You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login

Reply #146: "disgraceful.". [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU
petgoat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-22-06 05:16 PM
Response to Reply #142
146. "disgraceful.".
Edited on Sat Jul-22-06 05:23 PM by petgoat
Measure the damn photos. You are trying to refute a technical argument, which
is easily verifiable or refutable, with a bunch of spitting and fuming.

I point out that you attempt to refute a simple technical point by throwing
at the issue a kitchen sink, a bathroom sink, garage sinks, and the Humboldt

And you call this analysis of your argument a straw man, and then repeat the
argument: "You are the one willfully ignoring ALL OTHER EVIDENCE".

I am not arguing all the evidence. I am arguing about your CNN photo. "All
the evidence" has nothing to do with the measurements on the CNN photo.

And then you advance your own straw man:

You are acting as if the whole argument stands and falls on proving perimeter
column debris existed in the WTC 7 pile.

I am acting in no such way. I simply want to make one simple point: No photos
show WTC1 debris in the WTC7 debris pile, this perimeter column debris is quite
distinctive, and it's surprising that nobody bothered to photograph it because
they did photograph it at WTC6, at WTC3, at WTC4, at WFC, at the Bankers Trust
Building, and at 90 West Street.

It's not something I Photoshopped

I didn't say you did. I said you had failed to provide a source. I'll note you
still haven't provided a source.

the FDNY - that's who you are calling liars in this.

Unlike you, I am not calling anybody a liar. I am pointing out that the FDNY
descriptions of the building damage are completely inconsistent, and FEMA
chose to ignore them and ascribe the collapse to fire damage through some
unknown mechanism.

I will also point out that if FDNY personnel widely believed that explosives had
been planted in the towers, and that if they considered the possibility that the
gov't offices there were wired for self-destruction in case of loss of building
security, they might have been reluctant to go into the building for entirely
understandable reasons. Then when it became politically incorrect to discuss
explosives, under the pressure of explaining why they walked away from an $861
million building, they would be highly motivated to exaggerate the structural
damage, but not dishonest enough to get together and formulate a joint cover

Did you know Rep. Weldon, citing FDNY contacts, gives credence to the reports
of explosives in the twin towers?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC