Who the hell is Barry Jennings?

Brown Bomber

meglome wrote: »

. If any group had reason to kill Jennings it would be the CT'ers as he disagreed with them.

He didn't disagree or agree with anyone. What are you talking about? He initially gave a detailed account of his experiences.

He in no uncertain terms gave the impression that he was walking over dead bodies (or parts) in the lobby.

He was told "don't look down". Now what can you imagine he was not looking down at "that felt like body parts" after he has been hearing explosions the whole time and the lobby has been obliterated? The mind boggles.

He gives a frank and open interview with Dylan Avery for a film he is making. Avery plays some soundbites from the interview and Jennings asks him to not include the interview in the film as he is getting pressured from his employer. Avery honours his request. Jennings the appears in a BBC hit piece attempting to recant on his original testimony and looks like a idiot. Something has clearly happened in between both interviews for this change to happen. Avery then broadcasts the uncut interview online. Roughly 2 years later he is dead. No media outlets try to investigate the circumstances of his death despite the secrecy surrounding his death for no apparent reason.

demonspawn

Oh, and before you claim that the beam was cut by workers. That angle shown in the photo is consistent with the angle needed in all controlled demolitions to ensure the beam slides sideways and down to ensure it doesn't get caught and stop other parts of the building from falling. The cuts made by the workers do not resemble this whatsoever.

meglome

Mahatma coat wrote: »

See thats why I'm against talking in Absolutes, heres a video of some Thermate Exploding

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CQG3e75XiNg

I've seen thermite used on TV on a number of occasions and it didn't explode. And let's not ignore the fact there's nothing in the ingredients to make it explode. But sure why not believe some anonymous you tube video.

Brown Bomber

meglome wrote: »

Fires burn, stuff in buildings explode (aside from the impacts of the planes)... you know the fires that Jennings talks about at the time too.



So again we're back to you guys believing him when it suits you. I believe everything he said however that doesn't mean I believe everything he said was completely accurate. To say he had a bad day would be an understatement so I would have to assume some amount of confusion at the time.



America's air defence was build to protect the country from outside threats. On 911 there were 3000-5000 planes in the air over the US. They track commercial planes with their transponders, and the hijacked planes had their transponders switched off. And if you look at the typical response times, the times taken on 911 are in keeping with them.

How can you believe everything he said when he tries to contradict himself`?

Brown Bomber

meglome wrote: »

I've seen thermite used on TV on a number of occasions and it didn't explode. And let's not ignore the fact there's nothing in the ingredients to make it explode. But sure why not believe some anonymous you tube video.

as opposed to

"used on TV" ?

Soveriegn

demonspawn wrote: »

Oh, and before you claim that the beam was cut by workers. That angle shown in the photo is consistent with the angle needed in all controlled demolitions to ensure the beam slides sideways and down to ensure it doesn't get caught and stop other parts of the building from falling. The cuts made by the workers do not resemble this whatsoever.

Not to mention, if workers did cut through some steel girders, they would have used the fastest cuts - a straight line through, not longer diagonal lines

meglome

demonspawn wrote: »

Oh, and before you claim that the beam was cut by workers. That angle shown in the photo is consistent with the angle needed in all controlled demolitions to ensure the beam slides sideways and down to ensure it doesn't get caught and stop other parts of the building from falling. The cuts made by the workers do not resemble this whatsoever.

I know the picture you're talking about. To say "the photo is consistent with the angle needed in all controlled demolitions" is nonsense though. Every demolition would be different and they all take months to prepare for large buildings. But let's ignore the prep time too.

Soveriegn wrote: »

Not to mention, if workers did cut through some steel girders, they would have used the fastest cuts - a straight line through, not longer diagonal lines

So if you're cutting down a tree it's just a straight cut them? You'd never make a straight cut as the tree or girder would just as likely fall on you. Making stuff up in your head doesn't make it so.

Brown Bomber wrote: »

as opposed to

"used on TV" ?

Or you could highlight the important part... you know the one where there's nothing in thermite to explode.

Brown Bomber

Brown Bomber wrote: »

How can you believe everything he said when he tries to contradict himself`?

and by the way explosions also cause fires.

demonspawn

meglome wrote: »

Fires burn, stuff in buildings explode (aside from the impacts of the planes)... you know the fires that Jennings talks about at the time too.

Mandatory temperature standards for structural steel is 400°C in Japan, and 540°C in North America, China, and Europe.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structural_steel#Thermal_properties

Jet fuel has an open air burning temperature of 287.5 °C
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jet_fuel#Typical_Physical_Properties_for_Jet_A_and_Jet_A-1http:

Care to explain how the fires in WTC7 magically broke the laws of physics to melt the structural steel beams inside and to such a uniform degree that the entire building collapsed in on itself?

gizmo

Brown Bomber wrote: »

because its generalising bollox. What is a "CTer" for a start? Its used as a perjorative term. Am I a "CTer" because I am not convinced by the official conspiracy theory? If so, I have never mentioned anything ever here about thermite. Should I therefore answer on behalf of someone who bears no connection to me just because someone has decided to label all people who disagree with them?

I was specifically referring to the fact that people are pointing to Jennings and him hearing the explosions as proof that the building was taken down with a controlled explosion, yet the thermite explanation is one I've seen mentioned several times on this forum.

From the discussion in this thread can I then take it that most people believe the buildings were brought down by said controlled explosion and not by thermite?

meglome

demonspawn wrote: »

Mandatory temperature standards for structural steel is 400°C in Japan, and 540°C in North America, China, and Europe.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structural_steel#Thermal_properties

Jet fuel has an open air burning temperature of 287.5 °C
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jet_fuel#Typical_Physical_Properties_for_Jet_A_and_Jet_A-1http:

Care to explain how the fires in WTC7 magically broke the laws of physics to melt the structural steel beams inside and to such a uniform degree that the entire building collapsed in on itself?

So aside from the usual changing the subject... no other steel framed building has collapsed from fire alone, is that what you saying?

demonspawn

meglome wrote: »

So aside from the usual changing the subject... no other steel framed building has collapsed from fire alone, is that what you saying?

How am I changing the subject? You assert that fire was the cause of the collapse of WTC7. Explain to us all how that is even remotely possible?

stevejazzx

meglome wrote: »

America's air defence was build to protect the country from outside threats. On 911 there were 3000-5000 planes in the air over the US. They track commercial planes with their transponders, and the hijacked planes had their transponders switched off. And if you look at the typical response times, the times taken on 911 are in keeping with them.

Em, no. Source?
If CT'ers give this kind of vague response don't you guys tell them to list a source, a specific one with comparitive timelines?

Heres where I established my opinion on this matter

http://911reports.wordpress.com/2008/08/25/911-truth-part-6-of-11-air-defense-%E2%80%9Cfailures%E2%80%9D-simultaneous-war-games-continuity-of-government/

Also see:

US Air Security Timeline – HistoryCommons.org
The Failure to Defend the Skies on 9/11 by Paul Thompson
Flights 11, 175, 77, and 93: The 9/11 Commission’s Incredible Tales by David Ray Griffin
THE FAA KNEW! But were they set up? By Michael Kane
Guilty For 9-11: Bush, Rumsfeld, Myers, Part 1 by Illarion Bykov and Jared Israel
Mr. Cheney’s Cover-up: Part 2 of ‘Guilty for 9-11: Bush, Rumsfeld, Myers’ By Illarion Bykov and Jared Israel

9/11 Commission Deception, Cheney’s Actions on 9/11, and Why He Should Testify Under Oath by Peter Dale Scott

Senator Dayton: NORAD Lied About 9/11
NORAD: The Air Defense Network – 911Research.WTC7.net
September 11th Flights: 3 of 4 Hijacked Planes Encounter No Resistance – 911Research.WTC7.net
Air Defense: Multiple Failures of the Air Defense Network to Protect New York City and the Capital – 911Research.WTC7.net
NORAD Stand-Down: The Prevention of Interceptions of the Commandeered Planes – 911Research.WTC7.net
The ‘Stand-Down Order’ – 911Review.com
AIR DEFENSE ON 9/11: U.S. domestic air defense forces under the umbrella of the North American Aerospace Defense Command (“NORAD”) failed to intercept the errant flights of September 11, 2001, as called for in routine operating procedures for situational reconnaissance and response. – Justicefor911.org
Scapegoating NORAD by George Washington
Distracting The Defenders: Radar Injects, Ringing Phones and Fools Errands by George Washington
The 9/11 Stand Down in 2 Minutes by George Washington

Jeboa Safari

demonspawn wrote: »

Mandatory temperature standards for structural steel is 400°C in Japan, and 540°C in North America, China, and Europe.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Structural_steel#Thermal_properties

Jet fuel has an open air burning temperature of 287.5 °C
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jet_fuel#Typical_Physical_Properties_for_Jet_A_and_Jet_A-1http:

Care to explain how the fires in WTC7 magically broke the laws of physics to melt the structural steel beams inside and to such a uniform degree that the entire building collapsed in on itself?

Whats jet fuel got to do with WTC7

stevejazzx

I see that as usual the thread has descended into 'steel' and explosions etc. - I asked a question in this post which was ignored/missed whhc relates to the OP

Soveriegn

Jeboa Safari wrote: »

Whats jet fuel got to do with WTC7

Nothing. Nor does it have anything to do with the collapse of the towers.

meglome

demonspawn wrote: »

How am I changing the subject? You assert that fire was the cause of the collapse of WTC7. Explain to us all how that is even remotely possible?

Well to be accurate NIST says it was fires and I believe the report.

http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/factsheet/wtc_qa_082108.cfm

Now I took from your post that you have a problem believing steel frame buildings collapse just from fire?

demonspawn

Jeboa Safari wrote: »

Whats jet fuel got to do with WTC7

Then what are you proposing caused the fires that managed to break the laws of thermodynamics in order to melt all the structural steel beams in WTC7 at the same time, causing it to implode? Were these magical Islamic fires of hatred or did Satan himself rise up and melt the beams?

demonspawn

meglome wrote: »

Well to be accurate NIST says it was fires and I believe the report.

http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/factsheet/wtc_qa_082108.cfm

Now I took from your post that you have a problem believing steel frame buildings collapse just from fire?

That's all I wanted to hear. Thank you.

If you have evidence of other buildings that were built to the very high standard of the towers that also fell due to fire, please share.

meglome

demonspawn wrote: »

That's all I wanted to hear. Thank you.

If you have evidence of other buildings that were built to the very high standard of the towers that also fell due to fire, please share.

http://www.debunking911.com/firsttime.htm

Oh and where are you getting the very high standard from?

demonspawn wrote: »

Then what are you proposing caused the fires that managed to break the laws of thermodynamics in order to melt all the structural steel beams in WTC7 at the same time, causing it to implode? Were these magical Islamic fires of hatred or did Satan himself rise up and melt the beams?

The question should be how hot does it have to get to weaken the steel to a point when it cannot take the weight of the building. That point is a lot cooler than the melting point. And what implosion are you talking about?

Podman

Jeboa Safari wrote: »

Here's a quote from Jennings:
The writer and director of Loose Change, Dylan Avery, told The Conspiracy Files: "The amount of detail that Barry gave us in this interview was unreal. He says he was stepping over dead bodies in the lobby."

Barry Jennings himself disagrees with their interpretation of his words. Barry Jennings told the BBC: "I didn't like the way you know I was portrayed. They portrayed me as seeing dead bodies. I never saw dead bodies"

What Barry Jennings disagreed with was the use of the word "seeing", and not any other part of his interview.

What he actually said was, "We were stepping over people, you know you can feel when your stepping over people."

In the video we don't see much of the lobby at all, we see more of the escalator and even then, just a few seconds. Everything is covered in dust and debris, you could be looking at a part of a body and not recognize it, but you'd know what it feels like under your feet.

Jeboa Safari

meglome wrote: »

http://www.debunking911.com/firsttime.htm

Oh and where are you getting the very high standard from?



The question should be how hot does it have to get to weaken the steel to a point when it cannot take the weight of the building. That point is a lot cooler than the melting point. And what implosion are you talking about?

Aswell as the fact that the building was already damaged from the collapse of the twin towers, adding to its instability

stevejazzx

Podman wrote: »

What Barry Jennings disagreed with was the use of the word "seeing", and not any other part of his interview.

What he actually said was, "We were stepping over people, you know you can feel when your stepping over people."

In the video we don't see much of the lobby at all, we see more of the escalator and even then, just a few seconds. Everything is covered in dust and debris, you could be looking at a part of a body and not recognize it, but you'd know what it feels like under your feet.

This wasn't really discussed was it? Apart from scuffling at the begining of the thread which wnet nowhere. I mean in the bbc retraction he doesn't make a very great distinction does he?

demonspawn

Jeboa Safari wrote: »

Aswell as the fact that the building was already damaged from the collapse of the twin towers, adding to its instability

I assume you have evidence of this "fact"? Because otherwise it's just baseless speculation I'm afraid.

demonspawn

Podman wrote: »

What Barry Jennings disagreed with was the use of the word "seeing", and not any other part of his interview.

What he actually said was, "We were stepping over people, you know you can feel when your stepping over people."

In the video we don't see much of the lobby at all, we see more of the escalator and even then, just a few seconds. Everything is covered in dust and debris, you could be looking at a part of a body and not recognize it, but you'd know what it feels like under your feet.

And this is it. All he says is he never "saw" dead bodies, which is absolutely true and as far as I know nobody ever claimed he did see dead bodies. We can see this in the first two interviews. He does not refute anything else about the interviews he gave, including hearing explosions, experiencing the effects of the explosions, and the lobby being completely destroyed.

Jeboa Safari

demonspawn wrote: »

I assume you have evidence of this "fact"? Because otherwise it's just baseless speculation I'm afraid.

Look at any pictures of the building after the collapse of the twin towers, you can even see it.
There's also reports into the damage

meglome

Podman wrote: »

There is a difference between debate and ridicule.

There is a difference between scrutiny and denial.

There is a difference between yaysayers, naysayers and complete idiots.

Funny I have a feeling all of these people are people who disagree with you.

demonspawn wrote: »

And this is it. All he says is he never "saw" dead bodies, which is absolutely true and as far as I know nobody ever claimed he did see dead bodies. We can see this in the first two interviews. He does not refute anything else about the interviews he gave, including hearing explosions, experiencing the effects of the explosions, and the lobby being completely destroyed.

And i have no doubt that we did hear and feel "explosions"... but as much as this is getting tired explosions could be many things in this situation. How do you think the WTC collapsed?

Mahatma coat

in the timeline that Jennings is Discussing

BOTH TOWERS WERE STILL STANDING

So how could it be damage from the collapsing towers that caused the fires and instability in B7???????

demonspawn

meglome wrote: »

And i have no doubt that we did hear and feel "explosions"... but as much as this is getting tired explosions could be many things in this situation. How do you think the WTC collapsed?

Apparently the jet fuel melted the beams and both buildings pancaked in the exact same fashion. :rolleyes:

demonspawn

Mahatma coat wrote: »

in the timeline that Jennings is Discussing

BOTH TOWERS WERE STILL STANDING

So how could it be damage from the collapsing towers that caused the fires and instability in B7???????

Jennings was obviously a liar and had an ulterior motive. Duh!!

Edit: I mean, it couldn't possibly be the man who made a cool $4.55 billion from an insurance claim for buildings he leased only two months before the towers fell. Why would he lie about what happened?