Scott Forbes evidence is uncorroborated

[rodin]

We are not alone...

http://911review.com/errors/wtc/forbes.html

[kbo234]

Yes I think Willy would have known but why has he never mentioned it? Even if he had heard about a power down after 911 you would have expected him to incorporate it into his story. If Willy suddenly starts incorporating it into his story that would be suspicious.

Rodriguez has talked about the opportunities for contractors to access varies parts of the twin towers on his recent tour. I did not hear him myself but have spoken to people who attended and confirmed that this matter came up as part of his talk. He confirmed that there were many occasions when parts of the WTC buildings were shut down and access prohibited during various types of cabling/buildingwork.

The only suspicious entity around here is YOU Brown.

Very suspicious.

More than suspicious.

[Patrick Brown]

Hi 4U2P!

Keep trying

[rodin]

Rodriguez has talked about the opportunities for contractors to access varies parts of the twin towers on his recent tour. I did not hear him myself but have spoken to people who attended and confirmed that this matter came up as part of his talk. He confirmed that there were many occasions when parts of the WTC buildings were shut down and access prohibited during various types of cabling/buildingwork.

Can we establish more specific details about these 'power downs' - ie could they have been used to rig the buildings?

[Bongo]

I was at the Glasgow Leg of the William Rodriguez tour (10th Feb 2007) and he stated that Power-downs were quite common. Asked if he thought they provided an opportunity to rig explosives, his answer was along the lines of "It's a possibility."

Personally, I don't really think that this line of enquiry matters matters much at this time. If it can be proven by a new independant investigation that the towers were indeed demolished by explosives, then the questions and answers as to how these explosives were planted would follow.

[kbo234]

Indeed, it is the demolition evidence that counts...little else. It is not for us to explain how the crime was carried out.

That the buildings were brought down by the use of explosives is all we need to keep banging away at.

It is for an honest Inquiry to establish the how.

[kbo234]

......If Willy suddenly starts incorporating it into his story that would be suspicious.

Anyone who is suspicious of Willie Rodriguez either:

a) Lacks all discernment, or

b) Is deliberately trying to create mistrust of this transparently honest man.

I notice Rodin says he would never ban PB from this forum. It is easy to tell that you are mates Rodin. You are coming at us in threes and fours. I say this for the benefit of anyone who is puzzled by the trash they read on so many of this site's threads.

I don't suppose there is that much we can do to exclude the presence of disinfo agents on this site. There are too many powerful parties out there with much to lose from the dissemination of 9/11 truth........and too many venal tarts in all localities whose very souls are for sale.

I take the view that is easy, very possible and quite understandable for people to deny the claims of and oppose the 9/11 truth movement.........but not after they have seen the hard evidence. I know many who shout rubbish and refuse to look at the evidence but NONE who continue to deny the charge of 'inside job' after actually seeing the evidence, particularly of controlled demolition.

Because this evidence is on record and based on hard scientific fact it MUST fully come out in the end, however long that takes. The decent human soul cannot stand a lie.....particularly such a foul one as the OCT of 9/11.

God bless all who expose criminals and liars and spread the truth of 9/11 to as many as possible.

Our lives, the lives of our children and the liberation of humanity, presently under bondage to occult satanic forces, depend on the success of this mission. Doubt it not.

[Bongo]

KBO234 said,

God bless all who expose criminals and liars and spread the truth of 9/11 to as many as possible.

...Just wanted to add... that "The truth of 9/11" you are referring to would be the FACT that the official story is a lie!

We are accused of spreading "lunatic conspiracy theories", but at the end of the day, the vast bulk of Truthers simply aim to expose the bunk we are force fed!

[Skeptic]

I believe some London campaigners will be meeting with Mr Forbes soon to discuss this matter.

[Mark Gobell]

It has no bearing on Patrick's question but I did try to find out the answer to this question a long while ago.

I had an email exchange with the London office of the Port Authority of New York & New Jersey (PANYNJ - http://www.panynj.gov/).

They kept saying they would get back to me but eventually I lost interest in keeping on chasing them.

Perhaps someone else would like to try to contact them.

They are a public body so should respond to FOI requests too.

Oh, and well said kbo.

[Patrick Brown]

It has no bearing on Patrick's question but I did try to find out the answer to this question a long while ago.

I had an email exchange with the London office of the Port Authority of New York & New Jersey (PANYNJ - http://www.panynj.gov/).

They kept saying they would get back to me but eventually I lost interest in keeping on chasing them.

Perhaps someone else would like to try to contact them.

They are a public body so should respond to FOI requests too.

Just be good for the truth movement to get this one sorted because if the story is bogus it might do more good than harm i.e. Why would someone go to such lengths to create such a lie? An attempt to undermine the truth movement perhaps?

[Mark Gobell]

So, contact them Patrick !

[Patrick Brown]

So, contact them Patrick !

I emailed the company but have not recieved a reply yet.

[John White]

another thread properly discussed in critics corner: questioning the validity of 9/11 truth evidence IS what this section is for, afterall

[Patrick Brown]

OK John I see now!

[John White]

can't tell if thats sarcasm mode or not PB: regardless, you can continue your thread here

[Bushwacker]

............we have to question the “911 Mysteries” documentary as you would think the makers would have triple checked all their sources.

Why would you think that? There is little evidence of any 9/11 documentary maker doing any checking at all, let alone triple checking. Their more normal method seems to be simply to repeat everything they have heard about 9/11 that happens to appeal to them and fits in with the line they are running at the time.

[rodin]

I believe some London campaigners will be meeting with Mr Forbes soon to discuss this matter.

When? This is a significant opportunity if true. May we frame questions?

[pepik]

It is not for us to explain how the crime was carried out.

Hence the wildly implausible alternative scenarios. Remember, you have to pursuade people to accept your theories, "don't know/don't care/didn't bother/not my problem" aren't going to be very convincing.

[SHERITON HOTEL]

Has anyone mentioned Scott Forbes was a caller on Radio5Live this morning repeating his allegations about the NY port authority and 911 commision cover up of the power downs?

[Patrick Brown]

Has anyone mentioned Scott Forbes was a caller on Radio5Live this morning repeating his allegations about the NY port authority and 911 commision cover up of the power downs?

No they haven't.

But the point remains the same i.e. his story alone is not evidence.

[rodin]

Apparently his story is corroborated by Rodriguez and there were other witnesses. So let's move on to the next question while we shore this assumtion up - did anyone from the other tower report a similar event? Who can we ask about this?