9/11 Survivors, and Daniel Sanjata Speak w/ WAC engage JC residents Q&A *Updated*

page: 1
16
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 05:47 AM
link   
Loose Change: an American Coup narrated by Daniel Sanjata was screened this weekend, January 9th, 2010 in Jersey City, NJ. This event was hosted in the Jersey City Library, and the New Jersey Peace Movement. A Lot of people showed up to this event at the Jersey City Library’s theater. Firefighters, Local citizens from NYC, and NJ, First Responders, and survivors showed up to this event, and shared their stories.

William Rodriguez and Daniel Sanjata showed up to this event. Originally Sanjata was the only one expected to show up for Q&A, but to our surprise, Rodriguez showed up and joined in on the Q&A. I have a few videos of the Q&A Below.

I have one thing to add here. These witnesses are survivors of the WTC attack. Why do we look to our leaders for the official story to what happened, yet these witnesses/survivors convey a completely different story than what our government told us in the commission report, and NIST? Why are we going to listen to people, who were not there tell us something that contradicts eye witness accounts, then turn our back on the survivors, the families, the first responders, and then swallow the OS Hook-Line-Sinker? Why are we letting them think for us? The evidence is there, the survivors are there telling us something is wrong, but, we turn our back on them because we listen to what were told by our media sources. Why don’t we just listen to them for once?

Here is the video of the Q&A:

Part one:

Part Two:

Part Three: (My batteries died and missed about 3 minutes of the Q&A around 1 minute in.)

Part Four:

Part Five:

______________________________________________________________________________

here is a video of a survivor of 9/11. he said that he saw bodies in the lobby, and that he had to step over, or step on bodies as he was escaping the complex, and that the whole lobby was destroyed. fits in line with other witnesses saying the lobby was blown out before any towers collapsed.



There will be more videos in the future of witness's speaking out.

[edit on 1/10/2010 by ugie1028]




posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 11:40 AM
link   
That youtube clip is awful. You can hardly make out what the man is saying over the background gabble and the interviewer needs some lessons about not asking asking leading questions.

No-one disputes that there was lobby damage before collapse but there are perfectly rational explanations for it other than planted bombs.



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 11:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by ugie1028
hello guys,

We attended the Loose change an american coupe that was narrated by Daniel Sanjata. we had a great turnout for this event, and we had survivors of 9/11 show up and share their stories. here is a video. he said that he saw bodies in the lobby, and that he had to step over, or step on bodies as he was escaping the complex, and that the whole lobby was destroyed. fits in line with other witnesses saying the lobby was blown out before any towers collapsed.


Slight problem with your claim...actually no, there's a gigantic problem with your claim...the Naudet brothers were with the NYFD as they arrived at the lobby of the north tower and their cameras were rolling throughout the whole time, and their footage showed NO "bodies in the lobby" whatsoever. Unless you're willing to accuse the Naudet brothers of being secret gov't disinformation agents, we have to side with their video footage over this guy's unsubstanciated claims.

This is what disgusts me the most about the so-called 9/11 truth movement and these damned fool conspiracy web sites in particular; in their zeal to get people to believe in these conspiracy stories, they're quite willing to misrepresent one piece of evidence that completely contradicts other evidence. Case in point- the same Loose Change con artists behind this video. They're going around pushing the claim the planes had missile pods beneath the wings by "analyzing" grainy video taken from a mile away, which completely contradicts all the 500 OTHER videos with betetr detail that show no missile pods. Little wonder why they push out someone claiming there were bodies in the lobby while developing selective amnesia and ignore the video that specifically shows what the lobby looked like at the time.

I don't know George Mironis or what his background is, but I do know that the bunch behind that Loose Change mockumetary are among the most blatant con artists and liars infecting the 9/11 truth movement there are. If you want to be pushing these conspiracy stories of yours, fine, but I'd stay away from any association with them if I were you, 'cause you're not making them look better, you're making yourself look worse.



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 11:59 AM
link   
reply to post by Alfie1
 


For the sound in the video, i didn't have a problem hearing him.

Why would the lobby looked blown out with bodies littering the floor, covered in news papers, and debris? didn't the plane hit the top of the building? must of been one hell of a shock wave.


do you have an explanation to why those windows were blown out?



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 12:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by ugie1028
reply to post by Alfie1
 


For the sound in the video, i didn't have a problem hearing him.

Why would the lobby looked blown out with bodies littering the floor, covered in news papers, and debris? didn't the plane hit the top of the building? must of been one hell of a shock wave.


do you have an explanation to why those windows were blown out?


I go along with plane impact and jet fuel down elevator shafts :-

www.youtube.com...

Can you prove anything different ?



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 12:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Alfie1
 


Didint most, if not all the jet fuel explode on impact, and burn on the upper floors?

explain Rodriguez's accounts regarding lower explosions before the upper level explosions from the plane impact?



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 12:51 PM
link   
"covered in the NY Times".....? (referring to the bodies in the lobby)

That's a bit too detailed especially if you're in the throes of panic but....who knows. I'd be lucky if I remembered where I lived that day if I were a survivor.

Still............

9-11-01 was an inside job.
Period. The End.
And the TRUTH will come out one day (probably after I'm long gone though seeing JFK's truth is still unraveling 47 years later)



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 01:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by ugie1028

Didint most, if not all the jet fuel explode on impact, and burn on the upper floors?

explain Rodriguez's accounts regarding lower explosions before the upper level explosions from the plane impact?


The explainations are one and the same- the burning fuel caused a massive fireball to be pushed down the central shaft and elevator shafts. The guy that William Rodriguez helped out of the building was in elevator 50 around the fourth floor when the force of the fireball pushed the elevator down into the basement and burning him severely. Elevator 50 is the only shaft that runs throughout the entire length of the building. These are William Ridriguez' own words as given to the NIST investigation, so I have to consider them credible.

If the fireballs caused by the burning fuel caused such a strong force that pushed an elevator down to the basement, it's certainly not going to stop there. It's going to continue on and hit the basement like a sledge hammer.



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 02:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by ugie1028
reply to post by Alfie1
 


Didint most, if not all the jet fuel explode on impact, and burn on the upper floors?

explain Rodriguez's accounts regarding lower explosions before the upper level explosions from the plane impact?


Who knows how much jet fuel was immediately burned on impact ? Can you give me a formula for working it out ?

With regard to Rodriguez, I think his credibility is damaged by virtue of becoming a paid truther celeb and by embellishing his story.

His supervisor has said they were both working in a windowless basement and were not aware of the plane striking way above them.

I would find Rodriguez more credible if you could point me to some statements made by him close to 9/11 indicating explosions prior to plane impact.

This is something he did say nearer the time :-

"The fire, the ball of fire, for example, I was in the basement when the first plane hit the building. And at that moment, I thought it was an electrical generator that blew up at that moment. A person comes running into the office saying explosion, explosion, explosion. When I look at this guy ; has all the skin pulled off his body. Hanging from the top of his fingertips like it was a glove. And I said what happened ? He said the elevators. What happened was the ball of fire went down with such force down the elevator shaft on the 58th (50A) - freight elevator that we have in the North Tower, it went out with such a force that it broke the cables. It went down, I think seven flights. The person survived because he was pulled from the B3 level. But the person, being in front of the doors waiting for the elevator, practically got his skin vaporised."

Now, you may prefer things Mr Rodriguez has said since, for your own reasons, but the above is pretty clear support for the jet fuel down the shafts scenario and you have yet to come up with proof of anything else.



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 02:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Alfie1
 


thats a lovely story , about the only thing you didn't twist wrong ,was the

spelling of his name.



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 02:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sean48
reply to post by Alfie1
 


thats a lovely story , about the only thing you didn't twist wrong ,was the

spelling of his name.


Why don't you check it out ? No wonder you truthers never actually get anywhere near the truth.



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 02:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Alfie1
 


well you say anyone who is making money off the truth movement is not credible...

how about the trillions of dollars that were missing from the pentagon pre 9/11?

how about the money made off the wars after 9/11 by the military industrial complex?

who should we believe? the ones who made profits off of the death of citizens and soldiers? or a man trying to spread his story of what happened on 9/11, and trying to keep a roof over his head so he can survive?

please save me the economical rhetoric smearing this poor man.

[edit on 1/10/2010 by ugie1028]



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 03:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by ugie1028
reply to post by Alfie1
 


well you say anyone who is making money off the truth movement is incredible...

how about the trillions of dollars that were missing from the pentagon pre 9/11?

how about the money made off the wars after 9/11 by the military industrial complex?

who should we believe? the ones who made profits off of the death of citizens and soldiers? or a man trying to spread his story of what happened on 9/11, and trying to keep a roof over his head so he can survive?

please save me the economical rhetoric smearing this poor man.



Perfect fighting fire with fire right here folks!
I cant wait to see the response to this



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 03:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by ugie1028
reply to post by Alfie1
 


well you say anyone who is making money off the truth movement is incredible...

how about the trillions of dollars that were missing from the pentagon pre 9/11?

how about the money made off the wars after 9/11 by the military industrial complex?

who should we believe? the ones who made profits off of the death of citizens and soldiers? or a man trying to spread his story of what happened on 9/11, and trying to keep a roof over his head so he can survive?

please save me the economical rhetoric smearing this poor man.


Please don't tell me you think 2.3 trillion dollars went missing from the Pentagon piggybank just before 9/11.

You must know that figure represents total annual defence spending for several years and was being bandied about prior to the Bush/Cheney administration. Why do you think Rumsfeld was complaining about the sloppy accounting which had given rise to it ? It hadn't happened on his watch.

If you don't know the facts you shouldn't try to use it to support your argument.



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 03:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Alfie1
 


I'll help you out sir

It's a tricky thought process.

He's talking about the Neocon's getting the Industrial Military Complex

in full swing, making Trillions.



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 03:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Alfie1
 


please answer my question.

WHO do you believe?

Someone who is just trying to survive?

or someone who is banking billions and billions of dollars off of two wars?

please do tell me.



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 03:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Alfie1

Originally posted by ugie1028
reply to post by Alfie1
 


well you say anyone who is making money off the truth movement is incredible...

how about the trillions of dollars that were missing from the pentagon pre 9/11?

how about the money made off the wars after 9/11 by the military industrial complex?

who should we believe? the ones who made profits off of the death of citizens and soldiers? or a man trying to spread his story of what happened on 9/11, and trying to keep a roof over his head so he can survive?

please save me the economical rhetoric smearing this poor man.


Please don't tell me you think 2.3 trillion dollars went missing from the Pentagon piggybank just before 9/11.

You must know that figure represents total annual defence spending for several years and was being bandied about prior to the Bush/Cheney administration. Why do you think Rumsfeld was complaining about the sloppy accounting which had given rise to it ? It hadn't happened on his watch.

If you don't know the facts you shouldn't try to use it to support your argument.


Maybe you should take your own advice
Who was prior to bush and cheney



posted on Jan, 10 2010 @ 04:40 PM
link   
reply to post by blankduck18
 


some people will never get it, some will, but some cannot be reasoned with.

on the other hand, i think we should listen to the people involved like the firefighters, the first responders, the survivors, and anyone who was there that is not linked to a sector of the federal government. this is why we need an independent investigation.

we should send the wolf in to investigate the fox. sly moves, squirming and evasion will not work. we need a new investigation to find out the real truth. i do not know everything that transpired on that day, but these people illustrate a better image to what did, and its frightening.

The evil of men, they exist even here at home.



posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 12:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by ugie1028
some people will never get it, some will, but some cannot be reasoned with.


Now here, I agree with you completely. We have one witness making claims of stepping over bodies in the lobby, and we have two French brothers who videotaped that same lobby at the exact same time and showed there were no bodies in the lobby to step over. Clearly, they both cannot be correct...but YOU believe the witnesses' claims over the French brothers videotape. The reason why is blatantly obvious- the one you choose to believe supports these conspiracy claims of yours, while the other does not. I point this out to you, and what is your response? You put me on ignore and/or refuse to address the statement.

There is no reasoning behind these actions in any way, shape, or form, here, but then this is to be expected. I have said it before and I'll say it again- if these conspiracy theorists would ever hold their own conspiracy theories up to the same stringent level of critical analysis and reasoning that they do the commission report, they wouldn't be conspiracy theorists, for very long.



posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 12:46 AM
link   
"We have one witness making claims of stepping over bodies in the lobby, and we have two French brothers who videotaped that same lobby at the exact same time and showed there were no bodies in the lobby to step over."

Check out the video and listen to what Naudet has to say from about :50 seconds and onward about two people being on fire in the lobby and not wanting to film them. If you are going to be blatantly dishonest, the least you can do is check your facts to make sure you don't have to eat your words afterwards.

No surprise here - the same pack of lies and accusations by the same disreputable OS folks, who obviously have a short memory. But then again, when you lie non-stop 24/7, it is difficult to keep your story straight.





"well you say anyone who is making money off the truth movement is not credible...
how about the trillions of dollars that were missing from the pentagon pre 9/11?
how about the money made off the wars after 9/11 by the military industrial complex?"

You forgot to mention the tens of billions of dollars also made by "Pull It" Silverstein and other businesses on insurance claims for 9/11. These truthers are going to have to sell a lot of videos and t-shirts to rake in even a fraction of the money which was made and is continued to be made by the big boys who perpetuated this slaughter.

usgovinfo.about.com...

"A study released by the RAND Corporation shows that victims of the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks — both individuals killed or seriously injured and individuals and businesses impacted by the strikes — have received at least $38.1 billion in compensation, with insurance companies and the federal government providing more than 90 percent of the payments.

New York businesses have received 62 percent of the total compensation, reflecting the broad-ranging economic impacts of the attack in and near the World Trade Center."





top topics
 
16
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join