New Member

[tonicblue]

And there we have it. Is this supposed to be your defense against charges of paranoia?

Think a truck bomb actually exploded on King Street, far from the World Trade Center on 9/11 without a single person noticing, do you? Think cops "planned" (you made that up, by the way) to beat up the perps who drove the truck bomb that had a picture of a "radio-controlled" plane crashing into New York City?

Apparently you do think these things are true, despite the fact that the "government report" that you quoted says the truck was an innocuous delivery vehicle. No bomb!
Don't take my word that this patently absurd event didn't happen. How many times do I have to ask you to call the NYPD? Or you can write to them! They have email! They're open for business right now!

Good lord.

When a psychiatrist charges me with paranoia I will bother to mount a defence.

I ask again; where are the mainstream media articles which used this truck incident as an example of confusion? Your claim, your burden.

Is the Mineta report I quoted wrong? Yes, or no?

Edit:

You do realise that paranoia is the belief that people are out to get you? How does this truck fiasco in any way suggest I think people are after me?

 

[tonicblue]

Have you listened to the audio in which one officer tells another to beat the 2 men up? Can you explain why they ran away? Can you explain why their arrest was never reported?

 

[Gravy]

You are apparently the one person on earth who believes this preposterous story. I told you I had looked it up in April. That's good enough for me. Are you going to contact the NYPD to find out if the story is true?

Yes or no?

 

[tonicblue]

You are apparently the one person on earth who believes this preposterous story. I told you I had looked it up in April. That's good enough for me. Are you going to contact the NYPD to find out if the story is true?

Yes or no?

Where did I say I believed it?

Have you listened to the audio?

Oh right, so an anonymous internet poster saying he looked it up in April is meant to be good enough for me? Where did you look it up? Ive tried everything. Lexis, google etc. Nothing.

I will assume you are lying.

 

[RAMS]

You explained why, with the list you posted ...

Since this sort of reasoning is fallacious only when the person is not a legitimate authority in a particular context, it is necessary to provide some acceptable standards of assessment. The following standards are widely accepted:
...
1. The person has sufficient expertise in the subject matter in question.
...
2. The claim being made by the person is within her area(s) of expertise.
...
3. There is an adequate degree of agreement among the other experts in the subject in question.
...
4. The person in question is not significantly biased.
...
5. The area of expertise is a legitimate area or discipline.
...
6. The authority in question must be identified.
...

We've got some galute turns up in his ten gallon hat, who paints for NASA, and you assume all the above? I don't. Based on the fact that we can't even be sure of 6 - anyone could pretend to be this person and post here, we're looking at a stunningly decisive zero marks.

1. I am highly qualified to visually interpret and thus counter the claims of the 911 conspiracy movement claims.

2. My claims and statements made by me are well within the professional realm of the work I do and have done for some 26 years, in visuals and understanding results.

3. True.

4. I fail in this area is that I am biased, through experience, that there is no conspiracy or foul play within the 911 event.

5. Yes.

6. I am indentified and what I do and can do is verified. Consult signature below.


RAMS

 

[Gravy]

Where did I say I believed it?

Have you listened to the audio?

Oh right, so an anonymous internet poster saying he looked it up in April is meant to be good enough for me? Where did you look it up? Ive tried everything. Lexis, google etc. Nothing.

I will assume you are lying.

So that's it then, huh? Did I not just tell you not to take my word for it? You are the only one in the world who believes the story, and you could easily confirm the truth of it, but you refuse to, because whining is easier.

Beautiful, tonic. You are a real truther.

 

[tonicblue]

So that's it then, huh? Did I not just tell you not to take my word for it? You are the only one in the world who believes the story, and you could easily confirm the truth of it, but you refuse to, because whining is easier.

Beautiful, tonic. You are a real truther.

I do not believe anything. I have heard and read some interesting audio and documents. I wish to verify your claim of media coverage. If you will not provide the sources then I will assume you are lying.

Last chance. What is your source for the claim that the media used this as an example of confusion?

If I don't get an answer then I shall no longer engage you. In fact, I will put you on ignore as you are so fond of threatening to do.

 

[Gravy]

I do not believe anything. I have heard and read some interesting audio and documents. I wish to verify your claim of media coverage. If you will not provide the sources then I will assume you are lying.

Last chance. What is your source for the claim that the media used this as an example of confusion?

If I don't get an answer then I shall no longer engage you. In fact, I will put you on ignore as you are so fond of threatening to do.

Go right ahead: assume I'm lying. Assume I'm a disinfo agent. How will that solve your problem? Does that make a truck, painted with a "radio-control" plane crashing into NYC, explode on King Street on 9/11/01?

Does it? Did the truck now explode, without anyone noticing? You may think so. But meanwhile, in the real world, real people answer easy questions every day, simply by using their brains and choosing not to live in a paranoid fantasy.

Prove me wrong. Call the NYPD. Right now.

 

[RAMS]

I do not believe anything. I have heard and read some interesting audio and documents. I wish to verify your claim of media coverage. If you will not provide the sources then I will assume you are lying.

Last chance. What is your source for the claim that the media used this as an example of confusion?

If I don't get an answer then I shall no longer engage you. In fact, I will put you on ignore as you are so fond of threatening to do.

Mark (Gravy) has challenged in legitimate method to verify what you claim. I have researched and provided the means to do so. Please call.

Here is your contact information again for you:

(718)-999-2845/1234 FDNY

or email Melissa Smith at FDNY: smithma@fdny.nyc.gov

Melissa can also send you to First Responders and others to confirm what Mark (Gravy) has addressed to you in good faith regarding your claim or disclaim.

Or, call Larry Shanks, PA, NYPD, at:

(212) 741-8401




RAMS

 

[tonicblue]

Go right ahead: assume I'm lying. Assume I'm a disinfo agent. How will that solve your problem? Does that make a truck, painted with a "radio-control" plane crashing into NYC, explode on King Street on 9/11/01?

Does it? Did the truck now explode, without anyone noticing? You may think so. But meanwhile, in the real world, real people answer easy questions every day, simply by using their brains and choosing not to live in a paranoid fantasy.

Prove me wrong. Call the NYPD. Right now.

I never mentioned disinfo, you did. I will not be calling the NYPD. If you ever wish to back up your claims then PM me.

 

[DavidJames]

I will not be calling the NYPD. If you ever wish to back up your claims then PM me.

Of course you won't. No one here every expected you to. We know you live in the CT world where primary sources are as rare as the facts and evidence tin hatters use to accuse innocent people of murder.

 

[scooby]

4. I fail in this area is that I am biased, through experience, that there is no conspiracy or foul play within the 911 event.

Biased eh?
Well why didn't you say so - explain away, I'm all ears.

 

[Gravy]

tonicblue,

It took me 7 minutes to find this reference, which I looked for because the laziness of you people who claim to be searching for "truth" pisses me off so much.

''I'm concerned for the city,'' said Gary Foster, 42, a public relations official at a biotechnology firm at Rockefeller Center. ''I was already concerned with the potential of a severe economic downturn and was waiting for the impact to be felt by the city. I'm sure we will be going through a phase here where we will be inconvenienced. As for the long term, I'm just hoping that this city does not change radically.''

Perhaps not radically. But by any measure, this has knocked the wind out of a brash city in ways that became evident even before the first sun set on the rubble of the World Trade Center. One hour after the second tower tumbled, unnerved passers-by just south of Houston Street scattered as a police bomb squad towed away a truck that had been abandoned on King Street.

After that, in first the hours and then the days ahead, every parked, abandoned truck loomed as a potential bomb. The buzz of low-flying military jets or police helicopters inevitably drew anxious glances from pedestrians. The wail of sirens was no longer the white noise backdrop to life in a lively city.

From AFTER THE ATTACKS: PERCEPTIONS; Anxiety Knocks the Wind Out of a Once-Brash City New York Times, Sept. 16, 2001

You demanded that I show you how the press used this incident as an example of the confusion that reigned that day. There it is. Have you learned anything?

 

[RAMS]

Biased eh?
Well why didn't you say so - explain away, I'm all ears.

I have, in countless posts. Through 26 years of dealing with the U.S. government in one form or another.

'No conspiracy or foul play in the 911 event by elements of my government.'

RAMS

 

[chipmunk stew]

I do not believe anything. I have heard and read some interesting audio and documents.

There's that word again. CTers use that word when they mean "suspicious". The rest of us use that word just before we seek the information that would satisfy our curiosity.

I wish to verify your claim of media coverage. If you will not provide the sources then I will assume you are lying.

But apparently, you have no wish to verify whether or not the "interesting" rumors you've heard are true. You'd rather hang on to the possibility that they might be true than risk finding out that they're not.

Last chance. What is your source for the claim that the media used this as an example of confusion?

If I don't get an answer then I shall no longer engage you. In fact, I will put you on ignore as you are so fond of threatening to do.

You should know better than to give such ultimatums to people who have a track record of only making claims that they can back up.

 

[Belz...]

By the way, which posts of mine gave you the impression I was paranoid?

I guess, the one where you say that RAMS is a truther in disguise, and, in the same post, imply that Hubble could've been used to deflect some form of beam weapon.

 

[Belz...]

You are either delusional or a very poor liar. My guess is the former.

That above is a pathological lie.

Kids, kids. Can we dispense with this ?

 

[Belz...]

He's trying to sell us an appeal to authority.
I see a lot of this ...

That's because you don't know what the term means, obviously. That was NOT an appeal to authority.

 

[RAMS]

Kids, kids. Can we dispense with this ?

Agreed and thank you for the reminder.

Will refrain in answer to allegations like this and you are correct.

RAMS

 

[Belz...]

I just find it somewhat disturbing that accusations of lying fly about so easily, these days.