NoahFence
Banned
He was talking about the building he was in. WTC 7. Looked one way and it was there, the other way and it was gone. The huge gash in the building backs this up.
- Status
He was talking about the building he was in. WTC 7. Looked one way and it was there, the other way and it was gone. The huge gash in the building backs this up.
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
You mean like speculating that there would be no reason for firefighters to be north or east of WTC7 while the task at hand for them was two large burning towers.
.
So? Supposedly they were there before #2 collapsed.
Yeah, a common thing for people amped on adrenaline are apt to do. It can play funny things on recollections. Its one reason why eyewitness testimony is unreliable.
Unfortunately the interviewers allowed him this freedom which at times made his re-telling somewhat confusing for the viewer.
I for one have never accused Mr.Jennings of lieing. Being incorrect, not lieing.
Just as you utterly ignore my pointing out that in order to attract attention, going to the south side would have been more to the point.
Did he say he moved from window to window? Who's speculating now?
If everybody did the same, no one would be replying to your CD claims.
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
What part of "credible" did you not understand?
If you'd care to "open my mind", tell me what time Barry Jennings got to WTC7.
Last edited:
"No evidence", means 911 truth has no evidence. It is simple, and not a shut mind thing. 911 truth has produced no evidence for an inside job, CD, thermite and high explosives. 911 truth is based on fantasy, and a fantasy has no evidence except in the open minds of 911 truth followers, who think opinions are evidence.
No evidence tells me 911 truth has failed for 13 years.
LSSBB
Devilish Dictionarian
You can't pick and choose the puzzle pieces you want, and put the order you want them in, and discard all the other puzzle pieces out there (Hess statements, collapse timelines, etc.), and still expect anyone to take what you've taped together as serious evidence.
Anyone except yourself, apparently.
MM isn't talking to me any more, it seems.
But the point that Barclay was full of burning vehicles when Jennings broke the NE window pretty much settles his timeline as nonsense. Barclay was set aflame by the WTC1 collapse.
But the point that Barclay was full of burning vehicles when Jennings broke the NE window pretty much settles his timeline as nonsense. Barclay was set aflame by the WTC1 collapse.
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
Now you're getting it.
No one here is calling him a liar. He just did what every human does. He justified the time-line in his head to how he thought it went down. This make him human and points to the reason witness statements always need to be justified with a known time line.
I have no doubt Mr Jennings thought he witnessed an explosion when and where he said. The problem is, it was was later than he thought.
This may surprise you, I accept Mr Jennings testimony.
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
Well, on the chance MM has you on ignore, I mentioned that a couple times as well.
Seems he missed it though.
Miragememories
Banned
I do not agree that Mr. Jennings observed the burning vehicles immediately after breaking the windows.
For one thing, the collapse induced burning vehicles did not require broken windows to be observed.
I believe he observed this later after the collapses and was anxious to talk about it for the camera.
It was one of the dramatic observations that breaking the windows allowed him to see clearly.
No doubt you will disagree with this but it is what I believe explains Mr. Jenning's obvious break in the timeline.
I do not believe he was so stupid as to not realize that without the collapse of the towers, the sight of those burning vehicles made no sense.
In the same interview he stated that when he got home he spent the rest of the day watching all the 9/11 News.
He could not avoid this knowledge.
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
Even though it fits the time-line better? Seems you are the one with the closed mind not willing to accept facts that are problematic.
Richard the G
Critical Thinker
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2012
- Messages
- 253
Lol
Seymour Butz
Muse
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2008
- Messages
- 884
I don't see anything wrong with this.
But remember, he got to the oem and found it locked and couldn't get in. So it was definitely some time after the evacuation of the oem. They didn't meet anyone coming down on their way up, so probably well after 9:45. Probably around 10? They left and found someone with keys and got in and THIS is when he saw the towers standing. How long did it take, wandering around those big floors until they ran into the right guy? A half hour?10:30. How much time inside the oem before they left? 10 minutes? 2 fell while they wandering around inside, trying to figure out what to do and get outta Dodge. In his own complete statement, they then left a second time and THIS is when he makes the statement about the stairwells blowing out. That's when 1 fell.
Your alternative requires stuff happening ridiculously quick. Everything after their first arrival at the oem would of needed to take 30 minutes. That's an insane belief , that a large fellow like Jennings woulda been sprinting around.
Do as some have requested. Put together a time line. Convince us.
We know you can't .........
Last edited:
I don't understand, why Jennings doesn't tell us what he actually saw! He could just say "I saw WTC 1 on fire" or "I saw debris falling from WTC 1" or something else like that instead of his cryptic testimony.
ETA:
This is an interesting hypothesis, but please tell me one thing: Jennigs said the following in the LC interview:
What do you think is the meaning of "once" in the context of his testimony?
I'm not a native speaker, but to me it means "as soon as".
Last edited:
Miragememories
Banned
From the 8th floor of WTC7, looking out the south windows from approximately half way across the floor, he would see the lower part of the WTC twin towers and therefore nothing dramatic.
So plain direct english confuses you but you have no problem when faced with subtlety?
"Once", the window was broken, a view was enabled, that previously wasn't.
That does not mean that once the window was broken the view he described was the first one he observed.
What he described were the most interesting things he was able to observe as a result of breaking the window.
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
Because until you break a window you can't see out of it.
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
No, unless you break the window you can't see the towers to check to see it they were still there. Why you would be looking to see this would be anyone's guess (considering he would have no reason to believe they would not be)
Last edited:
Miragememories
Banned
Mr. Jennings arrived at WTC7 more than 1 1/2 hours before WTC1 collapsed.
When he arrived, he only observed police officers, none of whom mentioned the evacuation, and after his first failed attempt to access the 23rd floor, without advisory comment, they gladly escorted him to the 23rd floor.
I find it very difficult to believe that it took so long for Mr. Jennings to reach the 23rd floor OEM, see that it was vacated, be told to immediately evacuate and then only get as far as the 6th floor stairwell.
Redwood
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- May 9, 2012
- Messages
- 1,557
Besides the fact that Mr. Hess and Mr. Jennings would have been severely injured, if not killed, had they been anywhere near actual demolition charges being set off, if demolition charges had been set off, there would have been no need to break any windows, as windows galore would have been shattered by the blast. In actual demolitions, windows are always removed but there is still the problem of window breakage in adjacent buildings. See photo of window breakage in a building adjacent to the Landmark demolition in Texas
Attachments
TJM
Potsing Whiled Runk
Rubbish.
Source it.
- Status