Needs of the Many

Bring Your Lies & Half-Truths … I Will Destroy Them

John Edwards Says He’ll Look Into WTC 7 … Let Me Help John

Posted by Casey on May 10, 2007

One of the funniest videos to come out of the current campaign. Not only does Edwards not know what the truther is talking about, but he promised to look into it when clearly he won’t. There is no need to look into it. Sane people know that, but here is a quote from someone who was there, Deputy Chief Hayden:

Yeah. There was enough there and we were marking off. There were a lot of damaged apparatus there that were covered. We tried to get searches in those areas. By now, this is going on into the afternoon, and we were concerned about additional collapse, not only of the Marriott, because there was a good portion of the Marriott still standing, but also we were pretty sure that 7 World Trade Center would collapse. Early on, we saw a bulge in the southwest corner between floors 10 and 13, and we had put a transit on that and we were pretty sure she was going to collapse. You actually could see there was a visible bulge, it ran up about three floors. It came down about 5 o’clock in the afternoon, but by about 2 o’clock in the afternoon we realized this thing was going to collapse.

So we gathered up rollups and most of us had masks at that time. We headed toward 7. And just around we were about a hundred yards away and Butch Brandies came running up. He said forget it, nobody’s going into 7, there’s creaking, there are noises coming out of there, so we just stopped. And probably about 10 minutes after that, Visconti, he was on West Street, and I guess he had another report of further damage either in some basements and things like that, so Visconti said nobody goes into 7, so that was the final thing and that was abandoned. Firehouse: When you looked at the south side, how close were you to the base of that side? Boyle: I was standing right next to the building, probably right next to it. Firehouse: When you had fire on the 20 floors, was it in one window or many? Boyle: There was a huge gaping hole and it was scattered throughout there. It was a huge hole. I would say it was probably about a third of it, right in the middle of it. And so after Visconti came down and said nobody goes in 7, we said all right, we’ll head back to the command post. We lost touch with him. I never saw him again that day.

More eyewitness accounts here.

Advertisements

3 Responses to “John Edwards Says He’ll Look Into WTC 7 … Let Me Help John”

  1. BigFish said

    Listen, I have been following a few of your blogs and postings here and there. If you would like to know my personal position on this issue – it is “I don’t know.” I am stating this up front in order to deflect your usual approach which typically includes a series of judgments via name calling and/or other equally ignorant and/or less appealing structures of argument.

    “One of the funniest videos to come out of the current campaign. Not only does Edwards not know what the truther is talking about, but he promised to look into it when clearly he won’t. There is no need to look into it. Sane people know that”

    I am assuming that you are more than willing to title yourself as one of these “sane people.” Yet how can you justify that when you take the same type of position as any “truther”??? -so attached to your own hypothesis there is no room for error, because, well, I guess you revere yourself as a man of infallable logic.

    Is it really so clear that Edwards is not going to look into this? I did not hear him say anything to that effect, as a matter of fact he CLEARLY stated that he would look into this matter. hmmmm….your views are curious in the least.

    I’ll lay this out for you hopefully in a way that you might grasp it. There are two basic schools of thought based on 911. The “official” commissions report and all the different variations of its
    supporters such as yourself and those who question it. Let remind you that what you support, what you are so sure of, is an argument from authority – which is based on the reasoning that because something was proposed by an authority makes it so.

    This argument takes the following form:

    A came from authority.
    B does not.
    Therefore, A is true.

    It cleary, and I could cite countless events throughout history, does not constitute any form of “truth.”

    If I am following your argument throughout all of these posts correctly….you are thinking that if the official report is wrong then there must be a conspiracy afoot, in which you have cornered yourself and your opponent in a false dilemma. Which is just as not “sane” as you would propose for your opponent or “truther”

    The formal fallacy of false dilemma—also known as false choice, false dichotomy, falsified dilemma, fallacy of the excluded middle, black and white thinking, false correlative, either/or fallacy and bifurcation—involves a situation in which two alternative statements are held to be the only options, when in reality there exist one or more other options which have not been considered. The two alternatives presented are often, though not always, the two extreme points on some spectrum. Instead of such extreme simplification and wishful thinking, considering the whole spectrum, as in fuzzy logic, may be more appropriate. A typical false dilemma is the assertion “You are either for us or you are against us.” The fallacy of this type of argument is that it tries to eliminate the middle ground.

    What astounds me about you is that you are so sure of these things, your OPINIONS, that you go around thumping it like any religious fanatic carries his/her bible….preaching “truth”….which, in my opinion, puts you right up there dancing on stage with any hardcore conspiracy theorist. Thus, you have become immersed in the very element which you pride yourself on fighting….making claims like “bring your false truths, and I will destroy them”

    I am not so sure you, in particular, have the competence to make judgments on “truth” my friend.

  2. Casey said

    My approach includes a series of judgments based on facts. Name calling is reserved for those who’ve done it themselves. Nothing I’ve ever presented to you as evidence has been reputed by you … nor has there been any attempt.

    Yes, I am one of the sane people who understand science, and physics when it comes to WTC 7. I don’t take any position comparable to a truther at all. I’m not attached to “my” hypothesis … I’m attached to the factual events. Truthers make up events in order to fill gaps in their storied version of the truth. Then they find people too lazy to look into what the people involved in the attack, and rescue have to say … in order to make money off of them.

    The holier than thou mentality you’re trying to superimpose upon me is unfitting. I do not revere myself, and clearly I make mistakes. You should know by now that I have no problem atoning for those mistakes.

    Are you telling me you really believe Edwards will look into it? Doesn’t sound like you at all. You’d never believe what he said because he, like you, just doesn’t know.

    No one gets to make judgments on truth. Truth is truth, but truth does have a doppleganger hiding in the midst. This creature gives birth to conspiracy.

    I guess the statement from the fire chief above means nothing to you. He may have been there, but he doesn’t know right?

    Is that the same with the people inside the towers who had documentaries made about their struggle to get out. Do they not know?

    Maybe the police, or port authority don’t know either.

    The firemen, they are different for me. They do know … more than any of us could ever know. I believe them, and have been given no reason to not.

    I’ve always asked for one, just one piece of evidence to prove the attacks didn’t happen as the police, port authority, fireman, first responders, and victims have all said. I still don’t have one.

    Furthermore, I’ve asked you about Leslie Robertson and LERA’s statements. You promised a response several times, but never have provided one.

    On this issue, my friend, you know enough to not know … I just know.

  3. Dylan said

    Thank you for responding. I am glad we can discuss this like gentlemen.

    “My approach includes a series of judgments based on facts. Name calling is reserved for those who’ve done it themselves. Nothing I’ve ever presented to you as evidence has been reputed by you … nor has there been any attempt.”

    “Fact” is a big word. Only four letters, yet the implications are much larger than I feel comfortable wrestling with on this matter. How can I refute any “evidence” in this matter? I have little technical background. I have merely a couple college level Engineering, Physics, and Pre-Calculus classes under my belt and by no means do I feel like I can make judgements. How about you?

    “Yes, I am one of the sane people who understand science, and physics when it comes to WTC 7. I don’t take any position comparable to a truther at all. I’m not attached to “my” hypothesis … I’m attached to the factual events.”

    You are attached to “factual” events? All the way from Las Vegas? Really, I imagine you have some technical expertise at this point then – claiming to understand the physics and/or energy dynamics involved here and all. Unfortunately, there are no authorities when it comes to science – a scientist can only ever prove probability. However, if you are able to dance with the scientists investigating 911, why do you work for a Las Vegas radio station? You should teach at M.I.T. or something along those lines. And btw- some of the greatest minds to contribute to the mathematical and science fields were not “sane” by social standards. Not only “sane” people understand this stuff.

    The position you take similar to that of a “truther” is that you are so sure of things based on eye witness reports, junk science, what certain authorities have said, and what you prefer to believe – there is little room for being objective. You will find truthers dredging up the same types of arguments.

    “The holier than thou mentality you’re trying to superimpose upon me is unfitting. I do not revere myself, and clearly I make mistakes. You should know by now that I have no problem atoning for those mistakes.”

    I am more than pleased to hear this. It has seemed that you have been unwilling to compromise your opinion. Whether or not you are willing to atone for your mistakes is still yet to be proven.

    “Are you telling me you really believe Edwards will look into it? Doesn’t sound like you at all. You’d never believe what he said because he, like you, just doesn’t know.”

    What I believe is irreleative. How would you know what I sound like? This is the first time we have discussed anything like this. I am very comfortable not knowing at this point. It is honest.

    “No one gets to make judgments on truth. Truth is truth, but truth does have a doppleganger hiding in the midst. This creature gives birth to conspiracy.”

    I appreciate your honesty here. Truth is truth however, there is no bones about it. Truth would not be truth if it were not truth right? People’s perceptions of truth is another tale. People give birth to conspiracy in all ways – truth usually has little to do with it all.

    “I guess the statement from the fire chief above means nothing to you. He may have been there, but he doesn’t know right?”

    The fire chief reported a series of observations. He described a large fire, noise, a hole…ect. In my opinion, any fire chief that uses such observations for evidence of a cause is not using a professional methodology. This can be likened to an argument claiming, “there is blood coming from an area in the man’s chest, it must be from a cut.” From a medical standpoint, this claim is very important because a cut must be treated very differently than say, a bullet wound. Yet, more importantly, judgements of a cause cannot be simply made from observations – this has been proven time and time again. Beyond that, eye witness reports have little scientific bearing. If we still relied on eye witness reports – the Earth could still be argued to be flat. Oh, yeah, I so went there lol.

    “Is that the same with the people inside the towers who had documentaries made about their struggle to get out. Do they not know?”

    Haha, well, there are also mass reports and a couple documentaries of people eye-witnessing and/or being abducted by aliens. I do not see you lending them any credibility. Yes, even personal experience can be debated. However, being trapped in a building still does not conclude any type of cause for the incident. You should know that “truthers” use many eye-witness accounts for their side as well. As a matter of fact I was talking with a guy the other day about 911. He claimed to be “on the scene” when it happened saying,”I knew it was a conspiracy when it happened”….oooookay, so I asked him how he “knew” and he replied, “You could tell, I just had a feeling you know”….no I don’t know lol.

    “Maybe the police, or port authority don’t know either.”

    They know what they saw, yes I agree. Do they know the cause? They may have an idea, just like my friend that was “on the scene.” Appeals to authority are weak at best – they are just people – like any other dude “on the scene.”

    “The firemen, they are different for me. They do know … more than any of us could ever know. I believe them, and have been given no reason to not.”

    Again – the appeals to authority. If the firemen claimed to have seen Mickey Mouse running around the basement setting off bombs would you have the same faith in their statements?

    “Know” what?? Based on these observations, they know what caused the collapse? What about the fire chief pleading with people saying, “STOP…stop hauling away the evidence”???….I think I would rather hear what that guy would have to say if given the opportunity to investigate. Now that sounds like a critical thinker to me!

    If I saw a bright flash in the sky tonight would it be wise to go around thinking that aliens exist – possibly living the rest of my life in fear? Observations tend to give credit to what we, as imperfect, emotionally driven, human beings would PREFER to believe…..

    You may believe , yet you have no reason to go around preaching your opinion like it is the best thing since sliced bread. You should come to terms with the fact that what you have is an opinion – nothing more. You are still claiming to “know” all of this. In all reality I may have all I need to know what happened on 911, yet it will always be an opinion – even if it is founded in science. Even science is merely a finding of the most probable opinion.

    “I’ve always asked for one, just one piece of evidence to prove the attacks didn’t happen as the police, port authority, fireman, first responders, and victims have all said. I still don’t have one.”

    More appeals to authority. I still do not have any evidence that the Easter bunny and Santa Claus do not exist. In the beginning, all the authorities in my life told me they existed. If you watch “The Disclosure Project” by Dr. Greer you will see countless authorities including all ranks of current and former military personnel come forward to discuss their personal experiences with extraterretrial life and/or technology. Prove them wrong. “Just one piece” of evidence – just one.

    But to further entertain your claim – still none of these eye-witness accounts provide a cause for what took place on 911.

    “Furthermore, I’ve asked you about Leslie Robertson and LERA’s statements. You promised a response several times, but never have provided one.”

    Actually, you have me mistaken here. This is the first time you and I have discussed 911. You have not asked me for anything until now. Yet, I will be more than happy to pursue any form of truth with you.

    “On this issue, my friend, you know enough to not know”

    I know about enough to not know anything lol

    “… I just know.”

    This sounds preachy dude. I cannot see you, but are you waving a bible when you say that?

    Peace,
    -D

    you can hunt me down on myspace if ya want:

    http://www.myspace.com/taoji

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

 
%d bloggers like this: