View Single Post
Old 29th September 2008, 05:45 AM   #1
Master Poster
ref's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,685
What They Say? Truthers Speak - September 2008 Edition

To me it has always been amusing to see what the prominent truthers actually say. How they contradict themselves, what explanations do they offer, how they manage to trap themselves. And how lacking of any sense their statements are, especially when seen next to all the other statements they have made themselves.

Are these guys experts or are they not? Do they know who did it or don't they? Why did they do it?

It seems these guys don't know. Or do they? Sometimes they do and sometimes don't. Take a look.

1. About their expertise

Richard Gage:

However, the 3 high-rise buildings at the World Trade Center which "collapsed" on 9/11 (the Twin Towers plus WTC Building #7) presented us with a body of evidence (i.e., controlled demolition) that was clearly outside the scope of our training and experience.

We can play a very significant role as building professionals because we have the necessary technical credibility that Congress will respond to.

Robust science, we've got it, we're offering it.

Kevin Ryan:

“I don’t believe it’s possible to read the official explanations and then hear what highly credentialed scientists (Gage, Jones) have said and not come to the conclusion we don’t know a lot about what happened that day.”

2. How certain are they of their point of view?

Richard Gage:

Scientists (Steven Jones, Kevin Ryan) have determined conclusively that thermite — a high-tech incendiary — was used.

There is no other possible source for the molten iron (besides thermate).

“It is virtually impossible, no, it is impossible, I’ll say it,” he said (about the possibility of natural collapse of WTC7)

Twenty-seven hundred people were murdered in what we can now safely call demolitions," Gage said.

Steven Jones

It is now our belief that the case for falsity of the official explanation is so well established and demonstrated by papers in this Journal that there is little to be gained from accepting more papers here.

3. Who did it? Who is responsible?

Richard Gage:

We don't have to explain how this was done, or who may have been responsible.

Richard Gage & Kevin Ryan

Neither Ryan or Gage cared to speculate as to who might have orchestrated a demolition of the towers, instead preferring to talk about the inconsistencies of the government reports.

Richard Gage:

It was an inside operation, and it harvested all these goals that seem to have been well documented prior to 9/11.

We are not talking about a conspiracy by Al-Qaida anymore. That is a logical assumption that can be made. We are talking about something else entirely.

“It is important to understand it because it was a pretext for the invasion of two countries in which almost a million people have perished,” Gage said.

4. How did they do it? What methods did they use?

Richard Gage:

Well that's why they would have used thermite, which is a more silent, um, thermate, which is a special form of thermite with added sulfur, because obviously you wouldn't want a whole bunch of explosions to be heard, even though they were, it's not a perfect science. They have a hundred and eighteen witnesses just from those who were recorded in the oral histories. ig984.wmv

Thermate can produce all of these effects, used in conjunction with linear shaped charges.

Steven Jones:

Superthermite, in the nano-composite sol gel form, can be painted on the steel columns and that then can be touched off with radio controlled signals. This would not take months.

Kevin Ryan:

It seems that thermate may have been used not only to weaken or cut the steel infrastructure throughout the buildings, but also to help create that fiery presentation near the floors of impact. It seems possible that a thermate-like material, and/or other devices contributing to the destruction of the towers, could have been incorporated on the floors of impact and failure during the fireproofing upgrades.

That leaves the very real possibility of aluminothermic energetic materials placed in the WTC basement levels. A superthermite powder mixture, exploding and scorching as it goes, should be the highest priority root cause in any investigation.

5. It's getting spooky out there...

Steven Jones:

Sofia got me looking at chemtrails for example. And I'm not ready to talk about that too much, I have actually made some observations. I have not (unintelligible) what's in those trails, but some of those do certainly last longer than others. And that's... I could go into that a little bit, but I think that that's a valid area and it's not 9/11 but it is truth.

I've been talking for many months about the importance of getting some food and water stored up, for three months at least! Better for longer, like a year. You should have some benefit for waking up to what is going on -- get that food storage NOW while you're thinking about it. And please think of a "place of refuge" or two where you and family might go, should a nasty "event" take place in your city or near you.

6. And finally: Foreknowledge – a'la AE911Truth

The AE911Truth tele-conference will follow immediately after the NIST (National Institute for Standards & Technology) slide presentation and Q&A of their WTC 7 Final Report which will be Webcast beginning at 8am PDT / 11am EDT. In our AE911Truth response we will be documenting major flaws in the NIST report as well as the most serious omissions such as the collapse features of WTC 7 and the scientific forensic evidence of its explosive controlled demolition.
9/11 Guide homepage

Conspiracy theories abound and I believe firmly that all of them are without merit. - Chief Daniel Nigro

Last edited by ref; 29th September 2008 at 05:57 AM.
ref is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top