• 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.

My First Truther?

PhantomWolf

Penultimate Amazing
PhantomWolf
Joined
Mar 6, 2007
Messages
21,203
Well sort of. She was actually advocating for Greenpeace. Not sure that I'd want to live in the society she was projecting, sounded like a pre-industry communist state, but anyways... She was a french Canadian over here and while talking about enviromental issues she mentioned that she didn't trust the MSM but rather independant sources. Ihappened to point out that even so called independent media have their biases and can report bunk as fact, pointing to 9/11 as a case in point.

Well you guessed it, she appartently believes the US Govt was behind it. Her opening gambit was "Do you know who owned the towers?" It sort of threw her when I said "Yes, the New York-New Jersey Port Authority." She was expecting me to say Larry Silverstein, or not know. After pulling the rug out from under her on that I asked if she'd read the NIST report, which of course she hadn't (she hadn't heard of it.) Her response to this was that she refused to trust anyone paid by the Govt or Big Business. I asked if she'd trust the Structural Engineering Department of the University of Sydney in Australia. At that point I think she realised I was rather well versed on the matter and decided that "hey I need to get going" and so we left it there.

She did seem to believe in Apollo though, at least she wanted to know if we can get to the moon, why can't we build a non-polluting battery and when we discussed Apollo using Hydrogen Fuel Cells she didn't object to their having gone.

Pity that I didn't have more time or a few resources printed out, could have been more fun.
 
PhantomWolf said:
Her opening gambit was "Do you know who owned the towers?" It sort of threw her when I said "Yes, the New York-New Jersey Port Authority." .
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, you were wrong and owe that woman an apology. The PA owned the land, LS owns the bldgs.
 
RedIbis said:
Unfortunately, you were wrong and owe that woman an apology. The PA owned the land, LS owns the bldgs.
Click to expand...
Yet another error by RedIbis!

LS leased the towers, he didn't own them. He owned WTC 7 only.

Find that "official report" on the C-Ring hole yet RedIbis? :rolleyes:
 
I'm still waiting for Red Ibis' smoking gun with regard to Gen Myers' shenanigans on the morning of 9/11. You all remember -- he (Myers) hid out in a congressman's office... Say! You don't suppose... Red Ibis, was this a Larry Craig situation? No, couldn't be.

ETA: Not that there would be anything wrong with that.
 
Last edited:
SDC said:
I'm still waiting for Red Ibis' smoking gun with regard to Gen Myers' shenanigans on the morning of 9/11. You all remember -- he (Myers) hid out in a congressman's office... Say! You don't suppose... Red Ibis, was this a Larry Craig situation? No, couldn't be.

ETA: Not that there would be anything wrong with that.
Click to expand...

Possibly the most blatant and dated derail in the history of jref.
 
RedIbis said:
Of which he collected the insurance payouts. But that wasn't enough, he's now suing for get this... 12.3 billion more.


RedIbis, and the relevance of that statement would be what, exactly? Something about Jews and money? (Let me state here that I am sorely annoyed with my Jewish ancestors who seem almost to have had an aversion to holding onto money.)
Click to expand...
 
SDC said:
RedIbis said:
Of which he collected the insurance payouts. But that wasn't enough, he's now suing for get this... 12.3 billion more.
Click to expand...


RedIbis, and the relevance of that statement would be what, exactly? Something about Jews and money? (Let me state here that I am sorely annoyed with my Jewish ancestors who seem almost to have had an aversion to holding onto money.)
Click to expand...

And of course the inevitable Jew reference, which invariably is delivered by a so called debunker.

I will remind you that this tactic is no less bigoted than that which you feebly attempt to criticize. Not well done.
 
Last edited:
RedIbis said:
Of which he collected the insurance payouts. But that wasn't enough, he's now suing for get this... 12.3 billion more.

http://www.nytimes.com:80/2008/03/2...07281600&en=0261765c3042a010&ei=5070&emc=eta1
Click to expand...

So? You do realise that part of the lease was that he returned the buildings and site to the PA in a similar condition as they were when he leased them? You are aware that he is paying the PA and has been paying the PA the rent as if the buildings were still there for the past 6 years? You are aware that he (well his company) is the one that has to foot the bill for building the new towers and since the Insurance he got doesn't cover that cost (he already lost about $2 billion on WTC 7) he's going to go after anything he can to alleviate the loses suffered in the attacks?

Of course you were, or you wouldn't have brought this up right?

By the way, are you planning to apologise yourself?
 
RedIbis said:
Unfortunately, you were wrong and owe that woman an apology. The PA owned the land, LS owns the bldgs.
Click to expand...


Not surprisingly, you are wrong, and you owe PhantomWolf an apology. The PA owns the land and owned the buildings. Mr. Silverstein leased WTC 1, 2, 4 and 5 from the Port Authority.
 
Oh, piffle. I saw you in the shop of the Scandinavian institute on ... Park Ave? And I didn't buy you there. So you are sore.

Anyhow, this is your chance to explain why Silverstein's lawsuit is relevant to 9/11. Please go ahead.
 
SDC said:
Nope. Not close. Have you been following the exciting adventures of Tc329, lately?
Click to expand...

Seriously, if you're just going to shamelessly cross thread stalk and continue to derail threads, ask the mods for permission to set up a one on one debate on any subject about 9/11.

I'll heark squawking about this, but you have to defend an official position. You might be able to provide a compelling argument, but if it's not delivered by an official entity, a debate defending the official position is lost by you.

This is my new way of dealing with stalkers. It seems to be working so far.
 
Do I need to get a mod to clean out the off topic posts in just the 15th post?
 
LashL said:
Not surprisingly, you are wrong, and you owe PhantomWolf an apology. The PA owns the land and owned the buildings. Mr. Silverstein leased WTC 1, 2, 4 and 5 from the Port Authority.
Click to expand...

He bid for the 99 year lease. It gave him the rights to lease the real estate, as well as collect the insurance.

If he were simply a leasee, as opposed to the leaseholder, he wouldn't be collecting on anything.
 
Stalkers? Oh you saucy devil. At the Scandinavian institute I thought you were pretty darned cute, but not enough to buy. So you are jealous.

OK, mods, I'm yours. Tear me from limb to limb.

Let's see, what else did RedIbis instruct me to say ... Well, for one thing, I don't know what "heark squawking" means. You'll have to explain. Second, a debate... is lost... Hey, sailor, I am not debating. I'm just remembering your crushing destruction of Gen Myers. That was as close as you ever came, I believe, to staking out a position. Pretty weak.

Here's mine: the consensus 9/11 story, as represented by "official" entities, are essentially correct.
 
RedIbis said:
He bid for the 99 year lease. It gave him the rights to lease the real estate, as well as collect the insurance.

If he were simply a leasee, as opposed to the leaseholder, he wouldn't be collecting on anything.
Click to expand...

That doesn't make him the owner, the PA was still the owner. Just admit you got it wrong Red, you'll be the bigger for it. Right now you look pretty silly and are getting sillier by the minute as you try and squirm out of it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom