I am willing to treat respectfully anyone who is making an honest effort to try to figure out 9/11, and regardless of their current level of knowledge or whether they agree with me. All one asks is that they treat others respectfully and show some basic reasoning skills.
With regard to the testimony of William Rodriguez, here is one rendition, and here is the key phrase: "heard and felt explosions rock the basement sub-levels of the north tower JUST SECONDS BEFORE THE JETLINER STRUCK THE TOP FLOORS."
[begin excerpt]
June 24, 2005
By Greg Szymanski
What happened to William Rodriguez the morning of 9/11 is a miracle. What happened to his story after-the-fact is a tragedy.
But with miracles and tragedies comes truth. And truth is exactly what Rodriguez brings to the whole mystery surrounding 9/11.
Declared a hero for saving numerous lives at Ground Zero, he was the janitor on duty the morning of 9/11 who heard and felt explosions rock the basement sub-levels of the north tower just seconds before the jetliner struck the top floors.
He not only claims he felt explosions coming from below the first sub-level while working in the basement, he says the walls were cracking around him and he pulled a man to safety by the name of Felipe David, who was severely burned from the basement explosions.
All these events occurred only seconds before and during the jetliner strike above. And through it all, he now asks a simple question everybody should be asking? How could a jetliner hit 90 floors above and burn a man’s arms and face to a crisp in the basement below within seconds of impact?
Rodriguez claims this was impossible and clearly demonstrates a controlled demolition brought down the WTC, saying "Let’s see them (the government) try to wiggle out of this one."
Well, they haven’t wiggled out of it because the government continues to act like Rodriguez doesn’t exist, basically ignoring his statements and the fact he rescued a man burnt and bleeding from the basement explosions.
[end excerpt]
Based on everything I've read to date, I believe that all three towers were brought down by controlled demolition, not just WTC7 (which was a painfully obvious act of controlled demolition). The demolition method may have been unconventional and have involved a still classified technology. I couldn't care less whether real planes were used in the operation or not -- to me that is a minor detail in the overall crime. Who committed this crime and why they committed it is what matters. An even more pressing matter is what they plan to do next, and how and when. They have telegraphed strong signals that they intend to detonate one more nuclear weapons in American cities, probably within the coming year, and possibly within the coming months.
I am betting that there have been significant defections from the original conspiratorial group during the last year, as a result of the disastrous Iraq War, paralleling the defections of former neoconservatives like Francis Fukuyama from the neoconservative movement.
If 9/11 was in fact an inside job, as it appears to be, the truth is probably going to come out.
Bill Giltner <bill.giltner@gmail.com> wrote:
Bill Giltner <bill.giltner@gmail.com> wrote:
I hope others will join in, because I certainly don't claim to have the
only replies to the questions:
1) I think your understanding or your statement of the Rodriguez story is a
little off.... Or else mine is. I don't think he ever said the explosions
he witnessed preceded the "impact". I've never really thought the timing
mattered, only the rock solid testimony that explosions were happening that
were impossible to reconcile as being associated with the impact of a plane.
Maybe it is my assumption, but my reading was more of it being concurrent.
In addition to Rogriguez, there are many eyewitnesses who lived to tell
about the lobbies (are they called concourses?) of the WTC showing clear
explosive events completely as odds with being an after-effect of the
alleged plane impacts.
2) I have two answers. 1) The way one sees arranged mini-explosions that
show little "geisers" coming down the sides of the building preceding the
turn to dust / debris" events seem to be to parallel the vid footage of many
controlled demos. 2) There are other signatures of unknown technology
being used.
3) I've seen this postulated. If some official wants to come out and
explain this precisely, and explain why we weren't told the truth
here-to-fore, fine. There's still a gapping hole about why wtc7 was
demolished, even so.
And finally, as to why should I be rude. Here's why: If there are those
who truly are just ignorant, and want to learn, there are many many avenues
to start getting knowledge. I can't see this forum as 9/11 "101" class.
Maybe I've misunderstood.
The majority of posters who post disrupting and insulting 9/11 ideas are
disinfo agents. The Internet is crawling with them, especially now as the
truth is being to gain currency.
I don't see the harm in pointing out incompetents or saboteurs.
-------Original Message-------
From: Sean McBride
Date: 03/27/06 22:41:34
To: political-research@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [political-research] Personal Attacks on Those Who Disagree
with the No-Planes Theory
What purpose is achieved by insulting someone who may well be making an
honest effort to understand 9/11? Why not simply help the poster improve his
or her knowledge of 9/11?
A few points:
1. With regard to the alleged explosions which preceded the impact of the
alleged planes and which were reported by William Rodriguez -- what was that
all about? A mistake?
2. Could the towers have been brought down by an advanced and classified
military technology, and not conventional demolition explosives?
3. Were the towers prewired with conventional demolition explosives,
according to some kind of classified official policy? One attempt had
already been made to bring down one of the towers in 1993 -- other attempts
were no doubt expected. Plans were probably in place to bring down the
towers in a controlled way in case of terrorist attacks.
Bill Giltner <bill.giltner@gmail.com> wrote:
Sean,
I'm going to cooperate with the "respect your fellow posters" request you've
Made as much as I can...
In reference to "MrOsario's" post, I didn't think it deserved a response.
I think the post was, seriously, a funny joke: Someone who had some reason
To waste our time.
In any case, since you replied, I want to provide a "real" reply.
I respect your question: "test of common sense." However even though I
Agree with the gist of your reply, I think "common sense" is way too loose
Of a precept or concept of logic to apply here. To me, the likelihood of
The truth of 9/11 using a test of common sense is only possible if one has
Key facts at hand, and even with those key facts, I have to say, I have to
Keep on challenging my preconceptions to try to allow for the real truth.
As an aside, when we watch a magician, we see things that "test our common
Sense". It's only through being shown how our own intuitions mislead us at
Times, that we comprehend how we've been tricked.
So, let me get to my points:
Point 1: When one watches the towers coming down, one clearly sees the
Charges going off from the top down. The idea that those charges could have
Been planted by Firemen on the top floors of the towers is absurd.
The originally poster is either:
A) ignorant of what the video evidence shows
Or
B) believes his audience will be ignorant of what the video evidence shows
I believe the above is only common sense if one has taken the time to study
The demolitions.
Of course there are many other reasons to consider the poster the most crude
Of hooey generators:
Point 2: The physics of the crash and fires don't imply any kind of massive
Failure of the tower structures. There's no reason to think they would fall
Topple, or suffer any kind of structural failure.
Point 3: There is strong evidence pointing to bombs going off prior to the
Collapse. The idea of these events happening in a way consistent with the
Posters logic, especially the bombs in the basement is totally suspect.
What your really have here is some Joe that takes us for a fool, or is one
Himself.
-------Original Message-------
From: Sean McBride
Date: 03/27/06 21:36:08
To: political-research@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [political-research] Personal Attacks on Those Who Disagree
With the No-Planes Theory
If the towers were under threat of falling sideways from the impact of the
Hijacked planes, then why conceal an operation to force them to fall
Straight downwards? Why the necessity for secrecy?
Also, wouldn't some of the firefighters have spoken up about the operation
By now?
Does this scenario pass the test of common sense?
MrOsario <mrosario@rgv.rr.com> wrote:
The Twin Towers were to fall sideway and have a domino effect on the other
Buildings thereby
Killing around 140,000. So the decision was made to send in 200 firemen with
Bombs to set them
At strategic places so that the towers would fall the way a building is
Supposed to fall when it
Is being demolished.
----- Original Message -----
From: Sean McBride
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
Visit your group "political-research" on the web.
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
political-research-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Search the archives for political-research at http://www.terazen.com/
Subscribe to the RSS feed for political-research at http://rss.groups.yahoo
com/group/political-research/rss
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
Visit your group "political-research" on the web.
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
political-research-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Search the archives for political-research at http://www.terazen.com/
Subscribe to the RSS feed for political-research at http://rss.groups.yahoo.com/group/political-research/rss
SPONSORED LINKS
| Business intelligence | Competitive intelligence | Market intelligence |
| Emotional intelligence | Military intelligence | Critical thinking |
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
- Visit your group "political-research" on the web.
- To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
political-research-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
- Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
No comments:
Post a Comment