Posted: Sat Dec 02, 2006 11:23 am Post subject: will you even argue about william rodriguez testimony?
check him out.
he's an officially decorated 911 hero, worked in the wtc for 20 years and was the last man out that day. _________________ Have No Fear! Peace, Love & Hemp is here!
Remember Tank Man (Tiananmen Sq)
I have checked him out. What he said at the time was:
"We heard a loud rumble, then all of a sudden we heard another rumble like someone moving a whole lot of furniture," Rodriguez said. "And then the elevator opened and a man came into our office and all of his skin was off."
Now of course, when he goes on tour, we get a rather different version, featuring explosions. I am not saying he is lying, no doubt there were explosions, but that does not mean there were bombs, and I expect he finds that people are rather more willing to finance his touring if what he says tends to be more to their taste than his original comments. _________________ ".......some partial collapse [of WTC7] would not have been suspicious......." - chek
but where are you reading his first comments from?
are you sure they're not edited?
he says the first explosion came from below him in the basement.
why would he even want to tour as he could have just taken the $1million compensation and kept his mouth shut like a lot of others?
interesting, that before he started asking difficult questions everyone (bush, clinton) wanted to shake his hand and even help him run for office.
did you know:
1. his testimony was heard in secret and was not published in the official commission report?
2. the commission was not allowed to lay any blame on cia, fema, nsa, norad, etc _________________ Have No Fear! Peace, Love & Hemp is here!
Remember Tank Man (Tiananmen Sq)
Good one Hampton. I wonder if William's original statement is still in existence? _________________ We check the evidence and then archive it: www.911evidencebase.co.uk Get the Steven E Jones reports>HERE<
Whilst I accept that there is a great deal of conflicting evidence concerning the WTC - are explosions from the basement completely unlikely given the circumstances? How much fuel made its way to the basement, or elevators fell, what was in the basement that could be ignited - many variables are potentially to blame.
Rodriguez can quite correctly state what he heard and what he saw, but we must filter out any of his speculation and assumption. Because he was the 'last man out' does not make him an expert in any way as to what happened out of his sight.
I'm currently trying to get my head around Willy's comment about the 65 floor collapsing to the 44 floor. Listen to what he says in the short clip bellow:
Now if you forward this clip to about 11 min 30 seconds you'll note that the north tower which is in the foreground doesn't show any sign of windows being blown out dues to collapsing floors! Now I doubt that Willy is lying so what was the series of sequential explosions that Willy heard? Explosives cutting core columns perhaps?
Weakening the structure of the towers whilst at the same time trying to minimize the number of audible explosions would mean taking advantage of distractions. We therefore might expect explosions to coincide with the aircraft impacts. Willy may well have heard a series of sequential explosions but I very much doubt they were the effect of collapsing floors as the second video clip shows no windows exploding outward.
As I said on a different thread I may look at the audio on that second clip to see if there are any peak events around 80Hz which may point to a series of explosions. The audio may not reveal anything as it's quite cluttered. _________________ We check the evidence and then archive it: www.911evidencebase.co.uk Get the Steven E Jones reports>HERE<
Last edited by Patrick Brown on Sat Dec 02, 2006 3:42 pm; edited 2 times in total
the basement explosion was before the 1st plane hit
Yes of course, this is well documented from the way he has related it, one explosion coming a few seconds before a second (supposedly the plane hitting). Possibly I wasn't clear enough about what I meant.
However if you read the account and I quote;
Quote:
Just seconds later there was another explosion way above which made the building oscillate momentarily. This, he was later told, was a plane hitting the 90th floor.
Rodriquez is relying on hearsay to identify what is causing the explosions. He was essentially encased in concrete which can easily alter perspective. It is quite possible that the explosions and their causes have been reversed in his mind - I am not saying this happened - only it is possible.
Not to mention he simply maybe lying - remember how many people attempted to claim for dead relatives who were nowhere near WTC on 9/11.
Now remember the north tower was impacted at floors 92 to 98:
Quote:
At 8:46 AM, a jet, apparently Flight 11, slammed into the northeast face of the tower, creating an impact hole that extended from the 92nd to 98th floors.
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/attack/wtc1.html
So we have the firefighters saying they lost a floor (one floor 65) just after a series of sequential explosions. Also floor 65 was 27 floors away from the impact zone. Why would the 65th floor collapse? _________________ We check the evidence and then archive it: www.911evidencebase.co.uk Get the Steven E Jones reports>HERE<
The other day I was working out of the office. I was sitting in a car by a T-Junction reading a magazine, so my head was down, looking at the magazine in my lap. We were parked by a pub. I heard a crashing sound like breaking glass. I was 100% convinced that the crash came from behind me. I assumed that someone out the back in the pub had dropped a tray of glasses or something, because it sounded like breaking glass. I turned round to look, but could see nothing. So I turned back forwards in my seat, and was shocked to see there had been a car crash in front of me.
At the time of the sound I was certain, absolutely certain that that sound came from behind, that's why I immediately spun round in my seat.
Don't rely on your senses and first impressions. They are not reliable. _________________
I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth. - Umberto Eco
ah but william was blown upwards, off his feet, in to the air and a severely injured man came from the floor below _________________ Have No Fear! Peace, Love & Hemp is here!
Remember Tank Man (Tiananmen Sq)
Not to mention he simply maybe lying - remember how many people attempted to claim for dead relatives who were nowhere near WTC on 9/11.
it's difficult to question the integrity of a man who risked his life to go back into the building and save hundreds of lives.
HIS master key will be put on the ground zero memorial.
he's not trying to claim any money.
he could have got $1 million if he'd kept his mouth shut.
instead he has spent time living in his car during the campaign. _________________ Have No Fear! Peace, Love & Hemp is here!
Remember Tank Man (Tiananmen Sq)
When I have been relating Mr Rodriguez' story to people I have been very careful to point out that what he heard was the boomboomboomboomboomboom, not that he witnessed the internal floor collaspe, and point out that a fire fighter had indicated that is what it was.
A firefighter also said the sporadic small explosions were gas cookers going off, which had no basis.
Mr Rodriguez did not claim that he had witnessed an internal floor collapse so it doesn't make him less credible if it turns out that did not happen. What he heard was a sequence of loud noises, that's all.
ah but william was blown upwards, off his feet, in to the air and a severely injured man came from the floor below
Is that what happened, or what he remembers? Eyewitness accounts aren't reliable, especially in traumatic situations.
Quote:
Eyewitnesses often play a critical role in criminal investigations and prosecutions. However, we know that the quality of eyewitness evidence can vary, and that in cases of wrongful conviction, mistaken eyewitness identification is the single leading cause. As of the time you read this, post-conviction DNA testing has freed 110 persons in the U.S. and 8 in Canada who were convicted by juries of crimes that they did not commit (see Scheck, Neufeld, & Dwyer, 2000). Twelve of these had been sentenced to death. Although some of these cases involved perjury (e.g., jailhouse snitches who were lying) or coincidental circumstantial evidence, the vast majority have been cases in which the principal evidence was mistaken eyewitness identification testimony (Connors et al., 1995; see the links below). In our analysis of the first 40 exoneration cases we found that mistaken identification was involved in 36 of the cases, where 50 separate eyewitnesses had mistakenly identified defendants as being perpetrators (Wells et al., 1998; see the links below).
http://www.fulero.com/ _________________
I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth. - Umberto Eco
Not to mention he simply maybe lying - remember how many people attempted to claim for dead relatives who were nowhere near WTC on 9/11.
it's difficult to question the integrity of a man who risked his life to go back into the building and save hundreds of lives.
HIS master key will be put on the ground zero memorial.
he's not trying to claim any money.
he could have got $1 million if he'd kept his mouth shut.
instead he has spent time living in his car during the campaign.
For many people money is not the deciding motivator in life. There are countless people who tread the boards for absolutely no financial reward, instead they live for applause, to be in the spotlight.
I don't know anything about William, he may be genuine, however, there have been people who have come forward with all kinds of stories about 9/11 that have turned out to be manufactured. I am not saying William is not brave, but I have learned to take nothing whatsoever about 9/11 at face value.
To keep citing his words as 'gospel' is a trifle foolhardy (in my opinion).
but where are you reading his first comments from?
are you sure they're not edited?
His first comments are here
Why would they be edited, since there are plenty of quotes of people saying they heard explosions?
His comments have since become of greater interest to the "truth" movement, and earlier this year he flew off to Venezuala with Jimmy Walters. "Do you find your friendship with millionaire Jimmy Walters is affected to any degree by the way you tell your story of 9/11, Mr Rodriguez?" _________________ ".......some partial collapse [of WTC7] would not have been suspicious......." - chek
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You cannot download files in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
