Wednesday, August 18, 2010

Eric Lawyer Debunked

Over at JREF, by triforcharity.

At: 39 seconds in, he asked for an investigation that follows the standards and has contempt and subpoena powers. The "Standards" he is referring to, is NFPA's guidelines. Well, as we have already established, NFPA is not a law enforcement agency, and makes no laws. See above.

At about: 40 seconds in, he says that “This should have been the most protected, preserved, over tested and thorough investigation in world history."

Well, you see it was. Fresh Kills rings a bell. The FDNY and NYPD could not logically say that nobody was to try to rescue anyone, or move anything, until this scene was completely documented. To ask that is asinine at best.


Yep. This is one of the more idiotic things that Troofers say. Remember, they claim to represent the first responders and the victims. But they would have called off all search and rescue operations and put up crime scene tape all over the site, rather than save the 17 or so people who were actually pulled out of the pile and survived.

Note as well, this post there (#3) by tfk, quoting one of the men involved in training of the canines involved in the search and rescue operation:

No explosives or incendiary devices were planted anywhere in that complex. None. Our dogs and the other EDD K9's would have alerted after the fact as well. It's what they are trained for. We staged for the two weeks we were there at the Fresh Kills landfill on Staten Island. This is where much of the structural steel was brought. Despite rumors to the contrary, chain of custody was maintained and virtually all of the steel was cataloged and vital pieces were inspected. Not a single dog ever alerted to the presence of either explosives or incendiary residue.
Not one.

Labels: , ,

12 Comments:

At 18 August, 2010 13:57, Blogger M Gregory Ferris said...

So what these dorks are saying is that he thousands on investigators from the NYPD,NYFD,FBI, BATF,New York State law enforcement or civilian investigators were all in on it too.

They expect reasonable people to believe that NYPD detectives who lost friends in the attack found evidence of explosives (which would be proof of a larger conspiracy), and yet were happy to remain silent. They expect me to believe that the FBI found evidence and had to removed from Fresh Kills to some secret gub'mint site where it was destroyed, yet the same FBI would be more than happy to leak stories of torture at Gitmo to the NY Times.

Hell, yesterday the CIA turned over video of interrogations of a key Al Qaeda operative that - technically - should have been destroyed with all of the other recordings that would have gotten them in trouble. The CIA bungled the simple act of destroying a SMALL amount of evidence, but the could make thousands of tons of steel vanish with no problem.

Troofers give me a headache.

 
At 18 August, 2010 15:07, Blogger avicenne said...

" The CIA bungled the simple act of destroying a SMALL amount of evidence, but they could make thousands of tons of steel vanish with no problem."

Absolutely. Remember that these are the same people that were able to hijack planes, crash them into buildings, collapse the structures using high tech explosives, but...ah no! we forgot to put the hijackers' names on the passenger manifest. Run for cover. They're on to us.

 
At 18 August, 2010 15:26, Blogger GuitarBill said...

"...So what these dorks are saying is that he thousands on investigators from the NYPD,NYFD,FBI, BATF,New York State law enforcement or civilian investigators were all in on it too."

You forgot the bomb sniffing dogs; obviously, according to the troofers, they were in on the conspiracy, too.

 
At 18 August, 2010 20:35, Blogger Richard Gage's Testicles said...

Say... have a look at the posts on that page by user "ergo". The syntax is reminiscent of the anonymous asshat who recently disappeared from here. The substance of the comments is basically the same (insist that official story defenders are wrong but refuse to articulate an alternative theory). And ergo joined JREF in August of 2010. Coincidence?

 
At 19 August, 2010 07:03, Blogger Billman said...

That's good deductive reasoning, RGT. I bet you're right.

But weird that they will go through the trouble of registering for an ID at moderated JREF, and won't bother to do it here where Pat just requests they have a name.

 
At 19 August, 2010 07:10, Blogger Billman said...

Reading through those posts, yeah, that Ergo is definately one of our troofers... wow.

 
At 19 August, 2010 14:06, Blogger GuitarBill said...

RGT wrote, "...have a look at the posts on that page by user 'ergo'. The syntax is reminiscent of the anonymous asshat who recently disappeared from here. The substance of the comments is basically the same (insist that official story defenders are wrong but refuse to articulate an alternative theory). And ergo joined JREF in August of 2010. Coincidence?"

Yep, I agree 100%. You found the bastard, RGT.

Good work!

 
At 19 August, 2010 15:56, Blogger Triterope said...

The substance of the comments is basically the same (insist that official story defenders are wrong but refuse to articulate an alternative theory).

That could be said of any 9-11 Truther.

 
At 19 August, 2010 23:13, Blogger angrysoba said...

Hell, yesterday the CIA turned over video of interrogations of a key Al Qaeda operative that - technically - should have been destroyed with all of the other recordings that would have gotten them in trouble. The CIA bungled the simple act of destroying a SMALL amount of evidence, but the could make thousands of tons of steel vanish with no problem.



Oh man! You're so naiive!!!1! That's called a limited hangout!!!1!!!1!11!

 
At 20 August, 2010 06:37, Blogger BG said...

Short comment on latest post from website which identifies itself as being an exponent of Pat Buchanan.

Link:

http://grand-chessboard.com/blog/2010/08/20/two-complaints-911-analysis/

 
At 20 August, 2010 06:54, Blogger ConsDemo said...

itself as being an exponent of Pat Buchanan

That is a pretty meaningless statement. Anyone can set up a website in favor a candidate, whatever they post are their views, not necessarily those of the candidate. Having said that, Buchanan has certainly attracted his share of kooks and morons over the years, so it wouldn't surprise me that he has twoof followers.

Twoofers must really be feeling down with the "ground zero mosque" debate. I've scanned a couple of the debate threads and I finding no "hey, Muslims didn't attack us, the evil US government staged 9/11" comments. Not that they weren't irrelevant before, but this certainly clear evidence of their irrelevance.

 
At 20 August, 2010 07:41, Blogger Triterope said...

Short comment on latest post from website which identifies itself as being an exponent of Pat Buchanan.

You mean, the same website you posted here before, which turned out to be run by a kooky ex-staffer?

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home