Foolmewunz
Grammar Resistance Leader, TLA Dictator
Hi 911 - I'm back.... Jeez, you were right, you can't get "near" 911Eyewitness, the stench knocks you back about twenty meters. Actually I got so distracted clicking on idiotic 'articles' (any semblance to the word articulate is purely coincidental, I assure you), that I really couldn't get much into it, but I'm getting my aqualung and crap-proof armor and I'll go back, soon. I do so like the sites with the false erudition masking the nonsense!
Truly - I could spend a month over there.... But I got distracted by Googling the author of the below bit of wisdom
Here's just a sampling of Gerard Holmgren's linked article on 911Eyewitness. It seems to be from early 2004, so maybe he has lost favor (he was debating The Great High Poobah Jones at one point, so maybe they hit him with with too many WADP (whack-ass demerit points.... if you trip over your own rhetoric too many times they take away life points like they did to Juni in that third Spy Kids movie.....)
Anyway..... from the prolific pen of Gerard Holmgren (sorry - just citing a single paragraph - it's too long to quote the whole thing)
QUOTE
Now the Sth tower crash, the one shown live on TV. Surely this was a real Boeing 767 because we saw it live, and at superficial viewing it certainly appears to be a large jet. However, a frame by frame examination of the video reveals that it is not a real plane. It shows impossible physical characteristics and behaviour. It passes through the wall like a ghost without making a hole and without breaking off any parts. The hole only appears well after the plane has entirely disappeared without disturbing the building. It exceeds the maximum speed of a Boeing 767 at low altitude while banked sharply and flying in the opposite direction to that in which its banking. It hip hops across the screen regularly alternating ,frame by frame, between supersonic speed and hovering motionless. It has a strange anomaly in the shape of the belly.
It is a fake. The plane is simply a movie.
Witness evidence for a large plane hitting the Sth tower is as elusive as for the Nth Tower and the Pentagon. There is a police transcript of a report of someone firing missiles.
UNQUOTE
And for abject rhetorical gymnastics (you have to read it a few times to figure out what the f*** he's saying) try this one for more on Gerard....
http://www.serendipity.li/wot/holmgren01.htm I assume veteran skeptics will recognize him as he's just about the founding father of whack-ass theories. Most of his crap has been debunked, but I'm sure he's out there carrying on. He's an Aussie - any Aussie skeptics reading?
As to the quote.... I'm sure the great Gerard Holmgren's not reading, but if he was:
Listen, Jackass, I watched that whole morning from the 20th floor of 10 Exchange Place in Jersey City. Just as I've said to the idiots who report no windows on the plane,.... the plane came in from more or less over our right shoulder - and it were a plane, bro! A big plane, a 767. There was no mistaking it. It was not a missile, not a film (did you really say that, above???? what a jerk), and not a lost seagull - it was a big roaring 767. I'll be happy to give you the names of about a hundred people who were in the building that day and watched it. (You can find 10 Exchange Place on a map -there was probably (and unfortunately for the nightmares I still have) not a better viewing spot for that strike.
And why are there no 'eyewitness' reports in the record you ask? Well, because it's on film, Gerard.... How many eyewitness reports are there on record of Ruby shooting Oswald? The film is the eyewitness!
(*spotted all the way from Brooklyn, Gravy... I love that... looking through all those towers between the East River and the WTC they could see "no windows"... and that's cited all over the place)
Truly - I could spend a month over there.... But I got distracted by Googling the author of the below bit of wisdom
Here's just a sampling of Gerard Holmgren's linked article on 911Eyewitness. It seems to be from early 2004, so maybe he has lost favor (he was debating The Great High Poobah Jones at one point, so maybe they hit him with with too many WADP (whack-ass demerit points.... if you trip over your own rhetoric too many times they take away life points like they did to Juni in that third Spy Kids movie.....)
Anyway..... from the prolific pen of Gerard Holmgren (sorry - just citing a single paragraph - it's too long to quote the whole thing)
QUOTE
Now the Sth tower crash, the one shown live on TV. Surely this was a real Boeing 767 because we saw it live, and at superficial viewing it certainly appears to be a large jet. However, a frame by frame examination of the video reveals that it is not a real plane. It shows impossible physical characteristics and behaviour. It passes through the wall like a ghost without making a hole and without breaking off any parts. The hole only appears well after the plane has entirely disappeared without disturbing the building. It exceeds the maximum speed of a Boeing 767 at low altitude while banked sharply and flying in the opposite direction to that in which its banking. It hip hops across the screen regularly alternating ,frame by frame, between supersonic speed and hovering motionless. It has a strange anomaly in the shape of the belly.
It is a fake. The plane is simply a movie.
Witness evidence for a large plane hitting the Sth tower is as elusive as for the Nth Tower and the Pentagon. There is a police transcript of a report of someone firing missiles.
UNQUOTE
And for abject rhetorical gymnastics (you have to read it a few times to figure out what the f*** he's saying) try this one for more on Gerard....
http://www.serendipity.li/wot/holmgren01.htm I assume veteran skeptics will recognize him as he's just about the founding father of whack-ass theories. Most of his crap has been debunked, but I'm sure he's out there carrying on. He's an Aussie - any Aussie skeptics reading?
As to the quote.... I'm sure the great Gerard Holmgren's not reading, but if he was:
Listen, Jackass, I watched that whole morning from the 20th floor of 10 Exchange Place in Jersey City. Just as I've said to the idiots who report no windows on the plane,.... the plane came in from more or less over our right shoulder - and it were a plane, bro! A big plane, a 767. There was no mistaking it. It was not a missile, not a film (did you really say that, above???? what a jerk), and not a lost seagull - it was a big roaring 767. I'll be happy to give you the names of about a hundred people who were in the building that day and watched it. (You can find 10 Exchange Place on a map -there was probably (and unfortunately for the nightmares I still have) not a better viewing spot for that strike.
And why are there no 'eyewitness' reports in the record you ask? Well, because it's on film, Gerard.... How many eyewitness reports are there on record of Ruby shooting Oswald? The film is the eyewitness!
(*spotted all the way from Brooklyn, Gravy... I love that... looking through all those towers between the East River and the WTC they could see "no windows"... and that's cited all over the place)
Last edited:
