Jack White Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 Here is an interesting video I found just tonight. The pedestrian North Bridge over West Street had an explosion not known of previously. Why would a PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE EXPLODE? Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len Colby Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 Looks to me like the pedestrian bridge is being struck by debris from the collapse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len Colby Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 Thanks for your inciteful comments and righteous anger Terry. LC is what LC does.....make trouble; provoke and then blame those who respond; divert the thread; just plain debunk; and discredit persons; evidence and the Forum, as a whole [usually without new evidence or logic, only innuendo, doubt, and various gimmics in the toolbag of the provacateur-debunker. His presence on a thread almost always means things will devolve into uncivil behavior - which he blames on others - but IMO creates on purpose - and is obviously quite proud of it.A very good series of photos and videos [with some French commentary in between] here on WTC 7. http://forum.reopen911.info/p2760-07-08-2006-19-21-48.html What utter hypocrisy coming from some one who shows no qualms about posting material totally irrelevant to the thread topic and saluted Terry's post. Peter seems to define posting info that contradicts his pet theories as "provocation". Come on Peter if my posts a "gimmicks" a Ivy League educated guy like you should easily be able to refute them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len Colby Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 Yours and Lamson's condescending attitudes are designed to elicit that exact response. I'm just trying to expose your tactics for the underhanded charade they really are. Can you do any better than insults and citing cases unrelated to the subject of this thread. When you can get back to us, otherwise you`re wasting our time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evan Burton Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 Reporting on the report button on a post within 'Political Conspiracies' usually gets to Burton anyway...so he will most likley be moderating himself. There should be a Forum rule against moderators dealing with issues in which they are themselves involved - self obvious, but I had the exact problem with a very similar situation last week. With good reason, most moderators steer clear of this area full of undersea mines and venomous creatures. One seems to like to see this as his 'turf' to moderate. Yes, moderators have opinions too...but...tag-team stuff with a few others we all know by name is hardly playing 'fair'. I also think the issue of who attacks and who reacts/responds to attacks is not to be ignored. It is those who react most often who get slammed on this Forum. Jan, It might help you to know a few things about the way things work here. When you use the report button, a copy goes to ALL moderators - including, I think, John S. Everyone will be aware of your complaint. You are quite correct that some people tend to stick to some areas; for instance, I rarely stray over to the JFK section unless I think the matter needs immediate attention. It does not mean that others are not aware of your complaint. Your message and a link to the post in question are included in the PM. Regardless of the sub-forum that the complaint originated from, I always have a quick look to ensure that the matter does not require immediate attention; I am confident the other moderators operate in a similar fashion. You also have to remember that a moderator may not be immediately available; there are posters from all over the world on this Forum, operating in different time zones. The moderators come from various parts of the world, but people might be on holidays, away from their computers, etc, and so it may take up to 24 hours for a moderator to respond. As always, if you are unhappy with a particular moderators actions, you are quite free - indeed encouraged - to contact another moderator. If you still feel your complaint has not been adequately addressed, you should contact the board owners, John S or Andy W, via PM. Lastly, as I encourage ALL members to do when they have what they think may be a contentious or inflammatory post, I sent the text of the post to John S prior to posting, asking for his approval. John did not see any reason for the post not to be allowed. If you are in a similar situation, send it to a mod first. If unhappy, then send it to John. Hope this helps. Evan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Stephen Turner Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 To find out who threw the first stone simply, go to the first post, and read down until the first insult is cast. Given the tone of indignation in some of the posts in this thread, you might be surprised. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evan Burton Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 Jack, Apart from the images showing what you hypothesize shows an explosion on a bridge, are there any reports of such an explosion? Responder reports? Witness reports? Anything apart from your hypothesis? Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evan Burton Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 Jan, You are quite entitled to your opinion, but you seem to have missed where I told you that I submitted the above post to John Simkin prior to posting, and received approval to post it. Although I disagree with John on many issues, I have always found him to be fair and balanced. If he had said NO, I would have abided by his decision. My posts states an opinion - naming none in particular - and asks people to draw their own conclusions. People are free to decide for themselves which posters fit into which categories, and what their own opinions of those posters are.. pro OR con. Are you suggesting we stifle peoples opinions (minus insults, of course)? Now, to your specific claims: - I have never claimed to have a monopoly on the truth. I am often wrong. I do, however, claim a certain knowledge within a narrow field, and am prepared to defend and debate my opinions. - Whether I am hypocritical or not is for the individual to decide. Some will agree with you; some will disagree. You are free to hold your own opinion. - If you feel other Moderators are remaining silent, then you should make your opinion known to them personally via a PM, stating your reasons for your opinions, and urging them to follow a course of action you suggest. - If you take the phrase ".. even Blind Freddy can see that..." to be a personal insult towards you, then probably half the population of Australia has received such an insult; an insult uttered by at least one Australian Prime Minister. I don't think I will change your opinion, but I should try. - If I allowed Len to call you a Holocaust Denier - unfairly - then I was almost certainly in error. Because of the lack of confidence in me you display, I would strongly suggest you raise the matter with another Mod and ask them to review the matter. You know, I do finding both amusing yet tiring the claims made by some posters on this Forum.Let me explain: - Who are the people who mostly (if not always) complain about the behaviour of other posters? - Who are the people who mostly (if not always) complain that they are being victimised? - Who are the people who mostly (if not always) intimate that some posters should be removed because they are disruptive? - Who are the people who mostly refuse to debate topics or answer direct questions because they claim others to be some type of disinformation agents? - Who are the people who mostly use emotively negative labels about others (fascist, provocateur, etc)? Now, conversely: - Who are the people who mostly (if not always) provide references for their claims or statements? - Who are the people who mostly (if not always) are prepared to debate their claims? - Who are the people who mostly (if not always) always welcome another person into the debate? - Who are the people who mostly (if not always) are prepared to admit if they have made mistakes or have been proven incorrect? I know who I find open-minded and who I don't; I know who I find hypocritical and who I don't. Evan Burton clearly thinks one side has a near monopoly on truth. To witness a moderator (Burton) make the above post, which consists of nothing but hypocritical & provocative cant, on a self-styled Education Forum, and to find this being considered acceptable by other moderators (judging from their silence), destroys the raison d'etre of the entire enterprize. In the "Stealth" thread, he compared me to Blind Freddy and allowed Colby to compare me to a holocaust denier. Why? Because I was citing sources that they hadn't bothered to read. In fact, those sources destroyed the Colby-Burton position. So much for this rubbish about only side providing references and sources. Of course they failed to admit they were wrong or apologize for their aggressive behaviour and insults. I refuse to be moderated by Evan Burton because he has demonstrated clearly, and with evident pride, that he is on one side of the arugment only. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 To find out who threw the first stone simply, go to the first post, and read down until the first insult is cast. Given the tone of indignation in some of the posts in this thread, you might be surprised. Things get more complicated - as multiple threads are often being followed by the same persons and 'first stones' are often long ago cast. Many of us try to start new threads to [for a short time] leave behind those who only mean harm to the thread, its continuation, continuity, prgress and to those posting.....but it usually devolves after they arrive. Some IMO are only here to cause problems. I know I'm not the only person to think that. Look how smoothly many threads on the Forum progress when a few are not involved. The same ones, when involved = problems, nearly every time. How many have left the Forum due to the presence of these few? Many I know of - more I suspect have. Some just bait and provoke over and over and people react. Imagine this was a Chess Forum and a few kept posting 'I think chess is a stupid game played by idiots with nothing better to do...and furthermore the chess champion you mentioned lied and that match never happened....' You'd wonder WHAT ARE THEIR MOTIVES TO BE ON THAT FORUM, AND CONTINUED POSTING...if not just to cause distress, provocation, derailment, chaos, etc. Prehaps a Political Coincidence Area should be created and these demons bannished to post upon it and leave those of us in the Conspiracy area alone. I know it sounds dramatic, but I find these people no less dangerous than those 'good Germans' who no doubt told their fellow Germans who said they smelled burning flesh, or that the Jews were being mistreated or they hinted they thought the Reich or Hitler were going 'too far' et al. were silenced. Sometimes people are too polarized to debate. I have two on ignore and one informally so....yet they keep trying to goad me into a fight and when I don't they claim they've won as I didn't provide a counterarguement or 'sources'. If they are right we are just luney. If we are right, the world and especially America, are at the brink; and some of us will be damned if we won't try to stop it - reverse it - point it out - correct it!.....save it [the Planet, Peace, Justice, and its living beings]. Colby also tried to discredit every other witness who spoke against the official version of 911 or anything; and those threads and those posts must be taken into account Steven. Add to that the attempts he has made on the Forum to harm or attack/disrupt/ruffle me and others - and be the first to do so, long ago. Why do they never post their own threads on what they think happened? - only a negation of all anyone else tries to posit.....maybe you 'don't get it'; but most of us 'do'! They are here also to intimidate a lot of the watcher/non-posters from posting. Their arrogant and agressive styles keeps many newbees from posting out of fear of an attack from the vipers. Very sad state of affairs and very uncivil. Also, note that when we who are interested in solving this [or other] cases try to abandon the arguements and post an only on-thread post of substance, the usual crowd continues with the food-fight [they usually long ago started on many other threads]. Looking at this thread without the a global view is the same mistake as looking at Dallas or 911 without the global and historical view. These are not isolated incidents - patterns my dear Stephen, patterns....... I'd also ask you to note other's comments after mine - not so much angry at me, but subsequent posts and comments.....why do you think?...perhaps due to patterns we have all come to know? I might mention that there are a number of outstanding researchers from the Forum privately emailing about creating a new Forum minus these lice so we can really do some work....without the useless scratching. I think a sad, but perhaps an inevitable thing to come to pass at some point. A good thread on this Forum is often very good. They are usually marked by the ABSENCE of a few who know how to very creatively cause trouble - and IMO are only here to do so and take great pride in their 'work'. I don't blame the moderators as much as I blame those who try to agressively push their provocations and disruptions on the others. Well said, Peter. I remind that the DellaRosa forum does not put up with nonsense such as this. ALL OF THESE SAME ABUSIVE PEOPLE WERE BANNED THERE FOR THE SAME TACTICS. It did not begin here, but this forum is friendly to them, so it continues. Jack Correction: I now think of two provocateurs here who never registered at the DellaRosa forum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted July 23, 2008 Share Posted July 23, 2008 To find out who threw the first stone simply, go to the first post, and read down until the first insult is cast. Given the tone of indignation in some of the posts in this thread, you might be surprised. Things get more complicated - as multiple threads are often being followed by the same persons and 'first stones' are often long ago cast. Many of us try to start new threads to [for a short time] leave behind those who only mean harm to the thread, its continuation, continuity, prgress and to those posting.....but it usually devolves after they arrive. Some IMO are only here to cause problems. I know I'm not the only person to think that. Look how smoothly many threads on the Forum progress when a few are not involved. The same ones, when involved = problems, nearly every time. How many have left the Forum due to the presence of these few? Many I know of - more I suspect have. Some just bait and provoke over and over and people react. Imagine this was a Chess Forum and a few kept posting 'I think chess is a stupid game played by idiots with nothing better to do...and furthermore the chess champion you mentioned lied and that match never happened....' You'd wonder WHAT ARE THEIR MOTIVES TO BE ON THAT FORUM, AND CONTINUED POSTING...if not just to cause distress, provocation, derailment, chaos, etc. Prehaps a Political Coincidence Area should be created and these demons bannished to post upon it and leave those of us in the Conspiracy area alone. I know it sounds dramatic, but I find these people no less dangerous than those 'good Germans' who no doubt told their fellow Germans who said they smelled burning flesh, or that the Jews were being mistreated or they hinted they thought the Reich or Hitler were going 'too far' et al. were silenced. Sometimes people are too polarized to debate. I have two on ignore and one informally so....yet they keep trying to goad me into a fight and when I don't they claim they've won as I didn't provide a counterarguement or 'sources'. If they are right we are just luney. If we are right, the world and especially America, are at the brink; and some of us will be damned if we won't try to stop it - reverse it - point it out - correct it!.....save it [the Planet, Peace, Justice, and its living beings]. Colby also tried to discredit every other witness who spoke against the official version of 911 or anything; and those threads and those posts must be taken into account Steven. Add to that the attempts he has made on the Forum to harm or attack/disrupt/ruffle me and others - and be the first to do so, long ago. Why do they never post their own threads on what they think happened? - only a negation of all anyone else tries to posit.....maybe you 'don't get it'; but most of us 'do'! They are here also to intimidate a lot of the watcher/non-posters from posting. Their arrogant and agressive styles keeps many newbees from posting out of fear of an attack from the vipers. Very sad state of affairs and very uncivil. Also, note that when we who are interested in solving this [or other] cases try to abandon the arguements and post an only on-thread post of substance, the usual crowd continues with the food-fight [they usually long ago started on many other threads]. Looking at this thread without the a global view is the same mistake as looking at Dallas or 911 without the global and historical view. These are not isolated incidents - patterns my dear Stephen, patterns....... I'd also ask you to note other's comments after mine - not so much angry at me, but subsequent posts and comments.....why do you think?...perhaps due to patterns we have all come to know? I might mention that there are a number of outstanding researchers from the Forum privately emailing about creating a new Forum minus these lice so we can really do some work....without the useless scratching. I think a sad, but perhaps an inevitable thing to come to pass at some point. A good thread on this Forum is often very good. They are usually marked by the ABSENCE of a few who know how to very creatively cause trouble - and IMO are only here to do so and take great pride in their 'work'. I don't blame the moderators as much as I blame those who try to agressively push their provocations and disruptions on the others. Well said, Peter. I remind that the DellaRosa forum does not put up with nonsense such as this. ALL OF THESE SAME ABUSIVE PEOPLE WERE BANNED THERE FOR THE SAME TACTICS. It did not begin here, but this forum is friendly to them, so it continues. Jack Correction: I now think of two provocateurs here who never registered at the DellaRosa forum. The dellarose forum does not put up with the truth either, as was witnessed in the instance of the Moorman in the Street debacle. Given the sheer amount of photographic disinformation you post Jack, perhaps it would be best if you were banished to another section of the forum where you could do no further harm to innocent readers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted July 24, 2008 Share Posted July 24, 2008 Here is a good one. The UNTRUTHERS will scramble trying to excuse this one. There are numerous photos of an "airplane tire" on a sidewalk near some scaffolding. Here are two. Though similar, THEY ARE NOT THE SAME. Though the wheels look similar THEY ARE NOT THE SAME! I cannot explain this as being a true depiction of this alleged scene. But I'm sure the UNTRUTHERS can. Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted July 24, 2008 Share Posted July 24, 2008 Here is a good one. The UNTRUTHERS will scramble trying to excuse this one.There are numerous photos of an "airplane tire" on a sidewalk near some scaffolding. Here are two. Though similar, THEY ARE NOT THE SAME. Though the wheels look similar THEY ARE NOT THE SAME! I cannot explain this as being a true depiction of this alleged scene. But I'm sure the UNTRUTHERS can. Jack Today, scaffolding is still in place on this corner, but it may be different since today it is silver, not green. But the red NO PARKING sign is still there where the wheel was. And NOWHERE is seen any lamppole like the one in the gutter on 911. Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted July 24, 2008 Share Posted July 24, 2008 Here is a good one. The UNTRUTHERS will scramble trying to excuse this one.There are numerous photos of an "airplane tire" on a sidewalk near some scaffolding. Here are two. Though similar, THEY ARE NOT THE SAME. Though the wheels look similar THEY ARE NOT THE SAME! I cannot explain this as being a true depiction of this alleged scene. But I'm sure the UNTRUTHERS can. Jack Jack, or anyone have an idea what the orange-red areas (that look at first like spray-paint, but are not, I think) are/could be, on the ground all over in the first photo? They ARE spray painted lines and arrows, as if for positioning. Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Stephen Turner Posted July 24, 2008 Share Posted July 24, 2008 Here is a good one. The UNTRUTHERS will scramble trying to excuse this one.There are numerous photos of an "airplane tire" on a sidewalk near some scaffolding. Here are two. Though similar, THEY ARE NOT THE SAME. Though the wheels look similar THEY ARE NOT THE SAME! I cannot explain this as being a true depiction of this alleged scene. But I'm sure the UNTRUTHERS can. Jack Are these taken on the day of the attacks? and if so, how long after the impacts. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Lewis Posted July 24, 2008 Share Posted July 24, 2008 The last one appears to be some sort of tent or temporary structure. There are other pictures that appear to show the same thing here http://www.911myths.com/html/blue_box.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now