me know.

 

[jammonius]

Chief Ganci, Candidate for FIRST NO PLANER

I here offer an ode to Chief Ganci, a person who tragically died on 9/11/01 while on duty dealing with the destruction of the WTC complex:

I have only just realized the irony of his statement as quoted above and repeated here:

"...He was like no no no no, we have another explosion..."

That statement of what Chief Ganci saw is directly contrary to the teevee declaration that almost certainly informs the way so many people continue doggedly to hold onto the belief planes crashed into the Twin Towers on 9/11, namely:

"...there's another one..."

Chief Ganci got it right. There was another one, alright. There was ANOTHER EXPLOSION just like the late, great Chief said.

I here reiterate my condolences to his family. Chief Ganci is a Great American to whom we all owe a debt of gratitude. In time, the greatness of Chief Ganci will be realized and become manifest.

 

[The Platypus]

Time to give up folks,this is a hard case madman,nothing can be done to help him.

I agree.

 

[jammonius]

Hey Lurkers and Victims' Family Members,

Oystein relies on Zacharias Moussaoui's stipulation, meaning Moussaoui's signature on a document for purposes of proving what happened on 9/11; and, if I am interpreting his post correctly, Oystein is proud of it.

Apparently Oystein cannot do any better.

For the record of the thread, here is the confirmation that Oystein relies on Moussaoui for purposes of proving what happened on 9/11:

Oystein's source.

 

[EventHorizon]

I here offer an ode to Chief Ganci, a person who tragically died on 9/11/01 while on duty dealing with the destruction of the WTC complex:

[qimg]http://i1008.photobucket.com/albums/af205/jfibonacci/all43posting/th_0439443865_xlg.jpg?t=1279990153[/qimg]

I have only just realized the irony of his statement as quoted above and repeated here:

"...He was like no no no no, we have another explosion..."

That statement of what Chief Ganci saw is directly contrary to the teevee declaration that almost certainly informs the way so many people continue doggedly to hold onto the belief planes crashed into the Twin Towers on 9/11, namely:

"...there's another one..."

Chief Ganci got it right. There was another one, alright. There was ANOTHER EXPLOSION just like the late, great Chief said.

I here reiterate my condolences to his family. Chief Ganci is a Great American to whom we all owe a debt of gratitude. In time, the greatness of Chief Ganci will be realized and become manifest.

What the hell are you talking about. Nothing here suggests there was no plane.

 

[Oystein]

Let me double check for accuracy, Compus. Surely you are not posting the above as proof of a plane crash, are you?

If you are, then you are engaging in blatant misuse of the memory of a small person, an infant, tender of age, who is apparently missing and presumed to be no longer among the living.

Let me double check for accuracy, jammonius: Surely you are not maling the claim that Christine Hanson did NOT die in a plane crash? You seem to accept that she has been missing since that day. Her grandparents presumably knew well where Christine was supposed to be and where she was supposed to go.

Let me double check further for accuracy, jammonius: Do you claim that Christine's father was NOT on the phone with her grandparents while on a plane (that is a yes/no question)? Or do you suppose he and his family were on the phone while airborne on a plane, but that plane did not crash (that is a yes/no question)? If so, pray tell us, jammonius: You surely have some idea about why Christine and her family are missing ever since - what is it (a one liner will suffice for the moment, no proof required as yet)?

And while you are at it:
What happened to Ed felt?
What happened to Betty Ong?

Doing what you have done lends credence to the claim I have repeatedly made that belief in the common storyline of 9/11 is connected to emotion and to emotional appeals....

Emotion is what you seem to be lacking here, jammonius.

Please see a doctor and seek help.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Hey Lurkers and Victims' Family Members,

Oystein relies on Zacharias Moussaoui's stipulation, meaning his signature on a document for purposes of proving what happened on 9/11; and, if I am interpreting his post correctly, Oystein is proud of it.

Apparently Oystein cannot do any better.

No he relies on evidence entered into court and accepted by all parties that lists the numbers of crash victims for four flights.


What more do you want if you won't allow evidence entered and accepted by a court?

 

[JohnG]

Hey debunkers,

Do any of the debunker websites contain video, blurry or otherwise, of Ed Felt boarding Flight 93? If so, I would be grateful for that link; and so might BigAl.

I suspect that you are being disingenuous (to put it kindly) in your request in that even if such a video was presented to you, you'd dismiss it on one or more of the following ways:

It is too blurry to determine if it is Ed Felt or not
It could be someone else disguised as Ed Felt
It could be a CGI recreation of Ed Felt and the airport
It might be a holographic image of Ed Felt (alas, this is something that you might really seriously consider)

You would further question the provenance and chain of custody of the video.

Others here have asked this but since you haven't answered it, I'll ask, too; assuming planes really did crash into the towers, what evidence would it take to convince you of this? Once you pull in scifi technology, mind control and millions of apparently corrupt or confused people is it even possible at this point to convince you? Haven't you arrived at a point where it is possible to dismiss any evidence that does not support your own theories?

I think it's quite simple, really; you have an emotional need to doubt almost all* aspects so called "official story". If the "official story" says planes were involved, then to you it naturally follows that planes definitely were not involved. If it is claimed that 19 foreign hijackers perpetrated the crime, then to you it was someone, anyone other than these 19 foreign hijackers. Unfortunately, this tactic forces you to cobble together counter theories (e.g., holographic planes) that you have no evidence for. You are irrationally/unjustifiably skeptical of aspects of the "official story" and yet all it takes to convince you that holograms were involved is some random website??

Your counter-theory regarding 9/11 is no theory at all. It is the fever-dream of a credulous teenage boy who has seen too many conspiracy thrillers when he should have been doing his homework.






* If you could find reason to dispute the date and locations of the attacks, you'd do that, too.

 

[TJM]

What the hell are you talking about. Nothing here suggests there was no plane.

That's our jammonius. He tends to use videos of planes crashing into buildings and the statements of people who saw the planes with their own eyes...

...to assert there were no planes.

He's going to be a remarkable case study one day, I hope I'm mentioned somewhere in it.

 

[Oystein]

Captain Swoop,

As to what you have or haven't seen, permit me to suggest you take your blinders off and review the thread. My claims are consistently backed by actual evidence. See, for instance, witness Scott Holowach.

Did you see that; or, did you miss it?

Hint: Look for the EXPLOSION quote. Let me know if you can't find it.

Was Scott Holowach's statement accepted as evidence by a court of law?
Was Scott Holowach's statement published by himself?
Can you rule out with certainty that Scott Holowach is a fraud?

If you answer "no" to all 3, I suggest you abide by your own standards and throw out Scott Holowach from your list of witnesses.



However, the claim that flights 11, 175, 77 and 93 crashed on 9/11 with passengers aboard has been accepted by a court of law as evidence. The names of passenger have been published by those who know best who would have flown on the planes: The air carriers. These lists contain, among others, the name of Ed Felt, Betty Ong and Christine Hanson.

So it is a matter of authenticated and authoritative public record that four planes crashed that day, with these three human being aboard.
You deny that fact.

You must therefore present an alternative explanation to the following facts:
- Ed Felt went missing after boarding flight 93, and making a phone call from there. Where is he?
- Betty Ong went missing after assigning herself to flight 11, boarding it, and making recorded phone calls from there. Where is she?
- Christine Hanson and her parents were last known to have been aboard flight 175 from whence they called her grandparents. Christine has been missing ever since. Where is she?

 

[Myriad]

Greetings Myriad,

Turn about is fair play, to be sure. Aside from that, I am not sure how or in what manner your post advances the search for clarity here. Perhaps you could elaborate if you would not mind doing so.

My post demonstrates the impossibility of advancing any search for clarity or any other form of discourse here. It does so by demonstrating that the philosophical principles upon which you're basing your claims are so completely invalid that you cannot even adhere to them yourself.

This is valuable knowledge. It serves to warn others that they are wasting their time, and to warn you that you will make no progress in convincing anyone else of your claims, unless and until you replace your feckless and essentially solipsistic methodologies with sounder more productive ones. If your failure to do so impedes achievement of clear answers that is entirely your problem.

Respectfully,
Myriad

 

[Oystein]

Hey Lurkers and Victims' Family Members,

Oystein relies on Zacharias Moussaoui's stipulation, meaning Moussaoui's signature on a document for purposes of proving what happened on 9/11; and, if I am interpreting his post correctly, Oystein is proud of it.
...

It has nothing to do with pride, jammonius. We all sure hope that you are not proud of a single word you ever wrote in this forum.

You have yourself denied the validity of quotes, pictures and videos presented to you by us, using the standard that they would not be admissible in a court of loaw.

Now that we DO have data that was admitted by a court of law, you ridicule the standard you yourself established.

That data coincides with the data published by those who always must know best which people flew on commercial planes and which did not: The airline companies.

These two lines of authentication beat everything you have ever presented in this forum.

If you want to ridicule original publications and accepted court evidence, you better leave the eintire forum at once, for nothing ever posted here will meet your own standards, including everything you will ever write.


But before you go, we'd really like you to make a complete fool of yourself by finally answering the damned questions that are inseperable from your theory of "no planes", namly:

- Where is Ed felt, if no plane crashed?
- Where is Betty Ong, if no plane crashed?
- Where is Christine Hansen, if no plane crashed?

 

[332nd]

That's our jammonius. He tends to use videos of planes crashing into buildings and the statements of people who saw the planes with their own eyes...

...to assert there were no planes.

He's going to be a remarkable case study one day, I hope I'm mentioned somewhere in it.

He's already slated for a "spot the logical fallacy" exam next semester.

 

[Tinfoil Hater]

My post demonstrates the impossibility of advancing any search for clarity or any other form of discourse here. It does so by demonstrating that the philosophical principles upon which you're basing your claims are so completely invalid that you cannot even adhere to them yourself.

This is valuable knowledge. It serves to warn others that they are wasting their time, and to warn you that you will make no progress in convincing anyone else of your claims, unless and until you replace your feckless and essentially solipsistic methodologies with sounder more productive ones. If your failure to do so impedes achievement of clear answers that is entirely your problem.

Respectfully,
Myriad

Jam's lack of logic when framing his arguments is a common thing within the Truther mindest- Their entire world view is built on a foundation of sand, so reaching them is not possible....

 

[Andy_Ross]

One thing about the planes? If it was an explosion in the towers why bother with the planes as a cover?
Wouldn't it be easier to just frame someone up with planting bombs or thermite or whatever in the towers?
It would be far more inline with past terrorist attacks around the world than the planes?

 

[DGM]

One thing about the planes? If it was an explosion in the towers why bother with the planes as a cover?
Wouldn't it be easier to just frame someone up with planting bombs or thermite or whatever in the towers?
It would be far more inline with past terrorist attacks around the world than the planes?

I don't know why you bother asking. Your asking this in a thread where the starter claims a plane crash would not sound like (or would be described as) an explosion. It's that simple.

 

[BigAl]

BigAl,

You are being disengenuous in the extreme here. You are changing the subject on virtually the same page as your original claim is found as posted by you:

BigAl, either you are going to post up links to your claims or you are not. Posting a link to the discredited 9/11 commission report is, by definition, a failure to post up a link to the quoted claims that you made.

Furthermore, the 9/11 Commission Report has been almost totally discredited and is not taken seriously as it is fatally flawed, false, stupid and useless.

There are no flaws or shortcomings in the 9/11 Commission report that if fixed would change the basic conclusion, that 19 Arab Islamists hijacked 4 planes and crashed them into three buildings and a cornfield, killing all aboard including my work-mate, Ed Felt.


What happened to my work-mate, Ed Felt, who was last seen boarding Flight 93, who's name is on the Flight 93 manifest and who made a call from the plane while it was over Western PA describing the hijacking and who's DNA was recovered along with the DNA of everyone else listed on the boarding manifest and with essentially the entire plane, Flight 93?