April Gallop's case....dismissed! Whod'a thunk it?

Originally posted by jthomas

Originally posted by ipsedixit

Originally posted by jthomas
Have you decided who the felons are? If so, what would be the purpose of a "new" investigation in your opinion?

I have strong suspicions of who the main ones are. . . .

So, if I am reading you correctly, you have already decided these are the "felons."

"Strong suspicions" would be the correct reading.

And if any investigation found no such evidence and no charges were filed then would you accept the outcome, or believe that justice was not served?

This is a complex question. There is prima facie evidence of a controlled demolition of WTC7. It fell symetrically into it's own footprint. There is the owner's statement that he and the fire department decided that the best thing to do would be to "pull it". A witness has said that there were explosions in the building.

I can't take anyone seriously who doesn't believe that WTC7 came down as the result of a controlled demolition.

I'm not trying to go off on a tangent, only to say that my reaction to any investigation would depend on what the investigation found out. If the investigation found out nothing and no charges were laid, I wouldn't be satisfied.

In the case of WTC7, it's really a question of who wired the building? Could it have been done through the good offices of the Israeli government? Were elements of the Bush administration in on it?

There have been a couple of threads recently discussing guests with American military connections who have appeared on an internet radio program trying to lay 9/11 at Israel's door. Israel looks good in the frame, but I'm not buying it. This operation was too big, even for the Israelis.

The Bush administration, taking a cue from the oil oligarchy and the neocon Israeli/American dual citizens cooked this up, undoubtely with cooperation from Israeli right wingers as a plan to secure America's energy requirements well into the period of "peak oil", and make a lot of money into the bargain.

This point of view has been the subject of innumerable threads on ATS. As time has gone by I have only become more convinced that this is the truth of what happened on 9/11.

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
I am sorry, but that's an absolute load of hogwash. Those that have looked into it know that plane was being tracked live by secondary military radar, and had a flight path trajectory headed right towards the pentagon after the 270 degree turn. In addition, April herself questions why the thing wasn't blown out of the sky because of air defenses she saw herself on a classified tour of the defenses.

To which I will respond...

a) what is "secondary military radar"? Secondary radar depends on the transponder beign turned on, and the transponder was most definitely turned off. Primary radar depends on air traffic control receiving the reflected radio returns, which was almost entirely unavailable due to ground clutter from the Appalachean mountains to the west of D.C.

b) after flight 77 completed the 270 degree turn, the Pentagon had about ten seconds of evacuation time.

c) Gallop is quoting Davin Ray Griffin's assertion there were missile batteries here, and Griffinis deliberately misrepresenting the fact that missile batteries were only set up a year AFTER 9/11, and specifically BECAUSE of 9/11.

Missile batteries sent to D.C., Sept 2002

d) Gallop is also quoting Griffin's misrepresentation that Mineta's "stand down order" referred to military aircraft when Mineta himself said not even thirty seconds later that he found out it referred to the civilian aircraft stand down order.

Gallop is therefore basing her lawsuit on nothing but a lot of false assumptions and unsubstanciated accusations on her part.

Originally posted by ipsedixit

This is a complex question. There is prima facie evidence of a controlled demolition of WTC7.

That is a claim only. There is no demonstrated evidence, no positive evidence for explosives.

It fell symetrically into it's own footprint.

That is, in fact, incorrect. It fell at an angle and damaged buildings outside of its footprint, in particular, the Verizon building.

There is the owner's statement that he and the fire department decided that the best thing to do would be to "pull it".

That has been easily debunked and nobody would accept that claim.

A witness has said that there were explosions in the building.

Hearing "explosions" is not evidence of explosives. Remember, not a single piece of positive evidence of explosives has ever been found.

I can't take anyone seriously who doesn't believe that WTC7 came down as the result of a controlled demolition.

In the end, that is irrelevant. You need to convince the right people why a new investigation is needed.

reply to post by jthomas

We'll just have to agree to disagree. These sorts of disagreements are decided upon in courts all the time. Very few defense attorneys ever say, "Aw shucks, you're right. My client is guilty. I'm wasting the court's time with my slippery half truths and equivocations." Judge and jury usually take care of that part.

Originally posted by SlightlyAbovePar
Cut to the chase:

Judge Chin has just dismissed the Gallop case. He said that the allegations are frivolous and based on fantasy and delusion. I will attach the decision."

Let me guess, bought off by the NWO, 'them', Dick Cheney, debunkers, "pseudo skeptics" and sundry others, right? Or is it possible this whole quilt of crackpot speculation is nonsense?

Oh yes, of course, I'm a paid 'disinfo agent' (as though any 9-11 CT'er says anything worth employing full time employees in the first place).

Read it and weep (or go further down the rabbit hole) here.

I had a thread asking if you believed the OS that I notice that you did not participate in that one. You sarcastically say in this OP that you are a disinfo agent.

So, let me ask, do you believe in the OS? Because if you say you do you really are a disinfo agent, just not a paid one. April Gallop took what she believed was the truth and ran with it.

If you do not do the same you have no right criticize her for it. If you do do the same thing everyone gets a good laugh.