DISINFO CORNER: NO PLANES / VIDEO FAKERY / SPACE LASERS

[jimd3100]

Dr Greg Jenkins’ “Directed Debunking Energy” and Prof Judy Wood
Scholarly Questions and Inquiry, or Badgering, Misrepresentation and Harassment?
Andrew Johnson
March 1st 2007

It seems this exotic space beam weaponry and no planes on 9/11 go hand in hand, I have no tolerance or sympathy at all for no planers, and....wait...what's this? Your Hero Andrew Johnson is a no planer and proud of it. Gee, what a surprise.

Evidence of Media Fakery on and before 9/11

Evidence which indicates there were no large Boeing crashes at the WTC.

Evidence for the use of some type of Directed Energy Weapon (DEW) being used to Destroy most of the WTC.

Links between the energy cover up and the 9/11 Cover up

Evidence that there is an active an ongoing effort to cover up and discredit research into “DEW” and “No Planes” and some of those individuals undertaking this activity.
http://exposureroom.com/members/adjohnson/06d56d572baf4bdf808b3d9e15cd40a1/

So you're a no planer huh? Well, do me a favor and tell the world the "gatekeeping" mod at prisonplanet is intolerant of the no plane hoax. Spread the word far and wide. Expose me!

[Viper]

Jim what was it that caused the vehicles to burn and rust, was it the dust cloud?

[jimd3100]

Jim what was it that caused the vehicles to burn and rust, was it the dust cloud?

Probably the same thing that caused this....



Ask Steven Jones

[Viper]

Thank you Sir.

[matrixcutter]

Those aren't my words they were taken from this...

Fair enough.  They are incorrect though.

But I am sure she is a waste of time.

As in everything she says is provably false, or as in you disagree with it?

And I'm sure she comes off as a nut in this UNEDITED interview.

It may be uneditted but it wasn't honest, and it wasn't about discussing her evidence.  It was about trying to ridicule her by concentrating on what the interviewer wanted to talk about and ignoring what the interviewee wanted to talk about i.e. her research.

Which is why you have no choice but to post an EDITED clip of the same interview

It was the justified response to an obvious ambush interview.

(trying to discredit the interviewer, and failed BTW)

Really?

and have some hack explain to you what to think. That's just sad.

If I needed people to tell me what to think, I would be conforming with the rest of the "truth movement" and calling people with alternative views names.

[jimd3100]

Thank you Sir.

The reason NIST investigated the WTC is because FEMA had already done so and said this.....

1. Suggestions for Future Research

The severe corrosion and subsequent erosion of Samples 1 and 2 are a very unusual event. No clear explanation for the source of the sulfur has been identified. The rate of corrosion is also unknown. It is possible that this is the result of long-term heating in the ground following the collapse of the buildings. It is also possible that the phenomenon started prior to collapse and accelerated the weakening of the steel structure. A detailed study into the mechanisms of this phenomenon is needed to determine what risk, if any, is presented to existing steel structures exposed to severe and long-burning fires.


They pretty much SEEM to describe the effects of a thermitic reaction. Check out the pics as well.....
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/metallurgy/WTC_apndxC.htm

[grapecrusher1]

Fair enough.  They are incorrect though.

As in everything she says is provably false, or as in you disagree with it?

It may be uneditted but it wasn't honest, and it wasn't about discussing her evidence.  It was about trying to ridicule her by concentrating on what the interviewer wanted to talk about and ignoring what the interviewee wanted to talk about i.e. her research.

It was the justified response to an obvious ambush interview.

Really?

If I needed people to tell me what to think, I would be conforming with the rest of the "truth movement" and calling people with alternative views names.

She is an academic and should be able to defend her position.  She wasnt ambushed and was given plenty of time too explain herself which she didnt.
Gibberish and bunk.

[matrixcutter]

It seems this exotic space beam weaponry

Are you referring to directed energy weaponry?  If so, why use misleading terms?
If this theory is so ridiculous, why is it necessary to misrepresent it at all, let alone so consistently?

and no planes on 9/11 go hand in hand,

Not necessarily, but generally, yes.

I have no tolerance or sympathy at all for no planers,

Oh.

and....wait...what's this? Your Hero Andrew Johnson is a no planer and proud of it. Gee, what a surprise.

My hero?

Is there any reason why you have to behave so childishly, rather than just addressing the evidence?

It is clear that there is more emotion than logic in these type of exchanges.

Evidence of Media Fakery on and before 9/11

Evidence which indicates there were no large Boeing crashes at the WTC.

Evidence for the use of some type of Directed Energy Weapon (DEW) being used to Destroy most of the WTC.

Links between the energy cover up and the 9/11 Cover up

Evidence that there is an active an ongoing effort to cover up and discredit research into “DEW” and “No Planes” and some of those individuals undertaking this activity.
http://exposureroom.com/members/adjohnson/06d56d572baf4bdf808b3d9e15cd40a1/

So you're a no planer huh? Well, do me a favor and tell the world the "gatekeeping" mod at prisonplanet is intolerant of the no plane hoax. Spread the word far and wide. Expose me!

I won't be doing anybody any favours, even if they ask me as nicely as you have.

If you don't like what I think, oh well.

If you want to address the evidence, that would be fine with me too.

I suspect you are already angry about my thoughtcrime, but putting that aside for a second, can you explain to me why the no planes theory is an impossibility?

Because it does need to be an impossibility, doesn't it?

[matrixcutter]

She is an academic and should be able to defend her position.  She wasnt ambushed and was given plenty of time too explain herself which she didnt.
Gibberish and bunk.

You have obviously made your mind up already, and that's your right.

But have you actually looked at the alternative point of view?

This interview is not the same thing as the theory itself.

Jenkins is very obviously trying to ridicule the woman, and not address all the evidence.

I assume you don't want to address the points made here:

http://www.checktheevidence.com/cms/index.php?option=content&task=view&id=46

-----

Have any of you talked to someone about 9/11 being an inside job, explained some of the evidence, pointed out what the media isn't telling us, etc., and then that person has responded with anger and name-calling?

If so, what did you think about that?

[jimd3100]

Is there any reason why you have to behave so childishly, rather than just addressing the evidence?

There is no evidence

It is clear that there is more emotion than logic in these type of exchanges.

There is logic, and emotion. The emotion is disgust.

If you want to address the evidence, that would be fine with me too.

There is no evidence, and that is the standard line we always hear from you no plane losers, as long as it's "discussed" it stays active, I wont be playing your stupid game.

I suspect you are already angry about my thoughtcrime, but putting that aside for a second, can you explain to me why the no planes theory is an impossibility?

If I had a theory that there is no such thing as air, we could discuss it forever. There is no theory, it's not even a hypothesis. It's stupidity, like no planes on 9/11.

Your retarded theory of the media creating the fake planes on 9/11 is disgusting, and here is just one reason, and it's the only reason I need. Chief Joe Pfiefer of the FDNY is who started the plane hit the WTC. NOT the media. He called it in before any media anywhere said anything about any plane. He watched this plane fly into the WTC. What he gained from 9/11 was one dead brother and a bad cough. Is he "in on it"? If the answer is yes, you wont be posting here anymore. If the answer is no then he watched a plane fly into the WTC like the rest of us did. If the answer is "he was fooled" then you are exposed as the fool.

[Viper]

I never seen all these toasted vehicles pics before so i for one am glad to have seen these vids and
i also find the hurricane at the same time and same location (just about) interesting too, and had never heard about it before, it too seems to have been ignored in media that morning.

[matrixcutter]

There is no evidence

That simply isn't true.

There is logic, and emotion.

I haven't seen any logical discussion of Dr Judy Wood's research from you, or from grapecrusher1, or from anybody who disagrees with it come to think of it, not that I've had more than a handful of discussions about it.

The emotion is disgust.

I see.

There is no evidence,

Again, that is not true.

and that is the standard line we always hear from you no plane losers,

Again with the name-calling?

as long as it's "discussed" it stays active, I wont be playing your stupid game.

I asked you why it is impossible.  Instead of providing proof that it is an impossibility you have called me a loser.  Obviously that is unconvincing.

If you don't want to discuss it with me, then don't.  It won't bother me.
It's just interesting to me when people so violently and relentlessly ridicule something and yet they are completely incapable of disproving it.

Your retarded theory of the media creating the fake planes on 9/11 is disgusting,

A) It isn't my theory.
B) Your disgust does not affect the evidence, although it might affect your perception of it.

If the answer is yes, you wont be posting here anymore.

The ultimate conversation killer.


Does anybody else want to explain why the NPT is, must be, and can only be an impossibility?

I didn't lose anybody on 9/11, and I don't want to upset anybody that did.

Some people argue that even suggesting that 9/11 was an inside job is a disgusting insult to everybody that died that day.  I would oppose that point of view.

[matrixcutter]

I never seen all these toasted vehicles pics before so i for one am glad to have seen these vids and
i also find the hurricane at the same time and same location (just about) interesting too, and had never heard about it before, it too seems to have been ignored in media that morning.

And in the 9/11 "truth movement".

[jimd3100]

I didn't lose anybody on 9/11, and I don't want to upset anybody that did.

Well Chief Pfieffer did, his brother was dead less than 2 hours after he called in the plane that he watched fly into the WTC, and you just implied that he's "in on it". You no planers expose yourselves with your stupidity. You are quite disgusting.

[matrixcutter]

Well Chief Pfieffer did, his brother was dead less than 2 hours after he called in the plane that he watched fly into the WTC, and you just implied that he's "in on it".

No I didn't, and you won't even let me explain why not without threatening to ban me.

You no planers expose yourselves with your stupidity.

Again with the name-calling?

You are quite disgusting.

OK.

Again, there are people who would say that you are disgusting for suggesting that 9/11 was an inside job, and that you are insulting everybody that died that day.  Obviously they are wrong.

Unfortunately, you are doing exactly the same thing.

[jimd3100]

No I didn't, and you won't even let me explain why not without threatening to ban me.

That was an answer in itself.

Again with the name-calling?

If she were a "truther" she'd be a No Planer....

Unfortunately, you are doing exactly the same thing.

  That's really old.....cry me a river No Planer   

[grapecrusher1]

More idiocy out of idiotboy at minute 25:00 -- there was no heat!!
moronic and foolish.
http://exposureroom.com/members/adjohnson/06d56d572baf4bdf808b3d9e15cd40a1/

[matrixcutter]

Other people's opinions are not important to me.  The evidence is important.

You have both shown that you are completely incapable of putting forward any sort of reasonable argument, let alone one based on a logical analysis of the evidence.

For example, calling someone an idiot for saying that there was no heat, without proving that there was heat is just a childish remark.  It is not an attempt to address the evidence.  It is the same tactic used by completely clueless "sheeple" who call people who disagree with the official 9/11 story "insane tinfoil hat wearing conspiracy theorists".  It is very revealing.

Whatever pictures you want to use to support your emotion-based attack, you cannot claim to have given any sort of proof that Dr Judy Wood's work is wrong.

And it is obvious that you never will, because your disapproval of it is not based on what the theory actually is.  You don't even seem to know what the theory is.

Anyone who would ask a question and tell someone that they will be banned for giving a certain answer is obviously not interested in rational debate.

[matrixcutter]

Unfortunately, you are doing exactly the same thing.

That's really old.....

I don't care how old something is.  I care whether it is true or not.
And we both know that it is true that you are using the same arguments as someone who believes the government's 9/11 story and gets angry and abusive at anyone who doesn't.

But only one of us will acknowledge that it's true.

cry me a river No Planer  

What do you think you are achieving by behaving like this?
Do you think you will insult me into submission?

I won't be answering any more of your posts unless you actually want to start an intelligent debate, rather than the childishness you have posted so far.

[Viper]

matrix, what i do when i run onto something new, i try it on and see how it feels.
Well i watched that vid and the Hiroshima one too and i'll say right now i'm trying on the idea that the nasa heat pics could have been faked, and that the buildings could have been upset sub-atomically.
What i find striking is the vehicle damage supposedly by the dust cloud, hmm even if it was thermitic dust i find it hard to buy it causing all the corrosion and flipped vehicles and melted fire trucks.
What's with all the mud and what's with all the fumes (if indeed they were fumes and not steam)?

[matrixcutter]

matrix, what i do when i run onto something new, i try it on and see how it feels.

Well according to some, that makes you an idiot.
It doesn't of course, but that doesn't seem to matter.

Well i watched that vid and the Hiroshima one too and i'll say right now i'm trying on the idea that the nasa heat pics could have been faked,

Of course they could.
They faked the moon landings 40 years ago.  Faking a picture could be done by someone on work experience, in their lunch break, with one hand tied behind his/her back.

and that the buildings could have been upset sub-atomically.

Most of the material that made up the Twin Towers turned to dust.  That's the important observation.
You really do have to ignore this piece of evidence to be satisfied by the authorised "alternative" 9/11 theories.

Does technology exist that can do that sort of thing?  Yes.
Would the perpetrators use it on 9/11?  Well, they did, obviously.
Can the evidence be explained away with thermite, jet fuel, planes and hijackers?  No.

What i find striking is the vehicle damage supposedly by the dust cloud, hmm even if it was thermitic dust i find it hard to buy it causing all the corrosion and flipped vehicles and melted fire trucks.

Especially when it only affects part of a car, and not some of the matter surrounding it.

What's with all the mud and what's with all the fumes (if indeed they were fumes and not steam)?

And what's with the refusal to address this evidence?  If something is obviously wrong and provably wrong, you prove it wrong.  You don't call the people talking about stupid or insane whilst refusing to address the evidence.  That's what the media does when it wants to smear 9/11 "truthers", or whoever else they want to smear.

[Freeski]

1/10-Dr Judy Wood & Andrew Johnson-Edge Media TV-911and DEW - 25 Feb 2010 (9mins 59s)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1_4NrRioRPU

2/10-Dr Judy Wood & Andrew Johnson-Edge Media TV-911and DEW - 25 Feb 2010 (9mins 59s)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qrnvI0N9rKg

3/10-Dr Judy Wood & Andrew Johnson-Edge Media TV-911and DEW - 25 Feb 2010 (9mins 59s)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O3ZOzBUFOR8

4/10-Dr Judy Wood & Andrew Johnson-Edge Media TV-911and DEW - 25 Feb 2010 (9mins 59s)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N6bUW3RczGA

5/10-Dr Judy Wood & Andrew Johnson-Edge Media TV-911and DEW - 25 Feb 2010 (9mins 59s)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VA-brf4LBiE

6/10-Dr Judy Wood & Andrew Johnson-Edge Media TV-911and DEW - 25 Feb 2010 (9mins 59s)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mlck_uf1-ZE

7/10-Dr Judy Wood & Andrew Johnson-Edge Media TV-911and DEW - 25 Feb 2010 (9mins 59s)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bcsztFp105g

8/10-Dr Judy Wood & Andrew Johnson-Edge Media TV-911and DEW - 25 Feb 2010 (9mins 59s)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NcEZ2OHaxUw

9/10-Dr Judy Wood & Andrew Johnson-Edge Media TV-911and DEW - 25 Feb 2010 (9mins 59s)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IXRICy-k6DY

10/10-Dr Judy Wood & Andrew Johnson-Edge Media TV-911and DEW - 25 Feb 2010 (9mins 57s)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FMeygS9QOOY

Bump for later - got up to part 4 and this is remarkable.

[jimd3100]

Other people's opinions are not important to me.  The evidence is important.

You have no evidence. The evidence says planes flew into buildings. You don't know what evidence means.

You have both shown that you are completely incapable of putting forward any sort of reasonable argument, let alone one based on a logical analysis of the evidence.

No, I've shown I have disgust and disdain for you no plane loonies wasting bandwith and my time and destroying the truth movement.

For example, calling someone an idiot for saying that there was no heat, without proving that there was heat is just a childish remark.

I agree with grapecrusher. Only an idiot would think fire doesn't cause heat.


  

It is not an attempt to address the evidence.  It is the same tactic used by completely clueless "sheeple" who call people who disagree with the official 9/11 story "insane tinfoil hat wearing conspiracy theorists".  It is very revealing.

In other words we must take any theory seriously or we are sheeple, which is what cointel is all about, it's called distraction and poisoning the well. It's hard to believe you are unaware of this.

Whatever pictures you want to use to support your emotion-based attack, you cannot claim to have given any sort of proof that Dr Judy Wood's work is wrong.

You mean like pictures of the plane parts? They don't count because it ruins your idiotic theory therefor they are planted and you pretend that's evidence. Yea, they planted an engine on a NY street. Brilliant.

And it is obvious that you never will, because your disapproval of it is not based on what the theory actually is.  You don't even seem to know what the theory is.

TV fakery, holograms, super secret space beam weapons, and all other nonsense I need to waste my life on to give you no planers attention and make us all look stupid, while ignoring the real evidence, you are a waste of time.

Anyone who would ask a question and tell someone that they will be banned for giving a certain answer is obviously not interested in rational debate.

Debate, debate, debate, thats what you no planers live for, to take us away from real issues and evidence to focus on insane nonsense to give you "nifty" theories that make no sense to debate on forever. And yes, you no plane turds trying to pin 9/11 on victims of the attack will get you banned, you wont be doing that on a forum I moderate on. The firefighters that nearly died on 9/11 are not "in on it".  Several watched the plane fly into the building.

[jimd3100]

That's really old.....
I don't care how old something is.  I care whether it is true or not.

BS! You care about outlandish and incredibly stupid conspiracy theories to debate forever for attention.

You're not part of any truth movement you're part of the 9/11 nut movement.

And we both know that it is true that you are using the same arguments as someone who believes the government's 9/11 story and gets angry and abusive at anyone who doesn't.

And you are a liar, and pathetically using the same no plane BS arguments that have been made for years.

"You support the official story," "you are acting just like the debunkers" and blah, blah. The same disruptive BS you no plane turds always use. Of course debunkers ridicule you because you deserve it. Your stupid no planes on 9/11 earns your ridicule. And I've got hundreds of posts that prove you are a liar when you say "you are using the same arguments as someone who believes the governments 9/11 story".  So you aren't just a no plane nut but a liar as well.

But only one of us will acknowledge that it's true.

Yea, it's true people that believe the gov story think no planers are idiots, and I agree, therefor in no plane land, I support the official story. How f**king lame. That ain't gonna fly here. I don't support the official story, nor do I support idiotic cointel BS.

What do you think you are achieving by behaving like this?
Do you think you will insult me into submission?

I give you the respect every no planer deserves, for f**king up and making 9/11 truth look like loonies. You aren't part of any truth movement, you are part of a nut movement.

I won't be answering any more of your posts unless you actually want to start an intelligent debate, rather than the childishness you have posted so far.

You will get the respect no planers deserve. None. "intelligent" debate, what you no plane nuts always chant, in other words, take us seriously, make us legitimate in 9/11 truth....just like cointel wants, it ain't gonna fly here, spew your no plane cointel garbage on your no plane retard boards.

[jimd3100]

Andrew Johnson:

According to a website you push on here, which is one of the dumbest and illogical sites I've seen, says this in regards to firefighter statements.....

A number of witnesses reported that they didn’t realize that the second impact was that of a plane – many of them “found out later”.
http://www.checktheevidence.com/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=134&Itemid=60

Yea, some were in the building, hard to see a plane fly into a building when you're indoors sherlock, some were outside and didn't see the hit, no one will see the hit unless they are looking up, and some did see it, are you really this stupid, or what? Frankly that's hard to believe so the question is why are you being so dishonest? And you want to pretend this is evidence or means something. You don't know what evidence is.

And then there is this.....

Similarly, the account of EMT David Timothy (File No. 9110156) expressed some doubt that he saw a plane.

"The next thing I heard was a loud like an engine roar. I looked up, and the next thing I knew I just saw -- I don't know if it was the tail end of the plane or what, but I saw something. When I looked up, I heard ‘boom’.

I'm sorry, the north tower was the first one. The south tower then got hit when we were right there."
http://www.checktheevidence.com/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=134&Itemid=60

In No plane nut land this is very suspicious, and casts doubt on if a plane really hit, but it gets dumber..........

Perhaps even more significant was where 2 witnesses who were standing next to each other, initially, did not agree upon the idea of a plane crash. From the account of Scott Holowach (File No: 9110114)

"At that time Chief Ganci was behind me and he thought there was another explosion in the north tower and that's when I turned around and said Chief, listen, there is a second plane that hit the other tower. He was like no no no no, we have another explosion. I said no, Chief, I witnessed it. I watched the plane hit the other tower. He is like are you sure. I said Chief, I'm 100 hundred percent positive I watched the second plane hit the other tower."
http://www.checktheevidence.com/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=134&Itemid=60

In no plane nut land it's very suspicious that the only person to see a plane fly into the building was the person who watched it happen. And yes, I get pissed off wasting my time on this BS.

And of course in no plane nut land numerous witnesses to a plane flying into the building means that it's unlikely a plane flew into the building.....

There was some additional confusion and rumours circulating about the nature of any planes involved. From the account of Anthony Bartolomey (File No: 9110013)

Q.  When you arrived there, did any civilians report anything to you?

A.  Yes. Numerous civilians were telling me that a plane had hit the building. There were discrepancies as to the type of plane. Some were saying it was a Cessna or Leer jet type, a small jet plane. Some said it was a large passenger plane. One person actually said that it was like a military style plane that actually shot missiles into the building.
http://www.checktheevidence.com/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=134&Itemid=60

How about some real evidence and eyewitness accounts......

physical evidence
http://wtcdebris.0catch.com/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oSWjgqpxE3w

We carried all our tools, the bottles, everything, and as we're walking down, part of the plane engine was sitting right in the street, still burning. I said, look, this is the plane. FDNY firefighter Paul Hyland page 4/12
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110374.PDF


Once we started taking off, I guess 30 feet in front of us, there was a lady on the ground by the curb and she was just waving her arms. That's all she could wave. Her legs were crushed. Apparently she got hit by part of the landing gear, one of the tires of the airplane. There was a large tire next to her. FDNY EMT Orlando Martinez  page 5/13
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110183.PDF

More on this from Reprehenser who ran 9/11 blogger.....

Orlando Martinez (EMS): "Once we started taking off, I guess 30 feet in front of us, there was a lady on the ground by the curb and she was just waving her arms. That's all she could wave. Her legs were crushed.

Apparently she got hit by part of the landing gear, one of the tires of the airplane. There was a large tire next to her. The person who was next to her, I guess worked with her, said something hit her. It may have been the landing gear. It was a large piece of metal that was so sharp it slit her whole back open, buttocks. Her legs were exposed, bones. We boarded her as fast as we could. There was nowhere to grab her. She was too slippery, so I grabbed the hip bone. That was exposed. We just kind of picked her up, put her on the long board and we strapped her up, put her on the stretcher and took as much flesh as we could. It was just hanging all over the place, put it between her legs. Put her in the ambulance and rushed her to Beekman."

The above lady was not hit by a "holograph". She was mangled by an aircraft part. An aircraft part that came from one of the planes that crashed into the towers.
http://www.911blogger.com/node/17206

...we started making our way to NYU Downtown Hospital, Beekman, to drop off our first set of patients when we got flagged down for another lady who got hit by the landing gear of the first plane. FDNY EMT Frank Puma page 4/12
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110273.PDF

We just passed a compact car where the engine was running and the door was open, which looked to me like the driver had escaped, but from the back seat to the trunk was crushed by a jet engine. We started going up West Street. I believe that's when Smitty ran over the part of the plane, but he did that to avoid the bodies because there were obviously bodies in the street. FDNY firefighter Michael Hazel  page 5/15
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110245.PDF

A young kid, Joe Sullivan, said, "Why is this plane flying through the smoke? Holy shit, he hit the second tower."  page 3/17

There was a car that we drove by that the driver's door and the passenger door were open, and there was a plane motor on the back half of the car. Two inches more, and both these guys would have been dead too.

That was their ticket. It was amazing. The car was actually cut right in half with this motor, right there back of the front seat. I sat there in amazement. FDNY firefighter Richard Saulle  page 5/17
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110247.PDF

"A section of the landing gear proved to me that this was a commercial airliner." PAPD Det. Sgt. Raymond Dilena Source
http://www.scribd.com/doc/17887558/NY-B30-PA-Police-Reports-1-of-2-Fdr-DiLena-Det-Sgt-Raymond

A tremendous fireball, flaming debris, pieces of the airplane, fuselage, landing gear, pieces of the building.

...We started running down one of the little side streets, Courtlandt or Dey. There were people dead in the street that obviously you couldn't help them. There was flaming debris coming down all over. It was just a matter of who got hit with the debris. FDNY Captain Michael Donovan  page 5/24
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110205.PDF

After that, an FBI agent came down the block. He identified some landing gear that was in front of our rig, asked me to make sure no pedestrians came down the block to interfere with any type of metals and debris that were there, because they were trying to identify to put the pieces back together for the plane. FDNY firefighter Sidney Parris  page 3/17
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110347.PDF

A little while later, I guess it was about a quarter to 9, somebody came in and
said they saw the plane coming over quarters and then they said they saw it hit the Trade Center. page 2/27

Vesey and Church, Vesey and Church right there. We stepped off the rig, and there were plane engine parts and people yelling and screaming. FDNY firefighter Bertram Springstead  page 4/17
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110225.PDF

Walking around, we came out to Rector Street. We saw one of the landing gears from the airplane. FDNY EMT Benjamin Badillo  page 11/16
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110495.PDF

Various pieces of the plane were falling on the street. As we went down the street you could see parts of aircraft with stencil numbers on it and things like that. There was a wheel, or like a wheel housing or something else there in the street. FDNY Deputy Commissioner Thomas Fitzpatrick  page 3/34
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110001.PDF

Walking down Vesey, we noticed large pieces of what looked like possibly the fuselage from the plane. There was a caravan of motorcycle police coming up. We stopped them and we cleared the path of big O rings and pieces of fuselage of the plane. We threw it to the side, and we told the guys to go on. Fire Patrolman Paul Curran  page 3/17
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110369.PDF

We walked down that block. It was littered with airplane parts.... FDNY Chief Ray Goldbach  page 4/24
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110150.PDF

Captain Nahmod and I were running down Vesey Street stepping over airplane pieces, several bodies and whatnot. There was what looked like the front wheel assembly of an airplane. Unknown the size of the plane that had hit, it just looked like it was one pair of wheels on an assembly, pieces of metal with rivets in them, a few body parts scattered around. FDNY EMT Richard Zarillo  page 4/15
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110161.PDF

Like I remember walking by with the chief, and I remember seeing the airplane engine. FDNY EMT Robert Kimball  page 6/9
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110368.PDF

I was putting on my pants and boots when I heard something similar to the
sound of a jet aircraft taking off, and when I looked up I saw the impact of the second plane hitting the south tower and immediately an enormous fireball erupted that actually masked the entire upper half of the building and part of the north tower. page 4/28

So we ran back to the car and laying right in back of my car was a large object which I thought was probably part of one of the aircraft turbines. FDNY Chief of Safety Albert Turi.  page 5/28
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110142.PDF

As I got down a little farther, there was what looked to be a piece of the cabin of the airplane, I guess. It looked like a piece of it about maybe six foot long. It looked like the windows. FDNY firefighter Brian Dixon  page 6/30
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110166.PDF

The other thing that was actually evident, though, is what appeared to be some plane parts, like some circular pieces of a plane, the walk down Vesey Street. FDNY EMS Dr. Michael Guttenberg  page 8/19
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110005.PDF

We were driving out of the tunnel up West Street and we're seeing body parts in the street, torsos, chunks of flesh, parts of the airplane landing gear, car fires everywhere. It was like a war zone. FDNY firefighter Steve Piccerill  page 3/15
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110330.PDF

I passed over some pieces of what appeared to be aircraft wreckage, fuselage, whatever, some body parts and bodies in various states, either people from the building or the airplanes. You couldn't tell. They weren't intact. FDNY EMS Division Chief John Peruggia  page 6/44
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110160.PDF

The landing gear of the aircraft was in that parking lot there. It was right near us. FDNY firefighter Dean Coutsouros  page 3/15
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110049.PDF

There were a number of airplane parts throughout the street, littering the streets. FDNY firefighter Robert Norris  page 7/30
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110396.PDF

But that piece of an airplane was way to big for the type of  plane that I envisioned hitting this building it's like you know it's jumbo jet come to think of it that piece of plane looked like it crushed half that car. FDNY firefighter Kevin McCabe page 27/28
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110344.PDF

...our initial response was seeing body parts and airplane parts all over the west side. FDNY EMT Stephen Hess  page 3/11
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110060.PDF

You heard the explosion and everything, but I saw the big fire ball. The stuff was coming down across the street. It looked like a meteor came flying across the street. They said it was the engine. FDNY firefighter Peter Fallucca  page 4/22
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110388.PDF

En route to the staging area, we were going down Columbia Street, saw the second plane strike the building....page 2/27

As we were riding in, we must have ran over some debris from the plane. We saw debris all over the floor. We saw a wheel. There was cars that were flattened. It was obvious that heavy things had fallen on them. FDNY firefighter Joseph Sullivan  page 3/27
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110286.PDF

That was before we got to the south pedestrian bridge, before Liberty Street . You could see airplane parts just littered across the street, across the highway. FDNY firefighter Craig Monahan  page 4/12
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110016.PDF

You could see airplane parts on the ground and although I didn't realize it at the time, I later realized there were body parts, both on the concourse and on the street. (some of these might have been jumpers) I now made a left on Vesey and walked down the street on the 7 World Trade Center side, where I could see more airplane debris. FDNY Assistant Commissioner James Drury  page 3/12
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110098.PDF

There was jumpers everywhere, there was bodies everywhere, pieces of plane everywhere. FDNY firefighter Kevin Murray  page 3/17
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110020.PDF

We walked down Vesey Street, and it was like total silence, nothing. It was eerie. There were police cars all parked on angles, metal going through their hoods. There was a tire of a plane on top of one. FDNY firefighter Arthur Riccio  page 3/10
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110277.PDF

I could see the fan, and that's what stood out in my mind. There was an airplane tire also there and then these bodies and luggage from the thing because there were shoes everywhere also. Some shoes had what looked like blood in it, other shoes didn't, other shoes were burnt, FDNY paramedic Manuel Delgado  page 28/32
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110004.PDF

In my zeal to get close, I had not noticed the falling bodies. Then I nearly stepped into a puddle of blood that was congealing beside what looked like the titanium gear of a pulverized airliner.
http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/09/11/getting-in-the-way-of-the-story/

One security officer reported that while the engine of the first plane had landed in the [Marriot] swimming pool, everyone in the health club was fine, and all were being brought to the lobby. Another officer radioed that the room-by-room evacuation was proceeding and that all guests were being brought down to the first floor.
http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-2035442/It-sounded-like-an-avalanche.html

Adam Ashton was working on a commuter ferry on the Hudson River when the twin towers were attacked.
I was dropping people off at the World Financial Center dock, close to the World Trade Center, when I saw the first plane streaking north to south across the sky and slam into the North Tower.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/talking_point/5317638.stm

I work in the West Village which is far enough away to be safe, but in a direct north view of the WTC.  Just as I was walking out of the subway station going to work Tuesday morning, I noticed a police officer standing in the street looking at the WTC saying "that's flying too low" and as I looked up, I saw the first plane hit the first tower. - Rebecca L. Kennedy
http://www.engr.psu.edu/ae/WTC/RebeccaKennedy.html

Operating at a gas leak, Battalion Chief Joseph Pfiefer said, "We heard a very loud plane, which you never hear in Manhattan. We all look up and see this commercial airline flying very low. We follow it and it goes right into the Trade Center. You could see it didn't veer off. It appeared to aim at the Trade Center smashed into
the upper floors. Created a big fireball and then disappeared into the building. I transmitted a second alarm...20 seconds after that I transmitted a third alarm."  -- Chief Joseph Pfiefer
http://www.firehouse.com/node/41579

Gee, wonder how those plane parts got there, and why people claim to see a plane fly into the building? You no plane assholes claim the media faked it, yet Chief Pfiefer who you want us to believe is in on it, who was nearly killed that day, and HAD HIS OWN BROTHER DIE, called in the plane strike THAT HE SAW, before any media outlet anywhere said anything. And the media wasn't the only ones who had "fake" footage, genius......

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lyqo4oh-AzU

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2859455565562890133#

Firefighter John Schroeder who was nearly killed that day also called in the plane THAT HE WATCHED FLY INTO THE WTC, before any media anywhere said anything about any planes, so your retarded theory depends on us calling these brave souls liars and murderers, that shit ain't gonna fly here you no planer loon.....

"We see the wing of the plane crash through building, I call dispatch and say a plane has just hit the trade center" - Firefighter John Schroeder      3:54 mark
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=53815767687186956&hl=en#

[matrixcutter]

Bump for later - got up to part 4 and this is remarkable.

You might be interested in this too.
Andrew Johnson:

I was invited to go on with Ralph Winterrowd last night to talk about the Thermite cover up. For those who have not yet been able to rid themselves of thermite, perhaps this may help (unless, of course, you are attached to thermite on 9/11 - in which case, who am I to tell you what to think...  
 
Andrew Johnson - No Thermite on 911 - The New 911 Cover Up - Ralph Winterrowd - 01 Mar 2010 - mp3
 
Or Top link:
 
http://www.checkthnutjobeevidence.com/audio/index.php?dir=911/&sort=date&order=desc
 
I only send it because of the re-energising of the thermite story, what with the Paul Craig Roberts article mentioning it, and this Architects and Engineers "initiative" (of intellectual herding).
 
Anyway, you can take it or leave it, for what it's worth!
 
You can also check out:
 
http://911termitefree.blogspots.com/
 
Which I have sent before, but some people on this list may not yet have seen it.
 
Some people say "It doesn't matter whether it was thermite or something else that destroyed the towers." Um - yes it does matter - for 2 reasons:
 
1) It will lead one, ultimately, to the perpetrators
2) The energy weaponry which was disclosed on 911 shows that we are slaves to the withholding of this technology and we have been scammed into using fossil fuels over the last 100 years or so.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Are you interested in what's really going on in the world, behind the facade? Then...
http://www.checkthedisinfoevidence.com/

What happened on 9/11?
http://www.drjudydeadwood.com/

Obviously there are people who are incapable of discussing this evidence in a mature and reasonable way, preferring instead to call people turds or idiots, but that doesn't make the evidence go away.

When some evidence sends people into an uncontrollable rage and they start insulting people, falsely attributing beliefs to them, unjustifiably calling them liars, etc., but not addressing that evidence and simply asserting that it doesn't even exist, then we know that the defense of a belief system has become more important than any analysis of that evidence.  Emotion has taken over from logic.

Most people who have woken up have encountered this sort of reaction from someone at some stage or another.

[madworld21]

Truth does not fear investigation. What's with the insults from certain posters? People should know better. Do you really believe in freedom of speech?

[grapecrusher1]

You might be interested in this too.
Andrew Johnson:
Obviously there are people who are incapable of discussing this evidence in a mature and reasonable way, preferring instead to call people turds or idiots, but that doesn't make the evidence go away.

When some evidence sends people into an uncontrollable rage and they start insulting people, falsely attributing beliefs to them, unjustifiably calling them liars, etc., but not addressing that evidence and simply asserting that it doesn't even exist, then we know that the defense of a belief system has become more important than any analysis of that evidence.  Emotion has taken over from logic.

Most people who have woken up have encountered this sort of reaction from someone at some stage or another.

You are the one that has no evidence.

There was a plethora of evidence just provided to you that is contrary to your position, but all you see is the odd insult peppered in amongst it.  Jimd must go to such lengths in blowing your argument out of the water to show how utterly delusional it truly is for the benefit of those reading it because you are a lost cause, completely oblivious to any rational logic.

What colour is the sky in your world?  Do you still talk to imaginary friends?  

[grapecrusher1]

Truth does not fear investigation. What's with the insults from certain posters? People should know better. Do you really believe in freedom of speech?

There is a threshold that was exceeded long ago.  I would suggest you go through some of this thread or just look at some of jimd3100's 1,000 plus posts dedicated to combatting this nonsense.

[Viper]

Seems some folks want more confirmation of THEIR truth than the actual truth.
I ony want the truth and i'll never stop searching for it, but it seems you guys have it all wrapped up already.

[grapecrusher1]

Seems some folks want more confirmation of THEIR truth than the actual truth.
I ony want the truth and i'll never stop searching for it, but it seems you guys have it all wrapped up already.

At this point there is ample evidence for a new investigation.  Lets put the kibosh on the space beam gibberish its almost been a decade there is no time for lollygagging gobdaws and nudniks.

Viper-- you did see those squibs right?  the floors popping out as the buildings came down?  the pyroclastic flow? and all the other characteristics that fit in with controlled demolition?

[Viper]

At this point there is ample evidence for a new investigation.  Lets put the kibosh on the space beam gibberish its almost been a decade there is no time for lollygagging gobdaws and nudniks.

Viper-- you did see those squibs right?  the floors popping out as the buildings came down?  the pyroclastic flow? and all the other characteristics that fit in with controlled demolition?

I seen all the 9/11 vids, i guess i looked at this DEW material more attentively than others may have
due to all the weather mods we've been seeing lately, like i believe they have weather weapons and maybe some tesla type gizmos too so why not DEW's?
WHY haven't i heard about the hurricane up until now?
In light of the recent weather mods, a hurricane off the coast of Manhattan on 9/11 is interesting to me.

[matrixcutter]

You are the one that has no evidence.

When you say that there is no evidence, you are not being honest.
This has been steered into a discussion about no planes theory, but Dr. Judy Wood's work is not about planes.  And it is not about space beams.

This has already been pointed out, yet her work is still deliberately being misrepresented.

There was a plethora of evidence just provided to you that is contrary to your position, but all you see is the odd insult peppered in amongst it.

No, I saw what else he posted too.  But the insults and the childishness demonstrate that there is no point communicating with this person.  He is not interested in a rational discussion, hence all the relentless and immature name-calling.  And he has essentially threatened to ban me for commenting on certain things.

Jimd must go to such lengths in blowing your argument out of the water to show how utterly delusional it truly is for the benefit of those reading it because you are a lost cause, completely oblivious to any rational logic.

Some people say that they think they saw planes.  Some people say that they didn't see planes.  Some people say that they heard planes approaching and some people say that they didn't hear planes approaching.

An important question is, is it possible that people believe they saw planes but actually didn't see planes?
And if you are honest, the answer to that question is yes, it is possible.
I know that some people will misrepresent this statement, but that doesn't change the reality that it is possible for one or more people to believe they saw something and to have been mistaken about exactly what they saw.

What colour is the sky in your world?  Do you still talk to imaginary friends?

Yet more childishness that just reveals an emotion-based response, as opposed to one based on reason.

There is a threshold that was exceeded long ago.  I would suggest you go through some of this thread or just look at some of jimd3100's 1,000 plus posts dedicated to combatting this nonsense.

Wow, that's a lot of posts.  Some people would hate to have to change their minds about something they have put that much time and energy into, not to mention the amount of abuse they have dished out about it.

At this point there is ample evidence for a new investigation.  Lets put the kibosh on the space beam gibberish

Space beam?
Again, what is the purpose of misrepresenting Dr. Judy Wood's work?
If it's so badly wrong, why would anybody need to misrepresent it at all, let alone so consistently?

[matrixcutter]

Seems some folks want more confirmation of THEIR truth than the actual truth.

Exactly.  It isn't difficult to spot it either, especially when playground insults are used instead of reasoned discussion of the evidence.

[jimd3100]

And he has essentially threatened to ban me for commenting on certain things.

No, dishonest no planer, it was one thing and here's the direct quote....

And yes, you no plane turds trying to pin 9/11 on victims of the attack will get you banned, you wont be doing that on a forum I moderate on. The firefighters that nearly died on 9/11 are not "in on it".

Have had it bigguy. I've obviously been a total asshole by not allowing you to expose what a fraud Chief Pfieffer is. Go hog wild. Expose Pfieffer and his fraud firefighter buddies. Show the "truth" of how he's a murderer.

An important question is, is it possible that people believe they saw planes but actually didn't see planes?

LOL! Actually an important question would be why are so many people reporting that they saw planes fly into the buildings? Is it because planes being tracked by the ATC are heading towards NY and into the skyscrapers? You have to admit it's possible. That might explain all the airplane parts. You have to admit, it's possible. This is an insane debate as usual.

Wow, that's a lot of posts.  Some people would hate to have to change their minds about something they have put that much time and energy into, not to mention the amount of abuse they have dished out about it.

Yea, that's probably what it is. Has nothing to do with the credibility of this board or something bigger than you or I and what we "believe", -->9/11 truth. It's just all about me.

I've already shown you that not only did firefighters call in watching with their own eyes a commercial airliner fly into the building before ANY media anywhere said a word about planes, and shown you the parts that came from the plane, one of these days you might actually comment on the evidence instead of saying.....

It isn't difficult to spot it either, especially when playground insults are used instead of reasoned discussion of the evidence.

Now I'm going to show it to you as it happened. If this is true, your no planes "theory" is a fraud. It really is that simple.

This from a no planer site....

"The point of the exercise is to establish that the Naudet film must have been staged by people who knew about the attacks in advance: who those people might be is a different subject. I have my own ideas on that, but they have little or nothing to do with the Naudet film, other than observing that it seems rather unlikely that two French infidels would be working for a Muslim fundamentalist group -or that that group could penetrate and subvert the Fire Department of New York, which at some level seems to have been involved in the planning of 9/11 — and the Naudet film."
http://serendipity.li/wot/naudet/raphael.htm

Do you agree with that?

The Naudet Brothers film.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2457244225269763926&hl=en#

Explain to the forum how this documentary film is fake, a complete fraud and
how those in it are participating in this fraud. Because in this incredibly important and fascinating movie, Documentary film makers are actually in the WTC Tower as the other tower comes down. So if someone is interested in researching 9/11 how can they possibly not want to experience actually being there as it happens? That's how important a film it is. In this documentary movie you see the planes hit the buildings and you're with Chief Pfieffer as he calls the first one in. Explain to the forum how Pfieffer is a fraud when even though this incredibly catastrophic event has happened he allows the film maker to go along and film, and made himself responsible for the safety of the filmmaker. Tell us how "fake" it is when it shows how the filmmaker looses the Chief in the chaos and takes off running as the other tower comes down debris reining down on him some stranger covers him with their body to protect him as they're pelted and waiting to die. Turns out it wasn't a stranger but Chief Pfieffer. He was responsible for this person and risked his own life to protect someone he hardly knew. As he was doing that his own brother's life was ending. Tell us what a fraud all that is. Explain to the forum how Pfieffer never had a brother who gave his life at the WTC that nearly killed himself, and did kill 343 of his firefighter brothers. Or is his brother still alive? Did he even have a brother? Tell us, prove to me the movie is a fake, and tell how Pfieffer is "in on it".

Want to get a glimpse of what it was like to be a firefighter on 9/11?
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2457244225269763926&hl=en#

I'm sorry I can only try and appeal to peoples sympathies and emotions instead of presenting real facts and evidence like a recording of the event as it happened. I don't know what is better evidence than an actual recording of the event, but you go ahead and tell us.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2457244225269763926&hl=en#

Now tell us how fake it is. It's such a shame it's all a fraud, because so many "truthers" have used this movie to point out things, things like building sevens' collapse at the 1:28:28 mark.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2457244225269763926&hl=en#

At the 1:22:45 mark is another famous scene, is it fake, or are the only parts of the movie,.... the parts that ruin your "theory",... fake?  How many have bothered to even watch the full movie?
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2457244225269763926&hl=en#

And why would the "U.S." attack itself or allow itself to be attacked? One of several motives shows itself at the 1:52:00 mark.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2457244225269763926&hl=en#

But you go ahead and show us how that's a fake actor. Explain to us all how I got duped and fell for this charade of a movie. I was dumb enough to fall for it, and then had the nerve to berate no planers for trying to expose the "truth", when I can't refute any of the evidence that hasn't been shown and everything I post is "fake". I'm quite an ass, not a gentleman such as yourself. So explain how Pfieffer was "in on" murdering his co workers and own brother. I realize what an ass I've been to consider that to be disgusting and discrediting to the forum and a slander against 9/11 truth itself.  So set me straight on what frauds these firefighters are, show the world that the prisonplanet forum will expose these frauds, to prove how "truthfull" we are.  

Tell us how it's fake, an elaborate acting job. Some people will probably believe it. I'll even help, Joe Pesci makes an appearance at the 1:15:43 mark.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2457244225269763926&hl=en#

or are the only fake parts of the movie,.... the parts that ruin your "theory"? LOL

No planers.....
"I believe — for the reasons in this essay — that those who had both the motive and the effrontery to carry out these attacks also had the motive and the effrontery to film the first one for propaganda purposes, passing it off as the product of luck, complete with a contrived cover story, the one told in the Naudet film."

the Fire Department of New York, which at some level seems to have been involved in the planning of 9/11 — and the Naudet film.
http://serendipity.li/wot/naudet/raphael.htm

343 Members of the Fire Department of New York were murdered on 9/11. You go ahead and defend this shit, and then feel free to mention what an asshole I am for resenting, that it's insisted, we associate ourselves with this disgusting, discrediting, garbage. And maybe just maybe I'll post some evidence myself someday, indicating planes flew into buildings on 9/11. Since all this doesn't seem to count. After all, this is a recording of what happened, not nearly as important as your no plane theory.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2457244225269763926&hl=en#

[madworld21]

There is a threshold that was exceeded long ago.  I would suggest you go through some of this thread or just look at some of jimd3100's 1,000 plus posts dedicated to combatting this nonsense.

If you accept freedom of speech, you must accept everything that comes with it. It can be hurtful and downright cruel, but there can be no limitations. In searching for truth, it can be upsetting.

[matrixcutter]

No, dishonest no planer, it was one thing and here's the direct quote....

Just to remind this angry being what he originally wrote:

Is he "in on it"? If the answer is yes, you wont be posting here anymore.

Given the fact that he made it clear that he could ban me, combined with the fact that he is being so abusive and so closed-minded, why would I conclude that any other comments could not cause Mr angry to ban me?

I've obviously been a total asshole

Well ...

by not allowing you to expose what a fraud Chief Pfieffer is. Go hog wild. Expose Pfieffer and his fraud firefighter buddies. Show the "truth" of how he's a murderer.

I haven't said he's a fraud or a murderer.  The fact that you have to pretend that I have is very odd.

LOL! Actually an important question would be why are so many people reporting that they saw planes fly into the buildings?

There weren't.  There were far more who didn't report seeing planes.

Wow, that's a lot of posts.  Some people would hate to have to change their minds about something they have put that much time and energy into, not to mention the amount of abuse they have dished out about it.

Yea, that's probably what it is. Has nothing to do with the credibility of this board

The credibility diminishes when moderators call people turds, idiots, liars, even murderers, etc.
If you disagree with something, that's one thing, but being abusive to "thoughtcriminals" is not consistent with maintaining a credible board, obviously.

or something bigger than you or I and what we "believe", -->9/11 truth.

I am for 9/11 truth.  Whether you reject evidence that interests me is completely irrelevant, and so are all your petty insults.

I've already shown you that not only did firefighters call in watching with their own eyes a commercial airliner fly into the building before ANY media anywhere said a word about planes, and shown you the parts that came from the plane, one of these days you might actually comment on the evidence

As I explained, it is possible to report seeing a plane when there was no plane.  The possibility that you seem obsessed with is that these firefighters are in on it and are simply lying.  I haven't said that.  You've said that.

That's not the only possibility, obviously.

Now I'm going to show it to you as it happened. If this is true, your no planes "theory" is a fraud. It really is that simple.

This from a no planer site....

I'm not interested in your attempts to put words in my mouth.

If you want to discuss the evidence, then do it without being abusive and childish.
If you don't want to discuss the evidence, then don't.

[matrixcutter]

Andrew Johnson:

Hi,

Thanks to an additional copy of the programme sent by Steve J, I have now re-authored a DVD of the "On The Edge" Show with Dr Judy Wood and yours truly, as posted here:

http://www.checktheDisInfo.co.uk/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=275&Itemid=60

(Both copies of the DVD were useful as I ended up using the sound from one and the video from the other!)

I have added to the DVD the following things:

1) Some MP3 audios of Dr Judy Wood's interviews - and a couple of mine.
2) Full set of slides sent to Edge Media - including the "missing" images.
3) 4 extra short videos - "911 Key Evidence", "Thermite Free RFC", CBS Special about lack of construction at Ground Zero, 911 Morning Weather Reports
4) Documents from the Legal Case and the Hutchison Effect and other related documents

If you want a copy, please let me know. Donations of £1 (if you are in the UK) or £2.50 (if you are outside the UK) or more are requested but not required, to cover costs. If you want more than 1 copy (which you can hopefully give to others!), just let me know how many you want.

PayPal to advertism.johnson@nutworld.com

You can either send the value in UK postage stamps or send a UK cheque to

Andrew "DickHead" Johnson
XX XXXX Drive
Borrowash
Derbyshire
XXXX XX
UK

Don't forget to include your address if I don't already have it!

Please forward this as you see fit.

Thanks for your help and support etc.

Andrew

[Leftovers]

I think the no plane theory ruins 9/11 truth .

[matrixcutter]

I think the no plane theory ruins 9/11 truth .

Interesting first post.
Do you have another account?