• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Ed Moving On is coming.

Gravy said:
I encourage everyone to watch the video at the upper right of this page:

http://kdka.com/911/local_story_253090222.html

It's about the living victims of 9/11 in Somerset County. Val McClatchey on Killtown:

“I’d like to see him - the coward that he is - set foot out here and lay claim to that. ...Until I have his identity, he gets away with it."

Proud of yourself, Killtown?
Click to expand...
How was Val a 9/11 victim???
 
Gravy said:
Russell is making the mistake of using Silverstein's 2002 quote as if it's specific firefighting terminology. He should know better.
Click to expand...

Gravy,

Should we do a video analysis of his inflection, head cocking and impersonal reference to firefighters as "it" followed by a juxtaposition of the interview linking the statement to watching the building coming down even though you know how long before the collapse the fireground was evacuated?

In that very same video didn't they mention "pull" in relation to the demolition of the remnants of another building?

Watch the video and then explain it as a collapse happening from the bottom up. Clue - I have actually had high-rise training and participated in minor high-rise fires.

Russell
 
qarnos said:
Killtown,

If there was another investigation into 9/11, and if this investigation came to the same conclusions as the original investigation, would you, in all honesty, accept those results?

Yes or no.
Click to expand...
If it was an open investigation with the Prez and VP not behind closed doors, not together, being recorded, and being underoath, then yes, I would condence with their findings.

So, you support a new investigation?
 
Russell Pickering said:
Gravy,
I was quoting Robert Mueller's statement in the context of the bodies still being unidentified to this very day. I was clear about my use of that quote.
Russell
Click to expand...
Okay, but I don't want any lurkers to get the impression that Mueller's statement during the ongoing investigation in September, 2001 is in any way indicative of the results of that investigation. As Mueller said on November 2, 2001,

“The FBI has resolved questions about the identities of the 19 hijackers involved in the Sept. 11 attacks and has discovered places outside the United States where the conspiracy was planned, FBI Director Robert Mueller said Friday. Saudi Arabian officials and others have questioned whether some of the hijackers identified by the FBI in the weeks after the attacks used stolen identifications. Mueller said those questions have been answered. “We at this point definitely know the 19 hijackers who were responsible," he said. Source

Mueller’s statement to the Joint Intelligence Inquiry Committee in 2002.
 
LashL said:
I have to say that I'm disappointed. Leaving aside the first link, which has been thoroughly debunked long ago (which you rightly acknowledge), and looking only at the second one, you have engaged here in egregious quote mining, Russell, by picking out these two sentences among hundreds and purporting to suggest that they support the premise you were getting at.

I'm a bit surprised at you.

Those two sentences do not even remotely reflect the content, the tone, the context, the totality, or the overarching theme of the entire document, and when they are pulled out of context as you have done, they are grossly misleading to those who won't be bothered to actually read the entire document, by those who are easily led astray, and by those who are, for whatever reason, incapable of analyzing information properly.

How disappointing to see that come from you.
Click to expand...

The disappointment card doesn't work here. That quote was referenced to a MSM broadcast of those very words which as I stated I can't link you to right now.

They were absolute statements in any context in my opinion.

Russell
 
Russell Pickering said:
Gravy,

Should we do a video analysis of his inflection, head cocking and impersonal reference to firefighters as "it" followed by a juxtaposition of the interview linking the statement to watching the building coming down even though you know how long before the collapse the fireground was evacuated?

In that very same video didn't they mention "pull" in relation to the demolition of the remnants of another building?

Watch the video and then explain it as a collapse happening from the bottom up. Clue - I have actually had high-rise training and participated in minor high-rise fires.

Russell
Click to expand...
No, we should rely on the accounts of the experts who were there, of the condition of WTC 7. I hope you'll read that whole section of my paper, which I assume as a former firefighter you'll be interested in.

You're not suggesting that Silverstein had any say in firefighting operations, are you?

Anyway, before you answer, please read the firsthand accounts of the condition of the building and the decision-making process to pull away from it.

Also, if you've seen America Rebuilds, you know that building 6 was physically pulled down with cables attached to excavators. That's in my paper also, with photos.
 
Russell Pickering said:
The disappointment card doesn't work here. That quote was referenced to a MSM broadcast of those very words which as I stated I can't link you to right now.

They were absolute statements in any context in my opinion.

Russell
Click to expand...

I'm not playing any "card", Russell. I'm saying that I find it disappointing to see you engage in such egregious quote mining.

Edit to add: What is it that you find suspicious about the statement, even as cited in the form that you cited it? Do you think it is suspicious that the hijackers did not leave behind computers or other electronic storage media with the plans for the attacks on them? Or is there something else that you find suspicious about the quote as presented?
 
Last edited:
Gravy said:
Okay, but I don't want any lurkers to get the impression that Mueller's statement during the ongoing investigation in September, 2001 is in any way indicative of the results of that investigation. As Mueller said on November 2, 2001,

“The FBI has resolved questions about the identities of the 19 hijackers involved in the Sept. 11 attacks and has discovered places outside the United States where the conspiracy was planned, FBI Director Robert Mueller said Friday. Saudi Arabian officials and others have questioned whether some of the hijackers identified by the FBI in the weeks after the attacks used stolen identifications. Mueller said those questions have been answered. “We at this point definitely know the 19 hijackers who were responsible," he said. Source

Mueller’s statement to the Joint Intelligence Inquiry Committee in 2002.
Click to expand...

Gravy,

Have their remains been positively identified to positively confirm this?

Russell
 
Last edited:
Russell, please tell me you don't think WTC7 was brought down by controlled demolition.

ETA: otherwise, why on earth are you focusing on the word "pull"?
 
Last edited:
Gravy said:
Self-made confession videos will not stand up in court.
Click to expand...
That's what I have said too. So be your agreement in that, what hard evidence is there that OBL was a conspirator with 9/11 that would be able to convict him in a court of law?
 
Killtown said:
That's what I have said too. So be your agreement in that, what hard evidence is there that OBL was a conspirator with 9/11 that would be able to convict him in a court of law?
Click to expand...
I'll answer your questions on this topic when you've apologized to Val McClatchey, creep.
 
You're not suggesting that Silverstein had any say in firefighting operations, are you?

Anyway, before you answer, please read the firsthand accounts of the condition of the building and the decision-making process to pull away from it.

Also, if you've seen America Rebuilds, you know that building 6 was physically pulled down with cables attached to excavators. That's in my paper also, with photos.
Click to expand...

Gravy,

I've had a long day.

I'll brush up on this and detail the issues later.

But watch the video again in the mean time and seriously try and imagine that being an accidental collapse. And then we have to wait for over five years for the complete report?

Russell
 
Killtown said:
That's what I have said too. So be your agreement in that, what hard evidence is there that OBL was a conspirator with 9/11 that would be able to convict him in a court of law?
Click to expand...

We don't need to provide any, the deal's already done. The sentence has already been handed off to the air force and marine corps to be carried out.

They have substantially lower evidentiary standards to fulfill.
 
Russell Pickering said:
Gravy,

I've had a long day.

I'll brush up on this and detail the issues later.

But watch the video again in the mean time and seriously try and imagine that being an accidental collapse. And then we have to wait for over five years for the complete report?

Russell
Click to expand...
I'm restraining myself from telling you what I really think about your suggestion that I haven't watched enough video of WTC 7's collapse.

Please read the firsthand accounts in my paper. If you do not, please don't bring this subject up again with me.

Have a good night.
 
Gravy said:
In the second section I get into that pretty heavily. I cite 26 instances of 9/11 first responders using the term "pull" to mean withdraw from the dangerous area.
Click to expand...
Gravy, how many times in those 26 instances do they use the phrase "pull it"?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom