Firefighters Urge "Peeling Of Giuliani's 9/11 Onion"

Firefighters Urge "Peeling Of Giuliani's 9/11 Onion"
Spokesman for largest Firefighters' union speaks out

There are some very pissed-off firefighters in New York
http://www.infowars.net/articles/march2007/120307Giuliani_onion.htm

and I agree with them. What Giuliani ordered, and the result, is disgusting.

What they actually said was that they wanted Giuliani's onion "pulled".

But they're New Yorkers; they sound funny when they talk.

Lovelynice said:

Firefighters Urge "Peeling Of Giuliani's 9/11 Onion"
Spokesman for largest Firefighters' union speaks out

There are some very pissed-off firefighters in New York
http://www.infowars.net/articles/march2007/120307Giuliani_onion.htm

and I agree with them. What Giuliani ordered, and the result, is disgusting.

Click to expand...

LN........ Do you really want to talk about this?

What? You don't think it's disgusting the remains of hundreds of innocent victims of the September 11 attacks are still buried in one the world's largest rubbish dumps, on Staten Island, leaving the victim's bodies rot in the ground with acres of stinking trash?

http://www.infowars.net/pictures/mar07/120307world_trade_center_debris.jpg

vetteman said:

He just laid the groundwork for a huge future Archaeological jobs program.

Click to expand...

Almost funny. Wait 20 more years.

Lovelynice said:

Firefighters Urge "Peeling Of Giuliani's 9/11 Onion"
Spokesman for largest Firefighters' union speaks out

There are some very pissed-off firefighters in New York
http://www.infowars.net/articles/march2007/120307Giuliani_onion.htm

and I agree with them. What Giuliani ordered, and the result, is disgusting.

Click to expand...

Infowars.net...yeah, there's an unbiased source.

If Rudy doesn't get the nomination, then who will?

The current list of Repub candidates is pretty weak and IMHO Rudy is the only one that would crush Hillary (if the Dems are stupid enough to throw her out there) in the presidential election.

jhuson said:

If Rudy doesn't get the nomination, then who will?

The current list of Repub candidates is pretty weak and IMHO Rudy is the only one that would crush Hillary (if the Dems are stupid enough to throw her out there) in the presidential election.

Click to expand...

I like Newt, but Hillary would probably beat him.

garbage can said:

I like Newt, but Hillary would probably beat him.

Click to expand...

Newt?

I think he appeals to the CON base and could get the nomination but I agree that there is no way he'd beat Hillary.

Newt simply has way too much baggage. And he's a scumbag and we don't need anymore of them in office.

jhuson said:

And he's a scumbag and we don't need anymore of them in office.

Click to expand...

Yup - eight years of Clinton was enough.

sticky_keyboard said:

Yup - eight years of Clinton was enough.

Click to expand...

Clinton Got a Blowjob

StellaSolaris said:

Infowars.net...yeah, there's an unbiased source.

Click to expand...

Compared to a sockpuppet like you it is.

Have you read Rudy's book?

LN, please understand: I am not a fan of the Bush administration. I voted against him, and I will vote against any candidate who approved the War in Iraq (including Hilary). I think Dubya is a frat-boy scumbag and the worst president since Harding. That said:

Were there mismanagements, fuckups, and possibly shady activities? Hell yes, there were. That's the nature of government, and particularly the nature of the Bush administration. Those guys don't just play dirty; they revel in it, and wink and nod at the cameras to hope we won't notice. Was this something that had bits and pieces knowable in advance? Yes, if people had paid attention at the right time.

But, if there were controlled explosives and this Star Chamber-style conspiracy, even taking your claims as fact, the fact would have come out before now. The American people aren't really good at keeping secrets. It's not one of our strengths. Occam's Razor says that your theory is less simple than the planes flying into the buildings, too.

My dad was in Manhattan on 9/11, although he was safe. I am close friends with people who lost friends and relatives there. I say this as a New Yorker, a diehard left-liberal, and a person who has protested against the War in Iraq out here in the Midwest and almost gotten punched for it several times: Please shut up. You don't know what the fuck you're talking about, and your barking lunacy, and that of people like you, is costing us the moral high ground.

The Bush government's incompetence, our eager willingness to not give a shit about anything and anyone even if they're asking about flying planes into buildings and how to get explosives, and our greed for material possessions and oil are the only things needed for a fuckup this colossal. Anything more than that, and you lose the plot.

I ask you this: Why does there need to be a conspiracy? Why isn't the fact that this happened and that we didn't, or wouldn't, see it coming and we reacted in the worst way possible to it enough of a sad, terrible thing? What good does it do to claim conspiracies when we've already embarrassed ourselves throughout the world, made people hate us who weren't too fond of us already, plunged ourselves into an unwinnable war, and created a mess of our own creation? Conspiracy would be a far less painful alternative than the fucked-up situation we're in, and will be in for the next twenty years at least.

fcdc said:

... I ask you this: Why does there need to be a conspiracy? ...

Click to expand...

Dude, how are you going to sell conspiracy t-shirts without a conspiracy?


http://www.infowars.com/images2/promo/shirt_injob_big.jpg


What are you? A Communist? Why do you hate free enterprise?

<--- Commie REDWAVE froggie *nods*

And that is just at Infowars. (The t-shirt, not the froggie)

fcdc said:

But, if there were controlled explosives and this Star Chamber-style conspiracy,

Click to expand...

They were.

No plane hit this building - it's a typical controlled demolition
http://xs513.xs.to/xs513/07104/building-implosion-11.gif

So is this
http://www.thewebfairy.com/killtown/images/wtc7/oslo_demo_clips.jpg

and neither did a plane hit this building...and it's an obvious controlled demolition too...
http://www.thewebfairy.com/killtown/video/wtc7/wtc7_collapse_lg.gif

and if they had the time to prepare the demo charges for this building (which would've taken weeks to do), then it was prepared for demolition BEFORE the 9-11 attacks. That makes it the smoking gun because the other two suspiciously collapsed buildings look just like controlled demolitions too...

This is a controlled demolition as well..http://xs513.xs.to/xs513/07104/building-implosion-9.gif

and according to an increasing number of physicists, engineers, demolition experts, and many other academics, this also is a controlled demolition...
http://xs513.xs.to/xs513/07104/image023.jpg


Here's another top-down controlled demolition for comparison
Didn't one of you loonies falsely claim that all controlled demolitions are from the bottom up (which I already proved was wrong?) Why yes you did!
http://oceanmirage.homestead.com/files/comparison.JPG

I've asked the crazy OCTers these questions many times over the years, on this board and others.

Please cite an event where some steel-framed hi-rise buildings collapsed straight-down into their own bases on some other day than Sept 11 2001 - without being controlled demolitions.

Also please provide a scientific study showing the cellphones can make successful calls from passenger jets flying six miles up at over 450mph without any use of an onboard cellular basestation (technology which didn't exist before 2004).

You know what? THEY NEVER CAN BACK THEIR CLAIMS!

fcdc said:

even taking your claims as fact, the fact would have come out before now. The American people aren't really good at keeping secrets. .......

Click to expand...

Now another sockpuppet pops up with a pathetic excuse.

They managed to hide the NSA for FORTY YEARS. It's an organisation with twice the staff, twice the budget of the CIA and not a word of it got into the media for FORTY YEARS.

mentioned this twice already now, guess you're a little blind and illiterate then.

It seems the next tactic when you can't argue with FACTS is to make up bullshit excuses exaggerating how many people would need to be involved.

I've seen some crazy, totally irrational excuses made up about window washers, cleaning ladies, and couriers having to be kept silent in some of the wacky excuses given GOVERNMENT SHILLS LIKE YOU. Others are only slightly more reasonable but still persist with excuses about "thousands of people" as if every single one of those people was going to know the whole story and every single detail of the entire operation. It stuns me that these fools think that anyone can take these excuses seriously, but GOVERNMENT SHILLS LIKE YOU repeat it like a magical mantra on every site, and every 9/11 ballot on this site.

Nobody except those individuals at the very top of each section of such an operation would need to know enough that their knowledge would be dangerous. Like any major black operation, there would be compartmentalisation of information. Everything on a "need to know" basis, and nothing more. Many are just going to be "following orders".

I doubt it would be anymore difficult than hiding than most other major secret intelligence operations which we never hear about until years, decades later. The NSA apparently was founded in 1949, and had more staff than the CIA, a greater budget, more facilities, and it was hidden from the USA public for nearly FORTY YEARS. Until the late 1980s, the average person didn't have a clue that the NSA even existed!

More recently, the Iran-Contra conspiracy managed to be hidden for a while too, and the first whistleblowers to that were harassed and insulted in the USA media too.

When sceptics said that the WMDs in Iraq claims were lies, they were harassed and insulted by the shills too. The USA news media went along with the lies like trained poodles.

Take a look at who controls the media. Do you think they'll give any face time to anybody who wants to speak out about the truth?

Let's look at some of the other ways, witnesses are kept quiet.

Legal gag orders; thousands of FAA and airport staff have had legal gag orders imposed on them.

Harrassment; many witnesses to Flight 93 exploding in the air have been harassed and were threatened by the FBI, told to keep quiet "while investigations were continuing" but in a very intimidating manner.

Media blackout; the mainstream USA media have ignored any witnesses who go against the official story, and generall called them "kooks", etc. They did the same tactic during the Watergate scandal, and other occassions.

Harrassment of academics; this has happened too much, and too many times, to be denied.

Harrassment of whistleblowers for other crimes; remember what happened to those people in the government who blew the whistle on the WMDs in Iraq lies? They didn't only lose their jobs, they were harrassed and insulted publicly, called "liars", "attention seekers", and "kooks".

fcdc said:

Why does there need to be a conspiracy?

Click to expand...

There doesn't NEED to be a conspiracy, but THERE WAS.

Deal with it, dear.

Pookie said:

how are you going to sell conspiracy t-shirts without a conspiracy...

Click to expand...

Oh poor stupid Pookie has lost it again!

You really are a silly dumb nutjob, aren't you? Are you trying to pretend that ONLY ONE PERSON did everything on 9/11?

If there are two or more people involved in the planning and perpetration of a criminal activity - that is a "CONSPIRACY". That means that any site that claims that 9/11 was done by more than ONE PERSON is by definition, a CONSPIRACY SITE - that includes government sites, Fox, CNN, and anything that else that you care to name.

Can you cite a single site - ANYWHERE - that says only ONE PERSON carried out 9/11?

Lovelynice said:

Oh ...

Click to expand...

Oh, you're obviously a disinfo shill for the government. It's completely obvious to anyone with COMMON SENSE that the government did this.

429truth responds to the Oakland Tribune
May 4th, 2007

Today the Oakland Tribune slammed 429truth.com. In addition to confusing this site with 429truth.org it made numerous false statements and unfair generalizations in an attempt to discredit our organization and paint its members as paranoid fools. They highlighted our most frivolous statements while ignoring the most convincing and deeply damning gathered so far. We would like to clarify their distortions and set the record straight.

* The “gas truck” which allegedly destroyed the overpass was never recovered by emergency workers. For the first time we have a crash with no vehicle.
* The driver, an immigrant named “Mosqe-Queda”, claims to have no recollection of the crash and claims to have somehow bailed out of a flaming tanker and ran away at full speed while unconscious, an explanation that strains all reasonable credibility.
* Someone within the state or federal government chose to give someone named Mosque-Queda with an extensive history of arrests a hazardous materials license that some say he should have never been given.
* Mere hours earlier there was an almost identical fire in the same exact spot.
* Government employees watched the flames and injured driver for 40 minutes without calling for help or offering assistance.
* It is not just Rosie O’Donnell who agrees that it is impossible for fire to melt steel. Numerous reputable, scientific sources confirm:
o the impossibility of burning petroleum reaching temperatures only possible with acetylene and bottled oxygen.
o 825ºC (1517ºF) is the maximum temperature of hydrocarbon fires burning in the atmosphere without pressurization or pre-heating
o Even a reduction in steel strength, as alleged by some, is unlikely to have caused the collapse.

How is it possible to believe that a tanker filled with petroleum could melt steel when 1510ºC (2750ºF) is the melting point of typical structural steel? Especially for a structure retrofitted to survive earthquake?
* The photograph supposedly depicting a mushroom cloud over Oakland was retracted two days before the Oakland Tribune published their story, yet the picture was presented as known fact and our retraction is not mentioned.
* On the evening of 4/28 and in the early morning of 4/29 at least 4000 jews conspicuously avoided the MacArthur overpass. Were they informed?

Although the Oakland Tribune and others may enjoy laughing at or ridiculing our work we will not be swayed. Unlike other websites we are serious - deadly serious - and we will not be cowed into submission by our enemies, the anti-intellectuals who are more interested in kowtowing to the “official explanation” than seeking the truth. We will not be intimidated or silenced.

Click to expand...

Are you wacky lunatics now so desperate that you think the government wouldn't collapse a bridge STRAIGHT DOWN into its own footprint before or after 4/29 without a CONTROLLED DEMOLITION being the only real reason?

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b25/pookstergrrl/429trutheb9.jpg

What's this new thing where the obviously insane refer to the sane as insane? It's disrespectful.

Pookie said:

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b25/pookstergrrl/429trutheb9.jpg

Click to expand...

That's a fake site. It was blown ages ago, and you already know this.
About the 4/29 site that you took those images from, I find this timeline rather interesting.
April 29: Bridge falls down
April 30: http://www.429truth.com is registered, up and running. (Whois)
May 1, late P.M. (next day): wingnut blogs and OCTers begin their campaign of making ridiculous comparisons between bridges and buildings.

Apart from the fact that the 429 site is an obvious fake, there's the wonderful idiocy of thinking that a bridge has anything like the structural design of a steel-framed hi-rise building.

You're just playing one of your usual little lying games.

Common aspects of the "Arabs Did It" Coincidence Theorist (eg. Pookie, Vetteman, et al....)
....
14. The coincidence theorist attempts to use the false ascribing to the other person of more impossible beliefs than their own in order to make their own impossible coincidences seem more likely by comparison.
....



Apparently you're trying to play the Ad Hominem and the "lying about what other people are saying" game again.

Your silly pretense that concrete & steel bridges are anything like similar in structure to a steel-framed hi-rise tower building actually show that you're a total fool. That bridge IS JUST A BRIDGE AND NOT A STEEL-FRAMED HI-RISE BUILDING.

The steel dowels were also 1/4" and 3/4" inch thick, which simply doesn't compare with the 3ft to 5ft thick steel columns of the Twin Towers.