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

New York Area Fire Commissioners Make History, Call for New 9/11 Investigation

Options
  • 28-07-2019 12:56pm
    #1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,705 ✭✭✭


    Since this is new decided it needed a new thread. Rare for an entire fire department to come out and side with the truthers. You often see one firefighter voice an opinion and they belong to a fire department.

    "The Franklin Square and Munson Fire District, which oversees a volunteer fire department serving a hamlet of 30,000 residents just outside of Queens, New York, became the first legislative body in the country to officially support a new investigation into the events of 9/11.

    The resolution, drafted and introduced by Commissioner Christopher Gioia, was unanimously approved by the five commissioners. Members of the audience — including the families of fallen firefighters Thomas J. Hetzel and Robert Evans, both Franklin Square natives

    Speaking to those still present after the meeting, Gioia made it clear that this was the first step in a long process. Their goal now is to get every fire district in the state to go on record supporting a new 9/11 investigation.

    After a pause, Gioia added, “We were the first fire district to pass this resolution. We won’t be the last.”

    https://www.ae911truth.org/news/540-new-york-area-fire-commissioners-make-history-call-for-new-9-11-investigation


«13

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 17,800 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    Looks like the "Lawyers’ Committee for 9/11 Inquiry" loons who are endlessly trying to get some reinvestigation into 911 have convinced the members of a fire station to back them

    Their "overwhelming evidence", that it was all some vague inside job, includes the BBC mistakenly reporting on WTC 7 falling I kid you not

    The never-ending quest to squeeze more money out of 911 truthers continues


  • Registered Users Posts: 12,580 ✭✭✭✭The Nal


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    Looks like the "Lawyers’ Committee for 9/11 Inquiry" loons who are endlessly trying to get some reinvestigation into 911 have convinced the members of a fire station to back them

    Their "overwhelming evidence", that it was all some vague inside job, includes the BBC mistakenly reporting on WTC 7 falling I kid you not

    The never-ending quest to squeeze more money out of 911 truthers continues

    Oh Jesus I missed the BBC part.

    Duped a volunteer fire department into believing this nonsense. Cash is king!

    I stumbled across a great theory though.

    "The destruction of WTC was an occult ritual.

    The Twin Towers represented Boaz and Jachin, the columns at the entrance to the Temple of Solomon

    Boaz and Jachin represent the two key energies: ying and yang, male and female, strength and beauty, north and south, up and down (duality - like the Star of David)

    WTC builder, Rockefeller, says the buildings are the perfect combination of "utility and beauty"; he also owns Jerusalem museum housing remains from Temple of Solomon

    Luciferianism predicts/wants a new age of transhumanism; Kaballah and freemasonry believe one attains perfection by mastering and combining male and female energies

    Twin Towers destroyed in consciousness altering event at start of millenium to usher in this new era of transhumanism

    Replaced by Freedom Tower where both towers are combined, one up and one down, like a Star of David

    2001: Space Odyssey is about man's evolution to transhumanism - he touches the black monolith and transcends human form to a space baby

    9/11 happened in 2001, next to the Millenium hotel designed to look like the black monolith

    Madrid bombing was 911 days after 9/11

    Sept 11 is the first day of the coptic calendar, first month is named after Thoth

    2001 was the start of the new millenium not 2000 (there was no year zero)"


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,705 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring2


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    Looks like the "Lawyers’ Committee for 9/11 Inquiry" loons who are endlessly trying to get some reinvestigation into 911 have convinced the members of a fire station to back them

    Their "overwhelming evidence", that it was all some vague inside job, includes the BBC mistakenly reporting on WTC 7 falling I kid you not

    The never-ending quest to squeeze more money out of 911 truthers continues

    Fire department does not believe the official story. Lot of people in official circles don't. Skeptics are convinced it just truthers who believe 9/11 was a inside job, but again they are wrong and ignore the evidence available.


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,800 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    Skeptics are convinced it just truthers who believe 9/11 was a inside job, but again they are wrong and ignore the evidence available.

    Nothing to do with tribalism. It's down to facts.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,705 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring2


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    Nothing to do with tribalism. It's down to facts.

    False facts. FBI and whistleblowers have come forward over the years and revealed a very different story to the official line. Some of these whistleblowers about 9/11 were gotten to and sibel edwards is one. You never heard of her of course. William Binney considered one of the original creators of the NSA agency and he too has claimed 9/11 was an inside job. FBI agents involved in Pentbom 9/11 investigation also made claims the official line about 9/11 is false and not accurate.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 17,800 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    False facts.

    According to you personally. It's historically accepted fact, and as mentioned so many times already there is no plausible alternative theory with credible evidence. None, zero, zilch.

    This thread is about a fire district being convinced by some crank artists. Fine. I believe there are hundreds of fire district's in NY, so they have some way to go.

    As usual, it's a whole bunch of nothing.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,705 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring2


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    According to you personally. It's historically accepted fact, and as mentioned so many times already there is no plausible alternative theory with credible evidence. None, zero, zilch.

    This thread is about a fire district being convinced by some crank artists. Fine. I believe there are hundreds of fire district's in NY, so they have some way to go.

    As usual, it's a whole bunch of nothing.

    Mainstream accepted no. Is there evidence for a conspiracy yes.

    Of course you don't think its weird Al Qeada members were busy and doing their thing and the CIA was aware of it and never stopped 9/11. Of course nothing to see here move along!

    Convinced by truther cranks, there actually no evidence for this all. How can a truther site convince an entire fire department to call for a new investigation?


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,800 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    Is there evidence for a conspiracy yes.

    Is there credible evidence for a plausible theory? Not in the slightest. None from Mr Gage, nothing from AE911, nothing from any other group or individual. 18 years and zero.

    Just bull**** merchants making money off the last remaining diehard truthers


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,705 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring2


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    Is there credible evidence for a plausible theory? Not in the slightest. None from Mr Gage, nothing from AE911, nothing from any other group or individual. 18 years and zero.

    Just bull**** merchants making money off the last remaining diehard truthers

    According to you AE911 theory about the collapses is not credible. In my opinion the only weak points is they have no evidence who exactly planted the demolitions and there explosive evidence is not great, but since NIST never tested for explosive either its a moot point.

    There engineering work is sound and clear to anyone who looked into they have solid foundation there. NIST work is just nonsense and truly debunked over the years, and we need a new investigation. This event caused millions to displaced in the middle east and cost hundreds of thousands of lives, 3000 lives lost in New York and Washington. True transparent investigation open discussion about everything needs to be held.


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,800 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    In my opinion the only weak points is they have no evidence who exactly planted the demolitions and there explosive evidence is not great, but since NIST never tested for explosive either its a moot point.

    Bingo

    quote-what-can-be-asserted-without-evidence-can-be-dismissed-without-evidence-christopher-hitchens-13-33-53.jpg


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 12,580 ✭✭✭✭The Nal


    "the only weak points is they have no evidence"

    lol


  • Registered Users Posts: 81,963 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    There engineering work is sound and clear to anyone who looked into they have solid foundation there.

    No. No they do not.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,705 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring2


    Overheal wrote: »
    No. No they do not.

    We have to agree to disagree. The official study about WTC7 collapse has not adequately explained how 82 columns across the width of the building on all sides/corners- east to west, north to south collapsed inside a few seconds. This can not be at all explained by natural building crushing, bending or slow progressive breakages.

    Online we have visually real time video of the collapse at 5.20pm and everyone whos not blind can see the failures was fast and rapid just after the penthouse caved in. NIST ignores the building was mostly stiff and was not shaking- or reacting to multiple floor collapses. You can not ignore all the data points that do show the collapse was very fast.

    NIST also ignores there no outside evidence floors were collapsing inside the building, they competely ignore the absence of dust plumes, the breaking of windows, and other visual clues across the width of the building. You want me to trust this group when they failed for six years to spot the building had underwent a freefall condition?

    They were shown up by an opponent physics teacher and within matter of a few months they completely changed their whole opinion and freefall had occurred. They placed it in and then waffled about its implications and lied they had thought about this all the time during six year study.rolleyes: Sure NIST we have video that proves 100 per cent this is a fabricated lie. I have explained the other lies they put out there in their study, so no need to go over it again. The Truthers are holding them to account for their fake study.


  • Registered Users Posts: 25,229 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    We have to agree to disagree. The official study about WTC7 collapse has not adequately explained how 82 columns across the width of the building on all sides/corners- east to west, north to south collapsed inside a few seconds. This can not be at all explained by natural building crushing, bending or slow progressive breakages.

    Online we have visually real time video of the collapse at 5.20pm and everyone whos not blind can see the failures was fast and rapid just after the penthouse caved in. NIST ignores the building was mostly stiff and was not shaking- or reacting to multiple floor collapses. You can not ignore all the data points that do show the collapse was very fast.

    NIST also ignores there no outside evidence floors were collapsing inside the building, they competely ignore the absence of dust plumes, the breaking of windows, and other visual clues across the width of the building. You want me to trust this group when they failed for six years to spot the building had underwent a freefall condition?

    They were shown up by an opponent physics teacher and within matter of a few months they completely changed their whole opinion and freefall had occurred. They placed it in and then waffled about its implications and lied they had thought about this all the time during six year study.rolleyes: Sure NIST we have video that proves 100 per cent this is a fabricated lie. I have explained the other lies they put out there in their study, so no need to go over it again. The Truthers are holding them to account for their fake study.
    So what new research do this new group present?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,705 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring2


    King Mob wrote: »
    So what new research do this new group present?

    Due this summer. If not out this year, then they have delayed and work away and complain.


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,800 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    The official study about WTC7 collapse

    And WTC 1 and WTC 2. Let's not "conveniently" forget them, you (and the Lawyers committee for 911 Inquiry) maintain they were also blown up.


  • Registered Users Posts: 25,229 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Due this summer. If not out this year, then they have delayed and work away and complain.
    The Commissioners presented a report that isn't out yet? :confused:

    Or do you mean Hulsey's report that is already a few years late?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,705 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring2


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    And WTC 1 and WTC 2. Let's not "conveniently" forget them, you (and the Lawyers committee for 911 Inquiry) maintain they were also blown up.

    I have taken the position there was cover up and WTC7 was demolished on purpose. I see undeniable proof there.

    WTC1 and 2 the evidence is not as clear cut, NIST proposed a theory and while there issues with it, it much harder to dispute. The floor trusses did buckle and pull in the side walls, i agree with NIST about this. I disgree on one point, there is evidence the steel hat truss collapsed first ( NIST says no to this) and after this then the floor trusses failed and pulled in corner walls. I also dislike NIST complete failure to explain the unfolding collapse. They only released a study about how it begun. I'm interested in knowing what their explantatioon was for top half of the building exploding in mid air and the pulverised concrete?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,705 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring2


    King Mob wrote: »
    The Commissioners presented a report that isn't out yet? :confused:

    Or do you mean Hulsey's report that is already a few years late?

    Hulsey report obviously. A comprehensive study takes awhile to complete. I prefer he gets it right then rush it. The Skeptics will be scrutinising every aspect of it when its out, we all know this. One big mistake the study will be worthless.

    The fire department is demanding a new 9/11 investigation. They said they are not alone and more fire departments will be coming onboard.

    Even if you don't believe building or buildings were demolished on 9/11, the evidence clearly does show this attack was allowed to go ahead. There plenty of information out there now the hijackers were well organised and had help. The CIA had all the information they needed to stop the attacks, and they hindered the normal process of recieveing information about terrorists. I think the American public and the world should demand answers to why two well known high level Al Qeada operatives were allowed to operate inside the United States freely for two years and board flight 77 on 9/11. CIA has refused to answer this and it still protect by state secrets acts and this is just not good enough when 9/11 has changed the world since 2001.


  • Registered Users Posts: 25,229 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Hulsey report obviously.
    Sorry, I asked what research the Fire commissioners presented.
    They can't have presented a study that is not out.

    So what did they present?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 17,800 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    I have taken the position there was cover up and WTC7 was demolished on purpose.

    You've taken the position that all 3 buildings were blown up. Are you now changing that?


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,331 ✭✭✭jeremyj1968


    I read about this story online and I think it is great news. Hopefully it will lead to some action being taken and a proper report in to the events. Or at least it could start others questioning the events. Because the official story does not make any sense.

    And Cheerful, I don't know why you even bother with this forum. All you get is smart ar$e remarks similar to the two posts above.


  • Registered Users Posts: 25,229 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    And Cheerful, I don't know why you even bother with this forum. All you get is smart ar$e remarks similar to the two posts above.
    Given that none of our points can be addressed, and you guys are so upset by simple and direct questions maybe you should seek out a safe space where your theories and opinions won't be critically examined.


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,800 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    I read about this story online and I think it is great news. Hopefully it will lead to some action being taken and a proper report in to the events. Or at least it could start others questioning the events. Because the official story does not make any sense.

    You think we need to question World War 2 more because some people think the Holocaust was a hoax? (e.g. Cheerful)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,705 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring2


    I read about this story online and I think it is great news. Hopefully it will lead to some action being taken and a proper report in to the events. Or at least it could start others questioning the events. Because the official story does not make any sense.

    And Cheerful, I don't know why you even bother with this forum. All you get is smart ar$e remarks similar to the two posts above.

    There so opposed to new investigation and sad really. Even when a fire department signs on asking for a new investigation, they resort to same bull**** responses. They don't examine the evidence at all. They are convinced they got the whole truth by looking at the evidence on wikipedia. Completely ignorning all the side information that has leaked out over the years. Even a congressional senate investigation concluded the 9/11 hijackers got state sponsored help, yet these findings got buried in a 28 page 9/11 commission classified report and that took 15 years to come out. Of course Skeptics don't bother with facts and never wonder why Saudi Arabia state involvement with 9/11 was not mentioned when they decided to go after Iraq in 2003.

    True, but some of the posters are ok even i don't agree with them. There only one guy who gets real personel and tries to detrail.


  • Registered Users Posts: 25,229 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    There so opposed to new investigation and sad really. Even when a fire department signs on asking for a new investigation, they resort to same bull**** responses. They don't examine the evidence at all.
    But this fire department has not produced any new evidence or research or anything at all...:confused:


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,800 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    There so opposed to new investigation and sad really.

    The case is closed. Only conspiracy theorists (and a few they've convinced) want a re-investigation.
    Even when a fire department signs on asking for a new investigation, they resort to same bull**** responses.

    Yeah a tiny fire department who have been convinced by truthers. They'll likely change their stance shortly when they start getting questions about their bizarre position.
    They don't examine the evidence at all.

    Not true
    They are convinced they got the whole truth by looking at the evidence on wikipedia.

    Not true
    Completely ignorning all the side information that has leaked out over the years.

    aaand not true :)
    Even a congressional senate investigation concluded the 9/11 hijackers got state sponsored help, yet these findings got buried in a 28 page 9/11 commission classified report and that took 15 years to come out. Of course Skeptics don't bother with facts and never wonder why Saudi Arabia state involvement with 9/11 was not mentioned when they decided to go after Iraq in 2003.

    Another distortion and (deliberate) misinterpretation of information


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,800 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    King Mob wrote: »
    But this fire department has not produced any new evidence or research or anything at all...:confused:

    And some important context

    https://www.metabunk.org/franklin-square-and-munson-board-of-fire-commissioners-9-11-resolution.t10842/


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,705 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring2


    Dohnjoe wrote: »

    Mike is very upset this happened ;)

    Quote
    I have mixed feelings about this. One the one hand it's a worrying development when local government commission are wasting time with baseless conspiracy theories.

    Know Mike they don't think the allegations are baseless like you do. Some of their firefighters died at the world trade center and they find the truther evidence provided to the grand jury compelling. This grand jury is still operating in secret and part of the law, so they don't have to tell us what happening till its concluded. The firefighter department just signing their names to the petition and they claim more departments will follow soon, maybe he knows more than all of us?


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,705 ✭✭✭Cheerful Spring2


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    The case is closed. Only conspiracy theorists (and a few they've convinced) want a re-investigation.



    Yeah a tiny fire department who have been convinced by truthers. They'll likely change their stance shortly when they start getting questions about their bizarre position.



    Not true



    Not true



    aaand not true :)



    Another distortion and (deliberate) misinterpretation of information

    Case is not closed. There 9/11 evidence provided to the grand jury and we have to wait and see on this. There is the hulsey report coming out. Fire department signing on and demanding a new investigation. FBI was sued recenty for 9/11 documents. Over 40 per cent of the American population right now believes 9/11 was a conspiracy and increasing over time.

    Nope the congressional senate investigation was more damning about Saudis sponsoring 9/11- then the 9/11 commission took over and kept a classified section of the report- the now famous 28 pages and those pages got watered down when released to the public . We had to wait till 2016, 15 whole years later, 12 years after the 9/11 commission report findings. There know distortion of the facts the 9/11 commission delibarately hide information about the attacks from the public for 15 years and by this time, 9/11 was a memory for most Americans. If this information came out in 2001, it would have destroyed the Saudi cosy relationship with the Americans and opened new avenues of investigations and official media would be demanding answers.


Advertisement