See other 9/11 Articles
Title: DR. STEVEN JONES- PNAC-4/14/07- NEW 9/11 EVIDENCE
Source:
YouTube
URL Source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bsp3DPTmiN0
Published: Apr 30, 2007
Author: Steven Jones
Post Date: 2007-04-30 23:57:52 by Critter
Ping List: *You Gotta Be Shitting Me* Subscribe to *You Gotta Be Shitting Me*
Keywords: 9/11, Truth, Thermate
Views: 6960
Comments: 150
Subscribe to *You Gotta Be Shitting Me*
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Robin, Christine, Diana, Zipporah, Honway, kamala, Aristeides, Red Jones, Ferret Mike, skydrifter, Destro, BeALoser, I mean BeAChooser, all (#0)
(Edited)
Good shit from the good doctor.
A new truth movement friendly digg type site: Zlonk it!
#2. To: IndieTX, kiki, Jethro Tull, Fred Mertz, Brian S, Tauzero, gengis gandhi, ladybug, orangedog, arete, Paul Revere, imawit, Mekons4, rack42, Dakmar, RickyJ, Indrid Cold, Horse, Tom007, Lodwick, , All (#1) (Edited)
Did I miss anyone? hehehe
A new truth movement friendly digg type site: Zlonk it!
#3. To: Neil McIver, Mind_Virus, noone222, Coral Snake, Axenolith, DeaconBenjamin, Simmering Frog, tzf90, a vast rightwing conspirator, (#2)
There, that should do it for now.
A new truth movement friendly digg type site: Zlonk it!
#4. To: Burkeman1 (#0)
I knew I forgot someone. You have to see these clips.
A new truth movement friendly digg type site: Zlonk it!
#5. To: Critter (#0)
This is very tough for me to listen to due to a hearing impairment. I wish someone had the presence of mind at the time to record the audio with a close mic on the speaker rather than from 60 feet away. :( Perhaps I can find a written transcript. Thanks for posting though.
Law Enforcement Against Prohibition
#6. To: Critter (#0) (Edited)
OK, if this dust was really from the WTC towers then I would have think it conclusively proves that thermate was used to bring the towers down. The spheres from the dust have almost the exact same composition as one would expect from thermate reactions. This is a big if however. Proving it was indeed dust from the WTC towers collapse might be nearly impossible today.
God is always good!
"It was an interesting day." - President Bush, recalling 9/11 [White House, 1/5/02]
#7. To: RickyJ (#6)
Proving that this particular sample was from the WTC might be tough, yes, but I am sure that there are official samples all over the place that can be called in for testing. I wish I still had my baggie full of WTC dust that I gathered when I visited the site in October 01.
A new truth movement friendly digg type site: Zlonk it!
#8. To: Critter, *9-11* (#0)
"Guard against the impostures of pretended patriotism." ~George Washington
#9. To: IndieTX (#5)
There might be better video out there somewhere Indie. This was all I could find so far. I had same problem, so I just cranked the volume and suffered through it to get most of what he was saying.
A new truth movement friendly digg type site: Zlonk it!
#10. To: Critter, ALL (#1)
ROTFLOL! Jones is either a liar or a very sloppy researcher. For example, he claimed this: was a photo of slag from a pool of molten steel. It is not. It is a photo of a chunk of pancaked floors composed of sheet steel, reinforced concrete, rebar, wood and even paper debris with writing still legible on it. And there is photo after photo available proving this: And this is only one of many dishonesties that ex-professor Jones has promoted with respect to 9/11. Here are some more: He has claimed that "there is recorded eyewitness testimony of the molten metal pools under both Towers and WTC 7". That is absolutely false. Neither he or any in the 911 CT community have named an eyewitness who actually said there were "pools" of molten metal. And the source that Jones cited to back up his claim when he said that didn't name a single eyewitness. In fact, the word "pool" wasn't even mentioned in the article he cited. With regards to the metal observed falling from the South Tower a short while before the collapse, Jones once claimed "the falling liquid appears consistently orange, not just orange in spots and certainly not silvery." As has been proven with a video of that event several times here at 4um, that is patently false. The material falling in the video is at times quite silvery in appearance. He also said "this molten metal, after falling approximately 150 meters (or yards) still retained a reddish orange color". That too is false, as the video showed quite clearly. And to show how willing Jones is to alter his claimed evidence in order to prove his obsession, he recently switched to describing the falling material as follows: "yellow-white hot molten metal". He said "the molten aluminum would appear silvery due to high reflectivity combined with low emissivity, while molten iron would appear yellow (as seen in the video record.)" Notice that it is no longer orange or reddish-orange as he initially claimed. Now it's yellow or yellow-white. He changed the color because he learned that molten steel would have to be that color. Perhaps he learned this from Thomas Eager of MIT who has been quoted (http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/2007/04/steven-jones-to-appear-on-view.html ) saying "I think that the best way to refute the molten steel hypothesis is to inform people that molten metal is not the equal of molten steel. I have little doubt that some aluminum from the aircraft melted (about 1100 F for the alloys used and well within the capacity of the fires). As I noted in my article, some had suggested a thermite reaction and I indicated that the brilliant white light from burning Aluminum (about 4000 F) would have been unmistakable, but was not observed. The photos which I have seen by the conspiracy theorists which shows glowing metal, shows a red glow or a red orange glow. This is NOT molten steel. Anyone who has ever seen molten steel even in a small weld puddle knows that it it yellow white in color. As temperature increases we go from red (800-900 F) like a kitchen electric range heater (will not melt aluminum pots) to red orange (1100-1200 F- molten aluminum) to orange (1500-1800) to yellow (2000-2300) to yellow white (2500-2800- molten steel) to white (3000 F and above with increasing light intensity, like a tungsten incandescent light bulb.) If you put the temperatures into common sense colors that people know, then they can go back to Steven Jones' photos and anyone can conclude for themselves that the red or red orange glows that they say are molten steel is really just proof that they have never worked around molten metal. Welders, casters plumbers and many other professionals know the colors of molten metals and Prof Jones simply is an uninformed academic, who enjoys the attention that all of you are giving him." I think Mr Eager is correct. Steven Jones is a DISHONEST sub-atomic particle physicist who wants the lime light. He didn't get it with another research topic he was involved in at BYU ... another scam ... cold fusion. As to his claims about the composition of the dust (the 1.5 mm spheres) and that they prove thermite was used at the WTC site, I have the following comments. First, Jones has clearly lied before about 9/11 evidence so I don't think he is above fabricating data to "prove" his allegation about 9/11. He is that obsessed with proving this since he's staked his career and credibility on the allegation. Second ... there is NO chain of custody in that sample of dust he claims came from the WTC site. According to Jones, it came from Janette MacKinlay, a visual *artist*, who it turns out is also highly obsessed (http://www.communitycurrency.org/blog.html ) with this topic (and making money from it). MacKinlay is the *colorful* lady with the scarf to the right of Jones in the photo below at one of their recent conferences. Curiously enough, Jones also says she took and supplied the photo that Jones claimed showed slag from a pool of molten steel. So she must have known that wasn't true since she must have seen the item up close when she took the picture. Yet she has let Jones misrepresent what the object was in public forums and papers. So she too seems somewhat dishonest and not above fabricating evidence. Which seems to be typical of those running the *truth* movement. Third ... http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/2007/01/and-now-for-some-science.html http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/2007/01/steven-jones-is-experimenting.html http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/2006/11/why-is-steven-jones-on-skids.html This is incredible! I love this guy!
Good shit from the good doctor.
"Large pieces of debris, likened to meteorites by preservationists, are actually several floors of the towers compressed together as the buildings collapsed. Furniture, twisted metal, pipes, cords and even papers with legible type are visible. The pieces are kept in a humidity-controlled tent in Hangar 17 of Kennedy International Airport.
(Photo by Lane Johnson)" 
---------------------------------------------------------
Aren't you lucky. You get to receive one of the 15 posts I'm allowed each day.
#11. To: BeAChooser (#10) (Edited)
This one must really scare you. You broke out the monster spam post for this, eh? I do believe that the people holding that chunk of whatever it is are the ones that said it was the result of a molten mass. You might wish to check on that.
A new truth movement friendly digg type site: Zlonk it!
#12. To: BeAChooser (#10)
No, there is not, but hopefully this will lead to an examination of dust samples which do have a verifiable chain of custody. You getting nervous yet?
there is NO chain of custody in that sample of dust he claims came from the WTC site.
A new truth movement friendly digg type site: Zlonk it!
#13. To: Critter, ALL (#11)
I do believe that the people holding that chunk of whatever it is are the ones that said it was the result of a molten mass.
"People holding"? What in the world are you talking about, Critter? No one is holding that chunk of material that Steven Jones claimed in his viewgraph presentation was slag from a pool of molten steel. Are you experiencing the same eyesight problems that kept you from seeing that the hole in the Pentagon was more than 20 feet wide? ROTFLOL!
---------------------------------------------------------
Aren't you lucky. You get to receive one of the 15 posts I'm allowed each day.
#14. To: BeAChooser (#13)
They are not holding it anywhere? It has been tossed out in the trash? WTF is wrong with you? Are you that retarded? Really? I really can't wait til Christine has had enough of your bullshit. You are the biggest asshole I have ever had the displeasure of meeting on a forum.
A new truth movement friendly digg type site: Zlonk it!
#15. To: BeAChooser (#13)
Here asshole, choke on this you piece of shit:
A new truth movement friendly digg type site: Zlonk it!
#16. To: BeAChooser (#13) (Edited)
Exposed to temperatures as hot as the earth's core
Bibliographic Entry Result
(w/surrounding text)Standardized
ResultHeath Earth Science. Heath, 1994: 22. "The inner core is probably no hotter than 7000 degrees Celsius." 7300 K The Worldbook Encyclopedia. Chicago: Worldbook, 1999: 20-21. "The temperature at the core maybe as high as 7000 degrees Celsius." 7300 K De Bremaecker, Jean-Claude. "Temperature in the core." Geophysics of the Earth's Interior. Canada, 1985: 296-297. "The temperature at the inner core boundary is probably between 3400 and 5700 degrees Celsius." 3700 - 6000 K Beiser, Arthur. The Earth. US: Time Life, 1969: 36. "It's temperature is somewhere between 2000 and 4500 degrees Celsius." 2300 - 4800 K Kubala, Bizy & Mahan Rao. Earth's Core Temperature. Byrdand Black, 1996. "Earth's core temperature is estimated at around 5000 to 7000 degrees Celsius." 5300 - 7300 K
A new truth movement friendly digg type site: Zlonk it!
#17. To: BeAChooser (#13)
Who said this dipshit? Who? The people who are holding the artifacts of the WTC. Now get the frig out of here and go bother some other forum with your asinine bullshit. You make any decent human being want to puke.
A new truth movement friendly digg type site: Zlonk it!
#18. To: BeAChooser (#10)
AGRICULTURE - wearstrips, chain guides, flights, chain tensioners, spreaders and grain strippers FOOD PROCESSING - augers, bearings, guide rails, rollers, chutes, hopper liners deboning tables, spiral freezers, idler sprockets, mixer bushings, mixer paddles and trough liners
Materials such as TIVAR 1000 UHMW offer low-friction, impact strength, wear resistance, and corrosion resistance for:
''the messianic side of Americans can be tiresome.'' - Nicolas Sarkozy
#19. To: Critter, ALL (#14)
Actually, it was in a museum. Or didn't you know that either? I certainly hope that christine has a sense of humor.
They are not holding it anywhere? It has been tossed out in the trash?
I really can't wait til Christine has had enough of your bullshit.
---------------------------------------------------------
Aren't you lucky. You get to receive one of the 15 posts I'm allowed each day.
#20. To: BeAChooser, Christine (#19)
When pathological liars are allowed to run around spamming every thread... well it's time for me to go.
A new truth movement friendly digg type site: Zlonk it!
#21. To: Critter (#20)
I'm really tired of this childish little game playing of his too.
#22. To: BeAChooser (#10)
So what do you think his real goal here is if it is not the truth of what happened on 9/11? Why would he risk his career and life over something that is false? Yes, he has received death threats over this. Who do you think is threatening his life? Do you even care, or does it only matter to you when certain people get killed such as Ron Brown?
I think Mr Eager is correct. Steven Jones is a DISHONEST sub-atomic particle physicist who wants the lime light. He didn't get it with another research topic he was involved in at BYU ... another scam ... cold fusion.
God is always good!
"It was an interesting day." - President Bush, recalling 9/11 [White House, 1/5/02]
#23. To: IndieTX (#5) (Edited)
They have the full one piece version on google now and the sound is a bit better:
A new truth movement friendly digg type site: Zlonk it!
#24. To: BeAChooser (#19)
OK, I let your dimness get under my skin tonight, and almost went to find a new home. But, I would miss beating the crap out of you on these threads too much, so... here's some more beating. hehehe The USGS has a Particle Atlas of world Trade Center dust: http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2005/1165/table_1.html It is basically a breakdown of the contents of dust samples. From the USGS spectra analysis of a couple of iron spheres found in the wtc dust samples: http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2005/1165/graphics/IRON-03.jpg http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2005/1165/graphics/IRON-04.jpg You will notice (if you're not a US government black op shill of course) that they very closely match what Dr. Jones spectra analysis produced, if you watched the video. Spheres, that the USGS found in the dust. Spheres. How do you make an iron rich sphere Mr. genius? You must melt the iron and propel it through the air. Since NIST confirms that the fires were not hot enough to melt steel, how did they melt iron and keep it melted long enough for it to be propelled through the air during the collapse mechanism in order to cool in a sperical condition? Come on genius. Tell me.
A new truth movement friendly digg type site: Zlonk it!
#25. To: Critter (#23)
Thank you. I'll just enable Tor and Privoxy before I go to Google though...they love to keep records of IP's for the spooks. :))
THANK YOU!!!
Law Enforcement Against Prohibition
#26. To: Critter (#24) (Edited)
I minored in geology and for iron, or magma, from volcanoes [for example] to take a spherical form before being ejected through the air, they would have already had to have been melted. :)))) Liquids form droplets. Solids ejecta would be irregular chunks and pieces. In order for this to have happened, extremely high temperatures would have been required..say maybe......THERMATE? :))
how did they melt iron and keep it melted long enough for it to be propelled through the air during the collapse mechanism in order to cool in a sperical condition?
Law Enforcement Against Prohibition
#27. To: IndieTX, BeALoser I mean BeAChooser (#26)
Exactly. Melted and ejected in liquid form. Check mate on the Loser, I mean Chooser. :)
they would have already had to have been melted. :))))
A new truth movement friendly digg type site: Zlonk it!
#28. To: IndieTX (#26)
The composition of the spheres Dr. Jones analyzed STRONGLY suggest that, if not prove that, and so does this sample done by USGS: In order for this to have happened, extremely high temperatures would have been required..say maybe......THERMATE? :))
A new truth movement friendly digg type site: Zlonk it!
#29. To: Critter, ALL (#24)
Wow! The government sure went to a lot of effort to cover up this smoking gun, critter. ROTFLOL! But why do you assume the spheres were produced before/during the collapse rather than after ... when no one argues that molten steel wasn't present? Here's what a chemist/metallurgist (rather than a sub-atomic particle physicist ... he he he) has to say about the production of metal spheres: ************ http://www.mujca.com/procrustes.htm The Collapse of WTC 1 and 2: A New Theory F. R. Greening ... snip ... Remarkably, however, there is some crucial scientific evidence for the presence of molten iron or steel in the pulverized remains of WTC 1 & 2 that has apparently been completely ignored by 9/11 researchers. I am referring to the observation of micron-sized iron spherules that have been seen in many WTC dust samples. These spherical particles are direct physical evidence that the iron within the particle was molten at the time the particle formed. Each of the references below specifically mention the detection of iron spherules in WTC dust samples (and in most cases also provide electron micrographs of the particles in question). Reference 1 includes two such micrographs labeled IRON-03-IMAGE and IRON-04-IMAGE. Reference 2 discusses which WTC particles could best be used as signatures of WTC dust; iron spheres were considered and rejected only because they were not found in all indoor dust samples. In reference 3 we read on page 17: “Various metals (most notably iron and lead) were melted during the WTC event, producing spherical metallic particles.” And finally in reference 4 we find a micrograph of a spherical iron particle and the comment that WTC dust contains evidence for “heat effected particles, including spherical particles.” 1. H. A. Lowers et al. “Particle Atlas of World Trade Center Dust.” USGS Open-File Report 2005-1165, (2005) 2. Various authors: “U.S. EPA Response to the Peer Review of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Final Report on the World Trade Center Dust Screening Study.” Page 28, (December 2006) 3. R. J. Lee et al. “Damage Assessment 130 Liberty Street Property: WTC Dust Signature Report on Composition and Morphology.” Issued December 2003. 4. S. R. Badger et al. “World Trade Center Particulate Contamination Signature Based on Dust Composition and Morphology.” Microscopy and Microanalysis 10 (Supplement 2), 948, (2004). The formation of spherical iron particles has been well documented and researched for steel making processes, (See for example: Steel Research 64, 23, (1993) and Steel Research 72, 324 (2001)). Iron spheres in the 30 mm to sub-micron range are typically seen in the dust-laden off-gases produced by molten steel and are believed to be formed by the ejection of metal droplets when the liquid metal degasses. In seeking an explanation of the formation of iron spherules during the destruction of WTC 1 & 2 it is significant that samples of WTC dust have an additional chemical signature - an enrichment of zinc. Data for iron and zinc in WTC aerosol samples have been presented by S. Qureshi and co-workers in Atmospheric Environment 40, S238, (2006). We first note that concentrations of these elements in PM2.5 aerosol collected in New York City prior to 9/11 were about 100 ng/m3 for iron and less than 20 ng/m3 for zinc. Qureshi’s data show that on September13 2001 the PM2.5 iron concentration was 127 ng/m3 and the zinc concentration was 217 ng/m3, i.e. airborne zinc concentrations were about ten times higher than normal. Qureshi’s data also show that both iron and zinc concentrations in New York’s 2.5-micron dust peaked in early October 2001 with iron at 370 ng/m3 and zinc at a remarkable 1028 ng/m3. These observations are consistent with iron and zinc data reported by the EPA for WTC air monitoring samples collected in the same post-9/11 time period. Why was so much zinc dispersed into the air above Ground Zero? In order to answer this question we need to consider sources of zinc in the Twin Towers. A review of the construction materials in these buildings shows that the galvanized 22-gauge corrugated sheet steel, used for the decking that supported the floor concrete, was a major source of zinc. Given that 22-gauge galvanized steel has a coating of about 50 mm of zinc on a 1 mm sheet of metal comprised of ~ 98 % iron, we may use our previous estimate of 16 tonnes for the mass of steel decking per floor to conclude that there was about 1.6 tonnes of metallic zinc on every floor in WTC 1 & 2. We have shown in the first part of this article that if some of the thermal insulation that was applied to floor assemblies in the Twin Towers was spiked with 25 % by weight of ammonium perchlorate and subsequently exposed to jet-fuel fires, it would have heated the steel decking to ~ 1390 °C. Now, since the boiling point of zinc is 908 °C, this degree of heating of a floor assembly would have been sufficient to vaporize the zinc in the galvanized steel! To conclude: we have shown that an AP collapse theory accounts for all four processes that collectively led to the observed level of destruction to WTC 1 & 2, namely: the buckling and fracture of floor elements; the collapse of entire floor sections; explosive spalling and “powderizing” of the concrete; melting of the floor pans. As an aside, we note that the addition of ammonium perchlorate to the thermal insulation on the upper floors of the Twin Towers comes very close to being the perfect crime. The deadly AP-spiked concoction would have been almost identical to the un-spiked coating; it could have been sprayed on selected surfaces with impunity; it required no elaborate detonator devices to be activated – moderate heating worked just fine. And finally, because AP decomposes to gaseous products, it leaves no telltale residues. Of course, I haven’t proved that AP was used in the Twin Towers, but to end with a famous quote: “How often have I said to you that when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth……..” F.R. Greening, March 15th, 2007 ************** Or perhaps professional engineer, Dr. John Durkee, writing in Controlled Environments Magazine in December 2003 has the answer (http://www.cemag.us/articles.asp?pid=399 ): "In eleven seconds, the fall of each tower generated crushing mechanical forces and extreme heat .... Molten aluminum, iron and other molten metals expelled into the air by the force of the collapse formed into spherical balls as they cooled and fell back to the ground." *************** Also, the steel rebar in the concrete floors and steel members in the structure were scraped during the collapse producing tiny particles. The melting point of steel is lower in this form? Think along the lines of the glowing particles coming off a grinding wheel. Perhaps micron size particles formed their spherical shape at the elevated temperature in the falling debris itself just due to mechanical friction? ROTFLOL!
Spheres, that the USGS found in the dust. Spheres. How do you make an iron rich sphere Mr. genius? You must melt the iron and propel it through the air. Since NIST confirms that the fires were not hot enough to melt steel, how did they melt iron and keep it melted long enough for it to be propelled through the air during the collapse mechanism in order to cool in a sperical condition?
The Sign of Four by Arthur Conan Doyle
---------------------------------------------------------
Aren't you lucky. You get to receive one of the 15 posts I'm allowed each day.
#30. To: BeAChooser (#29)
More BS I see. None of that explains the presence of sulfer, manganese etc, in the sphere. Occams razor. Remember that one? You use it all the time. The simplest explanation for the makeup up the spheres is the use of thermate. Too many coincidental anomolies have to take place to produce thermate signature spheres without using thermate. Go chase yoruself.
A new truth movement friendly digg type site: Zlonk it!
#31. To: Critter, christine, Minerva (#30) (Edited)
The idiot's only motive is his desire for war. He doesn't shill because the facts are on his side, he just sees the war and oppression the Bush Administration pushes in the wake of these false flag operations as the sort of reality that appeals to him. He knows he just has to blur the picture to dampen the increasing awareness of the American People to what has happened. He goes for making it seem like a reasonable debate is occurring to discourge people's interest in piercing the psychological thrushhold of not wanting to deal with the horror of having the worst sort of criminals possible in charge of government. He has failed to make his case, and doesn't have the tools to even try. I say react to an attack on getting the truth out that Goldi's biker bar banishment with a quid pro quo banning of Bealiar. It's possible his banning there was contrived in order to send him here to put a damper on the efforts of Truthers here. I would be curious to see if he was suddenly reinstated at LP if banned here; I say he will.
#32. To: BeAChooser (#29)
More like a professional moron. Keep it up BAC your "professionals" are nothing more than a bunch of liars. Are you the one threatening Jones' life?
professional engineer, Dr. John Durkee, "In eleven seconds, the fall of each tower generated crushing mechanical forces and extreme heat .... Molten aluminum, iron and other molten metals expelled into the air by the force of the collapse formed into spherical balls as they cooled and fell back to the ground."
God is always good!
"It was an interesting day." - President Bush, recalling 9/11 [White House, 1/5/02]
#33. To: Ferret Mike (#31)
if the vile evil entity gets no replies, IT will self exile. i can't imagine IT wants to continue to talk only to ITself.
#34. To: RickyJ, BeALoser, I mean BeAChooser (#32)
So a professional engineer says the towers fell in 11 seconds? Is he right about that BeALoser? I may actually take the time now to rip your post into shreds. You contradict yourself all over it.
professional engineer, Dr. John Durkee, "In eleven seconds, the fall of each tower generated crushing mechanical forces and extreme heat ....
A new truth movement friendly digg type site: Zlonk it!
#35. To: christine (#33)
LOL.
Mark
"I was real close to Building 7 when it fell down... That didn't sound like just a building falling down to me while I was running away from it. There's a lot of eyewitness testimony down there of hearing explosions. [..] and the whole time you're hearing "boom, boom, boom, boom, boom." I think I know an explosion when I hear it... — Former NYC Police Officer and 9/11 Rescue Worker Craig Bartmer
#36. To: christine (#33)
The trouble is that if his spam posts are left unrefuted, it may seem to a lurker that he has posted fact and that we cannot dispute it. I have this debate with myself all the time. What is better? Refute and get another spam post as his response, or leave his lie unrefuted at the risk of it being mistaken for fact. Which is worse?
if the vile evil entity gets no replies, IT will self exile. i can't imagine IT wants to continue to talk only to ITself.
A new truth movement friendly digg type site: Zlonk it!
#37. To: Critter (#36)
I would say it would depend on how much time you want to waste.
Mark
"I was real close to Building 7 when it fell down... That didn't sound like just a building falling down to me while I was running away from it. There's a lot of eyewitness testimony down there of hearing explosions. [..] and the whole time you're hearing "boom, boom, boom, boom, boom." I think I know an explosion when I hear it... — Former NYC Police Officer and 9/11 Rescue Worker Craig Bartmer
#38. To: Ferret Mike (#31)
Good analysis of BeachOoser. I like the tag also. ;0)
"When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one." Edmund Burke
#39. To: Critter, christine (#36) (Edited)
I have long opposed arbritrary banning based on difference of opinion. But we have here a person who shows in his early posting history at LP to be open to promoting a very scetchy conspiracy on Ron Brown because it fits his political agenda to do so. He does not work based on what is likely to be true, but to squash what hurts his overall promotion of NeoCon wars under the scetchy and vague heading "The War on Terror." He is terrified that if the truth comes out on the false flage opperations, his precious 'war' and the further destruction of what control the people have of this government will be hurt or reversed. He is not working in good faith, and his presence here is suspicious and bizarre. He refuses to answer questions pertaining to his activities elsewhere to try to fight the truth movement, and I am of the opinion you give him the oppertunity to proof and test the net of lies trying to destroy the truth movement for cracks and troublesome inperfections. If he won't answer what motives he has in doing what he does which are obviously more then merely to argue the issue, I would ban him immediately. If he won't stop stonewalling and start involving himself with good faith give and take of a lively discussion on this issue, I would ban him with extreme and well deserved prejudice. He is poison, and adding nothing to the discussion. Banning him would not be censorship, it would be removal of someone who has this virtual community's worst interests at heart.
#40. To: christine, Ferret Mike (#39)
I concur with Mike, FWIW. I don't really care one way or the other though, since I have BeAGayLoser bozoed and can't see his worthless posts.
.
.
.
Comments (41 - 150) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest