Merged Continuation - 9/11 CT subforum General Discussion Thread

[sylvan8798]

Trying to create an alternative narrative with their dots is not a trivial undertaking.

It's a dotty undertaking.

When Sociopaths are pushing a shopping cart, they are easy to spot. When they wear a suit and sit behind a big desk it is a much bigger problem.

Does anything you say make sense?

 

[DeathDart]

OK each truck carrying the material from WTC had a GPS,
OK nothing bad by itself.

Where are the records of their movements?
They either had someone monitor them in real time or their positions were electronically recorded.
I doubt if there were any recordings, that they still exist.
If they do they might show a lot of trips straight from WTC to the smelter.

Also go the site where the steel was sent for smelting. Look at the ground.
The WTC site looked like the dirt is kind of distinct.
Is there a lot of WTC dirt at the smelting pickup point(s).
That would indicate that it went from the WTC site straight to the smelter.

And I still say they had a 3 week head start on the investigators.

With that much metal if the investigators had actually seen all the metal, even if they weren't able to keep it. That would still have been too much.
When you do a certain job long enough you can have a terrible memory for a lot of things, but if you saw enough metal you would start keeping an inexact but running inventory of anomalies that you were seeing. If I was hiding something, the investigators would never see any of the anomalies.

 

[DeathDart]

If you still don't have any doubts about the investigation at the WTC, you should resign from the skeptics.

 

[DeathDart]

The NIST NCSTAR is damning by ITSELF. No other evidence is necessary!

 

[TJM]

If you still don't have any doubts about the investigation at the WTC, you should resign from the skeptics.

Naw, I'm having too much fun watching your list of conspirators grow.

 

[DeathDart]

It's a dotty undertaking.


Does anything you say make sense?

Each dot represents a voice.
You should only look at that dot when you write its voice.
Do the the same with each dot, let only that dots evidence write its song.
When all the dots have their songs,
raise your baton and hear their chorus.

It is called logic, you humans might want to try it.

 

[Craig4]

Trying to create an alternative narrative with their dots is not a trivial undertaking.

Yet you treat it as such.

 

[JohnG]

Israeli scum. Dual Israeli/US citizen scum helped do 9/11.

OK each truck carrying the material from WTC had a GPS,
OK nothing bad by itself.

Where are the records of their movements?
They either had someone monitor them in real time or their positions were electronically recorded.
I doubt if there were any recordings, that they still exist.
If they do they might show a lot of trips straight from WTC to the smelter.

Also go the site where the steel was sent for smelting. Look at the ground.
The WTC site looked like the dirt is kind of distinct.
Is there a lot of WTC dirt at the smelting pickup point(s).
That would indicate that it went from the WTC site straight to the smelter.

And I still say they had a 3 week head start on the investigators.

With that much metal if the investigators had actually seen all the metal, even if they weren't able to keep it. That would still have been too much.
When you do a certain job long enough you can have a terrible memory for a lot of things, but if you saw enough metal you would start keeping an inexact but running inventory of anomalies that you were seeing. If I was hiding something, the investigators would never see any of the anomalies.

You two build a criminal case like a cargo cult* builds a landing strip.

I realize that the anonymity and distance the internet affords us can tend to bring out the opinionated, loud-mouthed dilettante in a lot of people (myself included), but I'm afraid you still have years of education and self reflection ahead of you before you can claim even the modest title of "dilettante".





*No, don't bother to look up "cargo cults" on Wikipedia, you'll only get bored after the first paragraph. Cheer up though, maybe someone made a YouTube video on the subject?

 

[DeathDart]

Ok, Look up NIST NCSTAR 1-3B in PDF
Read Pages 3 and 4
Page 3 describes what the investigators were looking for.
Exterior column panels and interior core columns from WTC 1 and WTC 2 that were exposed to fire and /or impacted by aircraft

Exterior column panels and interior core columns from WTC 1 and WTC 2 directly above and below the impact zone.

The steel was moved to Fresh Kills landfill site, which was designated as a crime scene, and then fingertip searched at that location.

If this is an accurate description of what was done.

Look at the executive summary page XXV

Where is the steel from impacted floors?

They were specifically trying to get it.

Where is that steel?

Why wasn't it saved?

 

[Bell]

Where is the steel from impacted floors?

They were specifically trying to get it.

Where is that steel?

Why wasn't it saved?

Irrelevant.

Where is the hard evidence 9/11 was an inside job?

Why isn't there any?

 

[sylvan8798]

If they do they might show a lot of trips straight from WTC to the smelter.

Also go the site where the steel was sent for smelting. Look at the ground.
The WTC site looked like the dirt is kind of distinct.
Is there a lot of WTC dirt at the smelting pickup point(s).
That would indicate that it went from the WTC site straight to the smelter.

First of all there was no "smelter". It's not even the right term.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smelting

They weren't extracting metal from its ore, they were melting down pieces of already worked steel. And did they even do that prior to sending it to china? The steel was taken to salvage yards. Then it was shipped to buyers. There is no particular reason to melt down the pieces before shipping them, because the buyer would have to REMELT them, not to mention that the energy required to do so would probably outweigh the revenue gained by the salvage yards.

Once again, you are not making any sense.

 

[Sam.I.Am]

Well you know that I'm not gonna let this one just hang there:

June 8, 1967, Israeli forces attack the USS Liberty. They kill 34 American servicemen, wounding 171 others. It will be the highest casualty rate ever inflicted on a U.S. naval vessel, with 7 out of every 10 crew members killed or injured.

USS S-26 (SS-131)
USS SHARK (SS-174)
USS GRUNION (SS-216)
USS ARGONAUT (SS-166)
USS AMBERJACK (SS-219)
USS GRAMPUS (SS-207)
USS TRITON (SS-201)
USS PICKEREL (SS-177)
USS RUNNER (SS-275)
USS R-12 (SS-89)
USS GRAYLING (SS-209)
USS POMPANO (SS-181)
USS CISCO (SS-290)
USS S-44 (SS-155)
USS DORADO (SS-248)
USS WAHOO (SS-238)
USS CORVINA (SS-226)
USS SCULPIN (SS-191)
USS CAPELIN (SS-289)
USS SCORPION (SS-278)
USS GRAYBACK (SS-208)
USS TROUT (SS-202)
USS TULIBEE (SS-284)
USS GUDGEON (SS-211)
USS HERRING (SS-233)
USS GOLET (SS-361)
USS ROBALO (SS-273)
USS FLIER (SS-250)
USS HARDER (SS-257)
USS SEAWOLF (SS-197)
USS SHARK II (SS-314)
USS TANG (SS-306)
USS ESCOLAR (SS-294)
USS ALBACORE (SS-218)
USS GROWLER (SS-215)
USS SCAMP (SS-277)
USS SWORDFISH (SS-193)
USS BARBEL (SS-316)
USS KETE (SS-369)
USS TRIGGER (SS-237)
USS SNOOK (SS-279)
USS LAGARTO (SS-371)
USS BONEFISH (SS-223)
USS BULLHEAD (SS-332)

All of these boats were lost with all hands. That's a casualty rate of 10 out of 10 men dead after they were attacked and sunk for those of us who can count.

You are full of it and have no knowledge of naval history.

 

[Christopher7]

There was no water available for fighting the fires in WTC7, because all the water that was available was needed for higher-priority operations.

You don't "know that". No one said so in any of the interviews that I know of. Y'all are just stating your opinions.

Yes, we do know that, because the fire fighters involved, in their oral histories of the event, state that the building looked unsalvageable, so they pulled the operation to concentrate on other buildings and the rescue effort.

You subject shifted from "no water available" to "the building looked unsalvageable".

Found one more:
10:06:01 10-84, Engine 271/E 6, (left Command Post at West and Vesey Streets when WTC 1 collapsed, supplied water to standpipe Siamese at Verizon Building, extinguished fires around Verizon bldg.)

That was one of the higher priorities. That building didn't look like it might fall down.

You missed the point completely.
We are talking about water availability not PRIORITIES.

 

[Christopher7]

Hey Chris, before I address you other posts, please read this and tell me what it means to you.

http://i63.photobucket.com/albums/h131/triathlete247/00000000000000000000000000000001.png

1A pg 57
"Due to the focus on rescuing people trapped in the debris field, providing aid to the injured, and the loss of water in the hydrant system, FDNY was not able to consider the possibility of fighting the fires in WTC 7 until approximately 1:00 p.m."
In other words, at about 1:00 p.m., they had the water and personnel to to fight the fires in WTC 7. At 1:00 p.m. the only fires were on floors 7 and 12.

By 1:00 p.m., all the buildings in the area had no doubt been evacuated so the argument about not going into an unoccupied building is crap. Firefighters go into unoccupied buildings to put out fires.

It was another hour and a half before they gave the order to pull back

At approximately 2:30 p.m., FDNY gave the order to forgo firefighting activity and for personnel to withdraw to a safe distance from the building.

 

[Christopher7]

Google "Serpico".

Yep, and what does this have to do with 9/11? Oh, right, nothing.

Only to someone who cannot see the obvious connection. I will explain it for you.

If a firefighter "goes against the PTB" and speaks out, they could loose their pension or worse - like Serpico.

ETA: Before you say it, I know Serpico did not lose his pension, he just got shot in the face because his back up didn't back him up.

 

[Christopher7]

You started off OK but went into deep denial. He was completely wrong. The damage he was concerned with had nothing to do with the collapse which began at the other end of the building. You know that yet you still manage to block it out and make statements like that.

Not at all Chris. There is ample evidence NOW that the damage he saw to the structure was not enough to cause its glbal collapse but AT THAT TIME he did not and was more likely worried about a partial collapse. GIVEN that he does not know for sure but that it looks very bad he keeps his men out of the structure.

He overreacted. No worries. The damage looked bad but it was not structurally significant. He said he talked to an engineer. That engineer should have known that the debris damage was not the serious enough to prevent firefighters from entering the building.

OTOH there were other fire situations which could be fought from street level such as the vehicle fires throughout the area and WTC 6.

By 1:00 p.m. they had water and personnel to fight the fire in WTC 7. See post 8202.

So you are now stating that perhaps NIST authors completely madfe up the interview or completely misrepresented or made up the points discussed in an interview?

Shyam Sunder lied about there being a 10 story gouge 1/3 the width and floor 10 to the ground in the so called "Debunking" PM article. The authors of the final report lied about the fire on floor 12 thermally expanding the floor beams under floor 13 at 5:20 p.m.

I asled you if any fire Chief has come forth to state that the decision to end operations was not represented correctly in the NIST report.

Not that I know of, but if anyone did we would never hear about it.

Have you attempted a FOIA request for the interview and who was in attendance?

People have made FoIA requests for all the information but most have been denied.

I am not on the forum as much in the summer(its SUMMER!) so perhaps you could maybe give me a page number or post number

I have lost track of where this started. What is your question?

 

[Dave Rogers]

Interfering with internal US inventories of WMD's to create a false positive in Iraq would have triggered too many alarms. They also had to find a production factory for the WMD's. Its not like you can accidentally drop a whole factory out of your pocket and say "look what we have here".

And yet, in your fantasy world, doing exactly the same thing with highly advanced and confidential military demolition equipment to bting down the Twin Towers was so obviously simple, it's not even worthy of comment. Anybody see the contradiction there?

(Inside Job View) Less than 2 dozen Americans (other than those who also carried Israeli passports) would need to know in advance of 9-11. Those who knew in advance would need be fanatical individuals, or less fanatical individuals that had a group ideology that would reinforce their determination. A few of the individuals might actually be sociopaths.

At last, though, we're getting somewhere! If you know how many Americans were involved, you must have some idea who they were and what their roles were, so you'll be able to tell us. It would be nice to see a truther do that once in a while.

Or, conversely, you'll prevaricate and say that you can't possibly know who they were or what they did, because you can't possibly know the details of the operation, you're just asking questions. In which case, your "less that 2 dozen" figure, a vital part of your argument (since you just said that the conspiracy couldn't work if there were as many as a hundred Americans on board) is pulled out of thin air.

Your call.

OK each truck carrying the material from WTC had a GPS,
OK nothing bad by itself.

Where are the records of their movements?
They either had someone monitor them in real time or their positions were electronically recorded.
I doubt if there were any recordings, that they still exist.
If they do they might show a lot of trips straight from WTC to the smelter.

OK, so we're starting to build up some of the individuals involved. How many people of your "less than 2 dozen" were needed to monitor the movements of the trucks, how many to inspect the loads for suspicious material, and how many to issue the orders to take those loads "direct to the smelter"? Because all of them had to be part of the conspiracy.

Also go the site where the steel was sent for smelting. Look at the ground.
The WTC site looked like the dirt is kind of distinct.
Is there a lot of WTC dirt at the smelting pickup point(s).
That would indicate that it went from the WTC site straight to the smelter.

I wanted to comment on this, but it's so incoherent I hardly know where to start. Clearly you have no idea where the steel was taken or where it was recycled, otherwise you'd know how absurd this line is.

Dave

 

[Mikey T]

Chris7. In all of this minutiae you are spewing about whether or not fires in building 7 could or could not be fought. What are you implying? I'm at a loss. Are you saying NIST lied? Are you saying the FDNY lied?

It was like a war zone down there after the towers collapsed, everyone one of those rescue workers were doing their best in a situation that no one had ever experienced, and possibly the worst single rescue situation since those who first arrived at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. In terms of some natural disasters there may be several that rival, but as far as a man-made destructive occurance, these were the worst.

You seem to be stuck on this fantasy of an ultra elite fireman rescue effort where everyone was in perfect sychronicity, all communication was timely and perfect, where there were no concerns of further attacks, no problems with men and equippment getting to the site in a blink of an eye, no one was in shock of what just happened, yada, yada, yada....

If you just think about the big picture instead of minute details of which fire hydrant was pumping water, and which ones weren't, your sanity may be spared a bit. If you want to continue on with this theory, do so at your own risk to your mental stability, but if you learn from the educated posts made by the gentlemen who have EXPERIENCE in fire and rescue situations, you might step back and realize how unrealistic you are asking things to be. Mean old bad NIST didn't break down the situation of where water was availible or not. Who cares. They don't get caught up in that sort of minutiae, when it's just as easy to say, there wasn't water and man power available in a timely manner to save your precious Building 7.

 

[Oystein]

...
You missed the point completely.
We are talking about water availability not PRIORITIES.

No, you are missing the point.
We are not talking about water availability
We are talking about water availability for WTC7
And that discussion does involve talking about priority.

 

[Oystein]

Only to someone who cannot see the obvious connection. I will explain it for you.

If a firefighter "goes against the PTB" and speaks out, they could loose their pension or worse - like Serpico.

ETA: Before you say it, I know Serpico did not lose his pension, he just got shot in the face because his back up didn't back him up.

D'uh.

Got proof? One example maybe? Just one?

And did that ETA admnit that there is NOT an obvious connection?