By the way, you make excellent videos. You do your own soundtracks, too. Do you use midi? If so, you use really nice samples and set a nice mood. I hear the up and down strokes of the 'wha' guitar.And nice drums and bass. It all fits the video well.
@Jackblind1000 Thx, I do make my own soundtracks, with samples and live instruments. Trying to make them similar to the 'Loose Change' genre just for fun. People seem to go for those videos, I figure why not use the same techniques?
@Jackblind1000 You are arguing with yourself and wasting my time. The main entrance was South.
The stairwells in the building schematic are on the SOUTH side of the building. That is why they were damaged when the WTC 1 debris hit the SOUTH side of the building. What part of this do you not understand?????
If the firefighter's used the term 'backside' it is irrelevant to that fact. You are trying to invent a new, fictitious location for the stairwells, based on a vague comment by FDNY... :/
@AlienEntity1 According to "fema.gov/pdf/library/fema403_ch5.pdf" , "Figure 5-2" both east and west staircases are hugging the north core columns, just inside of the core columns. You are telling me this is wrong? I can't seem to locate NCSTAR 1-9.
@Jackblind1000 Whatever. They were in the core of the building, where the elevators are located, including the transfer hallways.
It is known that the debris from WTC 1 caused one elevator to be ripped right out of the shaft, which was seen by FDNY. Since the stairwells were in the areas of the elevators, it is rudimentary to understand that such a force would affect people who were in the stairwells when the tower collapsed on it.
@Jackblind1000 Anyway, I'm done arguing about this non-issue. Whatever argument you're trying to make is meaningless since there was no major facade damage on the North side. It's a non issue, and the stairwells were located in the core.
The South side damage was not seen until WTC 1 collapsed onto it, so any argument that people are making that somehow this damage was due to explosives is ridiculous and absurd.
@AlienEntity1 Who is talking about facade damage? Jennings and FDNY fireman (Jennings 2001 clip) were both referring to internal structural damage of WTC7. "I look one way, the building was there. I look the other, it was gone." You give the impression that Jennings is confused here and refers to the towers "at first glance" in his quote at 7:30. Not so. He uses singular and plural nouns properly. Use plain English not NIST analysis for interpretation. It will then make sense to you.
@AlienEntity1 Yes, finis. I will rest on that. We were misunderstanding each other. I didn't notice that you sometimes had two or three replies for my one comment, til days later, sometimes. The youtube inbox shows only the last reply that you send me. Sorry for the confusion and thanks for putting up with me.
@Jackblind1000 The main mistake you're making, based on your misinterpretation of the firefighter's comment, is that Jennings was looking out a N window and seeing some kind of massive damage. But we already know what the facade looked like, from the actual video taken when Hess was yelling out the one broken window.
Since both men testified that the stairwell instantly filled with smoke and heat, they obviously fled to the North side to escape. They wouldn't go South.... Duh.
@AlienEntity1 Am I interpreting their story correctly when I assume the window broken out by Jennings was, on the northeast corner of WTC7? I do need some knowledge of of WTC7 on 9/11.
@Jackblind1000 I can't answer as to interpretations. All I can tell you is that the FOIA footage shows Hess yelling out a broken window on the NE face. Jennings and Hess said they broke out a window.
The stairwells, according to the plans, we to the S side of the building, S of the middle-point. The elevator banks were located in the mid-point roughly.
If you have NCSTAR 1-9 you can see it on the pages I referenced.
Can you tell me why you'd interpret Barry Jennings as referring to the two towers when he says, "I look one way (left), the building was there. I look the other way (right), it was gone" 7:30
He is talking about one building, only. The building he was trapped in. He could not see the towers from that window and had no concerns that the towers were in danger of falling. There is no confusion here.
@Jackblind1000 YOu might want to direct this question to 9/11 Truthers, who insist that it 'proves' that the towers were still standing and had not fallen, so the event he experienced inside the building was the effect of demolition explosives.
But you've correctly pointed out that he couldn't have seen the towers, so when he said 'it was gone', and he was referring to one of the towers - he could not have known that.
He certainly wasn't referring to the building he was in.... that's absurd!
@Jackblind1000 The large chunk of WTC 7 was missing from the SW corner, so he couldn't have been referring to it, since he was on the North face, which was not heavily damaged from WTC 1 debris.
@AlienEntity1 The WTC7 observation is the only plausible way Jennings could look in two opposite directions and see the same building. Floor 6 stairwell fell from beneath their feet. Jennings was hanging on to a pole on floor 6. Floor 8 was the first part of the stairwell above, that was safe for them to remain. I never understood him as referring to a tower(s), doesn't make sense.. Referring to WTC7 is the only non-absurd explanation for Jennings' comment from inside that stairwell.
@Jackblind1000 Whatever. You seem to have a unique viewpoint, and I doubt you're interested in learning anything, since you've been repeating yourself.
Your view has no relevance to the reason the building fell anyway. And no truthers would agree with you, so you have little company...
@AlienEntity1 I'm trying to guess why you would think that interpretation is absurd. "He certainly wasn't referring to the building he was in.... that's absurd!"
An FDNY eyewitness involved in the rescue of Jennings and Hess said "We went through the building, we were lost. Both staircases, uh the backside was completely blown away. There was no way to access, we couldn't get to them"
Inside of the north face lower floors were heavily damaged, apparently.
@Jackblind1000 It's absurd because FDNY extensively documented the damage of the building, and the North face was not damaged. Your own quote says 'the backside' - that's the South side. Everybody in FDNY was clear about that damage.
Why you insist on reversing the testimony is beyond me. Why bother?
@AlienEntity1 The front of the building always faced south and faced the towers. Unless they changed the rules after 9/11, you can't wiggle out of this.
"We were unaware of the damage in the front of 7, because we were entering from the northeast entrance. We weren't aware of the magnitude of the damage in the front of the building. – FDNY Captain Anthony Varriale"
@Jackblind1000 Uhm, actually, on 9/11 the only way you could enter (after the collapse of the towers) was from the North Side, not the South. So when they refer to the 'backside' they obviously meant the opposite of the side they entered. Duh. That's why they couldn't access them.
You must live in an alternative universe where the context doesn't matter at all. LOL
@AlienEntity1 Their were two stairwells on the backside, Jennings and Hess were on the northwest stairwell. "When we got to the eighth floor, I started walking to one side of the building. That side of the building was gone." - Barry Jennings after climbing back from the sixth floor.
Hence; "I look one way, the building (WTC7) was there. I look the other way , it (WTC7) was gone". An FDNY fireman also verifies that same condition of WTC7, while trying to reach them.
@Jackblind1000 No. That is incorrect. The main stairwells, for example on floor 5, were on the 'front' of the building, which was the South side.
P 50, Figure 3-1 NCSTAR 1-9
There were long transfer corridors to the lower floors, but again moving up from 5 to 6 and onward, the stairwells (fig 3-3 p 53) were most DEFINITELY on the S side. Which is precisely why they impact of WTC 1 was so violently felt by Jennings and Hess, who were in one of those.
@Jackblind1000 Notice I gave you, not vague 'backside' references, but N/S orientation and page numbers from real floor plans.
This is not idle, ignorant speculation. It is fact. Please revise your thinking to reflect the facts, not your rather absurd hypothesis based on a bad misunderstanding of the structure
@Jackblind1000 nobody. Both men talked freely to the press multiple times.
Their experiences had nothing to do with the conspiracy to hijack planes and attack multiple targets. The 9/11 Commission did not look at WTC 7 since it was collateral damage. They didn't investigate WTC 3,4,5 6, Verizon bldg, Winter Garden, Fiterman Hall CUNY or any other buildings damaged by the collapses.
Why in hell would they???? To appease truthers? LMAO!
@AlienEntity1 Then why did the 911 Commission even bother taking statements from these two men? Where are these statements now? Are they available to the public? Find a grip, yourself! I'm calm.
"I had to be inside on the 23rd floor when the second plane hit" - Barry Jennings. That was 9:03am, and around 45 or more minutes off from your approximation. I feel the original eyewitness is more reliable on judging that time.
I don't understand why you are distracting support for a New York City investigation with witnesses under oath, this time. Do you fear this? The 911 Commission was a farce and hardly mentioned WTC7. There are too many Americans with questions, needing court answers.
@Jackblind1000 No, the emergency power came on while they were in the OEM. That was caused by WTC 2 collapsing, although they had no way to know that (they were well inside the building).
Jennings was wrong about that, plus, when he broke open the window and looked out, he thought the towers were standing. However, recently released FOIA video shows Mr. Hess shouting from that window, and it was on the N face. You cannot see either tower from that part of WTC 7, so Jennings was wrong about it.
@AlienEntity1 When did WTC7 lose water? The primary and backup water supply to the sprinkler systems for the lower floors relied on the city's water supply, whose lines were damaged by the collapse of WTC2 and WTC1. Yet, Hess was drenched by them? Hmmmm!.
Jennings says he watched emergency crews flee the area for both tower collapses from that window and then return.That FOIA video proves absolutely nothing inconsistent in Jenning's account. I believe him. He is consistent but Hess is not.
@Jackblind1000 There were some water tanks in the building as well which supplied sprinklers. Unfortunately they were not adequate.
The current WTC 7 has redundant standpipes, super-wide stairwells for better evacuation and more water storage onsite - for that reason.
Many changes have been made to very tall buildings since the WTC collapses. They include refuge floors with special air supplies (Shanghai), multiple load paths in case of damage etc.... extra concrete reinforcements..
@Jackblind1000 No, the emergency power came on while they were in the OEM. That was caused by WTC 2 collapsing, although they had no way to know that (they were well inside the building).
Jennings was wrong about that, plus, when he broke open the window and looked out, he thought the towers were standing. However, recently released FOIA video shows Mr. Hess shouting from that window, and it was on the N face. You cannot see either tower from that part of WTC 7, so Jennings was wrong about it.
@Jackblind1000 Unless you can explain how Jennings could see WTC 1 or WTC 2 from the window on the North face (ie facing N, while the towers were behind WTC 7 to the South), you have to admit Jennings simply couldn't have seen what he thought he did.
Actually, he does admit 'I had no way of knowing'. He was right about that. He didn't and couldn't. But truthers like yourself cannot understand context properly, because of your confirmation bias.
@AlienEntity1 I don't think they both remained at that north window, when they were trying to find another escape route from the 8th floor. Would you? I certainly wouldn't. There were probably many ways to look south on that floor. They did find a stairway from the OEM.
In that FOIA video, I only see Hess screaming there. Jennings was probably scouting for other possible escapes.
@Jackblind1000 I already told you they said they broke out a window so they could call for help. that's what the video shows, Hess yelling 'help' out the window. It's as clear as can be.
Jennings specifically says that when he broke out the window, he could see dust and papers everywhere and cars burning. That describes, perfectly, the aftermath of the WTC tower collapses. Perfectly.
But at that moment he also claims to have seen the towers. NOT possible, sorry. You can't have it both ways.
@AlienEntity1 Jennings specifically says that when he broke out the window, he could see dust and papers everywhere and cars burning. That describes, perfectly, the aftermath of the WTC tower collapses. Perfectly.
An explosion that took out the lower 7 floors of WTC7 would also do this.
@Jackblind1000 Huh? The collapse of WTC 1 was partly a direct hit on WTC 7. No major fires or damage were reported in WTC 7 until AFTER WTC 1 collapsed on it.
Your hypothesis does not reflect the facts at all.
What do you think hundreds of thousands of lbs of building crashing would feel like???? Seriously, you truthers need to give your heads a shake.
The burning vehicles and swirling papers occurred almost exclusively immediately POST collapse. You cannot twist reality to be otherwise.
@AlienEntity1 I already told you they said they broke out a window so they could call for help. that's what the video shows, Hess yelling 'help' out the window. It's as clear as can be.
That video doesn't show them breaking out that window. But Hess is at that window, and maybe at a later point..
@Jackblind1000 No, you can't see everything on youtube. That's a fact Jack. But we have a pretty clear picture of Hess, just about exactly where they appear to have broken the window (do you see other broken windows on that floor in that area? NO).
So I fail to see why you have a problem accepting this as solid corroborative evidence, except that it tends to put Jenning's perception of time out of sorts with what actually occurred. Allow him to be confused, considering the hell he went thru.
@AlienEntity1 "But at that moment he also claims to have seen the towers. NOT possible, sorry. You can't have it both ways."
Jennings actually says "I Look one way, it was there. I look the other way, the building was gone". He was talking about inside WTC7, not the towers that cannot be seen from there.
@Jackblind1000 That's my whole point. Jennings claims that the towers fell AFTER they broke out the window. The hard facts say otherwise. So the most logical and plausible cause for the event which Jennings and Hess experienced while inside the building was the direct collapse of WTC 1 onto WTC 7.
It's really not that hard to understand, if you're willing to let go of some of these bizarre urban legends. Why truthers are so hung up on this stuff is beyond reason. It's irrational belief.
@Jackblind1000 If you're going to hypothesize about what he might've done, although he didn't mention it, then you admit you simply don't know. You're trying to avoid the simple fact that the window was not in an area where they could see the towers. Don't avoid this reality, just accept it as fact (it is!).
I've checked the stairwells, they come out near that window. That's where the men were. Get over it.
@zezt Actually, a person posting as his son reported to P4911TRuth that he died of Leukemia, and his brother also predeceased him from the same disease.
Friends of the family have reported they were inundated with truthers after his death and wanted privacy.
Danny Jowenko was killed in a car accident a couple of weeks ago. People die eventually. It's unfortunate, but there it is. My best friend died of cancer 4 years ago. He was 53.
if they were trapped on the side facing opposite WTC 1, then how could the falling rubble trap them, much less destroy all means of exit from that side of the tower?? In the video i didn't see the ruble hit the north side of building 7? I'm no hardcore truth-er, just curious.
@FeelGoodinc91 Well, if you look at a schematic of the 6th floor, the stairwell was roughly halfway towards the South face, East of centre.
Damage, according to NCSTAR 1-9 Vol 1, p 176, directly S of that area, was 'window glass broken out'. Past the midway (E/W) point it was more severe, including 'granite and underlying truss damage' etc.
Also there were fires burning immediately following the WTC 1 collapse.
The stairwell was not far from this area. They escaped North from there.
@FeelGoodinc91 So, does that make sense? You should look at the diagrams. That will help.
Obviously there was heavy smoke(fires were seen immediately, Hess and Jennings commented on it as well), so they avoided it. The fires were concentrated at that time on the S side, makes sense they would head the opposite way.
@toto20091 No, you're correct, I didn't. That's mainly becuase the tower collapses began about 80 floor up, not in basements. There is zero evidence of nuclear fission materials.
The Hazmat suits you refer to. Can you provide a non-truther-website reference for your assertion that they were specifically trying to avoid radioactive 'vapors'? Please do that.
This might be a little bit off as it is related to the whole story, but very interesting version overall, plus some unexplained thing got more clear. tinyurl(DOC)com/2uejh7h
@AlienEntity1 I'm trying to keep open mind. This version explains some things none other could explain.
Regarding aliens..., I don't know. The way you use it would trigger emotional response from those conditioned to either believe in God and a human being about to enter paradise after one dies or materialists who believes that human life came from random atom recombination.
Instead please list your points why it is not possible.
@toto20091 You've also forgotten to include the intervention of Wizards and Warlocks using magic spells. That also explains everything.
And while we're at it, look into various Gods - not just the Judeo-Christian Gods, but include the Eastern Gods as well. They might have done it also.
Leave no stone unturned, and best wishes with your studies. :)
@AlienEntity1 Khalezov gives some points about human psychology that you just showed by always expecting that if nuclear, then it should be like Hiroshima. Maybe it is just my perception. Please correct me.
@toto20091 There is no point exploring the idea of a nuclear weapon with regard to the WTC collapses. There is zero evidence to support that line of inquiry.
If someone wants to present a coherent theory, and can explain how a nuke could be used without leaving evidence of melted steel - not just anecdotal reports from laymen, but metalurgical analysis by qualified people, then I'm all ears.
That won't happen, of course. That's why we might as well discuss the option that aliens attacked WTC
@AlienEntity1 Can you please clarify when Hess talks about tremendous amount of smoke much more than it had been and you comment says "before the collapse of 2nd tower"? Do you mean after 1st tower collapsed there was smoke and it was easier to breath before the 2nd tower collapsed; after which it got 'much more...' as Hess says? I got impression he talks about 5 things that happened and one of them was tremendous amount of smoke which would be event of 1st tower collapsing.
@toto20091 Sorry, missed this one. There was already smoke from the 1st tower collapse (South Tower). There is video footage which I provided, taken shortly after Tower 2 collapsed, and there are fire alarms going off in WTC 7.
Michael Hess originally stated explosions. I think Hess was told the truth, then changed his account to match the official conspiracy theory. Jennings is dead, Hess is not...
@Save0urSouls What's the point of all your denials? It doesn't make any difference - the two men reported slightly different things, there's no evidence that there were explosives planted in the buildings anyway - you truthers don't seem to comprehend this.
Jennings' own testimony contradicts itself - which is no big deal - it was a terrible day. But you twits cling onto every word as if it were God's own. In your world, only the other side can make a wrong statement. LOL
@Save0urSouls You see what you're doing? You're reading into the minds of people (or deluding yourself that you are) - you only excuse the mistatements of Jennings, but not Hess.
It's a double-standard. Both men made dubious statements, esp. Jennings with his references to stepping over bodies and seeing the towers. There's no evidence to back up either claim.
@Mr420woo@Mr420woo Jennings made quite a few statements which appear to be erroneous. He felt he was stepping over people, yet there is no evidence that there were any. Doesn't mean he didn't think there were. Dyou see the diff?
Also, both he and Hess looked outside when they climbed up and broke open a window (on the N side, near the NE corner). They both reported seeing firetrucks and cars on fire and huge amounts of swirling papers.
This can only mean that the North Tower had collapsed
@Mr420woo So when Jennings thinks he saw the towers still standing, we know he couldn't have, for 2 reasons:
1) He was facing North, and the towers were not visible from that window
2) The burning vehicles and paper prove that the tower had already collapsed - there is ample eyewitness and video evidence to show this.
Guess what? recently released FOIA footage shows Hess shouting out of the window. So we KNOW where they were. Many truthers have falsely claimed they were somewhere else.
@Mr420woo That's where I lose patience, in that truthers simply make things up, with no evidence (claiming the window was on either the W or E face, which is false), to try to prove that Barry could have seen the towers when he looked out the window.
Yet Jennings himself admits that he 'had no way of knowing', so he is apparently confused. Big deal. So he was confused. Let him rest in peace, for crying out loud.
@Save0urSouls Here's another good example: many firefighters testified that the building was leaning over, was creaking, was going to collapse - but of course you ignore all of this, and focus on just the statements that support your preconceived conclusion and conspiracy beliefs.
You'd rather protect a myth than accept the truth it seems. The firefighters saw the building degrading over hours. The FDNY thought it was going to collapse.
it is so funny to me how people listen to whatever is said and dismiss the facts. Are the truthers all right? No but i dont listen to what the goverment says either. To all you people who say that because of fire wtc7 came down your fools. go back and look at oklahoma city bombing and compare that building to wtc7 now which one should of fallin?
if that stupid comment was meant for me then all I can say is be gone. I dont particularly like dealing with know nothings anyway, especially ones that are full of shit about what their stance is.
As for bombs you just assume everything that gets consumed in fires and bursts is a bomb.
But youre clueless and gutless to boot sneaking in comments w/o using the reply.
Only nutless gutless worms do that.
Grow some balls and get the sand out of your vagina
Damn, was just joking with you, I didn't mean to get to you that much. Calm down, wipe away the tears. If you are a worm with a vagina, those are the least of your problems.
At about 5:57 in my video, Michael Hess is describing the events in the stairwell, as a firsthand eyewitness. He says 'The building began to shake' and the stairwell filled up with a 'tremendous amount of dust and smoke'.
This is entirely consistent with being hit by a 1300 ft flaming tower, but not consistent with a bomb.
MultiBlinkey is not emotionally ready to accept these facts, as the implications are obvious.
It is sad how people ignore Hess as if he didn't exist. Very sad.
. We can assume for arguments sake that he did receive the call about a cessna crashing into the twin tower WHILE he was in his car, on the way to work with traffic being "great". You say that the call could have been between 8:50-9am. I say BS, I would say between 8:46-8:50am b/c of his position he would be one of the first to be notified. The 9:10-9:20am is again a time that you pulled out of your ass. Do you know how long it takes him to get from A to B? You don't know what A is? Revise it.
Do your own frigging analysis then and make your own video.
Stop whining to me about it, dude.
You still have completely missed the point that the OEM wasn't evacuated until the time between 9:30am and 9:45am.
So Jennings and Hess didn't get there around 9am, did they? Use your brain man.
Your obstinacy is bordering on stupidity. For real. You hang on every word of Jennings as though it were God's own word, yet ignore or dismiss everything which opposes it.
Later, Jennings changed his tune and couldn't be certain about the people. He didn't feel confident about it any more.
Instead of gracefully accepting his apparent honesty (he really didn't know for sure) you have to construct yet another dumb conspiracy idea, out of your rear end, that he was threatened.
Now run along and bother someone else, kid. You're becoming annoying.
One thing I would reword is that WTC7 wasn't necessarily on fire after WTC2 collapsed, but there was dust and smoke.
The smoke was probably from WTC2, which obviously was on fire when it collapsed.
Both Hess and the worker in the lobby mention smoke, but no bomb. The worker doesn't say 'a bomb went off', he says 'the side of the building come down?'
He recognized that it was a building collapse.
And you don't see any dead bodies in the lobby, nor does he mention any.
When was it that Jennings mentioned that it was very very hot? That's right, as soon as he got to the eighth floor. We don't know how many bombs went off in WTC 7, but I'm guessing a lot did. Jennings is one out of more people that reported multiple explosions going off in WTC 7. You can find more footage on youtube and other websites that have witnesses saying bombs went off in WTC 7. Take your own advice, and do some more research.
You guess wrong. There is no evidence of even a single 'bomb'. There is direct, irrefutable evidence of a 500,000 ton building collapsing on WTC7 though.
Sorry, but that trumps your speculation. Again, noises are not bombs per se. You need more than that to prove this idea, which you do not have.
No bombs were seen. No bomb effects were seen. No sounds of explosions were reported by staff in the lobby, for example, or by Michael Hess.
Who started the no bodies myth? That's right, you did. Jennings, Hess and Firefighters had to avoid stepping on bodies as they walked down the stairs, out of respect, and because it must be unnerving to step on a corpse.
The reason your video is full of wild speculation is because you don't know from his testimony if he received the phone call while he was on his way to work, or from his house. You also don't know where he was driving from. You do know that by his estimation traffic was excellent, you have no idea how long it took him to park or how long it takes him to go up and down an elevator to 23rd floor. You also don't know when he received the phone call, You pulled the 45 minute figure out of your A**
Whoops. There you go again. He said he was driving when he received the phone call. So unless he recalled wrong, that's what happened.
But we do have an idea how long it would take to park, and to probably have discussions once he arrived at the building. It wouldn't take place in an instant.
Since we already know that the OEM was evacuated sometime after 9:30am, we know he wasn't there yet.
Wild speculation is when you don't have anything to corroborate. But we do.
He never said he was driving when he received the call. He said he was driving to work and that he had received a call in two separate statements, it's speculation as to when and where he received it. you said in an earlier comment that there were people in the OEM up until approx. 9:30am, now you are changing your timeline.
Fine, if you can't accept ''I was on my way to work, traffic was excellent.I received a call' as a simple, linear statement of events, then apply the same hyper-skepticism to everything he says.
You will find that his whole testimony falls apart if you do so.
At least you're attempting to be skeptical, even though you don't appear to understand how to be critical and sort thru info very well.
My timeline is based on multiple reports about the evacuation. One is 9:30am, the other is 9:45am. I accept the range of both, then corroborate with the fact the J and H arrived AFTER evacuation, but while coffee was still hot.
They then report that the lights went out. This happened (according to Con Edison) at 10am when WTC2 collapsed.
That's how we construct a more accurate timeline. Do you get it now?
What error? Do you know how long it took him to get up into the 23rd floor? Saying he got up there at 9:45am is speculation on your part, I'm not saying it's necessarily poor speculation, but it still is speculation. Do we know how long it would have taken him to get down to the 6th floor? No. Also, He said that someone had called him and told him that a small cessna had hit. He never said a small cessna had hit.
We know that the OEM was evacuated sometime between 9:30 and 9:45, so Jennings got there sometime after that point.
We do know that he wasn't there at 9:05am, nor at 9:15am.
So that's why you use a timeline which can be corroborated against other evidence. It's not that complicated.
And when he says 'I had no way of knowing' that the firemen ran away because the towers were falling, he is speculating. When he says 'That's when the tower fell' he is speculating, because he didn't see it happen.
Yup. But it couldn't be the case, since the vehicles were already burning when they broke the window.
Hess doesn't make that error. That's a good reason not to ignore him. Which is what truthers chronically do - they simply can't handle Hess being there and not backing up Jennings' version.
2 people, both eyewitnesses, with differing stories. That's human nature. Eyewitnesses can make mistakes under stress, this is well understood.
Ok, if he claims that it looked like lobby was destroyed by King Kong(metaphor for explosion) then why wouldn't vehicles in the area catch fire? Trauma victims initial testimony might have holes, but the interview with the loose change people was years later.
Did I really get to you that much by bursting your bubble? I concede that I made a mistake in stating no structural damage was sustained via collapse, but I was at least partially correct in saying that Fire alone is what brought it down, because NIST maintains that even without the damage to the lower seven lower floors exterior columns, 7 would have collapsed due to fire alone. You can go back to living in your black and white world of truther's and debunkers.
I hate saying this but, this statement is very childish, and if you are twelve I apologize. I obviously care about the facts as well, otherwise I wouldn't bother getting into a discussion because it would serve me no purpose. I don't discuss the events of 9/11 to prove myself right or someone else wrong(at least that is not my main goal), I do so to gain a better understanding of the events.
If I had a dollar for every doofus that blusters on with truther mythology, bereft of critical thinking skills, I'd be rich.
Unfortunately, I don't get paid to banter endlessly with people like yourself.
You accuse me of living in a black and white world, as if I don't have the sophistication to see and accept uncertainty, yet it is you who seems to have trouble grasping uncertainty.
Look in the mirror.
I made the video to demonstrate the conflicting testimony and sift thru it. You attack it.
If you are satisfied with your work, that's your problem. You only accept the official timeline and disregard the pieces of Barring's testimony that don't support your hypothesis. I'm not saying you are flat out wrong about your timeline, but it is obvious that some of the timeline in your video is speculation, only accentuated by the fact you make approximations. You may be absolutely correct about the timeline. It still doesn't explain what happened on the 6th floor, among other things.
You attack and dismiss my efforts as if you could do better.
Yet you have done nothing. You have produced no video, you have done very little basic research, yet you feel qualified (thru some level of arrogance I can only imagine) to lecture me.
It is very easy to attack and criticize. Talk is cheap. You came out aggressively denouncing my work, I will defend my work. Case closed.
You have every right to defend your work. I am doing you a favor by questioning it. I have actually done a lot of research, but I'd never focused on the timeline for building 7, doesn't mean I'm not familiar with most of it. I came here to not only discuss the timeline, but it seems you are only interested in the timeline since you haven't answered to anything else I have said. Either way, I look forward to continuing our conversation, case isn't closed, as hasty as you'd like to be in life.
They are starting to crack my friend. They are experiencing cognitive dissonance at the moment. They will get my respect when they admit the truth. The truth is overwhelming and is starting to invade their minds because it's just too obvious at this stage to insist that the towers didn't turn to dust from explosives. '
I rest my case. You are a deceptive person. You are indeed an arrogant truther. LOL
I am not a deceptive person. I have my moments like anyone else. If I was deceptive I would have already deleted that comment, because it has been thrown in my face multiple times already. I'm not going to deny that I get emotional on this subject, and that I have deeply rooted beliefs(doesn't mean I can't admit I'm mistaken or that I can't change my mind). I am being honest when I say that I am interested in discussing 9/11 with people who have an opposing view to gain a better understanding.
He says he could see the building standing and then it was gone(From eighth floor), after that he says he had no way of knowing that it was coming down, but I think that's because he was looking down at the firefighters instead of up at the building. He was on the North side of WTC 7 which means that he had a view of the tower from that side, and it explains why he'd say the South Tower was still standing, How would he confuse the two towers?
A building falling down onto another building does not cause floors to Blow up and send people flying upwards and backwards. Resorting to personal attacks when it doesn't go your way? Fine by me. How many times have you watched the WTC 1 collapse? Yes the explosives in 1 did send some debri flying towards 7, but it didn't cause the floor underneath him to blow up.
Watch my video. Listen to Hess' explanation. Learn. He describes the event slightly differently from Jennings.
You are focusing too much on Jennings' exact wording and missing the big picture. People speak in metaphors, they don't always use words accurately.That's a fact.
To focus on the full picture you have to take in the Exact wording as well as the gist of the wording and overlay the two as well as incorporate it and corroborate it with other testimonies. Something you failed to do correctly. You omit and cherry pick in your video. Be a man and admit it.
'To focus on the full picture you have to take in the Exact wording as well as the gist of the wording and overlay the two as well as incorporate it and corroborate it with other testimonies.'
Suit yourself, you still have the right to defend yourself, unless that has become too difficult. You are the expert who was going to walk me through the timeline via comments(since you have already graciously done so with your video). Thanks for the advice, I will make sure to follow it. Don't give up on making videos, now would be a good time to revise this one, perhaps dust it up a little, no harm in doing so correct? I appreciate your hard work here, I Truly mean that.
If I thought it needed revision I'd consider it, although reauthoring a video means a brand new title, comments, tags and everything else. That's how youtube works.
The main points of the video are simply that Jennings' perception of the time doesn't actually fit with other known (verifiable) facts from several sources.
Most notably the time the OEM shut down (after 9:30am), and the time when Jennings and Hess wer in the stairwell (Jennings erroneously thght it was WTC2 collapsed)
You mean when they were going back up the stairwell ? Because he says in the video that both buildings collapsed while he was trapped on the eighth floor,
It is inescapable that the massive event which occurred while they were attempting to descend (6th floor) had to be the collapse of WTC1. There is just no other plausible explanation, given their own observations once they broke a window.
For some reason Jennings didn't seem to realize that the towers had already collapsed at that point, but Hess did not share this opinion.
Jennings himself says 'I had no way of knowing', yet made an assumption.
As my video points out, when they broke windows, there was a great deal of dust and debris in the air, as well as burning emergency vehicles.
It is not possible that this could have been before the tower collapses, as those conditions simply did not exist before 10:28 am.
So Jennings' own observations contradict his own timeline. Hess confirms the burning vehicles, which confirms that it was past 10:28 when they went back up the stairwell to get air.
Before either tower collapsed there were still emergency personnel in the building (up until approximately 9:30 or so in the OEM itself) so they would have witnessed explosions. There's no evidence that happened, so it doesn't fit.
Also, a direct bomb blast in the stairwell would have produced probably fatal injuries to Jennings and Hess, and would have been registered by seisographs closeby.
Again none of those things happened, making the scenario very unlikely.
He never says direct bomb in the stair well. He says explosion from below collapses the floor and throws him back. As far as other emergency personnel, they could have died, and that still leaves a 28 minute window with no one else in the building. Micheal even says to Jennings while they are on the 23rd floor that they have to leave because they are the only one's inside the building. This is before they get to 6th floor via stairs.
I'm not sure what you mean by 'no one else in the building'. There was clearly a person in the building, appearing on the video, after 10am.
This was directly after WTC2 collapsed. We presume Jennings and Hess were waiting around on the 23rd floor (Jennings made several phone calls of unknown duration). And the lights flickered and elevators stopped working while they were in the OEM.
That places them there as WTC2 collapsed. Which is why Hess mentioned smoke in the stairwell.
I was saying that Jennings said that Hess ran into the room he was in and said that "We gotta get out, we are the only one's left in the building" (I never said it's a fact they were the only ones in the building, how many times do I have to correct you?) he had just been told on the phone to leave by someone else. You like to say the trauma jumbled his mind, but people do recover from traumatic experiences, and with it their memory. He also made a few calls of UNKNOWN duration.
You are correcting yourself, not me. I was referring you to your repeated claims that the building was evacuated, so nobody else was there except the two men.
That never was true. That's why you are correcting your own statements, so give yourself all the credit if you want.
Its a fact that the building was not empty. there were workers there.
ok, let me repeat myself. I never claimed that there was no one else in the building. I clearly said twice(this is the third time) that that is what HESS SAID.
There are NY firefighters that say that they heard and felt bombs in WTC 1,2 and 7. How is Jennings going to confuse a dead body(he emphasizes this and he alone mentions it, no one misconstrued anything), and why would a firefighter say don't look down while walking down STAIRS? It just won't fit for you.
People described explosions, but nobody saw a bomb. You need to be careful about metaphors. They also said it sounded like a train. Does that mean there was also a train there? You don't see the absurdity of literal interpretation of metaphor.
'Explosion' is not a description exclusive to a bomb. It can just mean 'a loud noise'.
Jennings emphatically says he never saw any dead bodies. He ASSUMED that he was stepping over people, but he didn't see.
Do you notice how he emphasizes the fact that he was stepping over bodies, the FEELING of it? What did he mistake that feeling with? He didn't see the towers collapse, but he said South Tower was still standing while he was back on the 8th floor. He was also adamant about how he knows what he heard and that he didn't mistake explosions with anything else. Do you honestly think that people were using explosion as a metaphor? What are you smoking?
It's great that you finally are grasping the inconsistencies in Jennings' statements. Good for you.
Now you realize that, just as he couldn't have seen the towers collapse (since they had already collapsed by the time he and Hess broke the window), yet he THOUGHT he saw the towers collapse, he also THOUGHT there were bodies, but didn't actually see any.
Cut him some slack. It was a miserable day for him and Hess. But Hess didn't see any bodies, and he was there also. Nor did the firefighters
We simply accept his testimony was inaccurate. The agenda is to reconcile known facts with his observations and learn which observations were in fact wrong.
I have already described the process in great detail, there is no need for you to mischaracterize the process. There is no hidden agenda. I'm only interested in the facts and truth, not mythology.
If that's not convenient for you, I'm sorry.
The myth is that he witnessed bombs going off before the towers fell. The reality is different.
There is no 'official story'. There is just the facts of the matter, that's all.
Showing that Jennings and Hess broke a window and saw the aftermath of the WTC1 collapse is a simple exercise in discovering and following the facts.
It proves that Jennings claim was wrong. That is a fact which stands above rumor, innuendo and myth.
If you prefer myth, then be my guest. That's your decision. There is no evidence of bombs in WTC7, direct or otherwise. Never has been, and likely never will be.
By the way, you make excellent videos. You do your own soundtracks, too. Do you use midi? If so, you use really nice samples and set a nice mood. I hear the up and down strokes of the 'wha' guitar.And nice drums and bass. It all fits the video well.
Jackblind1000 4 months ago
@Jackblind1000 Thx, I do make my own soundtracks, with samples and live instruments. Trying to make them similar to the 'Loose Change' genre just for fun. People seem to go for those videos, I figure why not use the same techniques?
AlienEntity1 4 months ago in playlist 9/11 debunking
back = north and front = south at WTC7
I can give you more firefighter's testimony to show you, this is trivial.
Jackblind1000 4 months ago
@Jackblind1000 You are arguing with yourself and wasting my time. The main entrance was South.
The stairwells in the building schematic are on the SOUTH side of the building. That is why they were damaged when the WTC 1 debris hit the SOUTH side of the building. What part of this do you not understand?????
If the firefighter's used the term 'backside' it is irrelevant to that fact. You are trying to invent a new, fictitious location for the stairwells, based on a vague comment by FDNY... :/
AlienEntity1 4 months ago
@AlienEntity1 According to "fema.gov/pdf/library/fema403_ch5.pdf" , "Figure 5-2" both east and west staircases are hugging the north core columns, just inside of the core columns. You are telling me this is wrong? I can't seem to locate NCSTAR 1-9.
Jackblind1000 4 months ago
@Jackblind1000 Whatever. They were in the core of the building, where the elevators are located, including the transfer hallways.
It is known that the debris from WTC 1 caused one elevator to be ripped right out of the shaft, which was seen by FDNY. Since the stairwells were in the areas of the elevators, it is rudimentary to understand that such a force would affect people who were in the stairwells when the tower collapsed on it.
AlienEntity1 4 months ago
@Jackblind1000 Good grief. You haven't got a copy of NCSTAR 1-9 yet? Do you know how to use google???
There was damage on 'Floors 5 and 6, the full floor span between the South face and the core between columns 19 and 20'
p 182
p185 describes the extent of damage on the 8th and 9th floors, about 1/3 the way into the building, right to the core.
That is direct evidence of major structural damage, very close to stairwells. Not DIRECTLY on them, no. The men probably would've died in that case
AlienEntity1 4 months ago
@Jackblind1000 Anyway, I'm done arguing about this non-issue. Whatever argument you're trying to make is meaningless since there was no major facade damage on the North side. It's a non issue, and the stairwells were located in the core.
The South side damage was not seen until WTC 1 collapsed onto it, so any argument that people are making that somehow this damage was due to explosives is ridiculous and absurd.
That's all I'm going to engage in this. Finis.
AlienEntity1 4 months ago
@AlienEntity1 Who is talking about facade damage? Jennings and FDNY fireman (Jennings 2001 clip) were both referring to internal structural damage of WTC7. "I look one way, the building was there. I look the other, it was gone." You give the impression that Jennings is confused here and refers to the towers "at first glance" in his quote at 7:30. Not so. He uses singular and plural nouns properly. Use plain English not NIST analysis for interpretation. It will then make sense to you.
Jackblind1000 4 months ago
@AlienEntity1 Yes, finis. I will rest on that. We were misunderstanding each other. I didn't notice that you sometimes had two or three replies for my one comment, til days later, sometimes. The youtube inbox shows only the last reply that you send me. Sorry for the confusion and thanks for putting up with me.
Jackblind1000 4 months ago
@Jackblind1000 The main mistake you're making, based on your misinterpretation of the firefighter's comment, is that Jennings was looking out a N window and seeing some kind of massive damage. But we already know what the facade looked like, from the actual video taken when Hess was yelling out the one broken window.
Since both men testified that the stairwell instantly filled with smoke and heat, they obviously fled to the North side to escape. They wouldn't go South.... Duh.
AlienEntity1 4 months ago
@AlienEntity1 Am I interpreting their story correctly when I assume the window broken out by Jennings was, on the northeast corner of WTC7? I do need some knowledge of of WTC7 on 9/11.
Jackblind1000 4 months ago
@Jackblind1000 I can't answer as to interpretations. All I can tell you is that the FOIA footage shows Hess yelling out a broken window on the NE face. Jennings and Hess said they broke out a window.
The stairwells, according to the plans, we to the S side of the building, S of the middle-point. The elevator banks were located in the mid-point roughly.
If you have NCSTAR 1-9 you can see it on the pages I referenced.
AlienEntity1 4 months ago
3 QUESTIONS 911 TRUTHERS DON'T WANT YOU TO ASK THEM:
How many times has Loose Change been edited for errors and re-released?
If the US invaded Afghanistan to build an oil pipeline, please explain why there has been absolutely no construction on it in almost ten years?
How could Barry Jennings be murdered if he died of leukemia in a hospital?
ctcole77 4 months ago
3 QUESTIONS 911 TRUTHERS DON'T WANT YOU TO ASK THEM:
How many times has Loose Change been edited for errors and re-released?
If the US invaded Afghanistan to build an oil pipeline, please explain why there has been absolutely no construction on it in almost ten years?
How could Barry Jennings be murdered if he died of leukemia in a hospital?
ctcole77 4 months ago
Can you tell me why you'd interpret Barry Jennings as referring to the two towers when he says, "I look one way (left), the building was there. I look the other way (right), it was gone" 7:30
He is talking about one building, only. The building he was trapped in. He could not see the towers from that window and had no concerns that the towers were in danger of falling. There is no confusion here.
Jackblind1000 4 months ago
@Jackblind1000 YOu might want to direct this question to 9/11 Truthers, who insist that it 'proves' that the towers were still standing and had not fallen, so the event he experienced inside the building was the effect of demolition explosives.
But you've correctly pointed out that he couldn't have seen the towers, so when he said 'it was gone', and he was referring to one of the towers - he could not have known that.
He certainly wasn't referring to the building he was in.... that's absurd!
AlienEntity1 4 months ago
@Jackblind1000 The large chunk of WTC 7 was missing from the SW corner, so he couldn't have been referring to it, since he was on the North face, which was not heavily damaged from WTC 1 debris.
AlienEntity1 4 months ago
@AlienEntity1 The WTC7 observation is the only plausible way Jennings could look in two opposite directions and see the same building. Floor 6 stairwell fell from beneath their feet. Jennings was hanging on to a pole on floor 6. Floor 8 was the first part of the stairwell above, that was safe for them to remain. I never understood him as referring to a tower(s), doesn't make sense.. Referring to WTC7 is the only non-absurd explanation for Jennings' comment from inside that stairwell.
Jackblind1000 4 months ago
@Jackblind1000 Whatever. You seem to have a unique viewpoint, and I doubt you're interested in learning anything, since you've been repeating yourself.
Your view has no relevance to the reason the building fell anyway. And no truthers would agree with you, so you have little company...
AlienEntity1 4 months ago
@AlienEntity1 I'm trying to guess why you would think that interpretation is absurd. "He certainly wasn't referring to the building he was in.... that's absurd!"
An FDNY eyewitness involved in the rescue of Jennings and Hess said "We went through the building, we were lost. Both staircases, uh the backside was completely blown away. There was no way to access, we couldn't get to them"
Inside of the north face lower floors were heavily damaged, apparently.
Jackblind1000 4 months ago
@Jackblind1000 It's absurd because FDNY extensively documented the damage of the building, and the North face was not damaged. Your own quote says 'the backside' - that's the South side. Everybody in FDNY was clear about that damage.
Why you insist on reversing the testimony is beyond me. Why bother?
AlienEntity1 4 months ago
@AlienEntity1 The front of the building always faced south and faced the towers. Unless they changed the rules after 9/11, you can't wiggle out of this.
"We were unaware of the damage in the front of 7, because we were entering from the northeast entrance. We weren't aware of the magnitude of the damage in the front of the building. – FDNY Captain Anthony Varriale"
Jackblind1000 4 months ago
@Jackblind1000 Uhm, actually, on 9/11 the only way you could enter (after the collapse of the towers) was from the North Side, not the South. So when they refer to the 'backside' they obviously meant the opposite of the side they entered. Duh. That's why they couldn't access them.
You must live in an alternative universe where the context doesn't matter at all. LOL
AlienEntity1 4 months ago
@AlienEntity1 Their were two stairwells on the backside, Jennings and Hess were on the northwest stairwell. "When we got to the eighth floor, I started walking to one side of the building. That side of the building was gone." - Barry Jennings after climbing back from the sixth floor.
Hence; "I look one way, the building (WTC7) was there. I look the other way , it (WTC7) was gone". An FDNY fireman also verifies that same condition of WTC7, while trying to reach them.
Same page so far?
Jackblind1000 4 months ago
@Jackblind1000 No. That is incorrect. The main stairwells, for example on floor 5, were on the 'front' of the building, which was the South side.
P 50, Figure 3-1 NCSTAR 1-9
There were long transfer corridors to the lower floors, but again moving up from 5 to 6 and onward, the stairwells (fig 3-3 p 53) were most DEFINITELY on the S side. Which is precisely why they impact of WTC 1 was so violently felt by Jennings and Hess, who were in one of those.
Now r we on the sm page? Stairwells = front
AlienEntity1 4 months ago
@Jackblind1000 Notice I gave you, not vague 'backside' references, but N/S orientation and page numbers from real floor plans.
This is not idle, ignorant speculation. It is fact. Please revise your thinking to reflect the facts, not your rather absurd hypothesis based on a bad misunderstanding of the structure
AlienEntity1 4 months ago
'The 911 Ommision Committee" took Barry Jennings and Michael Hess's.statements. Who suppressed them?.
Jackblind1000 4 months ago
@Jackblind1000 nobody. Both men talked freely to the press multiple times.
Their experiences had nothing to do with the conspiracy to hijack planes and attack multiple targets. The 9/11 Commission did not look at WTC 7 since it was collateral damage. They didn't investigate WTC 3,4,5 6, Verizon bldg, Winter Garden, Fiterman Hall CUNY or any other buildings damaged by the collapses.
Why in hell would they???? To appease truthers? LMAO!
AlienEntity1 4 months ago
@AlienEntity1 Then why did the 911 Commission even bother taking statements from these two men? Where are these statements now? Are they available to the public? Find a grip, yourself! I'm calm.
Jackblind1000 4 months ago
@Jackblind1000 You're ignoring the fact that their testimony is publicly avialable from other sources. Stop being silly.
The commission didn't publish their stories. So what? We already have their stories. You are trying to invent an issue where there isn't one.
AlienEntity1 4 months ago
"I had to be inside on the 23rd floor when the second plane hit" - Barry Jennings. That was 9:03am, and around 45 or more minutes off from your approximation. I feel the original eyewitness is more reliable on judging that time.
I don't understand why you are distracting support for a New York City investigation with witnesses under oath, this time. Do you fear this? The 911 Commission was a farce and hardly mentioned WTC7. There are too many Americans with questions, needing court answers.
Jackblind1000 5 months ago
@Jackblind1000 No, the emergency power came on while they were in the OEM. That was caused by WTC 2 collapsing, although they had no way to know that (they were well inside the building).
Jennings was wrong about that, plus, when he broke open the window and looked out, he thought the towers were standing. However, recently released FOIA video shows Mr. Hess shouting from that window, and it was on the N face. You cannot see either tower from that part of WTC 7, so Jennings was wrong about it.
AlienEntity1 5 months ago
@AlienEntity1 When did WTC7 lose water? The primary and backup water supply to the sprinkler systems for the lower floors relied on the city's water supply, whose lines were damaged by the collapse of WTC2 and WTC1. Yet, Hess was drenched by them? Hmmmm!.
Jennings says he watched emergency crews flee the area for both tower collapses from that window and then return.That FOIA video proves absolutely nothing inconsistent in Jenning's account. I believe him. He is consistent but Hess is not.
Jackblind1000 5 months ago
@Jackblind1000 There were some water tanks in the building as well which supplied sprinklers. Unfortunately they were not adequate.
The current WTC 7 has redundant standpipes, super-wide stairwells for better evacuation and more water storage onsite - for that reason.
Many changes have been made to very tall buildings since the WTC collapses. They include refuge floors with special air supplies (Shanghai), multiple load paths in case of damage etc.... extra concrete reinforcements..
AlienEntity1 4 months ago
@Jackblind1000 No, the emergency power came on while they were in the OEM. That was caused by WTC 2 collapsing, although they had no way to know that (they were well inside the building).
Jennings was wrong about that, plus, when he broke open the window and looked out, he thought the towers were standing. However, recently released FOIA video shows Mr. Hess shouting from that window, and it was on the N face. You cannot see either tower from that part of WTC 7, so Jennings was wrong about it.
AlienEntity1 5 months ago
@Jackblind1000 Unless you can explain how Jennings could see WTC 1 or WTC 2 from the window on the North face (ie facing N, while the towers were behind WTC 7 to the South), you have to admit Jennings simply couldn't have seen what he thought he did.
Actually, he does admit 'I had no way of knowing'. He was right about that. He didn't and couldn't. But truthers like yourself cannot understand context properly, because of your confirmation bias.
AlienEntity1 5 months ago
@AlienEntity1 I don't think they both remained at that north window, when they were trying to find another escape route from the 8th floor. Would you? I certainly wouldn't. There were probably many ways to look south on that floor. They did find a stairway from the OEM.
In that FOIA video, I only see Hess screaming there. Jennings was probably scouting for other possible escapes.
Jackblind1000 5 months ago
@Jackblind1000 I already told you they said they broke out a window so they could call for help. that's what the video shows, Hess yelling 'help' out the window. It's as clear as can be.
Jennings specifically says that when he broke out the window, he could see dust and papers everywhere and cars burning. That describes, perfectly, the aftermath of the WTC tower collapses. Perfectly.
But at that moment he also claims to have seen the towers. NOT possible, sorry. You can't have it both ways.
AlienEntity1 5 months ago
@AlienEntity1 Jennings specifically says that when he broke out the window, he could see dust and papers everywhere and cars burning. That describes, perfectly, the aftermath of the WTC tower collapses. Perfectly.
An explosion that took out the lower 7 floors of WTC7 would also do this.
Jackblind1000 4 months ago
@Jackblind1000 Huh? The collapse of WTC 1 was partly a direct hit on WTC 7. No major fires or damage were reported in WTC 7 until AFTER WTC 1 collapsed on it.
Your hypothesis does not reflect the facts at all.
What do you think hundreds of thousands of lbs of building crashing would feel like???? Seriously, you truthers need to give your heads a shake.
The burning vehicles and swirling papers occurred almost exclusively immediately POST collapse. You cannot twist reality to be otherwise.
AlienEntity1 4 months ago
@AlienEntity1 I already told you they said they broke out a window so they could call for help. that's what the video shows, Hess yelling 'help' out the window. It's as clear as can be.
That video doesn't show them breaking out that window. But Hess is at that window, and maybe at a later point..
Jackblind1000 4 months ago
@Jackblind1000 No, you can't see everything on youtube. That's a fact Jack. But we have a pretty clear picture of Hess, just about exactly where they appear to have broken the window (do you see other broken windows on that floor in that area? NO).
So I fail to see why you have a problem accepting this as solid corroborative evidence, except that it tends to put Jenning's perception of time out of sorts with what actually occurred. Allow him to be confused, considering the hell he went thru.
AlienEntity1 4 months ago
@AlienEntity1 "But at that moment he also claims to have seen the towers. NOT possible, sorry. You can't have it both ways."
Jennings actually says "I Look one way, it was there. I look the other way, the building was gone". He was talking about inside WTC7, not the towers that cannot be seen from there.
Jackblind1000 4 months ago
Respond to this video...
AlienEntity1 4 months ago
@Jackblind1000 That's my whole point. Jennings claims that the towers fell AFTER they broke out the window. The hard facts say otherwise. So the most logical and plausible cause for the event which Jennings and Hess experienced while inside the building was the direct collapse of WTC 1 onto WTC 7.
It's really not that hard to understand, if you're willing to let go of some of these bizarre urban legends. Why truthers are so hung up on this stuff is beyond reason. It's irrational belief.
AlienEntity1 4 months ago
@Jackblind1000 If you're going to hypothesize about what he might've done, although he didn't mention it, then you admit you simply don't know. You're trying to avoid the simple fact that the window was not in an area where they could see the towers. Don't avoid this reality, just accept it as fact (it is!).
I've checked the stairwells, they come out near that window. That's where the men were. Get over it.
AlienEntity1 5 months ago
LMAO, so how do you have the authority to make up facts? Using the words "Presumingly", "approx.", "perhaps" etc. and so fourth.
joshbarber89 5 months ago
@joshbarber89 Get a grip, 'approximate' is all we have, nobody can know exactly what time Jennings and Hess moved around the building.
Do you have any more accurate timing? .....I didn't think so.
AlienEntity1 5 months ago in playlist 9/11 debunking
300,000 tons of skyscraper crashing down from an average height of 175 meters, calculates to about 5E+10J, or the energy of about 12 TONS of TNT.
I'm surprised that WTC7 was even standing after that.
SovereignStatesman 6 months ago 3
this gut suddenly myteriously died, though in perfect health, two days before the HIST report came out?
Tordy1 1 year ago
@Tordy1 He was in perfect health? According to the coroner's report or some truther website?
Do you even know what he died of? I don't, because the family apparently requested privacy. Gee I wonder why.
AlienEntity1 1 year ago
@AlienEntity1
Cancer
CrazyRay7979 11 months ago
@AlienEntity1 well then YOU dont then...do you?
zezt 6 months ago
@zezt Actually, a person posting as his son reported to P4911TRuth that he died of Leukemia, and his brother also predeceased him from the same disease.
Friends of the family have reported they were inundated with truthers after his death and wanted privacy.
Danny Jowenko was killed in a car accident a couple of weeks ago. People die eventually. It's unfortunate, but there it is. My best friend died of cancer 4 years ago. He was 53.
AlienEntity1 6 months ago 2
@Tordy1 Perfect health?He was middle aged and overweight.
dangerouslytalented 1 year ago
@Tordy1 ...yeah, a full SEVEN YEARS after his AND HESS' story was well known to the world.
horseytown 10 months ago
@Tordy1 Perfect health, except for that 5 year long bout with leukhemia.
LOL. idiots
EdgemanLL2 6 months ago
if they were trapped on the side facing opposite WTC 1, then how could the falling rubble trap them, much less destroy all means of exit from that side of the tower?? In the video i didn't see the ruble hit the north side of building 7? I'm no hardcore truth-er, just curious.
FeelGoodinc91 1 year ago
@FeelGoodinc91 Well, if you look at a schematic of the 6th floor, the stairwell was roughly halfway towards the South face, East of centre.
Damage, according to NCSTAR 1-9 Vol 1, p 176, directly S of that area, was 'window glass broken out'. Past the midway (E/W) point it was more severe, including 'granite and underlying truss damage' etc.
Also there were fires burning immediately following the WTC 1 collapse.
The stairwell was not far from this area. They escaped North from there.
AlienEntity1 1 year ago
@FeelGoodinc91 So, does that make sense? You should look at the diagrams. That will help.
Obviously there was heavy smoke(fires were seen immediately, Hess and Jennings commented on it as well), so they avoided it. The fires were concentrated at that time on the S side, makes sense they would head the opposite way.
AlienEntity1 1 year ago
@AlienEntity1 thank u, i will look into the schematics.
FeelGoodinc91 1 year ago
@toto20091 No, you're correct, I didn't. That's mainly becuase the tower collapses began about 80 floor up, not in basements. There is zero evidence of nuclear fission materials.
The Hazmat suits you refer to. Can you provide a non-truther-website reference for your assertion that they were specifically trying to avoid radioactive 'vapors'? Please do that.
AlienEntity1 1 year ago
This might be a little bit off as it is related to the whole story, but very interesting version overall, plus some unexplained thing got more clear. tinyurl(DOC)com/2uejh7h
toto20091 1 year ago
@toto20091 Oh come on, dude. Nuclear demolition? Is there any wacked-out idea that truthers DON'T subscribe to?
Maybe it was aliens......
AlienEntity1 1 year ago
@AlienEntity1 I'm trying to keep open mind. This version explains some things none other could explain.
Regarding aliens..., I don't know. The way you use it would trigger emotional response from those conditioned to either believe in God and a human being about to enter paradise after one dies or materialists who believes that human life came from random atom recombination.
Instead please list your points why it is not possible.
toto20091 1 year ago
@toto20091 You've also forgotten to include the intervention of Wizards and Warlocks using magic spells. That also explains everything.
And while we're at it, look into various Gods - not just the Judeo-Christian Gods, but include the Eastern Gods as well. They might have done it also.
Leave no stone unturned, and best wishes with your studies. :)
AlienEntity1 1 year ago
@AlienEntity1 Khalezov gives some points about human psychology that you just showed by always expecting that if nuclear, then it should be like Hiroshima. Maybe it is just my perception. Please correct me.
toto20091 1 year ago
@toto20091 There is no point exploring the idea of a nuclear weapon with regard to the WTC collapses. There is zero evidence to support that line of inquiry.
If someone wants to present a coherent theory, and can explain how a nuke could be used without leaving evidence of melted steel - not just anecdotal reports from laymen, but metalurgical analysis by qualified people, then I'm all ears.
That won't happen, of course. That's why we might as well discuss the option that aliens attacked WTC
AlienEntity1 1 year ago
@AlienEntity1 There is zero evidence???
* FBI agents in hazmat suits with tape covering all wholes to prevent radioactive vapors.
* So called air quality devices responders had to carry that could be radioactive detectors to monitor/prevent overdose.
* Many first responders died of some type of blood cancer (some doctors claimed should take 15 year to develop)
* Manhattan residents were kept away for 6 months, could be to let rad. vapors go down.
* Burning core for 100 days
* melted steal/rock
toto20091 1 year ago
@AlienEntity1 here's some declassified info on demolition use of nukes: tinyurl(dot)com(slash)24jvzvm :
i. Mere fact that the U.S. has developed a munition suitable for demolition work. (57-5)
gov site: tinyurl(dot)com(slash)22wm5r5
toto20091 1 year ago
@AlienEntity1 Can you please clarify when Hess talks about tremendous amount of smoke much more than it had been and you comment says "before the collapse of 2nd tower"? Do you mean after 1st tower collapsed there was smoke and it was easier to breath before the 2nd tower collapsed; after which it got 'much more...' as Hess says? I got impression he talks about 5 things that happened and one of them was tremendous amount of smoke which would be event of 1st tower collapsing.
thanks.
toto20091 1 year ago
@toto20091 Sorry, missed this one. There was already smoke from the 1st tower collapse (South Tower). There is video footage which I provided, taken shortly after Tower 2 collapsed, and there are fire alarms going off in WTC 7.
AlienEntity1 1 year ago
9/11 was an inside job
mselliot2 1 year ago
@mselliot2 Sorry, no proof of that. Next cheap slogan please.
AlienEntity1 1 year ago
@AlienEntity1 wake up dude
mselliot2 1 year ago
@mselliot2 You wake up. You're brainwashed, dude.
AlienEntity1 1 year ago
Michael Hess originally stated explosions. I think Hess was told the truth, then changed his account to match the official conspiracy theory. Jennings is dead, Hess is not...
Save0urSouls 1 year ago
@Save0urSouls What's the point of all your denials? It doesn't make any difference - the two men reported slightly different things, there's no evidence that there were explosives planted in the buildings anyway - you truthers don't seem to comprehend this.
Jennings' own testimony contradicts itself - which is no big deal - it was a terrible day. But you twits cling onto every word as if it were God's own. In your world, only the other side can make a wrong statement. LOL
AlienEntity1 1 year ago
@Save0urSouls You see what you're doing? You're reading into the minds of people (or deluding yourself that you are) - you only excuse the mistatements of Jennings, but not Hess.
It's a double-standard. Both men made dubious statements, esp. Jennings with his references to stepping over bodies and seeing the towers. There's no evidence to back up either claim.
How gullible are you?
AlienEntity1 1 year ago
@AlienEntity1 mistatements? So what you're saying is that Jennings staements were false. How would you know. He was there. Were you?
Mr420woo 1 year ago
@Mr420woo @Mr420woo Jennings made quite a few statements which appear to be erroneous. He felt he was stepping over people, yet there is no evidence that there were any. Doesn't mean he didn't think there were. Dyou see the diff?
Also, both he and Hess looked outside when they climbed up and broke open a window (on the N side, near the NE corner). They both reported seeing firetrucks and cars on fire and huge amounts of swirling papers.
This can only mean that the North Tower had collapsed
AlienEntity1 1 year ago
@Mr420woo So when Jennings thinks he saw the towers still standing, we know he couldn't have, for 2 reasons:
1) He was facing North, and the towers were not visible from that window
2) The burning vehicles and paper prove that the tower had already collapsed - there is ample eyewitness and video evidence to show this.
Guess what? recently released FOIA footage shows Hess shouting out of the window. So we KNOW where they were. Many truthers have falsely claimed they were somewhere else.
AlienEntity1 1 year ago
@Mr420woo That's where I lose patience, in that truthers simply make things up, with no evidence (claiming the window was on either the W or E face, which is false), to try to prove that Barry could have seen the towers when he looked out the window.
Yet Jennings himself admits that he 'had no way of knowing', so he is apparently confused. Big deal. So he was confused. Let him rest in peace, for crying out loud.
AlienEntity1 1 year ago
@Save0urSouls Here's another good example: many firefighters testified that the building was leaning over, was creaking, was going to collapse - but of course you ignore all of this, and focus on just the statements that support your preconceived conclusion and conspiracy beliefs.
You'd rather protect a myth than accept the truth it seems. The firefighters saw the building degrading over hours. The FDNY thought it was going to collapse.
but what do they know? LOL
AlienEntity1 1 year ago
@Save0urSouls how did jennings die?
cassius969 1 year ago
it is so funny to me how people listen to whatever is said and dismiss the facts. Are the truthers all right? No but i dont listen to what the goverment says either. To all you people who say that because of fire wtc7 came down your fools. go back and look at oklahoma city bombing and compare that building to wtc7 now which one should of fallin?
truthali1 1 year ago
@beastshawnee I won't approve that kind of comment. You have provided no evidence and it is offensive.
Do you even know what he did of? Do you even care?
AlienEntity1 1 year ago
@AlienEntity1 Weeeeell, then you win By censorship. You just proved how smart you aren't!
beastshawnee 1 year ago
a totally unrelated incident, thoroughly debunked.
Rodriguez was in the basement, and couldn't possibly have known whether a jet had hit or not. It's just silly.
And has zero bearing on Jennings and Hess, who were in a different building.
AlienEntity1 2 years ago
/watch?v=FMEe7JqBgvg&feature=p opula
if that stupid comment was meant for me then all I can say is be gone. I dont particularly like dealing with know nothings anyway, especially ones that are full of shit about what their stance is.
As for bombs you just assume everything that gets consumed in fires and bursts is a bomb.
But youre clueless and gutless to boot sneaking in comments w/o using the reply.
Only nutless gutless worms do that.
Grow some balls and get the sand out of your vagina
LHOdidntdoit 2 years ago
Damn, was just joking with you, I didn't mean to get to you that much. Calm down, wipe away the tears. If you are a worm with a vagina, those are the least of your problems.
MultiBlinkey 2 years ago
you dont ever get to me.
Gutless nutless Morons simply aren't capable. EVER.
Of course you still no reply button used confirming you still have that sand up your cunt.
And NO BALLS.
LHOdidntdoit 2 years ago
At about 5:57 in my video, Michael Hess is describing the events in the stairwell, as a firsthand eyewitness. He says 'The building began to shake' and the stairwell filled up with a 'tremendous amount of dust and smoke'.
This is entirely consistent with being hit by a 1300 ft flaming tower, but not consistent with a bomb.
MultiBlinkey is not emotionally ready to accept these facts, as the implications are obvious.
It is sad how people ignore Hess as if he didn't exist. Very sad.
AlienEntity1 2 years ago
. We can assume for arguments sake that he did receive the call about a cessna crashing into the twin tower WHILE he was in his car, on the way to work with traffic being "great". You say that the call could have been between 8:50-9am. I say BS, I would say between 8:46-8:50am b/c of his position he would be one of the first to be notified. The 9:10-9:20am is again a time that you pulled out of your ass. Do you know how long it takes him to get from A to B? You don't know what A is? Revise it.
MultiBlinkey 2 years ago
Do your own frigging analysis then and make your own video.
Stop whining to me about it, dude.
You still have completely missed the point that the OEM wasn't evacuated until the time between 9:30am and 9:45am.
So Jennings and Hess didn't get there around 9am, did they? Use your brain man.
Your obstinacy is bordering on stupidity. For real. You hang on every word of Jennings as though it were God's own word, yet ignore or dismiss everything which opposes it.
That's just idiotic.
AlienEntity1 2 years ago
There are two different sources which give a range of time for the evac of the OEM.
That means Jennings was there later than he thought. He also thought at first that he'd stepped over dead bodies. He was off on that as well.
He also thought he saw the towers standing later, yet he couldn't have, since they had already collapsed.
His testimony is not 100% accurate or reliable. Get over it and stop treating him like Jesus Christ.
AlienEntity1 2 years ago
Later, Jennings changed his tune and couldn't be certain about the people. He didn't feel confident about it any more.
Instead of gracefully accepting his apparent honesty (he really didn't know for sure) you have to construct yet another dumb conspiracy idea, out of your rear end, that he was threatened.
Now run along and bother someone else, kid. You're becoming annoying.
AlienEntity1 2 years ago
Mr Hess is pretty clear here:
watch?v=hy5lpp6yADw
LHOdidntdoit 2 years ago
Get out of our discussion, you're polluting it.
MultiBlinkey 2 years ago
Re:"Get out of our discussion, you're polluting it"
I love this comment.
I post a vid that clears things up and you OF COURSE say it pollutes.
You are on some kind of anti-Earth where everything is the opposite of what reality is.
Good luck with that.
LHOdidntdoit 2 years ago
One thing I would reword is that WTC7 wasn't necessarily on fire after WTC2 collapsed, but there was dust and smoke.
The smoke was probably from WTC2, which obviously was on fire when it collapsed.
Both Hess and the worker in the lobby mention smoke, but no bomb. The worker doesn't say 'a bomb went off', he says 'the side of the building come down?'
He recognized that it was a building collapse.
And you don't see any dead bodies in the lobby, nor does he mention any.
This contradicts the bomb
AlienEntity1 2 years ago
When was it that Jennings mentioned that it was very very hot? That's right, as soon as he got to the eighth floor. We don't know how many bombs went off in WTC 7, but I'm guessing a lot did. Jennings is one out of more people that reported multiple explosions going off in WTC 7. You can find more footage on youtube and other websites that have witnesses saying bombs went off in WTC 7. Take your own advice, and do some more research.
MultiBlinkey 2 years ago
You guess wrong. There is no evidence of even a single 'bomb'. There is direct, irrefutable evidence of a 500,000 ton building collapsing on WTC7 though.
Sorry, but that trumps your speculation. Again, noises are not bombs per se. You need more than that to prove this idea, which you do not have.
No bombs were seen. No bomb effects were seen. No sounds of explosions were reported by staff in the lobby, for example, or by Michael Hess.
Remember Hess? He was there. He heard no bomb.
AlienEntity1 2 years ago
In short, you continue to have nothing but heresay reports, with nothing concrete to back them up.
That's why I refer to 'myth'. Facts, dear man. A giant building collapsed on it. That's a fact.
Fact - no bombs were found, nor evidence of bombs.
You should be supporting the strongest evidence, but you seem to prefer the myth.
That's what makes us different.
And Jennings saw no bodies. Nobody did. Another dumb myth for the conspiracy nuts.
AlienEntity1 2 years ago
Who started the no bodies myth? That's right, you did. Jennings, Hess and Firefighters had to avoid stepping on bodies as they walked down the stairs, out of respect, and because it must be unnerving to step on a corpse.
MultiBlinkey 2 years ago
Complete fiction. I guess you don't mind lying and making things up. There is zero testimony from FDNY or Hess to support your claim.
No bodies were seen. Jennings himself changed his mind and retracted the original claim
It's a dead issue unless you're a 9/11 troll who likes to dredge up myths and present them as facts.
You're basically behaving as a troll now - you're not interested in learning, nor the truth.
Goodbye.
AlienEntity1 2 years ago
The reason your video is full of wild speculation is because you don't know from his testimony if he received the phone call while he was on his way to work, or from his house. You also don't know where he was driving from. You do know that by his estimation traffic was excellent, you have no idea how long it took him to park or how long it takes him to go up and down an elevator to 23rd floor. You also don't know when he received the phone call, You pulled the 45 minute figure out of your A**
MultiBlinkey 2 years ago
Whoops. There you go again. He said he was driving when he received the phone call. So unless he recalled wrong, that's what happened.
But we do have an idea how long it would take to park, and to probably have discussions once he arrived at the building. It wouldn't take place in an instant.
Since we already know that the OEM was evacuated sometime after 9:30am, we know he wasn't there yet.
Wild speculation is when you don't have anything to corroborate. But we do.
AlienEntity1 2 years ago
He never said he was driving when he received the call. He said he was driving to work and that he had received a call in two separate statements, it's speculation as to when and where he received it. you said in an earlier comment that there were people in the OEM up until approx. 9:30am, now you are changing your timeline.
MultiBlinkey 2 years ago
Fine, if you can't accept ''I was on my way to work, traffic was excellent.I received a call' as a simple, linear statement of events, then apply the same hyper-skepticism to everything he says.
You will find that his whole testimony falls apart if you do so.
At least you're attempting to be skeptical, even though you don't appear to understand how to be critical and sort thru info very well.
AlienEntity1 2 years ago
My timeline is based on multiple reports about the evacuation. One is 9:30am, the other is 9:45am. I accept the range of both, then corroborate with the fact the J and H arrived AFTER evacuation, but while coffee was still hot.
They then report that the lights went out. This happened (according to Con Edison) at 10am when WTC2 collapsed.
That's how we construct a more accurate timeline. Do you get it now?
AlienEntity1 2 years ago
'I was on my way to work, traffic was excellent.I received a call that a small Cessna had hit the World Trade Center'
Can I make your error any more clear? I think you have some problems processing information, to be frank. You seem to scramble things up.
btw, he said that a small Cessna had hit; should we take that as clear evidence that the planes were not jets, but small Cessnas? Why not?
Oh, because it doesn't fit the rest of the known facts and evidence, just like the 9:00am explosion..
AlienEntity1 2 years ago
What error? Do you know how long it took him to get up into the 23rd floor? Saying he got up there at 9:45am is speculation on your part, I'm not saying it's necessarily poor speculation, but it still is speculation. Do we know how long it would have taken him to get down to the 6th floor? No. Also, He said that someone had called him and told him that a small cessna had hit. He never said a small cessna had hit.
MultiBlinkey 2 years ago
We know that the OEM was evacuated sometime between 9:30 and 9:45, so Jennings got there sometime after that point.
We do know that he wasn't there at 9:05am, nor at 9:15am.
So that's why you use a timeline which can be corroborated against other evidence. It's not that complicated.
And when he says 'I had no way of knowing' that the firemen ran away because the towers were falling, he is speculating. When he says 'That's when the tower fell' he is speculating, because he didn't see it happen.
AlienEntity1 2 years ago
Either way, I'm not sure about this, so I am asking. Didn't he say he saw the tower still standing while he was on the 8th floor?
MultiBlinkey 2 years ago
Yup. But it couldn't be the case, since the vehicles were already burning when they broke the window.
Hess doesn't make that error. That's a good reason not to ignore him. Which is what truthers chronically do - they simply can't handle Hess being there and not backing up Jennings' version.
2 people, both eyewitnesses, with differing stories. That's human nature. Eyewitnesses can make mistakes under stress, this is well understood.
I don't think either Jennings or Hess were lying.
AlienEntity1 2 years ago
Ok, if he claims that it looked like lobby was destroyed by King Kong(metaphor for explosion) then why wouldn't vehicles in the area catch fire? Trauma victims initial testimony might have holes, but the interview with the loose change people was years later.
MultiBlinkey 2 years ago
Because that's not what happened. There were no explosions in the lobby, remember? There were workers in the lobby, they are on video, remember?
That was after tower 2 collapsed, and the lobby wasn't destroyed yet - that happened when WTC1 fell on WTC7.
I'm sorry you have such a hard time accepting basic facts.
Jennings memory and interview was years later, exactly. And he seemed unsure what he saw. But you don't seem to accept his uncertainty.
AlienEntity1 2 years ago
John Kerry is a liar, but in this case I think he was just corroborating what he'd heard.
/watch?v=qRtiESCN3b8&feature=PlayList&p=B6E1590764C870FC&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=23
MultiBlinkey 2 years ago
There were some buildings brought down by controlled demoltion (thru cable systems and such) but that didn't apply to WTC7.
I can see where people are confused if they take a snippet here and there.
AlienEntity1 2 years ago
Those buildings were brought down later, during clean up of ground zero. Kerry is specifically asked about WTC 7.
MultiBlinkey 2 years ago
You're wasting my time. Goodbye.
The facts are plain to see. You do not wish to see or learn.
That is a normal characteristic of a 9/11 truther - they don't want the truth, they prefer the myth.
AlienEntity1 2 years ago
Did I really get to you that much by bursting your bubble? I concede that I made a mistake in stating no structural damage was sustained via collapse, but I was at least partially correct in saying that Fire alone is what brought it down, because NIST maintains that even without the damage to the lower seven lower floors exterior columns, 7 would have collapsed due to fire alone. You can go back to living in your black and white world of truther's and debunkers.
MultiBlinkey 2 years ago
I just care about facts. Too bad if you don't like that.
AlienEntity1 2 years ago
I hate saying this but, this statement is very childish, and if you are twelve I apologize. I obviously care about the facts as well, otherwise I wouldn't bother getting into a discussion because it would serve me no purpose. I don't discuss the events of 9/11 to prove myself right or someone else wrong(at least that is not my main goal), I do so to gain a better understanding of the events.
MultiBlinkey 2 years ago
If I had a dollar for every doofus that blusters on with truther mythology, bereft of critical thinking skills, I'd be rich.
Unfortunately, I don't get paid to banter endlessly with people like yourself.
You accuse me of living in a black and white world, as if I don't have the sophistication to see and accept uncertainty, yet it is you who seems to have trouble grasping uncertainty.
Look in the mirror.
I made the video to demonstrate the conflicting testimony and sift thru it. You attack it.
AlienEntity1 2 years ago
If you are satisfied with your work, that's your problem. You only accept the official timeline and disregard the pieces of Barring's testimony that don't support your hypothesis. I'm not saying you are flat out wrong about your timeline, but it is obvious that some of the timeline in your video is speculation, only accentuated by the fact you make approximations. You may be absolutely correct about the timeline. It still doesn't explain what happened on the 6th floor, among other things.
MultiBlinkey 2 years ago
You attack and dismiss my efforts as if you could do better.
Yet you have done nothing. You have produced no video, you have done very little basic research, yet you feel qualified (thru some level of arrogance I can only imagine) to lecture me.
It is very easy to attack and criticize. Talk is cheap. You came out aggressively denouncing my work, I will defend my work. Case closed.
AlienEntity1 2 years ago
You have every right to defend your work. I am doing you a favor by questioning it. I have actually done a lot of research, but I'd never focused on the timeline for building 7, doesn't mean I'm not familiar with most of it. I came here to not only discuss the timeline, but it seems you are only interested in the timeline since you haven't answered to anything else I have said. Either way, I look forward to continuing our conversation, case isn't closed, as hasty as you'd like to be in life.
MultiBlinkey 2 years ago
Hahahaha!! I should have known..
'
MultiBlinkey
MultiBlinkey (1 week ago)
They are starting to crack my friend. They are experiencing cognitive dissonance at the moment. They will get my respect when they admit the truth. The truth is overwhelming and is starting to invade their minds because it's just too obvious at this stage to insist that the towers didn't turn to dust from explosives. '
I rest my case. You are a deceptive person. You are indeed an arrogant truther. LOL
AlienEntity1 2 years ago
I am not a deceptive person. I have my moments like anyone else. If I was deceptive I would have already deleted that comment, because it has been thrown in my face multiple times already. I'm not going to deny that I get emotional on this subject, and that I have deeply rooted beliefs(doesn't mean I can't admit I'm mistaken or that I can't change my mind). I am being honest when I say that I am interested in discussing 9/11 with people who have an opposing view to gain a better understanding.
MultiBlinkey 2 years ago
He says he could see the building standing and then it was gone(From eighth floor), after that he says he had no way of knowing that it was coming down, but I think that's because he was looking down at the firefighters instead of up at the building. He was on the North side of WTC 7 which means that he had a view of the tower from that side, and it explains why he'd say the South Tower was still standing, How would he confuse the two towers?
MultiBlinkey 2 years ago
A building falling down onto another building does not cause floors to Blow up and send people flying upwards and backwards. Resorting to personal attacks when it doesn't go your way? Fine by me. How many times have you watched the WTC 1 collapse? Yes the explosives in 1 did send some debri flying towards 7, but it didn't cause the floor underneath him to blow up.
MultiBlinkey 2 years ago
Argument from incredulity. Your ignorance is not a valid engineering hypothesis.
You do not know what you're talking about.
AlienEntity1 2 years ago
And you are referring to?
MultiBlinkey 2 years ago
Watch my video. Listen to Hess' explanation. Learn. He describes the event slightly differently from Jennings.
You are focusing too much on Jennings' exact wording and missing the big picture. People speak in metaphors, they don't always use words accurately.That's a fact.
AlienEntity1 2 years ago
To focus on the full picture you have to take in the Exact wording as well as the gist of the wording and overlay the two as well as incorporate it and corroborate it with other testimonies. Something you failed to do correctly. You omit and cherry pick in your video. Be a man and admit it.
MultiBlinkey 2 years ago
'To focus on the full picture you have to take in the Exact wording as well as the gist of the wording and overlay the two as well as incorporate it and corroborate it with other testimonies.'
Follow your own advice.
Now stop wasting my time. I'm done with you.
AlienEntity1 2 years ago
Suit yourself, you still have the right to defend yourself, unless that has become too difficult. You are the expert who was going to walk me through the timeline via comments(since you have already graciously done so with your video). Thanks for the advice, I will make sure to follow it. Don't give up on making videos, now would be a good time to revise this one, perhaps dust it up a little, no harm in doing so correct? I appreciate your hard work here, I Truly mean that.
MultiBlinkey 2 years ago
If I thought it needed revision I'd consider it, although reauthoring a video means a brand new title, comments, tags and everything else. That's how youtube works.
The main points of the video are simply that Jennings' perception of the time doesn't actually fit with other known (verifiable) facts from several sources.
Most notably the time the OEM shut down (after 9:30am), and the time when Jennings and Hess wer in the stairwell (Jennings erroneously thght it was WTC2 collapsed)
AlienEntity1 2 years ago
You mean when they were going back up the stairwell ? Because he says in the video that both buildings collapsed while he was trapped on the eighth floor,
MultiBlinkey 2 years ago
It is inescapable that the massive event which occurred while they were attempting to descend (6th floor) had to be the collapse of WTC1. There is just no other plausible explanation, given their own observations once they broke a window.
For some reason Jennings didn't seem to realize that the towers had already collapsed at that point, but Hess did not share this opinion.
Jennings himself says 'I had no way of knowing', yet made an assumption.
AlienEntity1 2 years ago
As my video points out, when they broke windows, there was a great deal of dust and debris in the air, as well as burning emergency vehicles.
It is not possible that this could have been before the tower collapses, as those conditions simply did not exist before 10:28 am.
So Jennings' own observations contradict his own timeline. Hess confirms the burning vehicles, which confirms that it was past 10:28 when they went back up the stairwell to get air.
AlienEntity1 2 years ago
What if bombs had been going off in the building before either tower collapsed? Wouldn't that have caused a great deal of dust and debri?
MultiBlinkey 2 years ago
Before either tower collapsed there were still emergency personnel in the building (up until approximately 9:30 or so in the OEM itself) so they would have witnessed explosions. There's no evidence that happened, so it doesn't fit.
Also, a direct bomb blast in the stairwell would have produced probably fatal injuries to Jennings and Hess, and would have been registered by seisographs closeby.
Again none of those things happened, making the scenario very unlikely.
AlienEntity1 2 years ago
He never says direct bomb in the stair well. He says explosion from below collapses the floor and throws him back. As far as other emergency personnel, they could have died, and that still leaves a 28 minute window with no one else in the building. Micheal even says to Jennings while they are on the 23rd floor that they have to leave because they are the only one's inside the building. This is before they get to 6th floor via stairs.
MultiBlinkey 2 years ago
I'm not sure what you mean by 'no one else in the building'. There was clearly a person in the building, appearing on the video, after 10am.
This was directly after WTC2 collapsed. We presume Jennings and Hess were waiting around on the 23rd floor (Jennings made several phone calls of unknown duration). And the lights flickered and elevators stopped working while they were in the OEM.
That places them there as WTC2 collapsed. Which is why Hess mentioned smoke in the stairwell.
AlienEntity1 2 years ago
I was saying that Jennings said that Hess ran into the room he was in and said that "We gotta get out, we are the only one's left in the building" (I never said it's a fact they were the only ones in the building, how many times do I have to correct you?) he had just been told on the phone to leave by someone else. You like to say the trauma jumbled his mind, but people do recover from traumatic experiences, and with it their memory. He also made a few calls of UNKNOWN duration.
MultiBlinkey 2 years ago
You are correcting yourself, not me. I was referring you to your repeated claims that the building was evacuated, so nobody else was there except the two men.
That never was true. That's why you are correcting your own statements, so give yourself all the credit if you want.
Its a fact that the building was not empty. there were workers there.
AlienEntity1 2 years ago
ok, let me repeat myself. I never claimed that there was no one else in the building. I clearly said twice(this is the third time) that that is what HESS SAID.
MultiBlinkey 2 years ago
Then why do you repeatedly fail to see that the 'explosions' were never witnessed by anybody else who was in the building?
You act as though Jennings perceptions trump everyone elses, but that isn't rational.
AlienEntity1 2 years ago
There is no evidence that emergency workers died in WTC7. It doesn't exist.
FDNY were also in the building, remember? They didn't find any dead bodies either.
It just doesn't fit, either the bodies or bombs.
AlienEntity1 2 years ago
There are NY firefighters that say that they heard and felt bombs in WTC 1,2 and 7. How is Jennings going to confuse a dead body(he emphasizes this and he alone mentions it, no one misconstrued anything), and why would a firefighter say don't look down while walking down STAIRS? It just won't fit for you.
MultiBlinkey 2 years ago
People described explosions, but nobody saw a bomb. You need to be careful about metaphors. They also said it sounded like a train. Does that mean there was also a train there? You don't see the absurdity of literal interpretation of metaphor.
'Explosion' is not a description exclusive to a bomb. It can just mean 'a loud noise'.
Jennings emphatically says he never saw any dead bodies. He ASSUMED that he was stepping over people, but he didn't see.
Nor did he actually see the towers collapse.
AlienEntity1 2 years ago
Do you notice how he emphasizes the fact that he was stepping over bodies, the FEELING of it? What did he mistake that feeling with? He didn't see the towers collapse, but he said South Tower was still standing while he was back on the 8th floor. He was also adamant about how he knows what he heard and that he didn't mistake explosions with anything else. Do you honestly think that people were using explosion as a metaphor? What are you smoking?
MultiBlinkey 2 years ago
It's great that you finally are grasping the inconsistencies in Jennings' statements. Good for you.
Now you realize that, just as he couldn't have seen the towers collapse (since they had already collapsed by the time he and Hess broke the window), yet he THOUGHT he saw the towers collapse, he also THOUGHT there were bodies, but didn't actually see any.
Cut him some slack. It was a miserable day for him and Hess. But Hess didn't see any bodies, and he was there also. Nor did the firefighters
AlienEntity1 2 years ago
So you are throwing out all of his testimony except for the bits that suit your agenda?
MultiBlinkey 2 years ago
We simply accept his testimony was inaccurate. The agenda is to reconcile known facts with his observations and learn which observations were in fact wrong.
I have already described the process in great detail, there is no need for you to mischaracterize the process. There is no hidden agenda. I'm only interested in the facts and truth, not mythology.
If that's not convenient for you, I'm sorry.
The myth is that he witnessed bombs going off before the towers fell. The reality is different.
AlienEntity1 2 years ago
There is no 'official story'. There is just the facts of the matter, that's all.
Showing that Jennings and Hess broke a window and saw the aftermath of the WTC1 collapse is a simple exercise in discovering and following the facts.
It proves that Jennings claim was wrong. That is a fact which stands above rumor, innuendo and myth.
If you prefer myth, then be my guest. That's your decision. There is no evidence of bombs in WTC7, direct or otherwise. Never has been, and likely never will be.
AlienEntity1 2 years ago