You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.
Join our community!
|Moved:Hi everyone; New to forum, check out some of my video|
|Tweet Topic Started: Aug 31 2009, 03:25 PM (4,978 Views)|
|alienentity||Aug 31 2009, 03:25 PM Post #1|
Hi dudes, dudettes and others,
This is my first time on your forum, just wanted to let y'all know I've produced a couple of videos that might interest you.
1) Barry Jennings and Michael Hess timelines, carefully corroborated with other accounts and facts
2) A video exposing a couple of major lies and distortions by Richard Gage and AE911 Truth.
Check 'em out, feel free to leave comments. I have set comments by approval since I've gotten a lot of very obscene messages, and this really cuts it down. I am happy to post any comments which attempt to address the issues on the videos.
Thanks in advance, and may the truth prevail! No more lies from anybody, ok?
Edited by alienentity, Aug 31 2009, 03:26 PM.
|Miragememories||Aug 31 2009, 06:54 PM Post #2|
Your first bold statement; Time: Approx 8:50 to 9:00 am, pops on the screen in loud green titling over Barry Jennings stating he was in his car and on his way to work. During his drive Barry receives a call about the first aircraft hit and is directed to go and manage the Office of Emergency Management, OEM, at WTC 7 on the 23rd floor.
As Barry describes his arrival at WTC 7, more loud green titling pops on stating; Time: Approx 9:10 to 9:20 am.
You provide no explanation in an attempt to corroborate this estimated arrival time.
At his arrival, Barry describes there being police in the lobby and that they escorted him by elevator to the 23rd floor OEM which they discovered was locked. They took the elevator back down and the police and security took them back up in a freight elevator and they gained entry to the 23rd floor OEM.
You really stretch your imagination at this point, by estimating the action of taking two urgent round trip elevator rides to the 23rd floor would take anywhere from 35 to 50 minutes!
You explain away your estimate with a huge assumption.
That in this major emergency, in an evacuated building situation, with police and security providing Barry with an express elevator escort, you assume it took from just over half an hour to almost an hour for Barry's elevator escort to place him at the 23rd floor OEM.
Next big green time title jumps on the screen 9:45am - 10:00 am over Barry Jennings stating that upon arriving at the OEM he noticed everyone was gone.
Your apparent corroboration for this time estimate, is based on another time estimate, which is based on a statement by an unnamed manager, who is believed to have ordered the evacuation at 9:45 am.
from the 9/11 Commission Report
After the South Tower was hit, OEM senior leadership decided to remain in its bunker and continue conducting operations, even though all civilians had been evacuated from 7 WTC. At approximately 9:30, a senior OEM official ordered the evacuation of the facility, after a Secret Service agent in 7 WTC advised him that additional commercial planes were not accounted for.
from the NIST
When the first aircraft struck WTC 1, the electrical power went out for several seconds inside WTC 7. Many people immediately began leaving the building, and the OEM operations center began receiving calls related to the emergency. As the second aircraft struck WTC 2, a decision was made to evacuate WTC 7 [WTC 7 Interview 1110402, fall 2002.] By the time WTC 2 was struck by the second aircraft at 9:03 a.m., many WTC 7 occupants had already left the building and others had begun a self-evacuation of the building. At approximately 9:44 a.m., after the report of a third aircraft heading into the city and news that the Pentagon had been attacked, a Deputy OEM Commissioner ordered the complete evacuation of WTC 7. [not the same as of the OEM]
Meanwhile you pop in your next green time title; Time: Approx 10:00 am to 10:20 am as Barry describes the deserted OEM.
You have now moved Barry Jenning's eyewitness timeline well out of sync with his own testimony, but conveniently in sync with the official story.
So what were you saying alienentity about "may the truth prevail!... No more lies from anybody"??
|BoneZ||Aug 31 2009, 09:26 PM Post #3|
Your WTC7 "comparison" amongst other "facts" is bullshit. Here's a real comparison:
And then you procede to attack truthers like you're some kind of god. Not a single person here will take you seriously or give you the time of day when you act in such a childish manner.
I'll debunk the rest of your disinformation later when I get more time.
Edited by BoneZ, Aug 31 2009, 09:27 PM.
|alienentity||Sep 1 2009, 02:06 AM Post #4|
Thanks for your comments on my Jennings video. As you may know, Jennings got the call while driving to work, sometime after the first plane hit Tower 2 at 8:46am
From this we can presume that the call was probably received sometime between 8:50am and 9:00 am. Nobody knows for sure.
I haven't been able to find out where Jennings lived at the time, nor how long his commute typically was. So that is why I provide an estimated arrival of 9:10 to 9:20am as likely. It seems he was not present when the second plane hit, as he makes no mention of that knowledge in his testimony. In other words, I have indeed corroborated the time by referencing the second plane. If he had been in the OEM or in the lobby of WTC7 at the time the second plane hit, we would expect him to have recalled this.
Obviously that didn't happen.
Since we do know that the OEM was evacuated sometime after 9:30am. It may have been 9:45am, as you know.
Jennings and Hess both testified that the OEM was abandoned and locked when they arrived. Thus it is not plausible that this was around 9am. Based on all available info, it was certainly later.
Next, I carefully corroborated the power outage, which was reported by Con Ed to be at 10:00am, after the South Tower fell. Mr. Hess clearly recalls the power going out, and he also references smoke in the building. It is reasonable to conclude that Mr. Jennings and Mr. Hess were in the OEM when the South Tower collapsed - this event also produced a great deal of atmospheric effects like smoke and dust in the area, consistent with the comments of MR. Hess.
Finally, and most important, both Jennings and Hess state very clearly that, upon breaking the windows, they saw utter mayhem outside, including flying papers, burning cars and buses and clouds of dust. There can be no doubt that both towers had collapsed by this time.
That means that the men were in the stairwell at the time of the North Tower collapse. There is just no way around that fact. You can criticize me for making assumptions, but nobody has exact info about Jenning's whereabouts; it must be inferred from other sources. That is a limitation we all have to accept. But with all due respect, the burning cars and buses are the key to understanding what time it was when the men broke windows to call for help and get air.
Don't forget, I've cross-reference the timeline with as much info as possible, working backwards as well as forwards. This timeline is not just about Mr. Jennings, it has to reflect all the known information, to the best of our knowledge.
Dismiss this evidence if you like, but then you also must dismiss a true account of the events. I would hope you wouldn't want to do that.
|alienentity||Sep 1 2009, 02:09 AM Post #5|
BoneZ - 'I'll debunk the rest of your disinformation later when I get more time.' I look forward to your analysis.
All I ask is that you show respect for the facts.
|Domenick DiMaggio||Sep 1 2009, 02:50 AM Post #6|
||aren't you that jrefer that posted this same rubbish videos a few months back?|
|alienentity||Sep 1 2009, 11:09 AM Post #7|
Domenick DiMaggio - To answer your rather disparaging remark/question, I completed the Jennings/Hess video on June 19, 2009, and the AE911 Truth video on August 26, 2009.
If you have an intelligent comment or point to make, please do so. Calling it 'rubbish' doesn't constitute a meaningful rebuttal of anything.
The reason I brought the Jennings video to the attention of this forum was because I heard a recent interview with Dylan Avery where he made mention of Jennings' claim. It appears he and others still do not correctly grasp the timeline of events, especially with regard to the cataclysm on the landing of the 6th floor which nearly killed Jennings and Hess.
|C.H.||Sep 1 2009, 12:34 PM Post #8|
||Any response to Chandler's latest videos?|
|Toriac||Sep 1 2009, 01:40 PM Post #9|
I love when people use facts to make their points. Thanks for sharing.
|BoneZ||Sep 1 2009, 03:51 PM Post #10|
And you think calling the work of AE911T "bullshit" will help constitute meaningful discussion? How about calling us truthers "cowards", do you think that will help constitute meaningful discussion here?
You're a pathetic hypocrite and unwelcome here as far as I'm concerned. I won't waste any more of my life addressing a hypocrite.
|oquestionador||Sep 1 2009, 04:51 PM Post #11|
He's shown his arguments, that's the difference. Where's your arguments?
Did he call someone here coward?
Hmmmm. And what about this?
|alienentity||Sep 1 2009, 05:30 PM Post #12|
BoneZ, I would prefer to discuss those things elsewhere, as I don't want to breach the LC forum rules. You're welcome to post your thoughts on my channel, and I will respond in detail, I assure you. FYI, my video and my comments are about AE911 Truth and the truthers who produce videos for their youtube channels but won't allow any comments. Specifically I have a problem with David Chandler. I will clarify this in my next video, which is going to be on Chandler's WTC 1 and 2 videos.
So I thank you for pointing out where I should be clearer about whom I'm speaking.
I refer to this because you brought it up. However, your quibbles with my language have nothing to do with my arguments or how they're presented. You haven't rebutted the claims themselves. Why don't you stick to that instead of the personal attacks?
If you aren't up to it, that's your call. I'm not afraid to respond to critics. In fact I welcome intelligent criticism.
ps according to the forum rules, personal attacks of any kind are forbidden. I believe you have breached the rules, but I won't follow your example, sorry.
Edited by alienentity, Sep 1 2009, 05:46 PM.
|noeffects||Sep 1 2009, 05:49 PM Post #13|
I guess you don't feel like addressing that question for some reason ?
|alienentity||Sep 1 2009, 05:56 PM Post #14|
I thought I had answered that question about the two videos, by giving you the dates when I finished them. Is there something else you want to know?
I'm happy to address the other topics. But I don't want to breach LC forum rules, so I'd prefer not to do that here. I don't want to get banned on this forum, and I'm not confident that I understand how the forum operates (what the latitude is). There's a big warning in the board rules regarding 'debunkers' and what you're not allowed to discuss. That kind of freaked me out. Have you read it?
Also, I notice that I'm not listed as a 'member', but as a 'skeptic'. That wasn't my choice either. I already feel like I've been branded.
If you're game, I'll start a new thread on the JREF forum just for this discussion. I'm not allowed to start new threads on this forum anyway.
We can discuss this anytime. Let me know if that will work for you.
Edited by alienentity, Sep 1 2009, 05:57 PM.
|Domenick DiMaggio||Sep 1 2009, 06:01 PM Post #15|
so this is the same jennings video that was duhbunked back in june you just re-uploaded and pretend you're someone else. got it.
i actually left comments on your original posting of this video.
i imagine it must have been trashed on youtube for you to take it down and reupload it again and act like no one ever picked it apart before.
|JFK||Sep 1 2009, 06:05 PM Post #16|
That is bullshit. You may begin threads here in the skeptics forum.
The rest of the board is off limits posting wise to skeptics.
And yes you are one.
|noeffects||Sep 1 2009, 06:14 PM Post #17|
ae...Why you think you are not allowed to say if you are a special Jrefer or not ?
I read the rules...no Jref mentioned there
Do you need a monocle ?
..I think I'll use this as my new pic..
|alienentity||Sep 1 2009, 06:17 PM Post #18|
May I ask why the brand of skeptic is applied to people who have certain types of questions, and why they can't start threads elsewhere?
It feels like there are two standards applied, based on philosophy or politics. I've never come across that on the internet before.
Thanks for correcting me, and the swearing was a nice touch as well.
Just asking questions...
|alienentity||Sep 1 2009, 06:22 PM Post #19|
If you're referring to the Jennings video (which btw has not been debunked by anybody to my knowledge, at least not in the English language!)
My youtube channel was suspended last week because AE911 Truth complained about a couple of my videos using their materials. That's why it is a different channel. It was not my choice. I already mentioned above why I posted on the LC forum - I think I've already addressed that question.
The last video that got me suspended was a critique of AE911 Truth's advertisment, which I used in an original video. I thought it would be ok under 'fair use', but apparently they couldn't stand it and complained.
So they not only won't allow me to comment on their videos, they won't even let me use their materials in a rebuttal video. Nice huh?
Oh well. Created a new channel. Does that answer your questions?
Edited by alienentity, Sep 1 2009, 06:37 PM.
|alienentity||Sep 1 2009, 06:23 PM Post #20|
edited: accidental duplicate post
Edited by alienentity, Sep 1 2009, 06:23 PM.
|alienentity||Sep 1 2009, 06:33 PM Post #21|
Love the picture.
Of course it didn't say anything about JREF. You brought JREF up, not me. But I've already been branded as a 'skeptic', so a different set of rules already applies, doesn't it? I think the mod just pointed that out to me.
Specifically I was referring to:
This is a privately owned forum and the administration reserves the right to restrict the participation of any user that is deemed disruptive for any reason.
Also, if you are a self-professed "skeptic", please note the following arguments will be either ignored or erased, as they have no merit:
* "too many people would be involved, so your conspiracy is bogus"
* "all the people involved must be paid off, so your conspiracy is bogus"
* "you guys are still alive, so your conspiracy is bogus"
* "our government is too dumb to pull this off, so your conspiracy is bogus"
* "our government would NEVER do this, so your conspiracy is bogus"
* "screw you guys, your conspiracy is bogus"
* "you guys are all in this for the money"
* "you guys are all Bush bashers"
* "you guys are all Liberals"
* "you guys are all nuts"
I regarded the above as examples, not limited to what might constitute a breach of the forum. I told you already, it kind of freaked me out, since I don't know what the tolerance level of the mods is.
Also I read:
Regarding personal attacks:
No Tolerance of Personal Attacks
Due to the increased debate on the issue of what happened at the Pentagon, any personal insults, attacks, threats, etc, will be dealt with strictly. ...etc... Childish mudslinging, name-calling, and personal attacks, as we’ve all seen in the past, do nothing but ruin our credibility as legitimate researchers and divide the movement. We’re not all going to agree, so let’s be mature about it when it happens.
And yet it seems that has already happened to me today. Being 'branded' as a 'skeptic', I can sense a certain oppressive attitude here. Can you blame me for this? (yes, I'm sure you can...and will)
|Miragememories||Sep 1 2009, 06:51 PM Post #22|
Extract from the Loose Change interview with Barry Jennings;
Dylan Avery: "Barry, I'm sorry, could you just wait for that chopper, because this is vital!
Because the whole Official Story, the whole reason that Building 7 collapsed, allegedly, was because the North Tower fell onto it and caused damage.
And what people are going to say, is they're going to say "Barry was hit by debris from the North Tower."
Barry Jennings: "No. What happened was - when we made it back to the 8th floor, --- as I told you earlier, both buildings were still standing because I looked -- [he points] "Two" [pauses] "I look one way, look the other way -- now there's nothing there."
[From his vantage point, looking out the broken 8th floor window on the Northeast corner of WTC7, when Barry looks south he can only see WTC2. He repeats that he looked in both directions. He saw Two, as in WTC2. He quickly finishes that recollection with -- now there's nothing there.
In an attempt to lend clarity to what must seem incredibly obvious to Barry, he again repeats his experience with the explosion on the 6th floor as proof that his later sighting of WTC2 from his broken 8th floor window clearly makes it impossible for the explosion to have been the collapse of either tower.]
Barry Jennings: "When I got to the 6th floor there was an explosion that forced us back to the 8th floor.
Both buildings were still standing.
Keep in mind, I told you the fire department came..and ran.
They came twice.
Because building tower 1 fell and then tower 2 fell.
And then when they came back, they came back, they came back all concerned like to get me the hell out of there.
And, and they did.
And we got out of there..
I got into the building a little before nine, a little after nine..
I didn't get out of there until like 1 PM."
|JFK||Sep 1 2009, 06:53 PM Post #23|
In the past much time was wasted when skeptics like yourself invaded legitimate threads where discussion was taking place on what could have been the cause of the events on 9/11. Those skeptics in effect turned discussion into flame wars, and that is the reason for this section.
Blame your predecessors for that.
You are correct, there are two standards in place here diametrically opposed to the double standard enforced the Jref forum.
|Domenick DiMaggio||Sep 1 2009, 07:12 PM Post #24|
answer = yes
ok, that took a little bit but at least we got it resolved.
now i am ready to move on to round 2.
if i am successful and put my time into thoroughly undertaking this task will you in return be interested in engaging me with a different thread regarding my shanksville work in these forums?
my opening statement will be as follows :
barry jennings did an interview with ltw. in it he describes many things inconsistent with the official story and when proven true will show inside complicity and cover up of the 9/11 attacks. once barry fully understood what took place that day and the implications of his experience and in telling the truth he asked ltw not to include said interview in their documentary loose change final cut.
respecting his request, ltw did agree not to include it.
when someone who most likely was an inside source [ i personally suspect it to be alex jones but thats irrelevant] relayed said information to those most interested, jennings was contacted to do a second interview. the second interview aired on corporate network television and was manipulated and edited if not coerced to tell a more favorable scenario.
after this was done dylan made the decision to release the uncut interview with barry jennings.
subsequently barry jennings was murdered and silenced.
michael hess also appeared in interviews and told the version of the story most favorable.
the source who manipulated and edited jennings account has never released an uncut version unlike dylan. this shows that dylan has nothing to hide and that the source of the questionable testimonial most likely does as there is no reason to suspect mr. jennings is anything other than truthful. no evidence to the contrary has ever been presented. ultimately in this end those who make unedited video available to everyone to view has the credibility.
michael hess, unlike barry jennings, wasn't murdered.
its clear as day. you have to have half a brain to be able to put a puzzle together with the pieces in front of you. perhaps this is your problem or perhaps it is your death grip about your beliefs much like that of a religious fanatic that thinks "governments only kill people who belong to other countries"....
but let me make something clear to you : the same people who are responsible for every death of every human being everyday in iraq, afghanistan, pakistan, and palestine see no difference between blowing up those peoples children and blowing up your children.
while you continue to subscribe to all the little groups were all in which keeps us seperated such as religious, race, or sexuality you will continue to remain asleep and gripped so tightly to your teddy bear childhood ignorant beliefs. while those who kill, torture, and maim indiscrimintely will continue to do so because all they see are "haves" and "have nots". they see it for what it is. masters and slaves. owners and workers. and i can guarentee you that regardless of whichever group you and i and everyone who will read these posts and everyone who reads those jref posts and everywhere else you go believe they belong to......every single one of us is a 'have not' in reality or we wouldn't be here.
it is 2009. the fact that we are even arguing whether or not the people who shredded the us constitution, legalized torture, invaded countries based on lies, spys on its own citizens, has secret cia prisons in europe and concentration camps in cuba were behind 9/11 which is the event that made all of this possible is ridiculous.
p.s. i don't even care what you think about shanksville so forgot all about that invitation. i know what happened. i dont need to continue wasting time with those who cant see the even bigger picture which makes the strongest argument for the need for a new transparent open investigation into the attacks......
|Domenick DiMaggio||Sep 1 2009, 07:17 PM Post #25|
i remember when the sewer you dwell in banned me for reporting the ad hom attacks i was receiving on 7 out of every 8 posts the 8th being a big circle jerk for the first 7.
and no one has really even attacked you thats the best part. don't act like you're a revolutionary or something, you go other places and call us names with typos and thinks this somehow undermines the information uncovered and evidence exposed during the last 8 years by everyday "have nots".
|2 users reading this topic (2 Guests and 0 Anonymous)|
|Go to Next Page|
|« Previous Topic · Skeptics · Next Topic »|