CONT

Sorry where is your evidence for that? DON'T waste MY time presenting evidence I can't verify. In any case, I don’t recall anywhere in their testimony, anyone saying that they believed that explosives were planted. I heard people say “like explosions” and “like demolitions” etc. No one actually said that the towers were brought down using pre-planted explosives.

You say >> “It's clear that the above and quite a few other contributions of yours concerning New York firefighters have been misleading.”

Just because you haven’t understood what I was saying doesn’t make it misleading, it just shows AGAIN how poor your analytical/comprehension skills are.

you say >> “Paul, why won't you stop wasting our time by quoting evidence we can't verify for ourselves?”

Firstly I’d like to again note your blatant insanity in continuing to pretend that someone else is reading this. How about you try and get someone other than one of your sock puppets or mates to SHOW themselves. I suspect you had imaginary friends as a child and maybe still do.

You say >> “So how about providing the page on which the image ... ”

Here. It was really tough to find, another demonstration of your thorough investigatory skills.
http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/thermite.htm

you say >> “In any case, the caption you quoted is factual. The columns shown in the picture are not the same as those shown in the YouTube broadcast at http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=LJyBuANVkQ4 so it is possible that the steel in the image was cut by "shaped charges slic(ing) through steel beams."

What? Are you really that thick? If you watch as the video pans along the cut columns, which are at right angles to the photo in the “truther” website, when the camera get to the last cut column (1:23 in) you see the columns going off at right angles to the left of screen. That corner column, which has the three “candles” as a backdrop is the same cut column as in the “truther video”

Paul wrote, "You have sub-par comprehension skills which you make up for by just flat out lying, don't you."

Once again, my words were:

"Like when you insisted that John Schroeder was the only Firefight in New York city who attested to having witnessed explosions around the (WTC)?"

I would have that it was self-evident that you hadn't literally written that. Nevertheless, it was clear to me that when you wrote the following words,

"... But FDNY guys were actually there. They are PRIMARY sources in this investigation. Griffin used interviews with dozens of these FDNY guys to highlight his claims of explosions. But can he get ANY of them (besides Schroeder) to stand up and support his claims that there were actual explosives in the buildings? Not that I?m aware of."

... that that was what you were trying to imply.

If you insist on calling that "flat out lying" on my part, then I would suggest to you that you are clutching at straws.

---

Paul asked, "Where does Lou Cachioli say that he believes there were bombs placed in the building? ..."

Here's where Lou said that:

"I somehow got into the stairwell and there were more people there. When I began to try and direct down, another huge explosion like the first one hits. This one hits about two minutes later, although it's hard to tell, but I'm thinking, 'Oh. My God, these bastards put bombs in here like they did in 1993!' " (http://patriotsquestion911.com/survivors.html#Cacchioli)

Perhaps, after all, it's not myself who "(has) sub-par comprehension skills" or who "struggle(s) with plain English".

In another piece of testimony, Brian Dixon who was in the South Tower wrote, "I was watching the fire, watching the people jump and hearing a noise and looking up and seeing -- it actually looked -- the lowest floor of fire in the south tower actually looked like someone had planted explosives around it because the whole bottom I could see -- I could see two sides of it and the other side -- it just looked like that floor blew out."

(tobecontinued)

(continuedfromabove)

... but I guess Paul would insist that that that testimony doesn't count, because the words 'planted explosives', rather than 'bomb', was used.

Paul is clearly playing with words in order to confuse others, rather than to help shed light on the issue.

---

Paul, regarding the supposed "truther" lie about a column discovered with angled cuts, I didn't go out of my what to track down the page, because it seemed to me that you were doing precisely what you have repeatedly accused me of doing, that is dragging in new issue in order to create enough distraction to get yourself out of corner.

As it turns out, what you have shown is not an example of a 'truther' lie, but rather a denialist lie.

Paul wrote, "If you watch as the video pans along the cut columns, which are at right angles to the photo in the 'truther' website, when the camera get to the last cut column (1:23 in) you see the columns going off at right angles to the left of screen. That corner column, which has the three 'candles' as a backdrop is the same cut column as in the 'truther video'"

If Paul is trying to suggest that any of the columns in that video match the column in the image at, he is wrong.

The angle of the cut in the image at http://whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/thermiteonwtccolumns_small.jpg http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/thermite.htm is clearly sharper than any of those viewed in the video, in particular those viewable 1:23 into the video. Also none of them have the same surrounds as the column in the image.

Most likely the photo with the fireman standing in it would have been taken immediately after the collapse before any cleanup had begun. In the videos of the cleanup, no firefighters are seen as would be expected as they would not have had any useful role to play at that point.

One apt comment posted to the page of the "debunking" video http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=ySHgiUxnLC0 is

"The only thing this video debunks is the producer's ability to put forward a sound logical argument."

Dagget,

You really are a simpleton. There are fire-fighters who used terms like bomb and explosion to describe the events of that day. We both know this.

But Cachhioli ISN”T actually a witness to any explosions (at least as far as his testimony goes). He experienced the significant shaking of the building which he now knows was the collapse of the 1st tower. Furthermore he is reportedly angry for being taken out of context. http://911myths.com/html/quote_abuse.html

My point is, who of these people have since come forward to say that they actually experienced bombs. Apart from Schroeder I don’t know of ANY.

Here is a transcript of Lou Cacchioli in 2002. http://sixtyminutes.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=263793. He clearly believes Osama Bin Laden to have been behind the attacks.

Quote >> “Guest asks: If you had the chance to say something to Osama bin Laden, what would you say?

Louis Cacchioli says: I'd probably love to grab a hold of him, I don't know, I'd probably go crazy because of what he did, but I'd have to ask him why? What made you do something like this and why are you training young kids to do this; it's not the right way to handle things. And then I'd probably go crazy, as I've got so much hate from all the hurt he's caused.

It’s funny that whenever Cacchioli’s name appears in “truther” material, it is almost always in conjunction with the original interview he did with People magazine on September 12 2001. Since then, apart from his outburst at being taken out of context at the 9/11 inquiry, he has said NOTHING which the conspiracists can use. So they don’t quote him.

You say >> “In another piece of testimony, Brian Dixon who was in the South Tower wrote, "I was watching the fire, -- it actually looked -- the lowest floor of fire in the south tower actually looked like someone had planted explosives around it"

So he was in the south tower watching the south tower burn and then explode? Really

TBC

CONT,

Except, hang on, the towers collapsed from the top down. We all saw it. None of the lower floors gave way until the collapsing upper stories reached them. Funny that.

Most of these fire-fighters are clear that the “explosions” they experienced were not actually BOMBS. Scores of people described the sound of human bodies hitting the pavement at terminal velocity as “like a bomb going off”. Funnily enough, none of them were actually suggesting the bodies were wired with C4.

The “truthers” always deliberately ignore the fact that the sounds people heard were much more likely to be explosion of things like oil filled transformers, gas pockets in the building, oxygen canisters, diesel fuel generators or structural collapse incidents etc.

None of these people who Griffin quoted ( Griffin used the testimonies of their experiences on the day which were published in the NY Times) stood up and said they saw BOMBS going off.

“Most fundamental from a logic standpoint, all of these witnesses are describing what they saw and heard during the time the buildings were collapsing or about to collapse—i.e., after the plane strikes (which some conspiracists claim never took place at all). They are all describing the effect. None are describing the cause. “http://signalsnoises.blogspot.com/2006/04/911-explosion-testimony-why-it-doesnt.html

They are telling us what they experienced, not how it happened. Do you even understand the difference?

Dagget says >> “If Paul is trying to suggest that any of the columns in that video match the column in the image, he is wrong.”

No Dagget, you just see what you want to see. You see cut columns – therefore its evidence that the building was demolished. The photos are clearly of the same column.

You say “Most likely the photo with the fireman standing in it would have been taken immediately after the collapse “

You really don’t mind using your imagination to fill in the blanks do you? If you recall you yourself have posted links of fire-fighters saying they were there days/weeks after the collapse. Yet now you are claiming no fire-fighters were there.

Paul asked, "Where does Lou Cachioli say that he believes there were bombs placed in the building? ..."

Then I responded:

"Here's where Lou said that:

"'I somehow got into the stairwell and there were more people there. When I began to try and direct down, another huge explosion like the first one hits. This one hits about two minutes later, although it's hard to tell, but I'm thinking, "Oh. My God, these bastards put bombs in here like they did in 1993!"' (http://patriotsquestion911.com/survivors.html#Cacchioli)"

Paul, do you or don't you mean to deny that these words mean that Lou Cachioli thought there were "bombs placed in the building"?