Merged Continuation - 9/11 CT subforum General Discussion Thread

[NoahFence]

3) There was no water immediately available for fighting the fires.

At 12:47 p.m. there was water available.

(insert self-debunking picture here)

* * * * *
I will get to the sprinklers and standpipes tomorrow.

Your picture at post 7238 is all the evidence you need to see you're a fool, Chris.

The statement was made that water wasn't available to fight WTC 7 - and that photo proves it. Because the water is being directed elsewhere. Think.

 

[King of the Americas]

...

KotA, the truth is that you really don't know much about all this, as you reveal every time you post. In that context, I'm almost pleased to see how strongly you support the conspiracist view of events, because it's a superb demonstration of how that view is rooted purely in ignorance, and can't be taken seriously by anyone who allows themself to become well-informed.

Dave

The truth is that I don't care enough to uncover the fact that I won't ever know everything about what happened and when, around 9/11.

I saw the leader the the free world literally stupefied for 10 minutes. In that time 'I' would have both asked a single question, and issued a single order. "Are there more planes not responding?" & "Shoot them down."

In this case, 10 minutes and an order from THE top down, could have made a difference.

You could be well informed about 9/11, but you'll never be fully informed.

The only thing I care to know, which I already do, is that for whatever reason(s), government failed to protect Americans from a foreign threat. Whether it was through conspiracy or incompetence makes little matter, to me.

Security forces, the F.B.I., the C.I.A., and even the President FAILED us, and Americans died.

End of story.

Or should we start talking now about how we were attacked because of our freedom?

 

[twinstead]

Or should we start talking now about how we were attacked because of our freedom?

We weren't attacked because of our freedom--in many ways the attacks were successful because of our freedom.

 

[Clayton Moore]

Which is, of course, even if completely correct, (a) in no sense evidence for the lie you just made up that Cheney was giving orders from Washington to Bush in Florida at the time of the attacks, and (b) utterly irrelevant to the question of whether either or both was in any way involved in a conspiracy to carry out or assist the attacks.

Dave

Which of course, as usual, was not what I said.

 

[dafydd]

At least you're admitting it was a CD.

0/10 for reading comprehension. Ask your English teacher for more lessons. I said that Chris7 saying that it was a CD was not enough. I've highlighted the important bit to make it easier for you. If it's still too hard get somebody with more suss than you to explain it. Still no full theory from you or Chris7.

 

[NoahFence]

I saw the leader the the free world literally stupefied for 10 minutes.

Two commercial airliners just crashed, on purpose, into the symbol of your countries financial might, perhaps killing 10s of thousands. Are you supposed to give the 'nothing to see here' look?

that time 'I' would have both asked a single question, and issued a single order. "Are there more planes not responding?" & "Shoot them down."

Nobody had the answers at the time. And as far as shooting them down, you would have then been responsible for shooting down AT LEAST 4 or 5 planes that were not hijacked. Live with that.

Stop your monday morning quarterbacking. It serves no purpose.

 

[Oystein]

Which of course, as usual, was not what I said.

At least you admit that your post was wildly off-topic as it had nothing whatsoever to do with any event on 9/11.

 

[twinstead]

Stop your monday morning quarterbacking. It serves no purpose.

The "If I ran the circus" arguments are probably some of the most aggravating that truthers can muster.

 

[Bell]

Because when the US government was planning the terrorist attack nobody thought of a way to make George W. Bush look like a strong leader. I guess the scriptwriter had a day off.

 

[ElMondoHummus]

Because when the US government was planning the terrorist attack nobody thought of a way to make George W. Bush look like a strong leader. I guess the scriptwriter had a day off.

My God, I know! I'm repeatedly dumbfounded by how conspiracy peddlers use the President's initial inaction and ineffectiveness as evidence that there was a plot. It's flabbergasting that cognitive dissonance does not set it and clearly shout out "You're pushing contradictory beliefs here!".

That's just mindboggling.

 

[twinstead]

Maybe the scriptwriters were on top of it and scripted him to stand up, rip his suit off exposing a Superman costume, and fly up through the roof, but GWB is just a bad actor?

 

[Dave Rogers]

Which of course, as usual, was not what I said.

Ah, playing the innocent. So, when you made a claim in a post, someone else made a post disputing that claim, and you replied to that post with a new claim, the new claim was in no sense intended to support the old one. Who, exactly, do you think you're fooling?

And why, as I've mentioned before, do truthers try so desperately to distance themselves from their own opinions?

Dave

 

[ElMondoHummus]

I don't understand why y'all are debating details of pumps and hoses and water volumes, and doing math on pressure, heights and flows.

Why?...


...
Y'all should not ask C7 for some math - that is idle claptrap and a distraction.

While you're correct about Chris's argumentative tactics, I was personally kinda hoping the discussion would continue. I never even thought about the fact that pressure loss over lengths and heights affects firefighting. I mean, I knew inside on a very broad and superficial level that there was some problem induced by long runs of hose up multifloor structures; I did, after all, see that Discovery or History channel documentary that included water delivery from the Catskills. So it's obvious even to me that there's an effect. The thing is, though, I never stopped and thought about the fact that in regards to firefighting, it must have been empirically determined a very long time ago exactly what those effects were, and how to calculate them. So for me, Tri and others calculating this all out has been educational.

Yes, I agree that it's all wasted on Chris. That's why I have him on ignore; it's useless to try to convince him of anything when he's already manufactured a conclusion and simply tries to twist evidence and arguments to fit it. But he's not the only audience here.

 

[Clayton Moore]

Because when the US government was planning the terrorist attack nobody thought of a way to make George W. Bush look like a strong leader. I guess the scriptwriter had a day off.

Inside job doesn't represent the will of the U.S government.
It represents the will of the old PNAC. The will of William Kristol and his friends.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1uT7kcAu4i8

 

[Dave Rogers]

The truth is that I don't care enough to uncover the fact that I won't ever know everything about what happened and when, around 9/11.

The truth is that you've come to this forum pretending to request information, then rejected the information you've received in reply.

Still, it's a good thing you weren't on your throne on 9/11, issuing orders to shoot down any airliner that wasn't responding to radio messages. Who knows how many more victims you would have gifted to al-Qaeda? What is required of a leader in these circumstances is not knee-jerk, knob-waving shootdown orders; it's that he take stock of the situation and respond sensibly. Bush did neither, to his lasting shame, but at least he spent eight minutes not making things worse. A better response, in fact, than the one that, after ten years to think about it, you've come up with.

Dave

 

[ElMondoHummus]

And why, as I've mentioned before, do truthers try so desperately to distance themselves from their own opinions?

Dave

My opinion: They notice how effective it is when rational opponents point out to them that they're not properly stating the base oppositional argument. Or not properly representing the pertinent facts (eg. "No plane struck WTC 7"). So they simply try to turn it around on others when they think they have the opportunity.

It's basic mimicry. It occurs on all levels of trutherdom. Remember: Jones, Harrit, et. al. tried to mimic Tillotson's group's experimental procedures without proper understanding of what they'd need to do to prove their point. On a more global level, truthers tried to mimic the forms of scientific or social inquiry with their cargo-cult-like presentations, panels, and "journals". This percolates down to individual face-to-face tactics. They must mimic, because they have no legitimate examples on their own side on how to do nearly anything. Hence, ridiculous energy expenditures on street protests and web petitions, when simple acts, such as a better-chosen spectographic run on the Jones/Harrit dust would settle a good quarter to third of the claimed issues. And a genuine study of the available ATC information, such as the radar data (like what John Farmer here did) would setting a different quarter to third. They do it because they choose other examples to follow without comprehending what actual effective tactics are.

This is a fundamental thing with them. They truly have nothing original, organic, or self-generated. Even the base paranoia is from peddlers like Alex Jones. Mimicry is simply the only thing they've got.

 

[000063]

The truth is that I don't care enough to uncover the fact that I won't ever know everything about what happened and when, around 9/11.

Yet you will readily make assertions from your lack of knowledge.

Contemptible.

I saw the leader the the free world literally stupefied for 10 minutes. In that time 'I' would have both asked a single question, and issued a single order. "Are there more planes not responding?" & "Shoot them down."

Bull. That experience is so far out of most people's normal set of experiences that any assertion about what one would do is pissing into the wind. In fact, by the time you even attained the office of the President, you would certainly be a very different person from the one you are now.

You could be well informed about 9/11, but you'll never be fully informed.

While you, as you have openly stated, don't even care enough to look for the answers for yourself, relying on what "guys" tell you.

The only thing I care to know, which I already do, is that for whatever reason(s), government failed to protect Americans from a foreign threat. Whether it was through conspiracy or incompetence makes little matter, to me.

I, personally, am not sure it was incompetence, any more than Muhammad Ali being taken down by a sucker punch would indicate he was a lousy boxer.

Security forces, the F.B.I., the C.I.A., and even the President FAILED us, and Americans died.

People died. Americans. French. Brits. Not just Americans.

Or should we start talking now about how we were attacked because of our freedom?

Standard issue truther misquote, not helped in the least by the late-night comedy crowd;

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Why_do_they_hate_us?#President_George_W._Bush

Americans are asking, why do they hate us? They hate what we see right here in this chamber -- a democratically elected government. Their leaders are self-appointed. They hate our freedoms -- our freedom of religion, our freedom of speech, our freedom to vote and assemble and disagree with each other.

In context, the quote is pretty inspiring.

Because when the US government was planning the terrorist attack nobody thought of a way to make George W. Bush look like a strong leader. I guess the scriptwriter had a day off.

He also forgot to plant WMDs in Iraq to support their bogus war, or even credible evidence linking Al Qaeda and/or the Taliban to Saddam. No Stephen J. Cannell this writer guy, that's for sure.

 

[TjW]

My opinion: They notice how effective it is when rational opponents point out to them that they're not properly stating the base oppositional argument. Or not properly representing the pertinent facts (eg. "No plane struck WTC 7"). So they simply try to turn it around on others when they think they have the opportunity.

It's basic mimicry. It occurs on all levels of trutherdom. Remember: Jones, Harrit, et. al. tried to mimic Tillotson's group's experimental procedures without proper understanding of what they'd need to do to prove their point. On a more global level, truthers tried to mimic the forms of scientific or social inquiry with their cargo-cult-like presentations, panels, and "journals". This percolates down to individual face-to-face tactics. They must mimic, because they have no legitimate examples on their own side on how to do nearly anything. Hence, ridiculous energy expenditures on street protests and web petitions, when simple acts, such as a better-chosen spectographic run on the Jones/Harrit dust would settle a good quarter to third of the claimed issues. And a genuine study of the available ATC information, such as the radar data (like what John Farmer here did) would setting a different quarter to third. They do it because they choose other examples to follow without comprehending what actual effective tactics are.

This is a fundamental thing with them. They truly have nothing original, organic, or self-generated. Even the base paranoia is from peddlers like Alex Jones. Mimicry is simply the only thing they've got.

Yes. Mimicry is one area where twoofers have gotten "better". There was a period when the one-size-fits-all reply from twoofers was "straw man".
Nowadays there seems to be a bit more variety in the way they express their idiocy.

 

[Clayton Moore]

The truth is that I don't care enough to uncover the fact that I won't ever know everything about what happened and when, around 9/11.

I saw the leader the the free world literally stupefied for 10 minutes. In that time 'I' would have both asked a single question, and issued a single order. "Are there more planes not responding?" & "Shoot them down."

In this case, 10 minutes and an order from THE top down, could have made a difference.

You could be well informed about 9/11, but you'll never be fully informed.

The only thing I care to know, which I already do, is that for whatever reason(s), government failed to protect Americans from a foreign threat. Whether it was through conspiracy or incompetence makes little matter, to me.

Security forces, the F.B.I., the C.I.A., and even the President FAILED us, and Americans died.

End of story.

Or should we start talking now about how we were attacked because of our freedom?

Great post. Americans have been steadily diminished for the past 40 years. When you review the impact of 9/11 on the average American you should see how it fits in nicely with diminishing America and most Americans.

 

[NoahFence]

Great post. Americans have be steadily diminished for the past 40 years. When you review the impact of 9/11 on the average American you should see how it fits in nicely with diminishing America and most Americans.

How would you know? You're what - 15?