Ed, I feel sorry for you. Your blinders are on and you don't even notice, or maybe you do you just couldn't be bothered with it. Whatever your reasoning is not to see the truth in this is beyond me, there is so much information on 9/11 out there that is mind boggling. I understand that it is a very touchy suject, nobody wants to believe that their own government might not have the peoples best interest in mind when policies are made. It's hard, but once you do, your a different person....just like that kid in the movie who saw dead people...I see lies everywhere now. Do you like being lied to? I don't, it makes me angry. Hey Eddie, take a look at these cutter charges.....things that make you go hmmmmm.




If quacks like a duck, walks like a duck and looks like a duck and does whatever a duck does....guess what, it usually is a duck.

Ed, maybe you need to smoke a jont and relax a bit, that will help you think outside the box too.

enjoy

"Ed, I feel sorry for you. Your blinders are on and you don't even notice, or maybe you do you just couldn't be bothered with it."

That would be the idea of having blinders on, redundant truther. Wait, I might be a hypocrite.

"Whatever your reasoning is not to see the truth in this is beyond me,"

Evidence.

" there is so much information on 9/11 out there that is mind boggling"

I agree! Have you ever read the NIST report? It's very comprehensive.

" I understand that it is a very touchy suject, nobody wants to believe that their own government might not have the peoples best interest in mind when policies are made.

It's especially touchy when you zoom in on pictures, in effect implementing the fire fighters. (will get to this near the end)

"It's hard, but once you do, your a different person....just like that kid in the movie who saw dead people...I see lies everywhere now. "

You saw that movie too!? I'm not sure why truthers love referencing movies to prove their point, it's quite embarrassing. Some of the movies I've had truthers beg my convictions with: The Matrix(apparently it's real), 1984 (they don't like reading the book), Die Hard, National Treasure.

"Do you like being lied to?"

Perhaps you should have asked this before you posted your "that make you go hmmmmm", I would have indicated my preference and we could have avoided this whole exchange.

"I don't, it makes me angry. "

I then recommend reading actual scientific papers on the subject.

"Hey Eddie, take a look at these cutter charges.....things that make you go hmmmmm."

http://youtube.com/watch?v=ySHgiUxnLC0 - here is a debunking, with your exact pictures. It's the damn clean up effort, hence you see the firefighters there.

Lessons:

-Have dates for the pictures. (In case of 9/11, even specific times)

-Be specific on what you're trying to prove instead of doing this: "If quacks like a duck, walks like a duck and looks like a duck and does whatever a duck does....guess what, it usually is a duck. " It is troubling that you hear all the quacking in your head, so put the weed away.

For God's sake, you see the rubbles around them, when they're putting on the "cutter charges", moron.

"Ed, maybe you need to smoke a jont and relax a bit, that will help you think outside the box too. "

Maybe you don't need another joint. And no thank you, I don't do drugs.

Speaking of cleanup effort, why were they so hasty to get the beams cut and loaded onto trucks to be sold to Chinese auto manufacturers. SHOULDN'T THERE HAVE BEEN A FORENSICS TEAM THERE BEFORE THE DEMOLITION CREW???

blackwaters,

The ethical thing to do is admit that I debunked the previously stated claim, and then move on to your question. Instead of doing this:

"Speaking of cleanup effort, why were they so hasty to get the beams cut and loaded onto trucks to be sold to Chinese auto manufacturers."

Well, it wasn't "hasty", that's a misrepresentation. You forgot to consider what the first concern was on that day. Read this - http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.h ... A9679C8B63
and http://www.berkeley.edu/news/berkeleyan ... _grou.html The main concern was the identification of human remains and not the defense against conspiracy charges that were going to later arise on the internet.

" SHOULDN'T THERE HAVE BEEN A FORENSICS TEAM THERE BEFORE THE DEMOLITION CREW???"

This is a typical truther tactic. Pose a rhetorical question which makes me answer your previous question while keeping your premise. So no, that's not how an investigation must occur in such a large scale scenario. The demolitions crew can appear way ahead of any investigative team, as long as they leave samples to be tested. Again, keep in mind the main concern on that day. This very issue was argued in the NYT article I posted before.

Here is how the investigation was actually started and what happend to the steel

"Massive Effort Underway to Recycle Trade Center Wreckage" (NYT Oct. 9, 2001). Excerpt:

"When the World Trade Center towers fell, the buildings became a heartbreaking mass grave, and -- at a coldly physical level -- 1.2 million tons of tangled debris. If a plan for removing that debris was going to be devised responsibly, engineers and government officials needed to be much more specific about what materials lay in the wreckage. Leslie E. Robertson Associates, a structural engineering firm involved in building the trade center, developed a more accurate assessment, estimating that each of the twin towers contained 3,881 tons of steel reinforcing in the concrete floor slabs; 47,453 tons of vertical steel columns; 8,462 tons of aluminum and glass; 2,531 tons of ceiling materials; 4,218 tons of flooring; and 31,350 tons of partitions or walls. The total came to about 1,176,000 tons of debris, including about 285,000 tons of steel. A tightly controlled system of transportation, disposal and recycling was developed, with virtually every piece of the trade center now having a prescribed destination. Tracked at checkpoints, the materials are shuttled from cranes to trucks to docks in Manhattan and Brooklyn and from there to investigation sites, landfills and scrapyards. Nearby scrap recyclers have begun cutting, shearing, shredding and shipping the biggest volumes of metals they have ever faced. Recycling the steel and other metals could net a few tens of millions of dollars."

http://www.fema.gov/pdf/library/fema403_apd.pdf
http://www.house.gov/science/hot/wtc/wt ... _sheet.pdf

City Clamping Down on Ground Zero Steel Sales - (New York Daily News, Feb 5, 2002)
The city is telling scrap yards not to sell steel from the World Trade Center to companies that want to exploit the tragedy by turning the wreckage into things like souvenirs, says the Daily News. A Georgia company, International Agile Manufacturing, has been melting tons of the steel into commemorative medallions and selling the souvenirs for $29.95 each.

Girder From World Trade Center Will Help Provide Insight Into Collapse - (NY Daily News, Apr 16, 2002)
Recovery workers this week found a mauled, 4-ton column of steel that stretched from the 100th to 103rd floors of the north tower of the World Trade Center. Thick bolts fastened to the column more than 30 years ago -- securing it to a much thinner structural plate -- were still in place. But the plate ripped apart. The National Institute of Standards and Technology, which investigates building collapses after disasters, will get the column -- along with about 60 other steel beams from important areas in the towers.

American Recycler: WTC steel recycling Excerpt: "Law enforcement authorities survey the material for evidence. Only then is it released to a scrap processor under an existing long-term contract with the NYC Department of Sanitation to purchase and then recycle scrap metal."

It wasn't hard to find this information due to Mark Roberts' research. I hope that you actually read it and stop using this "question" and encourage others not to use it anymore when they try to argue an "inside job".

There is more data available on the clean up effort - http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/groundz ... rtingopera

Lesson:

-Stop assuming how a clean up effort should proceed, until you research it.

-Admit when a truther claim has been debunked

ED

“That would be the idea of having blinders on, redundant truther. Wait, I might be a hypocrite.”
Yes, I do believe you are a hypocrite keep reading.
I also think GWB is one too, remember….Saddam has WMD he said but did he find ANY?…and you believe what he says about 9/11 too?
Do I need to show you the footage? Just ask.

“Evidence.”
I have lots, and so does this one site: http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/socio ... m#contents
Check it out, you must have missed this one, after all your not awake yet!

“I agree! Have you ever read the NIST report? It's very comprehensive.”
Not all but some and I do not take that as truth either, NIST is run by the government man!
See sections 12 and 13 in above paper.
I bet you think FEMA is a good organization too huh? Lmao


“It's especially touchy when you zoom in on pictures, in effect implementing the fire fighters. (will get to this near the end)”
Since when are firefighters demolition experts? Come on!
“implementing”….I don’t think that word means “proof “ either. Now you just embarrassing yourself.
See I can be a prick too if I want to be.
Yes, we will see near the end here too.

“You saw that movie too!? I'm not sure why truthers love referencing movies to prove their point, it's quite embarrassing.”
If other people embarrass you then that is your problem, you worry about what others think…now I understand why you don’t think for yourself and see the truth, you do not want a different opinion on 9/11 and/or other topics that differs from those around you. Sad really. Hey, don’t rock the boat….I say F that! LET’S ROCK!

“Some of the movies I've had truthers beg my convictions with: The Matrix(apparently it's real), 1984 (they don't like reading the book), Die Hard, National Treasure.”
Thanks for the list of your favourite movies but it was not needed, I only like 2 out of the 4 anyways. Was that an act of male bonding on your behalf? If so, please stop.
Embarrassing yourself again….doh!

“Perhaps you should have asked this before you posted your "that make you go hmmmmm", I would have indicated my preference and we could have avoided this whole exchange.”
I like to have exchanges, I find people like you very interesting, almost like old pets who cannot learn new tricks. But you can. We will make you a believer.

“I then recommend reading actual scientific papers on the subject.”
Ok, here you go: http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/socio ... m#contents

“http://youtube.com/watch?v=ySHgiUxnLC0 - here is a debunking, with your exact pictures. It's the damn clean up effort, hence you see the firefighters there.”
Once again, firemen are not demolition crews. Embarrassing yourself again….doh!

Lesson 1 - firemen put out fires, not set “cutter charges“ for demolitions.

“Lessons:”

“-Have dates for the pictures. (In case of 9/11, even specific times)”
That is all you need for evidence in your eyes?
Come on, any dude with photoshop can put a time/stamp on any picture with any time and any day.
WOW! Now you just embarrassing yourself agian.
You’re a hypocrite here….all of your info does not have time and date stamps. Tisk, tisk.

“-Be specific on what you're trying to prove instead of doing this: "If quacks like a duck, walks like a duck and looks like a duck and does whatever a duck does....guess what, it usually is a duck. " It is troubling that you hear all the quacking in your head, so put the weed away.”
Once again…Wow, cannot dispute the facts properly so attack on any front possible huh?
The only quack I can see or hear or should I say read is right here Eddie. DOH!
Now you just embarrassing yourself. By the way…I was not trying to prove anything there. Just an observation….you do know what that is don‘t you?

“For God's sake, you see the rubbles around them, when they're putting on the "cutter charges", moron.”
You sad moron you, those guys are not even on 9/11 rubble in that pic you moron!
This pic is from the History Channel: “Wrecking ball – Modern marvels”. MORON!
Check it out: http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/socio ... 11_24c.htm scroll down to see pic.
WOW again!
You need help Eddie.
Now you just embarrassing yourself.

“Maybe you don't need another joint. And no thank you, I don't do drugs.”
Too bad for you, more for me and my crew.
Oh, Eddie...
LESSON 2
If you digest coffee, nicotine, alcohol ect…then you do “do drugs”.
Game, set, match on that one Eddie, you druggie.

_________________
In times of change, the Patriot is a scarce man; brave, hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a Patriot.

Mark Twain

"Yes, I do believe you are a hypocrite keep reading.
I also think GWB is one too, remember….Saddam has WMD he said but did he find ANY?…and you believe what he says about 9/11 too?
Do I need to show you the footage? Just ask. "

Again, truthers with poor reading comprehension. I called myself a hypocrite because I accused you of redundancy by calling you a redundant truther. It was an implication that all truthers are redundant. Hence the statement "redundant truther" is in itself redundant. Moron. From now on I will use less complex insults. Also, don't change the subject to Iraq,coward.


"I have lots, and so does this one site: http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/socio ... m#contents
Check it out, you must have missed this one, after all your not awake yet! "

Before you created a whole thread to do with me, I was already contesting his paper in another thread, in fact the only other thread I posted in. Yet I "must have missed this one" since I am "not awake yet!". Dumbass. Enough with the new age rhetoric of me not being "awake".

"Not all but some and I do not take that as truth either, NIST is run by the government man!
See sections 12 and 13 in above paper.
I bet you think FEMA is a good organization too huh? Lmao "

Yes, "run by the government". This is all a truther needs in order to dismiss any information. You people think it's logical to prove a conspiracy by already assuming that it exists, thus dismissing the NIST report before you even prove the government guilty of anything. This is an illogical premise. A lot of truther claims don't even need evidence in order to be debunked. As for FEMA, I did reference them in previous post in this very thread. I don't care much about "good" vs. "bad", I just need scientific credibility. In sections 12,13 Jones, ignores the reason why certain experiments were deemed to be irrelevant. The most common reason was the risk of dismissing the effects of those floors in a full scale model of the towers. Hence there was the call to resort to simulations. His lack of experience in structural engineers peaks when he expects to see full simulations of the collapse, considering that not even the most powerful computers can simulate it. They can only track the initiation of collapse. And this is what was required from NIST. He then does something that even more reprehensible and regurgitates Ryan's statement that UL certified the steel. They didn't. Ryan learned this the hard way.

"Since when are firefighters demolition experts? Come on!
“implementing”….I don’t think that word means “proof “ either. Now you just embarrassing yourself.
See I can be a prick too if I want to be.
Yes, we will see near the end here too"

More poor reading comprehension. I don't think that word means "proof" either, especially since I wasn't using it that way. I was however pointing out how your pictures were suggestive that fire fighters were implemented in this "conspiracy". This is unethical, hence I pointed it out. Unfortunately, you don't have enough intelligence to be a prick.

"If other people embarrass you then that is your problem, you worry about what others think…now I understand why you don’t think for yourself and see the truth, you do not want a different opinion on 9/11 and/or other topics that differs from those around you. Sad really. Hey, don’t rock the boat….I say F that! LET’S ROCK! "

I liked this sort of rebuttal better when Bart plainly put is as "I know you are, but what am I?". And now you also know the opinions of those around me? No reading comprehension, but you have psychic powers. Might be a fair trade off.

"Thanks for the list of your favourite movies but it was not needed, I only like 2 out of the 4 anyways. Was that an act of male bonding on your behalf? If so, please stop.
Embarrassing yourself again….doh! "

Again, the "I know you are but what am I?" argument. It's quite clear that I was trying to discourage truthers from arguing this conspiracy through referencing movies. But you are so brilliant to turn it around on me and suggest that they are my favorites. I mentioned it in the very first place because you referenced the Sixth Sense. So if you consider criticism to be an act of male bonding, then yes. Speaking of your Simpsons arguments - "doh!". I thought I was debating a truther, now I have to take on the whole Simpsons family.

"I like to have exchanges, I find people like you very interesting, almost like old pets who cannot learn new tricks. But you can. We will make you a believer. "

And you accuse me of attempting to begin male bonding, yet you want me to be your pet. Again, poor reading comprehension. Go see to which statement I originally replied to. I sympothize with your use of "believer'', as you are a cult ,and I doubt you'll make this conversion happen any time soon.

"Ok, here you go: http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/socio ... m#contents "

This is your reply to me asking for "actual scientific papers". Do you know what happens to actual scientific papers? Peer review in national or international scientific journals, and not "the journal of 9/11 studies". Again, I've dealt with Jones' paper before, why do you keep bringing it up, suggesting that I missed it.

"Once again, firemen are not demolition crews. Embarrassing yourself again….doh!

Lesson 1 - firemen put out fires, not set “cutter charges“ for demolitions. "

Homer,

Is this why you think I mentioned firefighters? Moron. I pointed them out to indicate time. The firefighters wouldn't be there when they were supposedly planting the thermate bombs (X weeks, or months before). They would be there after the effect. I don't care so much that you use straw man arguments. But this one is just retarded. So you're right that firemen don't set cutter charges, but they do help secure and make room for the clean up crew.

"That is all you need for evidence in your eyes?
Come on, any dude with photoshop can put a time/stamp on any picture with any time and any day.
WOW! Now you just embarrassing yourself agian.
You’re a hypocrite here….all of your info does not have time and date stamps. Tisk, tisk. "

Except that I didn't post pictures to prove anything. The reason I asked you to indicate times is because they are relevant to your argument. Suppose you just edited them in using photoshop, they then could be contested. Try this in court some time. Explain the dates should be withheld due to their potential forgery. Idiot. The idea that times can be faked doesn't exclude them from being relevant.

I quoted to you first source documents, I'm not sure why those would require time, considering that they only had one printing. You're too desperate in making me out to be a hypocrite, such that it in fact it's "you just embarrassing yourself".

"Once again…Wow, cannot dispute the facts properly so attack on any front possible huh?
The only quack I can see or hear or should I say read is right here Eddie. DOH!
Now you just embarrassing yourself. By the way…I was not trying to prove anything there. Just an observation….you do know what that is don‘t you? "

I do dispute your "facts", hence in my replies I go statement-by-statement. Since this was one of your statements, I also replied to it. Again Homer, - "DOH!".

"You sad moron you, those guys are not even on 9/11 rubble in that pic you moron!
This pic is from the History Channel: “Wrecking ball – Modern marvels”. MORON!
Check it out: http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/socio ... 11_24c.htm scroll down to see pic.
WOW again!
You need help Eddie.
Now you just embarrassing yourself."

This is quite amazing. I take you at your word that what you're showing me is relevant to 9/11, and then you use it against me? So, turns out that the picture is even less relevant, to the point of being worthless? This is something you wish to point out as an argument against me? That I give credibility to your evidence and then disprove it. But then turns out that there was nothing to disprove in the first place. How does this help your cause? Did you give a source for the photo originally? You posted the 2 pictures right next to each other. This is precisely why I ask you to date your pictures.

"Too bad for you, more for me and my crew.
Oh, Eddie...
LESSON 2
If you digest coffee, nicotine, alcohol ect…then you do “do drugs”.


Keep in mind, it was you who brought up drugs in the first place, for whatever reason. Great logic, as I must also be a drug abuser for taking anti-biotics. As for your silly argument - I don't drink coffee, I don't smoke, and I have an alcoholic drink maybe twice a year (each time below 15%
concentration)

"Game, set, match on that one Eddie, you druggie."

Which game are you talking about? Suppose that reading comprehension, logic, misrepresentation, and evidence are not included in the rules, then you might be the winner. Until then, you're just a little bitch.

ED

A quick note - I apologize for responding in this thread before I responded in the previous thread. Those replies will come after Monday. I did have time to respond to this one in a few minutes, but the others will take the amount of time unavailable to me right now. Also, I may be a prick for insulting this user's reading comprehension. Perhaps English is not your first language?

ED

Ed's quote: Yes, "run by the government". This is all a truther needs in order to dismiss any information. This is what's preventing Ed from looking outside his box. Ed actually believes governments care about the people! That's right Ed the government would never harm you.

_________________
Survival of freedom requires a moral people. Absent this, the Constitution has no meaning, no matter how well written. ~ Ron Paul
http://kitchener911truth.blogspot.com/
http://www.youtube.com/user/Steeper33

Ed, you make me laugh with all the bullshit you talk.
It sounds like either your an agent for the government or you suck on GWB's peepee, which is it?

Oh, and by the way, when the 9/11 commission wanted to speak to GWB and Dick they both said they would testify not under oath and they must be together....why? Are they like little girls who have to go to the bathroom in groups?

When I shoot down your evidence you get all mad at turn it around like a lawyer....sad. Lawyers are disliked just like you ED.
Oh, yes, you can call names and try to insult me all you want, it shows your true character.
It really does make you look bad ED, and we all know you care what others think of you.

Yes, I will respond to your every remark in my next post.
I love making you angry, you just keep on embarrassing yourself!

Smile Ed, your government loves you!

_________________
In times of change, the Patriot is a scarce man; brave, hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, however, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a Patriot.

Mark Twain

"Ed, you make me laugh with all the bullshit you talk."

Build your own confidence, I'm not going to help here. And no one can hear you laugh over a forum.

"It sounds like either your an agent for the government or you suck on GWB's peepee, which is it? "

You're giving me a choice? Why can't I do both? After all, I end up having to deal with some dick either way.

"Oh, and by the way, when the 9/11 commission wanted to speak to GWB and Dick they both said they would testify not under oath and they must be together....why? Are they like little girls who have to go to the bathroom in groups? "

Now, in order for this idiot to not think that 9/11 was a conspiracy, I have to defend everything that Bush and Cheney do. First of all if Bush truly had something to hide, he wouldn't testify in the first place. He was given the choice. There were those not involved in the government at the time, who also chose not to testify under oath. This is because in the non conspiracy world, people don't take on extra obligations when they don't have to. Of course Bush's lawyers would of advised him to do this, in order to sound more competent. You really think he'd know the specifics of America's defenses if it wasn't for Cheney standing next to him? Of course he did this in order to have a "cover up". But not a cover up of a conspiracy. Note, at this point Bush is a little girl, who also happens to have a penis , which I happen to suck, depending on my choice. Why don't you stick to your own reality, it's already crazy enough, you don't need to build a new one.

"When I shoot down your evidence you get all mad at turn it around like a lawyer....sad. Lawyers are disliked just like you ED. "

What did you shoot down? And I love this. Truthers love to insult me by comparing me to upper level occupations. First I'm a government agent, now I'm a lawyer, maybe I'll get to be a CEO next. And I can see how you would dislike lawyers - evidence and proper procedure are cryptonite to the truth movement.

"Oh, yes, you can call names and try to insult me all you want, it shows your true character. "

Dr Phill Simpson,

What true character? Have I at first presented myself differently, perhaps as being kind and sympathetic to truthers? What have I revealed that I didn't convey before. You've also tried to insult me and called me names, so would that mean that your "true" character is the same as mine? And in the spirit of this - you're a retard.

"It really does make you look bad ED, and we all know you care what others think of you. "

How can I argue this if you can asses me so well? Most truthers just have tinfoil, whereas you also have a crystal ball.

"Yes, I will respond to your every remark in my next post. "

Why don't you talk shit once you respond?

"I love making you angry, you just keep on embarrassing yourself! "

Homer,

If I was truly embarrassing myself all this time, you wouldn't have to point it out. You're playing emperor's dress up.

"Smile Ed, your government loves you!"

Ok.