Firemen Explosion Testimony

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by maxella1

 

As far as I know the official story is that 19 people hijacked 4 jets, crashed 2 into WTC 1, and 2, crashed the third jet into the pentagon, and one jet crashed in Pennsylvania.
In NY three buildings collapsed due to extreme heat and structural damage. And officially there were no evidence of explosives, and no one died in or around WTC 7. I got this story from NIST, 9/11 commission report, and you. Am I wrong?

So there is no official story as to what may have caused the explosions heard in around the World Trade Center complex on 9/11/2001, yet you think the official story is wrong. Interesting.

As for the remainder of the narrative you suggest that the possibility of hijacking commercial aircraft is as remote as laser beams from space. Can you defend that?

The official story is a cover up from top to bottom. Michael Scheuer said it not me. So why should I believe it?

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by maxella1

 

You are the one who makes things up. I take what they say and don't make anything up at all.

Except:

Did the firefighters say that they were surrounded by fire when the heard explosives?

I am not aware of any firefighter saying they heard explosives.

Yes let me correct it;
did the firefighters say they were surrounded by fire when something exploded in the area that they were in?

reply to post by hooper

To seek out new life forms and boldly go.......

Any luck so far?

Originally posted by maxella1
reply to post by hooper

 

To seek out new life forms and boldly go.......

Any luck so far?

Actually, the other day I was fishing in a creek I fish in on a regular basis. It was just about dark and something swam past my leg that I have never seen before, too thick and short to be a fish and too fast to me a mammal. Its up north so most amphibians and reptiles are out of the question. Actually scared the **** out of me.

Originally posted by hooper

Originally posted by maxella1
reply to post by hooper

 

To seek out new life forms and boldly go.......

Any luck so far?

Actually, the other day I was fishing in a creek I fish in on a regular basis. It was just about dark and something swam past my leg that I have never seen before, too thick and short to be a fish and too fast to me a mammal. Its up north so most amphibians and reptiles are out of the question. Actually scared the **** out of me.

I just gave you a star.

reply to post by maxella1

Yes let me correct it;
did the firefighters say they were surrounded by fire when something exploded in the area that they were in?

Why is that relevant? Fire can cause failures in systems far removed from the site of the fire itself. Particulalry in electrical systems and hydraulic systems.

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by maxella1

 

Yes let me correct it;
did the firefighters say they were surrounded by fire when something exploded in the area that they were in?

Why is that relevant? Fire can cause failures in systems far removed from the site of the fire itself. Particulalry in electrical systems and hydraulic systems.

Lol.... You right... It's irrelevant .
Now give me back my star.

Originally posted by maxella1
And how do you know this?
What do they learn in the class rooms?

Ask thedman. He is a firefighter. My cousin is a Chicago Fire Fighter (lucky SOB) and hes had training for it, and never mentioned anything about listening to explosives. Plus that is just assinine.

Was the garage as large as WTC ?
Did it completely collapse?
Did the firefighters say that they were surrounded by fire when the heard explosives?

Does it matter? I heard explosions. If the firefighters didnt arrive on scene in time, it could have collapsed too. Also, hearing explosions in a fire is NOT some sort of new phenomenon.

You are the one who makes things up. I take what they say and don't make anything up at all.
The official story is preposterous to the actual facts. I never said I know what happened, but you do.

What actual facts? Actual facts are: planes hijacked by terrorists. Flown into buildings. Buildings heavily damaged and caught fire. Fire destroyed buildings without any extra explosives. No evidence of any explosives ever presented itself during or after the events, except for "hearing explosions". I do not know 100% what happened either, and I do have questions as well. However, I do accept the reasons of the collapses, and reject the conspiracy nonsense, on the simple premise that the 9/11 truth movement has been proven wrong time and again, and i have seen NO credible evidence to date of anything the Truthers say about explosives or such nonsense.

They did not only say “i heard explosions”, they were there when it exploded, and they were not in the middle of the fire, but much below it.
The only ones who say they know what happened 110% is you.

So they were inside hearing explosions. This proves what? That they heard things go boom during a fire. Even being below it, there are many things that can go boom, including ignition of vapors, electrical conduits, pressurized pipes, even the failure of the structural members can sound like explosions. If these were actual high power explosives, they would not be here today reporting it. They'd be dead.

Originally posted by GenRadek

Originally posted by maxella1
And how do you know this?
What do they learn in the class rooms?

Ask thedman. He is a firefighter. My cousin is a Chicago Fire Fighter (lucky SOB) and hes had training for it, and never mentioned anything about listening to explosives. Plus that is just assinine.

Was the garage as large as WTC ?
Did it completely collapse?
Did the firefighters say that they were surrounded by fire when the heard explosives?

Does it matter? I heard explosions. If the firefighters didnt arrive on scene in time, it could have collapsed too. Also, hearing explosions in a fire is NOT some sort of new phenomenon.

You are the one who makes things up. I take what they say and don't make anything up at all.
The official story is preposterous to the actual facts. I never said I know what happened, but you do.

What actual facts? Actual facts are: planes hijacked by terrorists. Flown into buildings. Buildings heavily damaged and caught fire. Fire destroyed buildings without any extra explosives. No evidence of any explosives ever presented itself during or after the events, except for "hearing explosions". I do not know 100% what happened either, and I do have questions as well. However, I do accept the reasons of the collapses, and reject the conspiracy nonsense, on the simple premise that the 9/11 truth movement has been proven wrong time and again, and i have seen NO credible evidence to date of anything the Truthers say about explosives or such nonsense.

They did not only say “i heard explosions”, they were there when it exploded, and they were not in the middle of the fire, but much below it.
The only ones who say they know what happened 110% is you.

So they were inside hearing explosions. This proves what? That they heard things go boom during a fire. Even being below it, there are many things that can go boom, including ignition of vapors, electrical conduits, pressurized pipes, even the failure of the structural members can sound like explosions. If these were actual high power explosives, they would not be here today reporting it. They'd be dead.

Ok now I understand everything, I have no further questions.
Why couldn't you tell me that everything is irrelevant earlier?
Anything and everything could have been exploding at any location for any reason.. As long as it happened on 9/11.
Actually I do have two last questions...
#1 What motivates you to enlighten us day after day?
#2 I haven't seen your buddy GoodOlDave in a while, is he on vacation, or got fired?

reply to post by maxella1


So what questions do you have? Why a fireman used the phrase "secondary explosions"? You've been given a wide variety of possible reasons, you know the only way to resolve the question is to ask that fireman so why don't you ask him? Obviously you're never going to accept any answer from anyone else unless it involves explosives and conspiracies, so why pretend like you've been in hot pursuit of the truth and all you keep running into is "official story" folk standing in your way?

Its one thing to cry about "unanswered questions" when you are busting your butt to find answers, but its the height of hypocracy to moan and groan about a lack of answers when you can't be bothered.

Don't complain about how high the grass is if you don't want to start the lawnmower.

Speaking of which......

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by maxella1

 

So what questions do you have? Why a fireman used the phrase "secondary explosions"? You've been given a wide variety of possible reasons, you know the only way to resolve the question is to ask that fireman so why don't you ask him? Obviously you're never going to accept any answer from anyone else unless it involves explosives and conspiracies, so why pretend like you've been in hot pursuit of the truth and all you keep running into is "official story" folk standing in your way?

Its one thing to cry about "unanswered questions" when you are busting your butt to find answers, but its the height of hypocracy to moan and groan about a lack of answers when you can't be bothered.

Don't complain about how high the grass is if you don't want to start the lawnmower.

Speaking of which......

I just remembered what I heard somewhere...
It goes something like:
When you argue with an idiot, after a while it is hard to tell who the real idiot is.
So I'm done.
We can talk about fishing if you want.

Originally posted by maxella1

Ok now I understand everything, I have no further questions.
Why couldn't you tell me that everything is irrelevant earlier?
Anything and everything could have been exploding at any location for any reason.. As long as it happened on 9/11.
Actually I do have two last questions...
#1 What motivates you to enlighten us day after day?
#2 I haven't seen your buddy GoodOlDave in a while, is he on vacation, or got fired?

Well you are asking what else could "secondary explosions" mean, I give you a whole TON of possible sources and you complain when I do. So I dont know what do you want. Its like you dont care for the truth, just so as long as there are bombs involved.

What motivates me? Denying ignorance. I will not allow ignorance to continue.

Originally posted by GenRadek

Originally posted by maxella1

Ok now I understand everything, I have no further questions.
Why couldn't you tell me that everything is irrelevant earlier?
Anything and everything could have been exploding at any location for any reason.. As long as it happened on 9/11.
Actually I do have two last questions...
#1 What motivates you to enlighten us day after day?
#2 I haven't seen your buddy GoodOlDave in a while, is he on vacation, or got fired?

Well you are asking what else could "secondary explosions" mean, I give you a whole TON of possible sources and you complain when I do. So I dont know what do you want. Its like you dont care for the truth, just so as long as there are bombs involved.

What motivates me? Denying ignorance. I will not allow ignorance to continue.

edit on 4/25/2012 by GenRadek because: adding stuff

Lol, great job denying ignorance!
This has to be one of best lines I read from you. "I will not allow ignorance to continue" just priceless
Try the UFO section.. They might need your help too. Lol

Originally posted by maxella1

Lol, great job denying ignorance!
This has to be one of best lines I read from you. "I will not allow ignorance to continue" just priceless

Try the UFO section.. They might need your help too. Lol

edit on 25-4-2012 by maxella1 because: (no reason given)

excuse me, I am not the one that goes, "Firefighters said they heard explosions! That means bombs!"

Ignorance? Check the mirror chief.

Originally posted by GenRadek

Originally posted by maxella1

Lol, great job denying ignorance!
This has to be one of best lines I read from you. "I will not allow ignorance to continue" just priceless

Try the UFO section.. They might need your help too. Lol

edit on 25-4-2012 by maxella1 because: (no reason given)

excuse me, I am not the one that goes, "Firefighters said they heard explosions! That means bombs!"

Ignorance? Check the mirror chief.

To be fair, I don't think that's his point. He wants the situation to remain as confused as possible so that he can claim that nobody knows what happened and that therefore some kind of conspiracy remains on the table, or at least within the realm of possibilities.

It's not a particularly intellectually honest standpoint, and it's the opposite of searching for some kind of factual truth, but it isn't actually a claim that there were bombs.

Originally posted by maxella1

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by maxella1

 

You are the one who makes things up. I take what they say and don't make anything up at all.

Except:

Did the firefighters say that they were surrounded by fire when the heard explosives?

I am not aware of any firefighter saying they heard explosives.

Yes let me correct it;
did the firefighters say they were surrounded by fire when something exploded in the area that they were in?

Good point the 9/11 deniers often cite the explosions were caused by the fires, although they cant tell what they explode or why firefighters would be surprised at explosions in burning buildings.

But the fact that the explosions took place in the abscence of fires is pretty damning I did not think of that.

Originally posted by Cassius666
Good point the 9/11 deniers often cite the explosions were caused by the fires, although they cant tell what they explode or why firefighters would be surprised at explosions in burning buildings.

But the fact that the explosions took place in the abscence of fires is pretty damning I did not think of that.

edit on 26-4-2012 by Cassius666 because: (no reason given)

So, just because we offer alternate and more probable causes of heard explosions in such a massive fire, you dismiss it because we cannot tell you exactly what caused? Oh boy......

Really? Explosions happened in absence of fires? You mean when they described the collapse of the Tower as they were in the lobby area? Yeah I'd call that being like an explosion. But hey, why use rational thought, when EXPLOSIVES sound so much sexier.

Originally posted by GenRadek

Originally posted by maxella1

Lol, great job denying ignorance!
This has to be one of best lines I read from you. "I will not allow ignorance to continue" just priceless

Try the UFO section.. They might need your help too. Lol

edit on 25-4-2012 by maxella1 because: (no reason given)

excuse me, I am not the one that goes, "Firefighters said they heard explosions! That means bombs!"

Ignorance? Check the mirror chief.

I know, you're the one that goes “firefighters said they heard explosions! That means firecrackers!”

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
To be fair, I don't think that's his point. He wants the situation to remain as confused as possible so that he can claim that nobody knows what happened and that therefore some kind of conspiracy remains on the table, or at least within the realm of possibilities.

It's not a particularly intellectually honest standpoint, and it's the opposite of searching for some kind of factual truth, but it isn't actually a claim that there were bombs.

you know what I think you are right. I get that feeling too!

reply to post by Cassius666

But the fact that the explosions took place in the absence of fires is pretty damning I did not think of that.

I thought things explode in a fire, but then Hooper explained why I’m ignorant.

Why is that relevant? Fire can cause failures in systems far removed from the site of the fire itself. Particulalry in electrical systems and hydraulic systems.

Irrelevant !