Adventures with AE911truth

[T.A.M.]

So do we have you on record, as a member of Architects and Engineers for Truth, that your organization feels the FDNY were willingly participating in the cover up of the WTC7 Collapse??

TAM

 

[Gravy]

Why don't yopu explain a single shred of evidence or suggest a credible motive for Osama bin Laden attacking the USA.

Why not read, listen to, and watch bin Laden and al Qaeda's explanations?

 

[Totovader]

"Doug, don't pretend to be inquisitive when you absolutely refuse to accept the answers that don't confirm your predetermined conclusion.

That's not curiosity- it's not skepticism- it's called being wrong. Notice how you haven't been able to support a single thing you've said- and in fact back out when the evidence is requested? That's not the sign of someone who's done the research due to curiosity."

Why don't yopu explain a single shred of evidence or suggest a credible motive for Osama bin Laden attacking the USA. the "he hates our freedom" is stupid and the "muslims hate our freedom" is even dumber because they come over here in large numbers and assimilate.

Everything I have said is backed up in easily accessable fact. I'm not doing your homework for you. There is nothing I have said that isn't easily found with a google search.

Pick one thing I have said, anything. Lets see how easy it is to learn about and to verify.

Doug, there's a thing called the quote button.

Learn to use it.

As for motive from Osama... I can't tell if you're serious or joking.

Either way- Osama has given his motive in several videos.

Pick one thing you have said? That's not easy, Doug- but it does show that you're unwilling to actually support what you're saying. You spew tons of filth and then expect to compromise with allowing a single statement to be verified?

No- I'm not biting. You verify everything you have said or you're being dishonest. You've already tarnished that good name of your organization- let's see if you can at least clean it up a bit.

Pointing to Google as your source is not sufficient, Doug. Surely, you understand that.

 

[T.A.M.]

"Doug, don't pretend to be inquisitive when you absolutely refuse to accept the answers that don't confirm your predetermined conclusion.

That's not curiosity- it's not skepticism- it's called being wrong. Notice how you haven't been able to support a single thing you've said- and in fact back out when the evidence is requested? That's not the sign of someone who's done the research due to curiosity."

Why don't yopu explain a single shred of evidence or suggest a credible motive for Osama bin Laden attacking the USA. the "he hates our freedom" is stupid and the "muslims hate our freedom" is even dumber because they come over here in large numbers and assimilate.

Everything I have said is backed up in easily accessable fact. I'm not doing your homework for you. There is nothing I have said that isn't easily found with a google search.

Pick one thing I have said, anything. Lets see how easy it is to learn about and to verify.

And I thought Malcolm Kirkman was battling with 5 year old info...man oh man.

The bolded text nearly made me spit out my morning coffee.

Where are all the descent truthers gone...lol

TAM

 

[Gravy]

So do we have you on record, as a member of Architects and Engineers for Truth, that your organization feels the FDNY were willingly participating in the cover up of the WTC7 Collapse??

TAM

He says he doesn't speak for them.

 

[Mancman]

Why don't yopu explain a single shred of evidence or suggest a credible motive for Osama bin Laden attacking the USA. the "he hates our freedom" is stupid and the "muslims hate our freedom" is even dumber because they come over here in large numbers and assimilate.

Everything I have said is backed up in easily accessable fact. I'm not doing your homework for you. There is nothing I have said that isn't easily found with a google search.

Pick one thing I have said, anything. Lets see how easy it is to learn about and to verify.

You talk as if the maniacal, muderous, insane Osama Bin Laden represents all muslims. Obviously he does not. He is part of a radical extremist movement.

Why don't you read his 1996 and 1998 fatwas to find out his motives:
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/terrorism/international/fatwa_1996.html
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/terrorism/international/fatwa_1998.html

Paragraphs such as the following illustrate them:

The ruling to kill the Americans and their allies -- civilians and military -- is an individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in any country in which it is possible to do it, in order to liberate the al-Aqsa Mosque and the holy mosque [Mecca] from their grip, and in order for their armies to move out of all the lands of Islam, defeated and unable to threaten any Muslim.

 

[Mashuna]

He says he doesn't speak for them.

True. However, as he also says things like:

Alex Jones is not a conspiracy theorist either. He also works from fact.

How much reliance can you put on what he says .

From reading the quote above again, I'm not sure what the most ridiculous part is. I'm leaning toward the word also.

 

[T.A.M.]

Gravy:

Thanks for that...easy to miss that in a thread.

Ok, so it is merely HIS opinion, that the FDNY was in on it...I have run accross some low truthers, but blaming the FDNY really sets a new low...

TAM

 

[Totovader]

Gravy:

Thanks for that...easy to miss that in a thread.

Ok, so it is merely HIS opinion, that the FDNY was in on it...I have run accross some low truthers, but blaming the FDNY really sets a new low...

TAM

Of course, but let's not forget he said this:

Everything I have said is backed up in easily accessable fact.

[sic]

So, either he's lying- or he believes that his associates are idiots.

It's sort of a catch-22, his associates either have to believe what he believes- which is that the FDNY was in on it, and they are murderers- or he has to believe that his associates are in on it, and they are murderers.

Can't have it both ways. Maybe his friends just haven't "seen the light"- but I'd like to see him try and explain his justification for calling the FDNY murderers to his group.

 

[T.A.M.]

I agree, if everything he says is truth, backed up by facts, than everyone who does not believe what he says is in denial, and everyone who does believe what he says, believes the FDNY is in on it.

So the rest of your colleagues at the Architects and Engineers for truth, do they believe these facts that back up all you are saying? If they do, than the entire organization must believe the FDNY is in on it.

TAM

 

[Furcifer]

Is the eagle's head pointing to the left or the right...Thats important ya know

Oh crap, you guys could have spoke up sooner. Do you have any idea how hard it was to stitch a roasted bald eagle? I now know why Betsy Ross went with stars and stripes )).

 

[SpitfireIX]

Why don't yopu explain a single shred of evidence or suggest a credible motive for Osama bin Laden attacking the USA. the "he hates our freedom" is stupid and the "muslims hate our freedom" is even dumber because they come over here in large numbers and assimilate.

This is an absurd straw-man caricature of bin Laden's motives. His principal goals are ending US support for Israel and getting the US completely out of Saudi Arabia, location of Islam's holiest shrine.

From a CNN.com article:

Some in the Arab world have disputed bin Laden's role in the September 11 strikes. That said, he has voiced his contempt for the United States on several occasions, declaring a holy war "against the United States government because it is unjust, criminal and tyrannical."

Everything I have said is backed up in easily accessable fact. I'm not doing your homework for you. There is nothing I have said that isn't easily found with a google search.

I seem to be unable to find anything about neocons' plans to legalize sex slavery and the crushing of little boys' testicles--could you please provide links?

Further, you ought to be providing evidence for your claims not for our benefit, but for the benefit of the unconvinced who will eventually read this thread. That's why we provide evidence and refutation of your outrageous assertions; not because we expect to convince you, which is obviously a lost cause. You should take a page from our playbook (that's a colloquialism from American football, for those unfamiliar).

Pick one thing I have said, anything. Lets see how easy it is to learn about and to verify.

Le'ts look at your contention that Kevin Ryan was fired for expressing his opinion on the September 11 attacks. This statement is at best a half-truth. What he was fired for was expressing his opinion a) on a subject that had nothing to do with his expertise or work for UL, b) to a UL client, c) in an email from his UL account, d) including his job title in the signature block, e) and copying the email to an outside organization. See here and here.

In short, he gave the impression that he was speaking for UL. The company was perfectly justified in firing him for that.

 

[~enigma~]

"Show me an official lie about 9/11. Please, so far not one has come up."

Many of the supposed hijackers that crashed the planes into the towers have shown up alive. This has been reported by multiple mainstream sources. I'm not going to give you a link because if you were interested in truth you would know this.

Or, how about the towers collapsing from fire when its obvious from the video that towers 1 & 2 were blown up & wtc7 was a perfectly executed conventional controlled demolition (textbook example). You can see pieces being ejected outward and upward during towers 1 & 2 collapse. Fire doesn't do that.

How about the gov saying that no one ever considered someone flying planes into the wtc's when their own internal docs, publiucations and memos prove otherwise. Plus it WAS ON TV - The Lone Gunman.

So theres a few lies just off the top of my head.

The FBI tapes of the wtc '93 bombing prove FBI involvement in both planning and execution of that bombing - again on mainstream but before the big corporate conglomeration of the media that was necessary to bring the USA and the world under fascists dictatorship control.

Maybe we will meet up at one of the detention centers that have been built (also on mainstream).

Perhaps you will wake up when the cops start grabbing the cute kids off the street and using them for the international sex slave trade - corporate profits for Haliburton & Bechtel. (also on mainstream)

Maybe you should just stick your head back in the sand.

What we have here is a full blown case of woo brain eating disease. Looks terminal in this case.

 

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

This is an absurd straw-man caricature of bin Laden's motives. His principal goals are ending US support for Israel and getting the US completely out of Saudi Arabia, location of Islam's holiest shrine.

From a CNN.com article:







I seem to be unable to find anything about neocons' plans to legalize sex slavery and the crushing of little boys' testicles--could you please provide links?

Further, you ought to be providing evidence for your claims not for our benefit, but for the benefit of the unconvinced who will eventually read this thread. That's why we provide evidence and refutation of your outrageous assertions; not because we expect to convince you, which is obviously a lost cause. You should take a page from our playbook (that's a colloquialism from American football, for those unfamiliar).




Le'ts look at your contention that Kevin Ryan was fired for expressing his opinion on the September 11 attacks. This statement is at best a half-truth. What he was fired for was expressing his opinion a) on a subject that had nothing to do with his expertise or work for UL, b) to a UL client, c) in an email from his UL account, d) including his job title in the signature block, e) and copying the email to an outside organization. See here and here.

In short, he gave the impression that he was speaking for UL. The company was perfectly justified in firing him for that.

RE Kevin Ryan:

""UL does not certify structural steel, such as the beams, columns and trusses used in World Trade Center," said Paul M. Baker, the company's spokesman.
Ryan was fired, Baker said, because he "expressed his own opinions as though they were institutional opinions and beliefs of UL."

"The contents of the argument itself are spurious at best, and frankly, they're just wrong," Baker said.

" http://www.mindfully.org/Reform/2004/Kevin-R-Ryan22nov04.htm

"Merely being affiliated with a company such as UL does not make one immune to becoming a conspiracy theorist. In any event, Ryan was not directly employed by UL; he was an employee of Environmental Health Laboratories, which is not, as he claimed, a division of UL, but merely affiliated with UL (as many companies are). UL released a public statement saying that they do not certify the steel materials for buildings, and that Ryan was fired for making his absurd and inaccurate comments. No credence should be given to anything Ryan said in his letter. "
http://www.skepticwiki.org/wiki/index.php/...up#The_UL_Claim

"Kevin Ryan is not an “expert” in the matters about which he spoke. Kevin Ryan is merely a “chemist” who was employed to study “water” at a division of Underwriter's Laboratories. [This and other easily verified facts ought to be mentioned in any subsequent articles about “loose change”]

Kevin Ryan committed deception and was justifiably fired. Kevin Ryan falsely asserted:
“We know that the steel components were certified to ASTM E119. The time temperature curves for this standard require the samples to be exposed to temperatures around 2000F for several hours. And as we all agree, the steel applied met those specifications.”

Apparently, because it did not suit his DECEPTIVE PURPOSES, Dylan Avery did not bother to look up what the ASTM E119 standard actually is. ASTM E119 does NOT test “steel” nor “steel components” per se as Mr. Ryan had implied. Rather, ASTM E119 time-temperature tests evaluate whole building assemblies that include fire-proofing or fire-resistance:

“ASTM E119, Standard Test Method for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials, is used to determine the fire resistance of a complete assembly. For example, a wall system fire rating is measured by constructing a 10 foot by 10 foot section of a total wall system: framing, cavity insulation, sheathing, siding, gypsum wall board, etc. The wall section is installed vertically on a gas furnace, and the wall is exposed to a standard temperature curve for the time period for which a rating is desired, i.e., one, two, three, or four hours. Failure points during time of fire exposure are:

“• Flame penetration through the wall section;
“• An unacceptable temperature increase on the unexposed side of the assembly;
“• Structural failure or collapse of the assembly.

“Therefore, a one hour fire resistance rating is taken to mean that a structure incorporating the tested wall construction will not collapse, nor transmit flame or a high temperature, while supporting a design load, for at least one hour after a fully developed building fire.” http://www.pima.org/technical_bulletins/tbull105.html

The chemical and physical or thermal properties of the framing steel members are standardized and known, or are tabulated in catalogues, and determining such are not the object of the ASTM E119 testing. Rather, it is the functionality of the fire-proofing or fire-resistance of the whole assembly that is tested. After you crash an airplane into a building, the ASTM E119 test results become totally irrelevant, because you have changed the structure, at least by removing the fire-proofing or the fire-resistant wall and ceiling materials. [Accordingly, UL spokesman Paul M. Baker stated, "UL does not certify structural steel, such as the beams, columns, and trusses used in the World Trade Center"] The ASTM E119 certification is intended to estimate how long the structural steel WILL BE PROTECTED FROM EXPOSURE to temperatures around 2000F.
" http://www.apfn.net/MESSAGEBOARD/08-15-06/...ion.cgi.88.html

http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=78435

 

[SpitfireIX]

Oh crap, you guys could have spoke up sooner. Do you have any idea how hard it was to stitch a roasted bald eagle? I now know why Betsy Ross went with stars and bars.[emphasis added]

Erm, I know you didn't mean any offense by this, but the flag of the United States of America is known colloquially as the "Stars and Stripes." The "Stars and Bars" is a colloquial name for the first "national" flag of the so-called Confederate States of America.

On a tangentially related point, Betsy Ross is alleged to have convinced the Founding Fathers to switch from six-pointed stars to five-pointed stars because the latter are easier to cut.

 

[AZCat]

I am astonished and saddened that someone could go through the educational system far enough to obtain an engineering degree, yet still has the critical thinking skills of a third grader. Why do we bother to educate people if all they do when they grow up is parrot the likes of Alex Jones?

 

[~enigma~]

Pick one thing I have said, anything. Lets see how easy it is to learn about and to verify.

Hijackers alive...

 

[Furcifer]

Erm, I know you didn't mean any offense by this, but the flag of the United States of America is known colloquially as the "Stars and Stripes." The "Stars and Bars" is a colloquial name for the first "national" flag of the so-called Confederate States of America.

Oops! It's been fixified, and duly noted. An interesting tid-bit of information as well, I'll take "Americana" for $2000 Alex".

 

[T.A.M.]

Necrotizing Encephalitis secondary to WIPD (Pronounced "Whipped") - Woo Induced Paranoia Disorder.

TAM

 

[Doug Plumb]

I seem to be unable to find anything about neocons' plans to legalize sex slavery and the crushing of little boys' testicles--could you please provide links?

For the crushing of testicles and sexual torure of young children:

search "torture_yoo_being_asked_justify_crushing_childrens_testicls.htm"

(see video-Skip forward to 1hr: 39mins: 43seconds)

John Yoo is widely quoted on this.

You can listen to the interviews of Michael Ratner, Dr John Coleman, wrt constitutional issues and the Bush administration.

The neocons do not outwardly plan to make sex slavery legal they just do not want to have their minions prosecuted for it when it is done outside the borders of the USA.

Here is a general link to the preversions and acts of evil on the part of the folks you guys are so veraciously defending on this forum.

search "021006elitistperversion.htm"

Lots of main stream links about investigations being shut down, etc.

There have also been numerous FBI agents & cops come out about this. You can search for Ted Gundersen or listen to the Rothstein interview archived at arcticbeacon for May 24 / 2007.

(I cannot post URLs yet because I haven't been here long enough)