Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.
Psychic Christine Holohan on TV Fri29Sep
-
28-09-2006 5:15pm#1Can any of you folks do a favour for Tony Youens and video her appearance?
Tony's post:
It seems not to matter what we do really. If you're a psychic you just talk tripe then providing it's the sort of tripe people want (and the media certainly want it) then success can be yours. Adrian Shaw and I looked into this case in some depth but hey who cares about that!
If anyone gets the chance perhaps they could record the interview mentioned at the bottom. (i.e. Christine will be interviewed on Good Morning AM on TV 3 this Friday, September 29 at 8am.)
The investigation done by Adrian and myself can be found on my website here: http://www.tonyyouens.com/ruislip_murder.htm
Tony
Article:
http://www.laois-nationalist.ie/news/story.asp?j=24135
Book by psychic tells story from beyond the grave
9/28/2006 - 11:15:51 AM
Voice From The Grave is a new book telling the story of how Stradbally psychic medium Christine Holohan helped British Police to capture the murderer of a barmaid, Jackie Poole in 1983.
Christine is well known in the county for her ability as a psychic medium with many people attending her clinics in Portlaoise. She also appeared on RTÉ's Late Late Show five years ago telling the story of how she helped the police to capture the murderer of the 25-year-old woman.
Her book Voice From The Grave was co-written by well known Laois writer Vera McHugh.
The book centres on Christine when she was living in London around the time the woman was murdered. She details the visits and messages she received from the dead woman's spirit, who asked her to help her.
She said when she first approached the police they were sceptical of her spiritual abilities. She had to prove her skills and indeed says she foretold three events that would affect one of the investigating officers.
She gave them the information that was passed on to her by the dead woman's spirit. She could describe the murder scene, personal details, the killer's description and even wrote his name.
She said that the dead woman passed on 130 details to her in the course of her many visitations. Of that total, Christine said 120 were correct and assisted the police in tracking down the woman's killer.
The book also documents Christine's life as she grew up in Stradbally and names local people and their role in shaping her life.
Christine has also taken part in many TV programmes and worked with police forces in various countries on the role of psychic mediums in helping to solve crimes.
Christine is currently helping British police in tracing the whereabouts of another missing woman whom police suspect has been murdered.
A local launch of Voice From The Grave will take place in The Kitchen, Hinds Square, Portlaoise on Thursday. October 12 at 8pm. All are welcome along.
Christine will be inter-viewed on Good Morning AM on TV 3 this Friday, September 29 at 8am.0
Comments
-
I watched the programme on Ireland AM with Christine Holohan, the psychic/medium, and then bought the book 'A Voice from the Grave'. It's an amazing story. I can't say if it's true or not but I think people should read it for themselves to decide. I think she's on the new show with Grainne Seoige this afternoon as well.0
-
I've read the book and i also went to her for after my friend died. - The only word i can use to describe it would be Amazing.0
-
There's a deceptively simple technique called "cold-reading" which is pretty easy to learn and which psychics use (consciously or unconsciously) to mislead people who aren't familiar with the technique into thinking that there's something genuine going on. There are plenty of guides to doing a good cold-reading out on the internet. Here's one:
http://www.skeptics.com.au/articles/coldread.htm
More general articles on the topic are here:
http://skepdic.com/coldread.html
http://www.skepticreport.com/psychics/confessions.htm
http://www.blgoldberg.com/PSYCHICS.htm0 -
sevo wrote:It's an amazing story. I can't say if it's true or not
Its hardly amazing then is it :rolleyes:
Robin do the British Police really use a phsyic in open cases?? I find that rather hard to believe, considering the annoyance of fake leads in an open case wasting resources and man power.0 -
> do the British Police really use a phsyic in open cases??
There are quite a few people who have claimed to have been contracted in to provide some "psychic" service or other, but I don't recall the UK police themselves ever saying that they've done it and I do recall them denying it sometime or other.
Over in the US, things are different. The US military did have a general, one Albert Stubblebine III, trying out all kinds of strange things, including his belief that people could walk through walls, become invisible, and best of all, do serious damage to goats (of all things) just by staring at them. All of this weirdness is documented in The Men who State at Goats. Predictably, Stubblebine has become, in his retirement, a regular contributor to the 9/11 conspiracy industry and you can find him on youtube here spouting the inevitable.
Uri Geller also claims to have done stuff for the US government and spends 5,000 words telling the world that he's a bit surprised that news of it leaked out:
http://www.uri-geller.com/gore.htm0 -
Advertisement
-
> do the British Police really use a phsyic in open cases??
There are quite a few people who have claimed to have been contracted in to provide some "psychic" service or other, but I don't recall the UK police themselves ever saying that they've done it and I do recall them denying it sometime or other.
Over in the US, things are different. The US military did have a general, one Albert Stubblebine III, trying out all kinds of strange things, including his belief that people could walk through walls, become invisible, and best of all, do serious damage to goats (of all things) just by staring at them. All of this weirdness is documented in The Men who State at Goats. Predictably, Stubblebine has become, in his retirement, a regular contributor to the 9/11 conspiracy industry and you can find him on youtube here spouting the inevitable.
Uri Geller also claims to have done stuff for the US government and spends 5,000 words telling the world that he's a bit surprised that news of it leaked out:
http://www.uri-geller.com/gore.htm
I am a healthy skeptic like yourself and that included 911. However the 911 conspiracy is no longer a subject of ridicule followed by tin foil hat wearing nut jobs.It is beginning to gain mainstream acceptance in America and respected Zogby polls reveal that the majority of Americans do not accept the official government version. I have done some research of my own and pretty quickly came to realize that the official version does not add up. you also have six out of the 10 commissioners including the head - John Farmer coming out and publicly stating that they were lied to and that this was tantamount to a criminal cover up. Do your own research by starting with the book by David Ray Griffin titled ' The New Pearl Harbor' - a book no less endorsed than by the great Gore Vidal. Discover how 1000 engineers and scientists have recently signed a petition to congress demanding a new investigation. I can guarantee that you will have your doubts.
“All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.”
- Arthur Schopenhauer0 -
This silliness is widespread not because of skepticism, but because of bland credulousness and what Richard Hofstadter famously referred to as The Paranoid Style which jointly, and very sadly, characterize much of what passes for public debate in the USA.the 911 conspiracy is no longer a subject of ridicule followed by tin foil hat wearing nut jobs.0 -
Somehow I doubt that.I am a healthy skeptic like yourself and that included 911.
Since you are a skeptic you'll be able to tell us what sort of evidence or reason that would convince you that 9/11 wasn't some vast global conspiracy, right?
Yes it is.However the 911 conspiracy is no longer a subject of ridicule followed by tin foil hat wearing nut jobs.
Well seeing as it's so well respected maybe you can post a link to this poll?It is beginning to gain mainstream acceptance in America and respected Zogby polls reveal that the majority of Americans do not accept the official government version.
Well if government officials and experts say it, it must be true....you also have six out of the 10 commissioners including the head - John Farmer coming out and publicly stating that they were lied to and that this was tantamount to a criminal cover up. Do your own research by starting with the book by David Ray Griffin titled ' The New Pearl Harbor' - a book no less endorsed than by the great Gore Vidal. Discover how 1000 engineers and scientists have recently signed a petition to congress demanding a new investigation. I can guarantee that you will have your doubts.0 -
Half of New Yorkers Believe US Leaders Had Foreknowledge of Impending 9-11 Attacks and "Consciously Failed" To Act; 66% Call For New Probe of Unanswered Questions by Congress or New York's Attorney General, New Zogby International Poll RevealsSomehow I doubt that.
Since you are a skeptic you'll be able to tell us what sort of evidence or reason that would convince you that 9/11 wasn't some vast global conspiracy, right?
Yes it is.
Well seeing as it's so well respected maybe you can post a link to this poll?
Well if government officials and experts say it, it must be true....
On the eve of a Republican National Convention invoking 9/11 symbols, sound bytes and imagery, half (49.3%) of New York City residents and 41% of New York citizens overall say that some of our leaders "knew in advance that attacks were planned on or around September 11, 2001, and that they consciously failed to act," according to the poll conducted by Zogby International. The poll of New York residents was conducted from Tuesday August 24 through Thursday August 26, 2004. Overall results have a margin of sampling error of +/-3.5.
The poll is the first of its kind conducted in America that surveys attitudes regarding US government complicity in the 9/11 tragedy. Despite the acute legal and political implications of this accusation, nearly 30% of registered Republicans and over 38% of those who described themselves as "very conservative" supported the claim.
I take it that you subscribe to the official explanation of 911?
As for having evidence of a conspiracy - you should read Project For A New American Century.
You feel free to believe your conspiracy - the official conspiracy theory of how Americas multi billion dollar defense system was pinned to its knees by a dozen Arab terrorists with primitive box cutters. All at the behest of some guy in a cave thousands of miles away using a sat phone. That guy by the way(OBL) is not wanted in connection with 911 according to the FBI. They admit to having no 'hard evidence' to connect him with that monstrous crime.0 -
Hang on a tick.Half of New Yorkers Believe US Leaders Had Foreknowledge of Impending 9-11 Attacks and "Consciously Failed" To Act; 66% Call For New Probe of Unanswered Questions by Congress or New York's Attorney General, New Zogby International Poll Reveals
On the eve of a Republican National Convention invoking 9/11 symbols, sound bytes and imagery, half (49.3%) of New York City residents and 41% of New York citizens overall say that some of our leaders "knew in advance that attacks were planned on or around September 11, 2001, and that they consciously failed to act," according to the poll conducted by Zogby International. The poll of New York residents was conducted from Tuesday August 24 through Thursday August 26, 2004. Overall results have a margin of sampling error of +/-3.5.
The poll is the first of its kind conducted in America that surveys attitudes regarding US government complicity in the 9/11 tragedy. Despite the acute legal and political implications of this accusation, nearly 30% of registered Republicans and over 38% of those who described themselves as "very conservative" supported the claim.
50% to 41% does not equal a majority.
In fact 50% to 61% don't believe that 9/11 was an inside job.
Therefore I win QED.
And I wonder how many of those believers are just parroting nonsense they read on the internet.
Pretty much yea.I take it that you subscribe to the official explanation of 911?
Speaking of parroting...As for having evidence of a conspiracy - you should read Project For A New American Century.
Yes I have read Project For A New American Century.
The question have you?
Can you actually supply anything from that paper that actually shows it was a blueprint for a conspiracy? (Other than that one "Pearl harbour" bit that is always taken out of context.)
And further more can you explain why they would admit to being involved in such a conspiracy in a document freely available on their own website?
And this is impossible because?You feel free to believe your conspiracy - the official conspiracy theory of how Americas multi billion dollar defense system was pinned to its knees by a dozen Arab terrorists with primitive box cutters. All at the behest of some guy in a cave thousands of miles away using a sat phone.
How many times where jetliners used as missiles?
How many times where several jets hijacked at once?
Did you know that every single other hijacking attempt was dealt with after the plane lands?
You feel free to believe your conspiracy - the official conspiracy theory of the American government, planting explosive in 3-4 of their own crowded buildings with no one noticing, then demolishing them leaving no trace and then admitting to it in a document they keep on their website.
Bull****.That guy by the way(OBL) is not wanted in connection with 911 according to the FBI. They admit to having no 'hard evidence' to connect him with that monstrous crime.
I dare you to back that up.
Should be easy if you did really research it and aren't just parroting nonsense you read on a tinfoil hat website.
And you didn't answer my question.
Since you are a skeptic you'll be able to tell us what sort of evidence or reason that would convince you that 9/11 wasn't some vast global conspiracy, right?0 -
Advertisement
-
Hang on a tick.
50% to 41% does not equal a majority.
In fact 50% to 61% don't believe that 9/11 was an inside job.
Therefore I win QED.- considering the poll was conducte a mere 3 yrs after 911 it represent a significant amount for that time, certainly mainstream by any standards. Wonder what a new poll would show - my bet a far higher percentage
And I wonder how many of those believers are just parroting nonsense they read on the internet.
Pretty much yea.
Speaking of parroting...
Yes I have read Project For A New American Century.
The question have you?
Can you actually supply anything from that paper that actually shows it was a blueprint for a conspiracy? (Other than that one "Pearl harbour" bit that is always taken out of context.)
And further more can you explain why they would admit to being involved in such a conspiracy in a document freely available on their own website?
And this is impossible because?
How many times where jetliners used as missiles?
How many times where several jets hijacked at once?
Did you know that every single other hijacking attempt was dealt with after the plane lands? - Isn't that what NORAD is there for? oh yeah I forgot they had stood down that day because they were conducting war game exercises on planes being hijacked and used as missiles. lol
You feel free to believe your conspiracy - the official conspiracy theory of the American government, planting explosive in 3-4 of their own crowded buildings with no one noticing, then demolishing them leaving no trace and then admitting to it in a document they keep on their website.
Bull****.
I dare you to back that up.
Asked to explain the process, Tomb responded, “The FBI gathers evidence. Once evidence is gathered, it is turned over to the Department of Justice. The Department of Justice then decides whether it has enough evidence to present to a federal grand jury. In the case of the 1998 United States Embassies being bombed, bin Laden has been formally indicted and charged by a grand jury. He has not been formally indicted and charged in connection with 9/11 because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting bin Laden to 9/11.”
Hmmmmm...
Enjoy believing your tinfoil hat wearing fairytale. I bet you believe Osama that 'ol CIA asset is still alive don't you?
PNAC - 911 fullfilled that script beautifully but you will say coincidence yawn..
Its amazing how defensive you get when someone dares question the offical 911 conspiracy. You know that version just doesn't wash with me mate. The alternative version on the other hand does. A more sober, rational and empirical analysis of what happened that day. 1000's of reputed and respected scientists are of the same opinion particularly regarding the collapse of WTC7. A collapse which cannot be explained by NIST and which was left out of the 911 commision report. Do yourself a favour and read Dave Ray Griffins books on this subject. It might help you take those red rosy glasses off that make you believe everything your government tells you. Bye now.0 -
So can you explain why an internal police force would be gathering information on someone not in the country?Asked to explain the process, Tomb responded, “The FBI gathers evidence. Once evidence is gathered, it is turned over to the Department of Justice. The Department of Justice then decides whether it has enough evidence to present to a federal grand jury. In the case of the 1998 United States Embassies being bombed, bin Laden has been formally indicted and charged by a grand jury. He has not been formally indicted and charged in connection with 9/11 because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting bin Laden to 9/11.”
Can you explain that if this was a vast conspiracy why don't the FBI fabricate the evidence? Or at lest just say they have it?
Why would they admit something like this at all?
Again you really haven't explained why it's impossible, or answered any of questions.Hmmmmm...
Enjoy believing your tinfoil hat wearing fairytale. I bet you believe Osama that 'ol CIA asset is still alive don't you?
Funny how you think truth is spread by ignoring that stuff.
Very Orwellian.
No it didn't.PNAC - 911 fullfilled that script beautifully but you will say coincidence yawn..
If you read the actual document instead of buying bull**** from conspiracy sites you'd see the exact opposite is true.
The quote I'm guessing you are think of (as it's the only part of this thing that conspiracy nuts throw around) is this one:
The document then drones on about how to change and update the America Military in the absence of the "New Pearl Harbour".Section V of Rebuilding America's Defenses, entitled "Creating Tomorrow's Dominant Force", includes the sentence: "Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event––like a new Pearl Harbor"
9/11 made this document completely obsolete.
But let's ignore reality for a sec and say it was evidence of a conspiracy, why is it on their website?0 -
And it's amazing how hypocritical the toofers are.Its amazing how defensive you get when someone dares question the offical 911 conspiracy. You know that version just doesn't wash with me mate. The alternative version on the other hand does. A more sober, rational and empirical analysis of what happened that day.
They seem very reluctant to answer the hard questions.
And what of the 100's of scientists that agree with the official report1000's of reputed and respected scientists are of the same opinion particularly regarding the collapse of WTC7.
Because the building wasn't attacked?A collapse which cannot be explained by NIST and which was left out of the 911 commision report.
So then would you like to explain how it fell?
Explosives that no one ever saw, exploded quietly and unseen, and left no trace?
So stop believing the government and start believing this guy?Do yourself a favour and read Dave Ray Griffins books on this subject. It might help you take those red rosy glasses off that make you believe everything your government tells you. Bye now.0 -
So can you explain why an internal police force would be gathering information on someone not in the country?
Can you explain that if this was a vast conspiracy why don't the FBI fabricate the evidence? Or at lest just say they have it?
Why would they admit something like this at all?
You believe that Osama did it, all I am saying is that the FBI dont have enough evidence to connect him to 911.The offical govt version tells us that it was the work of arab terrorists under the direction of Osama. It must be hard to track all those calls he was making to his 911 disciples from his cave in tora bora lol.0 -
WTC7 supports all the hypothesis of a controlled demolition, as for explosives their has been thermite residue found in hundreds of samples of dust taken from the tragedy - Steve Jones. Enjoy your govt fairytale.0
-
So then we can safely assume your knowledge of the "official version" comes from what you've read on conspiracy sites?You believe that Osama did it, all I am saying is that the FBI dont have enough evidence to connect him to 911.The offical govt version tells us that it was the work of arab terrorists under the direction of Osama. It must be hard to track all those calls he was making to his 911 disciples from his cave in tora bora lol.
Not by any stretch of the imagination.WTC7 supports all the hypothesis of a controlled demolition,
1. Thermite isn't an explosive, nor has it ever been used in any controlled demolitions, let alone secret ones.as for explosives their has been thermite residue found in hundreds of samples of dust taken from the tragedy - Steve Jones. Enjoy your govt fairytale.
2. Have you actually read the paper or like everything else you've said is just something you've bought unquestioningly form a CT website?
I have read the paper. Two major problems. One it was printed in a very dodgy journal that doesn't do proper peer review. Two, all the "Samples" were collected years later.
So any chance in your hunt for the truth you'll get around to answering all of my questions?0 -
I dont claim to have all he answers but i do believe that their is enough contradictions, prevarication and obfuscation in the 911 commision report to demand a new investigation.So then we can safely assume your knowledge of the "official version" comes from what you've read on conspiracy sites? Not at all. Again if I can reiterate
- 6 out of the 10 commisioners admit that the whole thing is a whitewash and evidence of a criminal cover up.
Not by any stretch of the imagination. A building collapsing at free fall speed neatly into its own footprint? hmmm...
1. Thermite isn't an explosive, nor has it ever been used in any controlled demolitions, let alone secret ones.
2. Have you actually read the paper or like everything else you've said is just something you've bought unquestioningly form a CT website?
I have read the paper. Two major problems. One it was printed in a very dodgy journal that doesn't do proper peer review. Two, all the "Samples" were collected years later.
So any chance in your hunt for the truth you'll get around to answering all of my questions?0 -
I dont claim to have all he answers but i do believe that their is enough contradictions, prevarication and obfuscation in the 911 commision report to demand a new investigation.
So then rather explain exact flaws in the commission report, you instead parrot irrelevant and completely debunked myths?
Then refuse to even acknowledge questions you can't answer?
That's some way to get to the truth alright.0 -
So then rather explain exact flaws in the commission report, you instead parrot irrelevant and completely debunked myths?
Then refuse to even acknowledge questions you can't answer?
That's some way to get to the truth alright.
Debunked myths like WTC7 free fall collapse and the fact that NIST cant explain it. Certainly hasn't been debunked. The fact that 6 out of the 10 commisioners want a new independent investigation cant be debunked either and are certainly not myths. The only myth we have here is the myth you believe in. Take care now.0 -
KING MOB - I have to bring wife out for dinner you know enjoy life a little. Will get back to you tommorrow. I see you have almost 4,000 posts...wow...incredible. Life must be so fulfilling for you write now.;) Bye now.0
-
Advertisement
-
It has been debunked and it has been explained by the NIST.Debunked myths like WTC7 free fall collapse and the fact that NIST cant explain it. Certainly hasn't been debunked.
But I doubt you'd have known that cause you only seem to listen to stuff from conspiracy sites.
Seeing as you claim to be a skeptic like us have a look through these.
http://www.911myths.com/html/wtc7___silverstein.html
http://www.debunking911.com/freefall.htm
http://www.debunking911.com/pull.htm
Ok then, Back it up!The fact that 6 out of the 10 commisioners want a new independent investigation cant be debunked either and are certainly not myths.
Which commissioners? When did they say this?
What exactly did they say?
So what about the other myths you've spewed?The only myth we have here is the myth you believe in.
That there was thermite found?
That norad stood down?
that PNAC was evidence of a conspiracy?
What about the questions you keep ignoring?
This is like the 4th time you've exited dramatically, you realise?Take care now.0 -
-
Hi King Mob Firstly I apologize for any offence incurred when I implied that you had no life except to post blogs on this site. More luck to you I only wish I was getting paid for all that effort! Secondly and for your consideration and in reply to an earlier quote
''Ok then, Back it up
Which commissioners? When did they say this?
What exactly did they say?''
Here goes -
The co-chairs of the 9/11 Commission (Thomas Keane and Lee Hamilton) said that the CIA (and likely the White House) “obstructed our investigation”.
The co-chairs of the 9/11 Commission also said that the 9/11 Commissioners knew that military officials misrepresented the facts to the Commission, and the Commission considered recommending criminal charges for such false statements, yet didn’t bother to tell the American people (free subscription required).
Indeed, the co-chairs of the Commission now admit that the Commission largely operated based upon political considerations.
9/11 Commission co-chair Lee Hamilton says “I don’t believe for a minute we got everything right”, that the Commission was set up to fail, that people should keep asking questions about 9/11, that the 9/11 debate should continue, and that the 9/11 Commission report was only “the first draft” of history.
9/11 Commissioner Bob Kerrey said that “There are ample reasons to suspect that there may be some alternative to what we outlined in our version . . . We didn’t have access . . . .”
9/11 Commissioner Timothy Roemer said “We were extremely frustrated with the false statements we were getting”
Former 9/11 Commissioner Max Cleland resigned from the Commission, stating: “It is a national scandal”; “This investigation is now compromised”; and “One of these days we will have to get the full story because the 9-11 issue is so important to America. But this White House wants to cover it up”.
9/11 Commissioner John Lehman said that “We purposely put together a staff that had - in a way - conflicts of interest“.
The Senior Counsel to the 9/11 Commission (John Farmer) who led the 9/11 staff’s inquiry, said “I was shocked at how different the truth was from the way it was described …. The tapes told a radically different story from what had been told to us and the public for two years…. This is not spin. This is not true.”
CONGRESS
According to the Co-Chair of the Congressional Inquiry into 9/11 and former Head of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Bob Graham, a U.S. government informant was the landlord to two of the hijackers for over a year (but the White House refused to let the 9/11 inquiry interview him).
Current U.S. Senator (Patrick Leahy) states “The two questions that the congress will not ask . . . is why did 9/11 happen on George Bush’s watch when he had clear warnings that it was going to happen? Why did they allow it to happen?”
Current Republican Congressman (Ron Paul) calls for a new 9/11 investigation and states that “we see the [9/11] investigations that have been done so far as more or less cover-up and no real explanation of what went on”
Current Democratic Congressman (Dennis Kucinich) hints that we aren’t being told the truth about 9/11
Former Democratic Senator (Mike Gravel) states that he supports a new 9/11 investigation and that we don’t know the truth about 9/11
Former Republican Senator (Lincoln Chaffee) endorses a new 9/11 investigation
Former U.S. Democratic Congressman (Dan Hamburg) says that the U.S. government “assisted” in the 9/11 attacks, stating that “I think there was a lot of help from the inside”
Former U.S. Republican Congressman and senior member of the House Armed Services Committee, and who served six years as the Chairman of the Military Research and Development Subcommittee (Curt Weldon) has shown that the U.S. tracked hijackers before 9/11, is open to hearing information about explosives in the Twin Towers, and is open to the possibility that 9/11 was an inside job0 -
You blatantly lied when you said NIST has provided an explanation for the collapse of WTC7. I have not lied once to you in this debate and if you have to revert to lies only shows desperation on your part. Some skeptic you are..
Benjamin Jones was energized in November when he and others received a response from the national lab charged by Congress to determine why and how the towers collapsed. The letter contained the following phrase:
"We are unable to provide a full explanation of the total collapse."
"That," Jones said, "really was progress. It made me believe we could talk with them."
It is striking. After producing a 10,000-page report, the National Institute of Standards and Technology can't explain the collapse. And on its Web site, NIST clearly states that nowhere in its report did it say that steel in the Twin Towers melted due to fires. In fact, the fires reached only 1,000 degrees Celsius. Steel melts at 1,500 degrees Celsius.
Meanwhile, the Federal Emergency Management Agency has said that its best hypothesis for the fall of the third tower, WTC 7 — diesel fuel stored in the building caused fires that collapsed the building — has a "low probability" of being correct.
read more:
http://deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,695275973,00.html0 -
-
So now you're implying I'm getting paid to debunk this nonsense?Hi King Mob Firstly I apologize for any offence incurred when I implied that you had no life except to post blogs on this site. More luck to you I only wish I was getting paid for all that effort! Secondly and for your consideration and in reply to an earlier quote
Ha, I wish.
Sources for these?Here goes -
And you do know what an out of context quote is right?
Really?You blatantly lied when you said NIST has provided an explanation for the collapse of WTC7. I have not lied once to you in this debate and if you have to revert to lies only shows desperation on your part. Some skeptic you are..
Have you ever actually visited the NIST website?
http://www.nist.gov/index.html
You'll find that the actually did supply a report on WTC7 in 2008.
Complete with explanations for it's collapse.
http://wtc.nist.gov/
Complete with FAQ
http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/factsheet/wtc_qa_082108.html
So that leave only two explanations, either a. you knew about this and lied or b. you are relying solely on crank website for your "Research" and simply don't have all the facts.
Which is it?
And?It is striking. After producing a 10,000-page report, the National Institute of Standards and Technology can't explain the collapse. And on its Web site,
NIST clearly states that nowhere in its report did it say that steel in the Twin Towers melted due to fires. In fact, the fires reached only 1,000 degrees Celsius. Steel melts at 1,500 degrees Celsius.[/B]
Steel loses 50% of it's structural strength at 750 degrees Celsius.
But then they don't tell you stuff like that on CT sites.Meanwhile, the Federal Emergency Management Agency has said that its best hypothesis for the fall of the third tower, WTC 7 — diesel fuel stored in the building caused fires that collapsed the building — has a "low probability" of being correct.
read more:
http://deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,695275973,00.html
And again more out of context quotes.
It's very ironic you accuse me of dishonesty among other things, yet still refuse to acknowledge tons of questions you can't answer.0 -
As for NORAD
The military’s first story was that no planes were sent up until after the Pentagon was hit. The military leaders were admitting, in other words, that they had left their fighters on the ground for almost 90 minutes after the FAA had first noticed signs of a possible hijacking. That story suggested to many people that a stand-down order had been given.[28]
By the end of the week, the military had put out a second story, saying that it had sent up fighters but that, because the FAA had been very late in notifying it about the hijackings, the fighters arrived in each case arrived too late. One problem with this story is that if FAA personnel had responded so slowly, heads should have rolled, but none did. An even more serious problem is that, even assuming the truth of the late notification times, the military’s fighters still had time to intercept the hijacked airliners before they were to hit their targets.[29] This second story implied, therefore, that standard procedures had been violated by the military as well as the FAA.
To try to defend the military against this accusation, The 9/11 Commission Report gave us, amazingly, a third version, according to which the FAA, after giving the military insufficient warning about the first hijacked airliner, gave it absolutely no notification of the other three until after they had crashed. But as I have argued in The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions, this account is wholly implausible. Besides portraying FAA personnel, from top to bottom, as incompetent dolts, the 9/11 Commission’s account rests on claims that contradict many credible and mutually supporting testimonies. In some of these cases, the fact that the Commission is simply lying is abundantly obvious.[30] In addition, this third story implies that the military’s second story, which it had been telling for almost three years, was almost entirely false. If our military leaders were lying to us all that time, why should we believe them now? And if our military is lying to us, must we not assume that it is doing so to cover up its own guilt?0 -
Maybe you can save time and just post the link to the site you're copy pasta from?As for NORAD
The military’s first story was that no planes were sent up until after the Pentagon was hit. The military leaders were admitting, in other words, that they had left their fighters on the ground for almost 90 minutes after the FAA had first noticed signs of a possible hijacking. That story suggested to many people that a stand-down order had been given.[28]
By the end of the week, the military had put out a second story, saying that it had sent up fighters but that, because the FAA had been very late in notifying it about the hijackings, the fighters arrived in each case arrived too late. One problem with this story is that if FAA personnel had responded so slowly, heads should have rolled, but none did. An even more serious problem is that, even assuming the truth of the late notification times, the military’s fighters still had time to intercept the hijacked airliners before they were to hit their targets.[29] This second story implied, therefore, that standard procedures had been violated by the military as well as the FAA.
To try to defend the military against this accusation, The 9/11 Commission Report gave us, amazingly, a third version, according to which the FAA, after giving the military insufficient warning about the first hijacked airliner, gave it absolutely no notification of the other three until after they had crashed. But as I have argued in The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions, this account is wholly implausible. Besides portraying FAA personnel, from top to bottom, as incompetent dolts, the 9/11 Commission’s account rests on claims that contradict many credible and mutually supporting testimonies. In some of these cases, the fact that the Commission is simply lying is abundantly obvious.[30] In addition, this third story implies that the military’s second story, which it had been telling for almost three years, was almost entirely false. If our military leaders were lying to us all that time, why should we believe them now? And if our military is lying to us, must we not assume that it is doing so to cover up its own guilt?
Did you even bother to check any of the facts it claims?
And as for NORAD standing down, maybe you (I say you, but we both know that means you copying from some crank)can shown what they should have done and how they should have done it.0 -
You haven't asked me tons of questions but feel free to and I will answer them, I do believe that I have answered of them. As for getting this information of websites - not at all. I have done my own research and read many books on the subject.0
-
Advertisement
-
Maybe you can save time and just post the link to the site you're copy pasta from?
Did you even bother to check any of the facts it claims?
And as for NORAD standing down, maybe you (I say you, but we both know that means you copying from some crank)can shown what they should have done and how they should have done it.
The 911 commision changed its story three times- have you read the piece.0
Advertisement