9/11 Conspiracy Theory Question

RealDealNeverstop said:

http://www.mindfully.org/Reform/2006/911-WTC-Twin-Towers26jan06.htm

“[T]here was just an explosion [in the south tower]. It seemed like on television [when] they blow up these buildings. It seemed like it was going all the way around like a belt, all these explosions.”--Firefighter Richard Banaciski

“I saw a flash flash flash [at] the lower level of the building. You know like when they demolish a building?”--Assistant Fire Commissioner Stephen Gregory

“t was [like a] professional demolition where they set the charges on certain floors and then you hear 'Pop, pop, pop, pop, pop'."--Paramedic Daniel Rivera

Click to expand...

"It seemed like on television [when] they blow up these buildings. It seemed like it was going all the way around like a belt, all these explosions." 'Pop, pop, pop, pop, pop' was most certainly the sound of floor meeting floor as the collapse progressed.

Why did NY withhold over 500 testimonies from Emergency workers for almost 4 years?

Click to expand...

What does it matter? The testimonies overwhelmingly back up the official version of events.

_Zap_ said:

Yup.

Basically, turning you all into a walking joke is the only way I can avoid despising you for your disgusting habits of twisting heroes into psychopathic murderers in order to live out your pathetic action movie fantasies.

But my generalization is valid. You have to be nearly as dense and deluded as steel pole man to believe the truther nonsense.

Click to expand...

What a profound straw-man argument. I never ever and let me repeat never twisted "heroes into psychopathic murders." Your resort to a straw-man argument with no substance indicates to me that you have no response to the valid questions I have raised... questions that do not "twist" the heroes of 9/11, many of whom are now dying because of chronic respiratory illnesses, but questions that brought into scrutiny that validity and methodology of the 9/11 Commission's findings. You provide no answers to such questions, but proceed with an argument lacking reason?

No-one need be "deluded" to believe or question the validity of the official conspiracy myth of 9/11. But one does need to be in denial to avoid the probing questions that unveil its inconsistencies.

bjspurple said:

What a profound straw-man argument. I never ever and let me repeat never twisted "heroes into psychopathic murders." Your resort to a straw-man argument with no substance indicates to me that you have no response to the valid questions I have raised... questions that do not "twist" the heroes of 9/11, many of whom are now dying because of chronic respiratory illnesses, but questions that brought into scrutiny that validity and methodology of the 9/11 Commission's findings.

Click to expand...

Yup, it's a straw-man.

In order to believe the 9/11 conspiracy, you have to believe that firefighters, law enforcement, and other normal people are lying to cover up mass murder. Their statements directly contradict the absurd theories of the truth movement.

Unless you think the government has zapped them with mind control rays, I guess.

_Zap_ said:

Yup, it's a straw-man.

In order to believe the 9/11 conspiracy, you have to believe that firefighters, law enforcement, and other normal people are lying to cover up mass murder. Their statements directly contradict the absurd theories of the truth movement.

Unless you think the government has zapped them with mind control rays, I guess.

Click to expand...

It is a falisity to state that in order to merely question the official conspiracy theory I must "believe that firefighters, law enforcement and other normal people are lying to cover up mass murder." For one, if government complicity did occur, then only a few individuals would know about it and they would certainly not tell others down the chain of command. And if anyone else knew about it, what would keep them from speaking out? Well, either simple orders to shut up, threats, or fear for the lose of their jobs or their reputation. For example, Paul Craig Roberts highlights reasons as to why many who see complications in the official theory would not speak up. He writes:
"Try to find an academic physicist who will express in public his doubts about the official explanation for the collapse of the three World Trade buildings. An academic career in physics is almost totally dependent on government research grants. By bringing federal funding to education, liberals handed government the power to control. One physicist who expressed his doubts about the collapse of the twin towers, Steven Jones, was terminated by BYU at the insistence of the federal government, which held the power of the purse over the university’s head.
The same constraint on truth exists everywhere. I once asked the proprietor of a distinguished engineering firm why he didn’t publicly express his doubts about the World Trade Center buildings. He said it would be the end of his business, that he would be denounced as an anti-American and demonized as a terrorist sympathizer. The fact that he would be an expert giving an expert opinion would carry no weight."
Also, the assumption that an incredibly sophisticated government operation cannot remain secret for long because "someone would have talked" is, just that, an assumption. As David Ray Griffin highlights: "The Manhattan Project to create an atomic bom, which involved some 100,000 people, was kept secret for several years. Also, the United States provoked and participated in a civil war in Indonesia in 1957 that resulted in some 40,000 deaths, but this illegal war was kept secret from the American people until a book about it appeared in 1995."
So please don't push on me the assumption that a gigantic multitude of people would need to be involved in the 9/11 operation, or that "someone would have talked." Furthermore, I never even claimed that firefighters and law enforcement was involved in some grand government conspiracy. All I claimed was that we should critically examine the official conspiracy theory and the Commission's methodology and the validity of its findings. But shhh... maybe I shouldn't ask those questions because I would somehow be implicating law enforcement and firefighters in a conspiracy.

oldbetang said:

"It seemed like on television [when] they blow up these buildings. It seemed like it was going all the way around like a belt, all these explosions." 'Pop, pop, pop, pop, pop' was most certainly the sound of floor meeting floor as the collapse progressed.

Click to expand...

Lol...if he was still in the building or was close enough to confuse the "pops" how could he have lived to give a testimony. Plus, that's overlooking the obvious fact these testimonies are recounting what happened before the collapses occurred. I also noticed a couple of words were cherry picked while the second testimony was completely ignored.

What does it matter? The testimonies overwhelmingly back up the official version of events.

Click to expand...

Yeah, who are we lowly citizens to question why our government tried to prevent the testimonies of over 500 emergency workers from being released to the public? Who are we taxpaying Consitutionally guarateed Citizens to demand the government not hide information regarding the worst terrorist attacks in US history? You're probably right, iam just all uppity about expecting our government to respect the Constitution.

RealDealNeverstop said:

Yeah, who are we lowly citizens to question why our government tried to prevent the testimonies of over 500 emergency workers from being released to the public? Who are we taxpaying Consitutionally guarateed Citizens to demand the government not hide information regarding the worst terrorist attacks in US history? You're probably right, iam just all uppity about expecting our government to respect the Constitution.

Click to expand...

Your government never tried to prevent the testimonies of over 500 emergency workers from being released to the public. So try throwing something else at the wall to see if it will stick.

oldbetang said:

Your government never tried to prevent the testimonies of over 500 emergency workers from being released to the public. So try throwing something else at the wall to see if it will stick.

Click to expand...

ROTFL..........talk about throwing stuff to the wall and see what sticks. But hey, I FULLY expected that type of response because I've come to realize certain things simply won't be addressed by the Believers.

"Part of the answer is that the city of New York would not release them until it was forced to do so. Early in 2002, the New York Times requested copies under the freedom of information act, but Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s administration refused. So the Times, joined by several families of 9/11 victims, filed suit. After a long process, the city was finally ordered by the New York Court of Appeals to release the records (with some exceptions and redactions allowed). Included were oral histories, in interview form, provided by 503 firefighters and medical workers.1 (Emergency Medical Services had become a division within the Fire Department.2) The Times then made these oral histories publicly available."

So let me guess, the Times and families of the victims had to fight in courts to get the info because.......(Since my point about cherry picking a single word from the quoted eyewitness was ignored iam guessing this won't be addressed either. Pessimist or realist?)

RealDealNeverstop said:

"Part of the answer is that the city of New York would not release them until it was forced to do so. Early in 2002, the New York Times requested copies under the freedom of information act, but Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s administration refused. So the Times, joined by several families of 9/11 victims, filed suit. After a long process, the city was finally ordered by the New York Court of Appeals to release the records (with some exceptions and redactions allowed). Included were oral histories, in interview form, provided by 503 firefighters and medical workers.1 (Emergency Medical Services had become a division within the Fire Department.2) The Times then made these oral histories publicly available."

Click to expand...

You'll have to forgive me , because I was under the impression that you were from Massachusetts, not New York. So, if you are in fact from New York city then your government did apparently hold back the release of the testimonies. For what reason, I have no idea .

oldbetang said:

You'll have to forgive me , because I was under the impression that you were from Massachusetts, not New York. So, if you are in fact from New York city then your government did apparently hold back the release of the testimonies. For what reason, I have no idea .

Click to expand...

One of the most ridiculous strawmen in the history of message boards, and quite possibly the Western world.

I have bookmarked the post to remind me it's prudent to not respond in the future.