Danny Jowenko - Manipulated by 9/11 Deniers

[uke2se]

It appears to be common practice amongst the Official Conspiracy Theory supporters
in this forum to lie.

People who are fond of lying seem preoccupied with the need to specify "honesty"
in the responses from others.

Though it doesn't appear to matter what you say if you are an Official Conspiracy Theory supporter.

TheRedWorm, unlike others of your ilk, it is not necessary to ask me to answer honestly.

I have no reason to lie.

In answer to your question; yes.

MM

So, why do you do it constantly?

Also, present said evidence in a paper and submit it for peer review. Claiming you have evidence when everything you produce on these forums is either based on lies of misunderstandings isn't getting you anywhere. If the Twoof is so important to you, get your bum off the internet and do something, or are you a coward?

 

[Miragememories]

"...truthers lied to your hero, they showed him a grossly misleading video. The last pages of the thread have not addressed these facts, Truther. Why are you lying about this truther?"

That is a lie.

Danny Jowenko was shown the same video that we have all seen here and accept is a true unaltered recording
of the WTC7 collapse.

If the video of WTC7 collapsing that Danny Jowenko watched was misleading, he certainly had ample opportunity
to correct his opinion after he was informed.

The producers were seeking an unprejudiced opinion.

You do know what an unprejudiced opinion is, I assume (huge assumption)?

MM

 

[The Big Dog]

I have no reason to lie.

MM

Yet, curiously, you lied when you said you addressed the facts that

1. the Truthers falsely told Jowenko that the collapse started at the bottom

2. The truthers falsely showed Jowenko an edited video that did not show the collapse of the East Penthouse.

3. The fact that Jowenko has not been heard from since that surreptitiously recorded phone call in 2007.

You sent lurkers here on a fool's errand claiming you had addressed these facts.

That wasn't true, was it MM?

(Pathetic dodge of a response anticipated in 3...2...1...)

 

[Disbelief]

If the video of WTC7 collapsing that Danny Jowenko watched was misleading, he certainly had ample opportunity
to correct his opinion after he was informed.

MM

He also has had plenty of time to consider WTC1 & 2. Why would he be worried about backlash for claiming those were CDs if he is getting no flak for believing WTC7 was a CD?

 

[Miragememories]

"I had forgotten that those interviews did indeed occur before the release of the 7 World Trade NIST reports. You're right, of course: There's been nothing out of him since 2007, and prior to that, all he was working with was a video and a blueprint. Definitely not the proper information that is now known."

During that first interview, Danny Jowenko was working with the NIST WTC7 2004 Preliminary Report.

The final report from the NIST, added nothing substantially new.

More significantly, the NIST FINAL WTC7 COLLAPSE REPORT eliminated many of the arguments Official Conspiracy Theory supporters had been basing their case on.

The NIST claimed it had definitely solved the collapse mystery.

The NIST claimed the fuel tanks were not a factor in their fire-based collapse theory.

The NIST claimed the ancillary damage caused by the collapse of WTC 1 was also not a factor in their collapse theory.

So tell us, ElMondoHummus, what was all this new "proper information" that became known?

MM

 

[The Big Dog]

Danny Jowenko was shown the same video that we have all seen here and accept is a true unaltered recording
of the WTC7 collapse.

If the video of WTC7 collapsing that Danny Jowenko watched was misleading, he certainly had ample opportunity
to correct his opinion after he was informed.

MM

What nonsense, sheer nonsense. The video was altered because the collpase of the Penthouse was edited out. I don't really care that you truthers think it is accurate, because it is not: it is shortened and silent. It is fraud.

BOOM

And how the hell is Jowenko supposed to know or care that they showed him a misleading video? He hasn't said a damn thing about it in three years.

 

[The Big Dog]

During that first interview, Danny Jowenko was working with the NIST WTC7 2004 Preliminary Report.

MM

Wow... I am speechless. You just flat out made that up.

And so MM destroys what little credibilty he has. Sad.

I do enjoy how you say that the Final report added nothing new and then go ahead and list several things that were new in the final report. GENIUS!!!

 

[Oystein]

It appears to be common practice amongst the Official Conspiracy Theory supporters
in this forum to lie.

People who are fond of lying seem preoccupied with the need to specify "honesty"
in the responses from others.

Though it doesn't appear to matter what you say if you are an Official Conspiracy Theory supporter.

TheRedWorm, unlike others of your ilk, it is not necessary to ask me to answer honestly.

I have no reason to lie.

In answer to your question; yes.

MM

You have yet to answer any question that I posed you honestly without being kicked to it. You distort questions in a very dishonest way. You make up answers based on nothing and try to dishonestly pass them by as well-founded information. It is therefore not surprising that people would insist you write something honestly for a change.



Obvious follow-up question: Which is your "evidence that 9/11 was an inside job"? But that would be off-topic to the OP, as Danny Jowenko can't be the source of any such evidence.

 

[Oystein]

That is a lie.

Danny Jowenko was shown the same video that we have all seen here and accept is a true unaltered recording
of the WTC7 collapse.

If the video of WTC7 collapsing that Danny Jowenko watched was misleading, he certainly had ample opportunity
to correct his opinion after he was informed.

The producers were seeking an unprejudiced opinion.

You do know what an unprejudiced opinion is, I assume (huge assumption)?

MM

He was shown the video without sound. That seems to me an important alteration when you are speculating about an event whose most remarkable sensory feature would be the insanely loud BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG that every demolition expert knows accompany any explosive demolition. As someone pointed out: Jowenko's own homepage demonstrates that quite nicely in the trailer: http://www.jowenko.com/

How do you know the producers were seeking an unprejudiced opinion? Do you know them personally? Are they superhuman?
Again something you pull out of your arse in the face of utter ignorance.

 

[Oystein]

During that first interview, Danny Jowenko was working with the NIST WTC7 2004 Preliminary Report.

And this you know how? What is your evidence?

The final report from the NIST, added nothing substantially new.

No, only a new, improved theory

More significantly, the NIST FINAL WTC7 COLLAPSE REPORT eliminated many of the arguments Official Conspiracy Theory supporters had been basing their case on.

The NIST claimed it had definitely solved the collapse mystery.

No.

The NIST claimed the fuel tanks were not a factor in their fire-based collapse theory.
The NIST claimed the ancillary damage caused by the collapse of WTC 1 was also not a factor in their collapse theory.
So tell us, ElMondoHummus, what was all this new "proper information" that became known?

MM

That is the scientific method, as employed by real critical thinkers, at work: Open minds can improve on their theories in light of evidence and reason.

 

[Miragememories]

"It isn't just a matter of; could fire cause a concrete and steel building such as WTC7 to collapse?

But, could any fire make such a building suffer a complete collapse with the same symmetry as is achieved in a successfully executed controlled demolition?

Plain and simple, the answer is no."

"You SURE about that? I happen to know of a building that had a massive fire, that was concrete with steel reinforcement, that fell just like a CD, and had no other damage whatsoever.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p22Ok...layer_embedded"

Thanks for the links.

As expected, they were not videos of complete, in unison, symmetrical building collapses such as was observed with WTC7, and is the normal expectation from successful controlled demolitions.

They nicely illustrate how buildings collapse partially when they are not controlled demolitions.

MM

 

[The Big Dog]

-Danny had never heard about or viewed the collapse of WTC7[/b]

MM

During that first interview, Danny Jowenko was working with the NIST WTC7 2004 Preliminary Report.


MM

Fascinating, ain't it folks? A couple of days ago, the Truther claimed that Jowenko "had never heard of the collapse of WTC7" and NOW? Jowenko was "working with the NIST WTC7 2004 preliminary report."

Oh MM, it is hard to lie, ain't it? You never know when you are going to stick your foot in your mouth.

Well, I'm just about done with this Truther.

Hey, MM, thanks for bumping this thread! Good job making it clear that the Truthers are a bunch of frauds.

 

[dafydd]

Why do these truthers never know that the floor has been wiped with them,and that their ass has been handed to them in a sling?

 

[triforcharity]

That is a lie.

Danny Jowenko was shown the same video that we have all seen here and accept is a true unaltered recording
of the WTC7 collapse.

If the video of WTC7 collapsing that Danny Jowenko watched was misleading, he certainly had ample opportunity
to correct his opinion after he was informed.

The producers were seeking an unprejudiced opinion.

You do know what an unprejudiced opinion is, I assume (huge assumption)?

MM

Yeah, like showing the entire collapse and not just the edited footage that they showed him.

Ahem *Pennthouse* ahem....

 

[triforcharity]

Thanks for the links.

As expected, they were not videos of complete, in unison, symmetrical building collapses such as was observed with WTC7, and is the normal expectation from successful controlled demolitions.

They nicely illustrate how buildings collapse partially when they are not controlled demolitions.

MM

How does a "symmetrical" building collapse hit two other buildings? One on it's roof? That is not symmetrical.

7WTC's collapse was not in unison either. But hey, it's cool. Shift **** **** those goalposts!

 

[Miragememories]

What nonsense, sheer nonsense. The video was altered because the collpase of the Penthouse was edited out. I don't really care that you truthers think it is accurate, because it is not: it is shortened and silent. It is fraud.

If the video he watched (and I'm not saying he wasn't shown the East Penthouse collapse), was continuous from start to finish, with no frames removed in between, and the speed unaltered, then it was a true presentation of WTC7 for that portion of time.

A year later, having had ample and easy opportunity to see every WTC7 video out there, Danny Jowenko remained firm in his belief that the collapse of WTC7 could not have been caused by fire!

MM

 

[The Big Dog]

If the video he watched (and I'm not saying he wasn't shown the East Penthouse collapse), was continuous from start to finish, with no frames removed in between, and the speed unaltered, then it was a true presentation of WTC7 for that portion of time.

A year later, having had ample and easy opportunity to see every WTC7 video out there, Danny Jowenko remained firm in his belief that the collapse of WTC7 could not have been caused by fire!

MM

This tiny little snippet of video was completely truethy!! Except for the fact it was misleading and silent! And they lied and told him it started at the bottom!

Hee hee! Keep posting bro, now I'm just in it for the lulz.

 

[Oystein]

If the video he watched (and I'm not saying he wasn't shown the East Penthouse collapse), was continuous from start to finish, with no frames removed in between, and the speed unaltered, then it was a true presentation of WTC7 for that portion of time.

So you agree Jowenko was given only partial information? Thanks.

A year later, having had ample and easy opportunity to see every WTC7 video out there

Cool. And did he? Do you know? Got any evidence?

, Danny Jowenko remained firm in his belief that the collapse of WTC7 could not have been caused by fire!

MM

Yup, "belief" it is.

 

[Oystein]

Fascinating, ain't it folks? A couple of days ago, the Truther claimed that Jowenko "had never heard of the collapse of WTC7" and NOW? Jowenko was "working with the NIST WTC7 2004 preliminary report."
...

Cool finding!

 

[uke2se]

Fascinating, ain't it folks? A couple of days ago, the Truther claimed that Jowenko "had never heard of the collapse of WTC7" and NOW? Jowenko was "working with the NIST WTC7 2004 preliminary report."

Oh MM, it is hard to lie, ain't it? You never know when you are going to stick your foot in your mouth.

Well, I'm just about done with this Truther.

Hey, MM, thanks for bumping this thread! Good job making it clear that the Truthers are a bunch of frauds.

Game, set and match. The twoof is out. MM lies.