RightNation.US
News (Home) | Righters' Blog | Hollywood Halfwits | Our Store | New User Intro | Link to us | Support Us

RightNation.US: Webcam catches person on roof, and a flash, just before Notre Dame fir - RightNation.US

Jump to content

Webcam catches person on roof, and a flash, just before Notre Dame fir Rate Topic: -----

#21 User is offline   usapatriot 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Copper Community Supporter
  • Posts: 370
  • Joined: 16-August 17

Posted 18 April 2019 - 12:15 PM

View PostMontyPython, on 18 April 2019 - 09:46 AM, said:

Oh brother. Look usapatriot, I like you. But you're WAY off base deluding yourself the two posters in that other thread are "snowflake-envy" posters with "tender sensibilities", ROFFLMFAO. In fact, precisely the opposite is true: They're two of the most-seasoned, most-credible, most intelligent, and LEAST "tender" people who frequent this site. I assure you, you don't wanna pick a fight with either one, they'll tear you to shreds quickly and easily.

And especially when they were right in the first place. "Mooslem" is very childish term.

B)

Hmmm, if you mean "they'll tear you to shreds quickly and easily" by responding to requests for facts by responding with feelings...I've given up waiting for that to happen. I'm always happy to be informed with facts because it makes me and everyone here smarter. Responding with feelings is nice, but if its not backed with facts especially when requested, the only thing learnt is now you know how someone feels.

For example, in a previous thread a few months ago, I learned from a post the smallpox vaccine was 100% completely effective in eliminating that disease from the face of the earth by 1948. In fact, it was so successful, that no one in the world has to take a smallpox vaccine anymore. Grateful for this information, I researched and discovered how they made the smallpox vaccine, how it was produced and its ingredients which all led to its effectiveness. The smallpox vaccine is radically different from what are in vaccines today and how they make them. The difference is Big Pharma is protected from lawsuits due to a defective product at the federal level, so companies will do what all companies do...maximize profits while minimizing risks. Risks were eliminated through the federal law banning lawsuits, so Big Pharma focuses on reducing costs by making their vaccines in the cheapest way possible and with the cheapest ingredients. And, because they want to maximize profits, there is no incentive to "eradicate" any disease where the vaccine is no longer needed (very bad business model). I discovered all of this because one person on a post here challenged me with a specific fact and then I took the time to follow up to learn more based on that new fact. I then posted what I found to enlighten others to what I found. Everyone learned something and we are all better off because of it. People may not agree with what I just posted here, but I encourage them to challenge me with facts so I can follow up and we can all keep the learning going.

And, ok, ok...no more use of the term "Mooslem"...I kind of like the "purported religion of peace" better anyway. :)
0

#22 User is offline   Tikk 

  • Oh Rrrrrreeeaaaally?
  • Group: Bronze
  • Posts: 8,801
  • Joined: 16-December 03

Posted 18 April 2019 - 01:03 PM

View Postusapatriot, on 18 April 2019 - 12:15 PM, said:

Hmmm, if you mean "they'll tear you to shreds quickly and easily" by responding to requests for facts by responding with feelings...I've given up waiting for that to happen. I'm always happy to be informed with facts because it makes me and everyone here smarter. Responding with feelings is nice, but if its not backed with facts especially when requested, the only thing learnt is now you know how someone feels.

For example, in a previous thread a few months ago, I learned from a post the smallpox vaccine was 100% completely effective in eliminating that disease from the face of the earth by 1948. In fact, it was so successful, that no one in the world has to take a smallpox vaccine anymore. Grateful for this information, I researched and discovered how they made the smallpox vaccine, how it was produced and its ingredients which all led to its effectiveness. The smallpox vaccine is radically different from what are in vaccines today and how they make them. The difference is Big Pharma is protected from lawsuits due to a defective product at the federal level, so companies will do what all companies do...maximize profits while minimizing risks. Risks were eliminated through the federal law banning lawsuits, so Big Pharma focuses on reducing costs by making their vaccines in the cheapest way possible and with the cheapest ingredients. And, because they want to maximize profits, there is no incentive to "eradicate" any disease where the vaccine is no longer needed (very bad business model). I discovered all of this because one person on a post here challenged me with a specific fact and then I took the time to follow up to learn more based on that new fact. I then posted what I found to enlighten others to what I found. Everyone learned something and we are all better off because of it. People may not agree with what I just posted here, but I encourage them to challenge me with facts so I can follow up and we can all keep the learning going.

And, ok, ok...no more use of the term "Mooslem"...I kind of like the "purported religion of peace" better anyway. :)


Sometimes it's a good idea to stop digging when you find yourself in a hole ....
0

#23 User is offline   MontyPython 

  • Pull My Finger.....
  • View gallery
  • Group: Gold
  • Posts: 57,800
  • Joined: 28-February 03

Posted 18 April 2019 - 02:41 PM

View Postusapatriot, on 18 April 2019 - 12:15 PM, said:

Hmmm, if you mean "they'll tear you to shreds quickly and easily" by responding to requests for facts by responding with feelings...I've given up waiting for that to happen. I'm always happy to be informed with facts because it makes me and everyone here smarter. Responding with feelings is nice, but if its not backed with facts especially when requested, the only thing learnt is now you know how someone feels.

For example, in a previous thread a few months ago, I learned from a post the smallpox vaccine was 100% completely effective in eliminating that disease from the face of the earth by 1948. In fact, it was so successful, that no one in the world has to take a smallpox vaccine anymore. Grateful for this information, I researched and discovered how they made the smallpox vaccine, how it was produced and its ingredients which all led to its effectiveness. The smallpox vaccine is radically different from what are in vaccines today and how they make them. The difference is Big Pharma is protected from lawsuits due to a defective product at the federal level, so companies will do what all companies do...maximize profits while minimizing risks. Risks were eliminated through the federal law banning lawsuits, so Big Pharma focuses on reducing costs by making their vaccines in the cheapest way possible and with the cheapest ingredients. And, because they want to maximize profits, there is no incentive to "eradicate" any disease where the vaccine is no longer needed (very bad business model). I discovered all of this because one person on a post here challenged me with a specific fact and then I took the time to follow up to learn more based on that new fact. I then posted what I found to enlighten others to what I found. Everyone learned something and we are all better off because of it. People may not agree with what I just posted here, but I encourage them to challenge me with facts so I can follow up and we can all keep the learning going.

And, ok, ok...no more use of the term "Mooslem"...I kind of like the "purported religion of peace" better anyway. :)


???:scratch:???

You've "given up waiting" for facts in that other thread (as opposed to feelings)?? You were presented with a LONG list of facts supporting his position. Here's a link so you can read it again. I can't help noticing you never bothered to respond to it. Maybe he's the one who should give up waiting.

:coolshades:

This post has been edited by MontyPython: 18 April 2019 - 02:46 PM

0

#24 User is offline   Magic Rat 

  • <no title>
  • Group: Bronze
  • Posts: 6,692
  • Joined: 12-April 04

Posted 18 April 2019 - 02:44 PM

View Postusapatriot, on 18 April 2019 - 12:15 PM, said:

Hmmm, if you mean "they'll tear you to shreds quickly and easily" by responding to requests for facts by responding with feelings...I've given up waiting for that to happen. I'm always happy to be informed with facts because it makes me and everyone here smarter. Responding with feelings is nice, but if its not backed with facts especially when requested, the only thing learnt is now you know how someone feels.

For example, in a previous thread a few months ago, I learned from a post the smallpox vaccine was 100% completely effective in eliminating that disease from the face of the earth by 1948. In fact, it was so successful, that no one in the world has to take a smallpox vaccine anymore. Grateful for this information, I researched and discovered how they made the smallpox vaccine, how it was produced and its ingredients which all led to its effectiveness. The smallpox vaccine is radically different from what are in vaccines today and how they make them. The difference is Big Pharma is protected from lawsuits due to a defective product at the federal level, so companies will do what all companies do...maximize profits while minimizing risks. Risks were eliminated through the federal law banning lawsuits, so Big Pharma focuses on reducing costs by making their vaccines in the cheapest way possible and with the cheapest ingredients. And, because they want to maximize profits, there is no incentive to "eradicate" any disease where the vaccine is no longer needed (very bad business model). I discovered all of this because one person on a post here challenged me with a specific fact and then I took the time to follow up to learn more based on that new fact. I then posted what I found to enlighten others to what I found. Everyone learned something and we are all better off because of it. People may not agree with what I just posted here, but I encourage them to challenge me with facts so I can follow up and we can all keep the learning going.

And, ok, ok...no more use of the term "Mooslem"...I kind of like the "purported religion of peace" better anyway. :)


So the fire wasn't started by "Mooslims", but Big Pharma Phirebugs? Do tell.
0

#25 User is online   JerryL 

  • <no title>
  • View gallery
  • Group: Bronze
  • Posts: 12,406
  • Joined: 06-October 03

Posted 18 April 2019 - 08:31 PM

View Postusapatriot, on 18 April 2019 - 02:33 AM, said:

Apparently, in a separate thread, a couple snowflake-envy posters got their "sensibilities" hurt when I referred to the "religion-that-cannot-be-named" as Mooslims. Michael Savage uses the same term for the "religion-that-cannot-be-named" because he stated that is how they pronounce it. Maybe I'll use your term "the religion-that-cannot-be-named" in the future so as to not unintentionally upset the tender sensibilities of any readers on RN. Better yet, maybe I'll use the term "the religion of peace" as they use that term to describe their religion, but there's just a little too much evidence to the contrary, so I have to preface it with "purported".

So what if they pronounce it Mooslim ? It is still spelled Muslim. But, whatever floats your boat.

By the way, you ę†hurt†Ľ nothing of mine in the thread that you abandoned after I provided specific facts showing you are wrong about the French.

Whatevs.
0

#26 User is offline   Ontop 

  • <no title>
  • Group: Community-Supported
  • Posts: 66
  • Joined: 20-August 08

Posted 19 April 2019 - 07:18 AM

View Postusapatriot, on 18 April 2019 - 08:09 AM, said:

This is all good information, but irrelevant and immaterial to the cause of the Notre Dame fire. As I noted above, ďAll I can tell you is that at the moment the fire began none of my employees were on the site. We respected all procedures," said Julien Le Bras, a representative for the firm repairing the Notre Dame roof and spiral. Everything you mentioned could only be a possibility if someone on the construction crew was still working, but they weren't. Other than the construction crew, there wouldn't be any reason why anyone would be on the roof other than for nefarious reasons. Also, I heard on the radio that the cathedral has literally dozens of 24x7 monitored security cameras that covers every square inch of the cathedral. If the French authorities are truly interested in getting to the truth and stopping any conspiracy theories, they would find out who that was on the roof and if that person was on the roof for legitimate purposes. Regardless of what they find out, they should be completely transparent.


Not irrelevant at all.

We have fire watches. Typically 1-2 even 3 hours AFTER using heat producing tools. A fire watch utilizes one or two individuals to stand by at or near the days work site to ensure that we don't have a situation where underlying insulation, wooden structure or any other combustibles are smoldering after our work. This smoldering of combustibles is not often seen immediately. When working on buildings we encounter negative pressures which can pull heat and flames INTO the building that is not easily noticed at the time.

Is the fire watch procedure the end all? Unfortunately no.

Don't just off hand reject the possibility that workers inadvertently started the fire just because the contractor followed all procedures OR it doesn't fit the narrative you are pushing.

The contractor in the links I provided "Followed all procedures" too.
0

#27 User is offline   Noclevermoniker 

  • Wire Dachsies Matter
  • Group: +Silver Community Supporter
  • Posts: 17,103
  • Joined: 13-November 03

Posted 19 April 2019 - 08:01 AM

View PostLadybird, on 18 April 2019 - 05:26 AM, said:


There are no white appearing mooselimbs?
0

#28 User is offline   Ladybird 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Copper Community Supporter
  • Posts: 17,181
  • Joined: 26-October 07

Posted 19 April 2019 - 01:38 PM

View PostNoclevermoniker, on 19 April 2019 - 08:01 AM, said:

There are no white appearing mooselimbs?

The poster I responded to brought up the ďif it was a white manĒ question.

Of course there are millions of white Muslims. Marc Lamparello is not one of them.

https://www.northjer...now/3517988002/

https://www.thedaily...edral-on-monday
0

#29 User is online   JerryL 

  • <no title>
  • View gallery
  • Group: Bronze
  • Posts: 12,406
  • Joined: 06-October 03

Posted 20 April 2019 - 11:28 PM

View PostMontyPython, on 18 April 2019 - 02:41 PM, said:

???:scratch:???

You've "given up waiting" for facts in that other thread (as opposed to feelings)?? You were presented with a LONG list of facts supporting his position. Here's a link so you can read it again. I can't help noticing you never bothered to respond to it. Maybe he's the one who should give up waiting.

:coolshades:

I donít think he is coming back to either thread.
0

#30 User is offline   MontyPython 

  • Pull My Finger.....
  • View gallery
  • Group: Gold
  • Posts: 57,800
  • Joined: 28-February 03

Posted 21 April 2019 - 08:12 AM

View PostJerryL, on 20 April 2019 - 11:28 PM, said:

I donít think he is coming back to either thread.


Yeah, it doesn't look like it. That's a shame, in my opinion. I never "disliked" usapatriot, it's just that he was wrong in that thread, and way off-base trying to paint you & Rat as "snowflakes", LOL. I wish he'd just scrape together a little courage and admit his errors.

:shrug:
0

#31 User is online   JerryL 

  • <no title>
  • View gallery
  • Group: Bronze
  • Posts: 12,406
  • Joined: 06-October 03

Posted 21 April 2019 - 08:51 AM

View PostMontyPython, on 21 April 2019 - 08:12 AM, said:

Yeah, it doesn't look like it. That's a shame, in my opinion. I never "disliked" usapatriot, it's just that he was wrong in that thread, and way off-base trying to paint you & Rat as "snowflakes", LOL. I wish he'd just scrape together a little courage and admit his errors.

:shrug:

No dislike or animosity here either. People donít like having their preconceived notions challenged. France has frequently been a whipping boy here over the years. There is a lot in France that goes against American ideals. There is also a lot thatbis admirable.
0

#32 User is offline   Alexis 

  • <no title>
  • Group: +Copper Community Supporter
  • Posts: 1,889
  • Joined: 14-January 06

Posted 21 April 2019 - 09:54 AM

View Postusapatriot, on 17 April 2019 - 09:22 PM, said:

This much we do know.

  • This video was taken at 5:05 pm.
  • At 5.20 pm, calls were sent to emergency services referring to a fire in the attic of the cathedral.
  • “All I can tell you is that at the moment the fire began none of my employees were on the site. We respected all procedures," said Julien Le Bras, a representative for the firm repairing the Notre Dame roof and spiral.
  • Within only hours after the start of the fire and even before the fire was put out, "Officials have been cautious about speculating on the cause of the fire, but Paris prosecutor Remy Heitz said there is no evidence of arson." How would ANYONE know that before investigators had an opportunity to examine the building to determine the origin of the fire???


They practically fall over themselves to quickly rule out arson.

So, let's interpret these events. No workers were present who would have been the only personnel to have a reason to be on the roof. Every construction zone is off limits to ANYONE not with the construction firm. An unauthorized person was on the roof and a flash is seen at 5:05 pm. At 5:20 pm, the fire alarm system alerted emergency fire crews of a possible fire. Coincidence? Well, if you believe it was, then please contact me as I have some some prime real estate to sell you in south Florida. Remy Heitz, who is a prosecutor, not a fire marshal or investigator, states there's no evidence of arson. That is utterly laughable because at that point he could have easily stated that there isn't any evidence that it wasn't arson. Sounds like they are already covering for someone...hmmm, I wonder who? Also, how come this video isn't front page news? Hmmm????


They practically fall over themselves to rule out arson.

This post has been edited by Alexis: 21 April 2019 - 09:55 AM

0

#33 User is online   Dean Adam Smithee 

  • School of the Cold Hard Facts
  • View gallery
  • Group: Platinum Community Supporter
  • Posts: 21,096
  • Joined: 11-December 04

Posted 21 April 2019 - 03:09 PM

View PostAlexis, on 21 April 2019 - 09:54 AM, said:

They practically fall over themselves to rule out arson.


*MOST*
arson is almost immediately obvious to a trained eye. That's because *MOST* arson - especially arson done by an 'outsider' - almost always involves a flammable liquid 'accelerant'. Something you wouldn't normally find in a place like a church. And it burns differently. I've seen enough industrial fires to know the difference between a chemical fire and, say, a wood fire started by hot wires from an electrical short or sparks from a welder. Two totally different animals: Different flame temperatures, different smoke, different spread patterns, etc., etc. And it's just not possible to make a chemically-induced fire look like NOT a chemically-induced fire.

FIRST thing is, you look not at what burned but what didn't - and there was much that didn't. Look at the heat damage, the smoke damage, the smoke patterns. A good investigator would be able to say within minutes that it "probably" was or "probably" wasn't arson. This is ESPECIALLY true in today's high-tech world where what used to need a weeks worth of lab work with a gas chromatograph/mass spectrometer (GC/MS) can now be done on-site within seconds with portable equipment. (Heck, even *I* have a handheld spectroradiometer)

YES, OF COURSE, a clever arsonist can fool an investigator, at least initially. You can't make a chemically-induced fire look like NOT a chemically-induced fire... but you CAN make it look 'accidental' rather than arson. Make it look like, for example, an open can of paint thinner got knocked over by a stray cat and then was ignited by a hot cigarette butt in an ashtray. But those are ALMOST ALWAYS "inside jobs" rather than "some guy on a roof doing something".

GUY ON A ROOF?
If in fact, it was that? The "flash" would have been lighting something off - perhaps a thermite stick or even a simple automobile flare - then dropping through a hole in the roof. Problem is time; hard to explain a 15-20 minute difference between that and alarms going off. The device itself would have set off alarms. (Kids, don't try this at home: Light an automobile flare, carry it indoors, count the seconds - not minutes but seconds - until it sets off the smoke detector.)

This post has been edited by Dean Adam Smithee: 21 April 2019 - 03:10 PM

0

#34 User is offline   Howsithangin 

  • The more ppl I meet, the more I like my cats
  • Group: +Bronze Community Supporter
  • Posts: 27,826
  • Joined: 07-March 08

Posted 21 April 2019 - 10:06 PM

View PostAlexis, on 21 April 2019 - 09:54 AM, said:

They practically fall over themselves to rule out arson.

:yeahthat:
0

Share this topic:


  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users