Merged Continuation - 9/11 CT subforum General Discussion Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
RedIbis said:
Yey! Semantics. What would you jreffers do without it. Any time you want to post a quote of my calling FDNY ffs a liar, go right ahead. We all know youcan't
Click to expand...

You don't come right out and specifically say "They are liars" but, you do say
RedIbis said:
I don't doubt for a second that these firefighters came to agree with the official explanations "after talking and finding out that it was the floors collapsing to where the plane had hit."
My point from the get-go was what these people said before people came to them and told them the source of these events.
Click to expand...

You're basically saying that they couldn't figure it out on their own, and only figured it out after they were told.
Yeah, you basically say that they were duped, and can't figure it out on their own.

Which also means that someone (your not specific, but in this context, it would be the higher ups in FDNY) lied to them.

So, what say you Red?
 
Last edited:
triforcharity said:
You don't come right out and specifically say "They are liars" but, you do say


You're basically saying that they couldn't figure it out on their own, and only figured it out after they were told.
Yeah, you basically say that they were duped, and can't figure it out on their own.

Which also means that someone (your not specific, but in this context, it would be the higher ups in FDNY) lied to them.

So, what say you Red?
Click to expand...

Considering the complexity of collapse hypotheses, no I don't expect ffs to have been able to determine the collapse mechanism that day, out on the street.
 
RedIbis said:
Considering the complexity of collapse hypotheses, no I don't expect ffs to have been able to determine the collapse mechanism that day, out on the street.
Click to expand...

They were not out there trying to determine a collapse hypthothesis, but rather whether the building was in danger of falling. Through their training and experience, they observed using a transit that the building was leaning, they saw a bulge, they heard creaking noises, etc. Through all these observations they were confident that it was going to collapse.
 
triforcharity said:
You don't come right out and specifically say "They are liars" but, you do say
Click to expand...

I wouldn't even insinuate anyone was lying since what was handed from the OEM to the FDNY was the truth. Word was passed to the street that the bldg would collapse, and guess what, it did.
 
triforcharity said:
You most certainly have.
Click to expand...

Then it should be no problem for you to post a quote of my calling ffs liars or idiots.

Please don't wait until after you post what I've requested and you've promised in the past. I consider this the more serious claim.
 
RedIbis said:
Then it should be no problem for you to post a quote of my calling ffs liars or idiots..
Click to expand...
I find it hard to swallow that firefighters below a particular rank would be incapable of making their own judgment call. If this isn't what you're implying then you obviously need to put better effort into clarifying your statements because it's obviously not clear yet if you're attempting to say something to the contrary of what you're writing. I'd like to give you the benefit of the doubt... you're more than justified to clear it up as best as you can if you feel sincerely your stance is being misrepresented :\
 
Last edited:
Redibis,

Have you seen the one I already posted?

RedIbis said:
I don't doubt for a second that these firefighters came to agree with the official explanations "after talking and finding out that it was the floors collapsing to where the plane had hit."

My point from the get-go was what these people said before people came to them and told them the source of these events.
Click to expand...

How about this one?
RedIbis said:
I didn't say he thought it was evidence of explosives. He says he saw "low level flashes" which is consistent with CD. Also on this list of accounts are people who heard, yes heard the sounds of explosions.

Sure, weeks, months, maybe years later, these people were informed of what the source of their initial descriptions were, but as any detective worth his/her salt knows, it's always the first interview which is most important. How people choose to interpret their experience later on is often of little consequence compared to the value of that first, unadulturated account.

I wonder why you didn't finish Gregory's quote, which states,
Click to expand...

So, this post is basically saying that they had their beliefs (not really, but you quotemine with the best of them) and that later on, someone told them something else, and that is what they believe now.

So, were they duped?
 
triforcharity said:
Redibis,

Have you seen the one I already posted?



How about this one?


So, this post is basically saying that they had their beliefs (not really, but you quotemine with the best of them) and that later on, someone told them something else, and that is what they believe now.

So, were they duped?
Click to expand...

Why argue this point if ffs were not in the bldg to witness the collapse mechanism?
 
RedIbis said:
Are the higher ups ffs or was I making a distinction?

Even in the post you quoted from me, it's blatantly clear how I suggest word of WTC 7's collapse might have hit the streets. But at least you helped prove once again that I've never called any ff a liar.
Click to expand...

You specifically stated higher ups in the FDNY. You have accused them of somehow being in on a deception. No?

Nice and classy as usual. Asking someone to reply and then handwaving one small part of the reply you asked for. No wonder you have the reputation you do here.
 
RedIbis said:
Why argue this point if ffs were not in the bldg to witness the collapse mechanism?
Click to expand...

Knowledgeable eyewitnesses don't need to know which joint or beam failed to know that fire and the lack of firefighting caused a poorly fireproofed structure to collapse.

Most of the people close to WTC7 after 2PM qualify as knowledgeable.
 
RedIbis said:
A commercial airliner strikes a skyscraper and you don't think someone in the basement would feel it or hear it above them?
Click to expand...
Of course they would.

Sheesh, DGM understood my question, apparently you did not.

Do you ever read for comprehension? I asked how, upon hearing TWO booms, did he know that the second one was the aircraft impact?

The simplicity of my query invites the suspicion that you tossed of that reaction to my post in the hopes that you can avoid explaining how WR made his determination (since of course there is no way that someone in the basement could know which of the two booms was the impact and which one was the explosion - though common sense would dictate that impact is the former, explosion the later)
 
RedIbis said:
Why argue this point if ffs were not in the bldg to witness the collapse mechanism?
Click to expand...

Because the collapse mechanism for all three skyscrapers were seen that day. Two were seen being parked into the side of the buildings at around 500 MPH by aparent friends of yours, and the other was seen shooting from the windows, and blowing smoke all over the place.

Care to elaborate on the statements that you have made Red?
 
gph said:
One of my co-workers has recently started buy into this conspiracy theory. His nail in the coffin argument is that #7 suffered no impact damage and shouldn't have fallen. I told him that I remembered seeing a video showing #1 or #2 debris falling into it but damned if I can find that video now. Could someone point me to a video showing debris hitting #7?
Click to expand...


NIST's take away message on WTC7: Note that damage from the North Tower is not mentioned at all and that furthermore they do not believe the diesel fuel played a significant role in the fires.

Spoken by Shyam Sunder, Head of NIST:-

1.The reason for the collapse of World Trade Center 7 is no longer a mystery

2.WTC 7 collapsed because of fires, fueled by office furnishings

3.It did not collapse from explosives or from fuel oil fires"

END TAKE AWAY MESSAGE.
 
Last edited:
bill smith said:
1.The reason for the collapse of World Trade Center 7 is no longer a mystery

2.WTC 7 collapsed because of fires, fueled by office furnishings

3.It did not collapse from explosives or from fuel oil fires"
Click to expand...

1. Believe it or not, this is all "Well, DUH!" information to a fire fighter.

2. Steel buildings without adequate protection over the steel are notorius for collapsing in fires.

3. Well, DUH! to the explosives part. That would have been obvious miles away in those urban canyons. And the diesel fuel turned out not to be so significant. Meh. A plastic and beaver board desk are going to burn a lot hotter that the diesel any way.
 
leftysergeant said:
1. Believe it or not, this is all "Well, DUH!" information to a fire fighter.

2. Steel buildings without adequate protection over the steel are notorius for collapsing in fires.

3. Well, DUH! to the explosives part. That would have been obvious miles away in those urban canyons. And the diesel fuel turned out not to be so significant. Meh. A plastic and beaver board desk are going to burn a lot hotter that the diesel any way.
Click to expand...

No steel-framed hi-rise building in the recorded history iof the Planet Earth has ever collapsed from fire despite some spectacular blazes that totally eclipse the small localised fires of 9/11. No building other than the three steel-framed hi-rise buildings on 9/11 that is..
 
bill smith said:
No steel-framed hi-rise building in the recorded history iof the Planet Earth has ever collapsed from fire despite some spectacular blazes that totally eclipse the small localised fires of 9/11. No building other than the three steel-framed hi-rise buildings on 9/11 that is..
Click to expand...
No totally steel-framed building was ever smacked with a 100-ton hammer travelling 400+ mph and set afire, either.

Do you have a point?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom