-
Posts
-
Let’s see how long it lasts on you-tube 8)
So is the bible but they still yap on about it, amazing aint it?.
Rodriguez is a proven liar.
For him to have done ALL he claims, he would need super-powers. Hence no-one (sane) takes him seriously.
@twistinmymelonman wrote:
I asked YOU what claims you had issue with, be specific. Don’t be lazy just giving a link.
It’s all explained there. Don’t be lazy by not clicking it. :)
@themaster wrote:
Hi Guys. Knew you couldn’t resist.
:D
Strange that – So did I … :)Well Rodriguez does appear to have differing versions of what happened. A critical thinker will need to view all of this information and put it in context with the greater picture. The link you put here is also nothing new and indeed has it’s very own debunker’s
It’s no great secret that a lot of dollars changed hands that day in that financial consortium, Rodriguez could well have inadvertently contradicted himself over the following years. He claims that the commission report not once mentioned his name, given how much of a ‘hero’ he was that day and a key eyewitness, why the omission?
To suggest that the only means of explosions in the basement could and were most likely to have caused the type of damage including the sounds of ‘bombs’ to have been caused by the impact and fire ball from the fuel, quite frankly defeats the whole purpose of critical thinking.
There are other materials that were potentially explosive in that complex at or below ground level that equally could have caused the ‘bomb effect’ , also there is not a single definite sign of what was responsible for those explosions.
Thanks for not resisting ~ You can go now. :P
@twistinmymelonman wrote:
You’re clearly just running your mouth, you cannot even express your own issues with what he says. Instead you give a link, and expect people to sift through an entire website. If you cannot or will not say what issues you have about his statements, why even bother to bring it up in the first place? :roll:
You asked me to clarify my statement, yes? I have done so. The fact that it’s too much for you is not really my problem.
Now, you have a choice. Sit there and whinge that being proven wrong is hard work or TRY and engage in a debate that is largely unnecessary as you’re fighting a losing battle.
@gazlan wrote:
Strange that – So did I … :)
Always a pleasure to debunk. :)
@gazlan wrote:
Well Rodriguez does appear to have differing versions of what happened. A critical thinker will need to view all of this information and put it in context with the greater picture. The link you put here is also nothing new and indeed has it’s very own debunker’s
Except, it’s not REALLY debunking is it? It’s asking questions but not bothering to find answers. You can’t actually call that evidence, can you? Can you?
@gazlan wrote:
It’s no great secret that a lot of dollars changed hands that day in that financial consortium, Rodriguez could well have inadvertently contradicted himself over the following years.
There’s no ‘could’ about it. He’s changed his story so many times over the years but he doesn’t DARE try and go back on himself; he’s making far too much money out of it.
@gazlan wrote:
He claims that the commission report not once mentioned his name, given how much of a ‘hero’ he was that day and a key eyewitness, why the omission?
Taking the word (or claims) of someone that’s a proven liar isn’t very good now is it?
@gazlan wrote:
To suggest that the only means of explosions in the basement could and were most likely to have caused the type of damage including the sounds of ‘bombs’ to have been caused by the impact and fire ball from the fuel, quite frankly defeats the whole purpose of critical thinking.
Except for the dozens of actual scientists (yeah, with proper proven degrees and letters after their names!) that have shown that the events of that day were exactly what was claimed: Two jet liners, filled with fuel and innocent passengers crashed into The World Trade Center and the impact, with the jet fuel, intense fires and the structure of the buildings made them collapse. There’s no bombs, no ‘squibs’, not any shred of proof of anything else.
@gazlan wrote:
There are other materials that were potentially explosive in that complex at or below ground level that equally could have caused the ‘bomb effect’ , also there is not a single definite sign of what was responsible for those explosions.
The floors collapsing, one by one? Just one example…
But there’s only Willie Rodriguez’s eye-witness accounts, versus dozens of others, so…
@gazlan wrote:
Thanks for not resisting ~ You can go now.[/b] :P
Why aren’t you kind. Misinformed, but kind. :)
You appear to think that one group of people be believed over another. Equally there are hundreds and now as likely thousands of academics etc challenging the ‘evidence’ put forward.
All moot of course being that the US Government acted against their own laws in having crucial crime scene evidence removed and destroyed.
It is plain to see that there were explosions in various parts of the buildings, some say before including Rodriguez and another ~ Sanchez who also maintained the building. The statements of various first responders also tell it that way.Of course, if the Government were in cahoots with A.N Other in creating this tragedy, they have in effect carried out one of the most heinous of crimes against it’s own people and as likely will get away with it.
In the greater scheme and without independent research and investigative authority, I would suggest that we have all been or could be mis-guided. Your claim of me being mis-informed is a non-sense as well you know it as either argument can be definitively ‘debunked’ and conjecture will never win an argument.
Best we concentrate on the facts, and the facts detail many anomalies, each with their own set of ‘professionals’ both for and against. To get people to think and re-think is hardly being mis-informed! So in effect, will be considered thus
Get involved in this discussion! Log in or register now to have your say!