• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Firefighter Tells His Experience/Expertise with 9/11[W:302]

sookster

sookster

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 12, 2011
Messages
1,838
Reaction score
452
Location
In my own world.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
9/11 Firefighter Blows Open WTC 7 Cover Up

What I found interesting is his expertise on fire (he was a fire marshal, so he has more extensive training) and he said fire alone cannot melt steel. When he was searching for bodies, he saw pockets of molten steel on the ground.

There are some people very educated on this topic, I'm not. But I wanted to share with the community something that I thought people would find interesting. Frankly I don't have the time to dive into the topic, I'm trying to do research in other areas.

What are your thoughts about the video?

What are the main arguments for, and against controlled demolition?

I hope I posted in the right forum. Given the nature of this topic I knew it belonged in Conspiracy Theories but I also view it as an opinion. I just hope I don't get another infraction for starting a post in the wrong sub-forum.
 
sookster said:
9/11 Firefighter Blows Open WTC 7 Cover Up

What I found interesting is his expertise on fire (he was a fire marshal, so he has more extensive training) and he said fire alone cannot melt steel. When he was searching for bodies, he saw pockets of molten steel on the ground.

There are some people very educated on this topic, I'm not. But I wanted to share with the community something that I thought people would find interesting. Frankly I don't have the time to dive into the topic, I'm trying to do research in other areas.

What are your thoughts about the video?

What are the main arguments for, and against controlled demolition?

I hope I posted in the right forum. Given the nature of this topic I knew it belonged in Conspiracy Theories but I also view it as an opinion. I just hope I don't get another infraction for starting a post in the wrong sub-forum.
Click to expand...

Main arguments against controlled demolition?

Facts, evidence, logistics, common sense, professional opinion, reality, etc.
 
sookster said:
9/11 Firefighter Blows Open WTC 7 Cover Up

What I found interesting is his expertise on fire (he was a fire marshal, so he has more extensive training) and he said fire alone cannot melt steel. When he was searching for bodies, he saw pockets of molten steel on the ground.

There are some people very educated on this topic, I'm not. But I wanted to share with the community something that I thought people would find interesting. Frankly I don't have the time to dive into the topic, I'm trying to do research in other areas.

What are your thoughts about the video?

What are the main arguments for, and against controlled demolition?

I hope I posted in the right forum. Given the nature of this topic I knew it belonged in Conspiracy Theories but I also view it as an opinion. I just hope I don't get another infraction for starting a post in the wrong sub-forum.
Click to expand...


Great video!

30 year veteran fire Marshal
First hand on site witness (that means he was there on the pile)
Endorses Richard Gage and
validated explosions and
and said wtc 7..."like classic demolition" and
"molten lava like pockets of steel" and
proved silverstein lied.

 
Last edited:
Fledermaus said:
Main arguments against controlled demolition?

Facts, evidence, logistics, common sense, professional opinion, reality, etc.
Click to expand...


What Facts ______________
What evidence ______________
What logistics ______________
What common sense ______________
What professional opinion ______________
What reality ______________
What etc. ______________

please fill in the blanks since debunkers have been asked for evidence and have not yet produced any.
 
KokomoJojo said:
What Facts ______________
What evidence ______________
What logistics ______________
What common sense ______________
What professional opinion ______________
What reality ______________
What etc. ______________

please fill in the blanks since debunkers have been asked for evidence and have not yet produced any.
Click to expand...

Evidence has been given. And ignored.
 
KokomoJojo said:
What Facts ______________
What evidence ______________
What logistics ______________
What common sense ______________
What professional opinion ______________
What reality ______________
What etc. ______________

please fill in the blanks since debunkers have been asked for evidence and have not yet produced any.
Click to expand...

Don't you ever get bored with this? You appear to have only one way of amusing yourself. You know very well that evidence has been presented.
 
Fledermaus said:
Evidence has been given. And ignored.
Click to expand...

please fill in the blanks since debunkers have been asked for evidence and have not yet produced any.
 
zyzygy said:
Don't you ever get bored with this? You appear to have only one way of amusing yourself. You know very well that evidence has been presented.
Click to expand...

Nope, debunkers have not provided any evidence to the contrary and their uninformed plausible fantasies are not evidence or fact.

Now they get to go up against a 30 year veteran fire marshal and tell everyone he doesnt know what he is talking about and try to convince the world people should be listening to debunkers hiding behind their keyboards instead of the people many of whom are REAL EXPERTS (like this guy) who were actually there and experienced it.

He even said that others would flinch when huge explosions went off but after his tour in nam it didnt affect him much, so much for the usual chaos and trauma and confusion arguments debunkers try to use. We got one here who has the experience knows the ropes cool as a cucumber jammin! Tellin it like it is!

So EVIDENCE PLEASE.
 
KokomoJojo said:
Nope, debunkers have not provided any evidence to the contrary and their uninformed plausible fantasies are not evidence or fact.

Now they get to go up against a 30 year veteran fire marshal and tell everyone he doesnt know what he is talking about and try to convince the world people should be listening to debunkers hiding behind their keyboards instead of the people many of whom are REAL EXPERTS (like this guy) who were actually there and experienced it.

He even said that others would flinch when huge explosions went off but after his tour in nam it didnt affect him much, so much for the usual chaos and trauma and confusion arguments debunkers try to use. We got one here who has the experience knows the ropes cool as a cucumber jammin! Tellin it like it is!

So EVIDENCE PLEASE.
Click to expand...

Evidence has been presented....

Have you a problem with it?

What evidence do you not agree with or perhaps don't understand.

Please be clear and concise.
 
sookster said:
9/11 Firefighter Blows Open WTC 7 Cover Up

What I found interesting is his expertise on fire (he was a fire marshal, so he has more extensive training) and he said fire alone cannot melt steel. When he was searching for bodies, he saw pockets of molten steel on the ground.

There are some people very educated on this topic, I'm not. But I wanted to share with the community something that I thought people would find interesting. Frankly I don't have the time to dive into the topic, I'm trying to do research in other areas.

What are your thoughts about the video?

What are the main arguments for, and against controlled demolition?

I hope I posted in the right forum. Given the nature of this topic I knew it belonged in Conspiracy Theories but I also view it as an opinion. I just hope I don't get another infraction for starting a post in the wrong sub-forum.
Click to expand...

Brilliant, thank you. Rudy Dent validates everything I've been saying for years and so much more.
 
Fledermaus said:
Evidence has been presented....

Have you a problem with it?

What evidence do you not agree with or perhaps don't understand.

Please be clear and concise.
Click to expand...

I dont see any evidence from debunkers who posted it?
 
Rudy Dent Interview

 
Fledermaus said:
Bravely mouthing TRUTHER talking points....

Are you going to spam all the threads with this?
Click to expand...

How about that,

HE IS A 30 YEAR VETERAN FIRE MARSHAL, AN EXPERT FIRST HAND WITNESS THAT CORROBORATES THE FACTS TRUTHERS ARGUE for years.

Your EVIDENCE to the contrary? ANYTHING?
 
Fledermaus said:
Covers WHAT exactly?
Click to expand...

http://www.debatepolitics.com/consp...c7-9-11-w-2152-2510-a-306.html#post1064447752

Inside Job.
Controlled Demolition.
Pull it.
Molten steel.
Explosions.
Fire mostly out.
NIST criminals.
Treason.
Jail.

Fledermaus said:
I admitted to adding the word fuel to the FUEL FIREBALL...

Yep, I admitted to that.
Click to expand...

Can't see, can't hear, don't understand, don't speak French, it's vague, ambiguous, anecdotal, where's the evidence, prove it, truther video, yoootoob, truther, truther, truther.
 
Bob0627 said:
http://www.debatepolitics.com/consp...c7-9-11-w-2152-2510-a-306.html#post1064447752

Inside Job.
Controlled Demolition.
Pull it.
Molten steel.
Explosions.
Fire mostly out.
NIST criminals.
Treason.
Jail.



Can't see, can't hear, don't understand, don't speak French, it's vague, ambiguous, anecdotal, where's the evidence, prove it, truther video, yoootoob, truther, truther, truther.
Click to expand...

What exactly does HE corroborate.?

Was he there when the "inside job" was planned?

Was he in ANY of the buildings to corroborate that the fires were almost out?

And what does HE corroborate about "pull it "?

Admit it... He present HEARSAY at best. And he is regurgitating TALKING POINTS.
 
Fledermaus said:
What exactly does HE corroborate.?

Was he there when the "inside job" was planned?

Was he in ANY of the buildings to corroborate that the fires were almost out?

And what does HE corroborate about "pull it "?

Admit it... He present HEARSAY at best. And he is regurgitating TALKING POINTS.
Click to expand...

Rudy Dent - Vietnam war veteran, 32 years as a policeman and firefighter, highly trained fire marshal (investigator in arson) and qualified expert witness (forensic detective), first responder on 9/11, saw WTC7 come down and molten steel. This is what he says in more detail:

I was there along with my fellow firefighters and there was an explosion and the building (WTC7) did come down in complete classical controlled demolition, it came down in its own footprint and there's no question about that.

Was the building pulled (per Larry Silverstein)? I was a trained fire marshal, considered an expert witness in court. We have no term that I know of that says pulling buildings, we've never done that, for him to say that, I don't know where he pulled that out of.

The issue is completely handled by Richard Gage and Architects and Engineers.

The idea that office fires caused the building to come down, if not for the seriousness, is laughable and ridiculous.

Fire never has and cannot bring down skyscrapers because it cannot burn hot enough to compromise and melt steel.

Spent the night searching for bodies and saw molten lava like pockets of molten steel with his own eyes.

This was a false flag operation.

Destruction of evidence is a crime unto itself. You must protect the crime scene.

NIST & the 9/11 Commission lied to the public. You cannot be that stupid.

Definition of a conspiracy is two or more people intentionally and knowingly committing the crime.

In law, every crime has a degree of mental culpability. Either you knowingly, intentionally, recklessly or negligently committed the act.

Was this a conspiracy? Absolutely, yes it was. Those people need to go to jail for treason.

And then there's you Fled, a self admitted liar, rather than accepting this man's eyewitness testimony based on his extensive and highly qualified background for what it is, you question everything about it, insinuating he's a liar.
 
Bob0627 said:
Rudy Dent - Vietnam war veteran, 32 years as a policeman and firefighter, highly trained fire marshal (investigator in arson) and qualified expert witness (forensic detective), first responder on 9/11, saw WTC7 come down and molten steel. This is what he says in more detail:

I was there along with my fellow firefighters and there was an explosion and the building (WTC7) did come down in complete classical controlled demolition, it came down in its own footprint and there's no question about that.

Was the building pulled (per Larry Silverstein)? I was a trained fire marshal, considered an expert witness in court. We have no term that I know of that says pulling buildings, we've never done that, for him to say that, I don't know where he pulled that out of.

The issue is completely handled by Richard Gage and Architects and Engineers.

The idea that office fires caused the building to come down, if not for the seriousness, is laughable and ridiculous.

Fire never has and cannot bring down skyscrapers because it cannot burn hot enough to compromise and melt steel.

Spent the night searching for bodies and saw molten lava like pockets of molten steel with his own eyes.

This was a false flag operation.

Destruction of evidence is a crime unto itself. You must protect the crime scene.

NIST & the 9/11 Commission lied to the public. You cannot be that stupid.

Definition of a conspiracy is two or more people intentionally and knowingly committing the crime.

In law, every crime has a degree of mental culpability. Either you knowingly, intentionally, recklessly or negligently committed the act.

Was this a conspiracy? Absolutely, yes it was. Those people need to go to jail for treason.

And then there's you Fled, a self admitted liar, rather than accepting this man's eyewitness testimony based on his extensive and highly qualified background for what it is, you question everything about it, insinuating he's a liar.
Click to expand...

So when is the court date?
If it is such a slam dunk case, Why hasn't AE911T help this person and take the case to court.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom