Oh schnap, my bad... Come to think of it, I do remember reading about that on CNN.com a few weeks ago. I just completely forgot about it :1orglaugh

And don't forget this. He's got to have something to do in his free time

http://i41.photobucket.com/albums/e2...in_clubbin.jpg

.....well
 

This is obviously a conspiracy carried out by several large auto manufactures.

Follow my explanation to freedom!

Osama Bin knocks our shit down -> We pound Afghanistan?s bum -> Afghanistan was to small and Bush didn't get off, so off to Iraq -> Now no longer a virgin Bush wills Isreal to give Lebanon a "Hot Carl" -> Oil prices rise -> Auto manufactures market fuel efficient cars with the help of government tax breaks and 0% financing -> Alternative fuels are produced and Danny Divito gets a beaner from Carrot Top.

See! Fucking obvious huh? Shit where?s my beer? Fucking illuminati must have stolen it! I would do something to fight them but sunlight frightens me.


BTW this thread is retarded, 101st Airborne you mother fuckers! Fuck with America and you best believe we will invade your shit. :thumbsup

:1orglaugh :1orglaugh :thumbsup

And with countries like Iraq who didn?t ?fuck? with America... Have resources that America wants and you best believe we will invade your shit. :thumbsup

:1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

No I didn't. My statement was directly in relation to your assertion that no modern skyscrapper had collapsed through fire which happen to occur on or as a result of the events on 9/11

You are welcome.

Never said they suffered a similar fate.

To repeat. Just because something has 'never happened before' is not a guarantee or evidence that it 'will never happen'. I will quote you an example. The sun has never expanded and vaporised this planet. However this is not evidence that this will never happen. The use of 'what has been the case' and extending it to 'this is the case and always will be the case' dribbling nonsense


Then if we accept that 97% of the evidence is removed then any 'proof' you provide is equally bunkus

Have already answered this. Just because building A did not catch fire does not mean building B cannot catch fire. Proximity of an item to an explosive event is a factor in the fate of said item but not the sole determining factor.

Correct. You cannot understand why building 7 collapsed. You therefore fulminate and seek answers in conspriacy theories. The same thinking underpins religious faith and conspiracy theorists. The need to have order and explain the unexplainable. Conspiracy theories are the new religion.


You capitalize for the same reason you call me (and others) a faggot. Misplaced aggression due to fear and insecurity mixed with latent homosexuality.

All i can say is that it doesnt matter what you believe. the main point is to question everything, do your own research, and come to your own conclusion.

believing everything the govt and media tells you makes you just as foolish as some of the conspiricy nuts...

Its fucking PATHETIC anyone on here believes the governments side of this. Basic physics (that you do NOT need to be smart to understand) prove the government is lying.

I find it truly disgusting that people have so much trust in the government - in a country founded on not trusting the government.

America started as a new system of checks-and-balances where one goverment office oversees another - everyone held accountable.

We moved away from this system a long time ago, covert operations, black budgets, and no oversight.

For you pro-bush dumbfucks who believe anything, its this simple:

THE WTC TOWERS COLLAPSED AT FREEFALL SPEED. The government claimed it was one floor crashing onto the next, but with NO RESISTANCE??

This is literally physically impossable unless floors were being demolished as the building was coming down - TONS of steel and concrete cannot instantly break apart, period. Thats what would have needed to happen for the governments story to be true.

Okay... you dont need a physics degree to understand steel and metal do not instantly dissolve. Please tell me none of you are stupid enough to not admit this is at least VERY SUSPICIOUS.

I hate conspiracy theories, but this is the first that actually has my attention.

Fire alone can?t bring down a modern skyscraper friend, this is confirmed. So the only thing you could have been referring to in 9/11 then is that no modern skyscrapers have been in such a situation as getting slammed by two jets full of delicious fuel. No amount of nut sucking or dick stroking you do is going to change what you meant, so you might as well stop it. Or don?t, it?s up to you.


>_<


And the reason that they didn?t suffer a similar fate? Magic? Delicious cock sundae?s protected them from structural damage, but the cock sundae just didn?t quite cover up all of building #7? Yeah that sounds about as logical as what FEMA said eh?


Did you really just say that about the sun?? Our sun is a type of star. OH WAIT, don?t respond back quite yet faggoteer! Our sun is a yellow dwarf, and because of other yellow dwarfs THAT WE?VE OBSERVED we *think* that our sun will follow the same eventual life cycle and eventually expand and vaporize most of the terrestrial planets. Now, here?s the thing little guy: scientists have OBSERVED other yellow dwarfs that have expanded, which is why they can make the assertion that one day our sun will eventually do the same thing. My dear faggot, we have NEVER OBSERVED A MODERN SKYSCRAPPER falling down because of intense fire, so your stupid fucking quote is about as accurate as I am taking a piss.

-And let me you I?ve hit the ceiling before when I?ve pissed if that tells you my accuracy.


I can?t provide hardcore proof, just circumstantial evidence. Kind of like the Scott Peterson trial, you know the one, where a man was sentenced to death with no real evidence? Yeah, it?s kinda like that. Kinda.


Already stated previously, etc. Building #7 was further away from WTC than many other buildings. Many other buildings caught fire and suffered damage from falling debris, none magically fell like building #7 did, which means obviously that Gamara used his hard shell to deflect the debris and intense heat from the other buildings but his shell just wasn?t quite big enough to protect #7. Fucking Gamara, I hate that guy.


I understand that the reasons that FEMA gave are completely unsubstantiated, which leads me to believe that building #7 collapsing was setup in advance. Does this mean that the government was behind 9-11? No. Does this mean that a select group of people knew about 9-11 in advance? Probable. As for conspiracy theories being the new religion, that?s a bunch of shit. It?s healthy to question the answers you are given. Religion on the other hand is usually never a good thing. How many people have died because of religion? Compare that number to how many have died because they delve in conspiracy. Get back to me when you have the numbers faggot. =)

By the way, I really love that big word you used there friend, fulminate. I like it! You may be a faggot but that word makes up for it, god DAMN I love that fucking word.


Latent homosexuality? I?m a full blown queer (when I want to be). I call people (and others) faggots because I can. I?m a big believer in this magical thing called FREE SPEECH. Uh oh, there I go capitalizing again for your benefit. Oh I?m so silly! Tee hee, tee hee, oh shut the fuck up you stupid faggot and go back to sucking some cock.

Great quote !!

A lot of people know what really happend, but the mainstream media is controlled and trying to surpress the 911 truth movement and any important questions raised.

What would they have to gain by this?

It's replaying starting now on cspan. Might be worth a watch because saturday night tv sucks, lol.

one last time...a little logic. i am sure it will be wasted, but hopefully it will help you with a breakthough in your paranoia and delusions.

a) you are not an engineer or structural engineer and are not qualified to make such statements as "fire alone cannot bring down a modern skyscraper"

b) "fire alone" did not bring either building down. significant structural damage combined with fire did. you might have missed the massive holes punched in the buildings by the jets. look around, i am sure you can find pics or video.

nothing like this has ever happened in the history of the world... so there is no rational way to argue what should happen or what might typically happen in such a situation.

c) no other buildings on the planet compared to the WTC, either in size or in the unique construction of the towers. with the exception of this event, never in the history of the world, have buildings similar in construction and size been hit by two passenger jets full of fuel.

d) since c. is true... and your argument relies on a comparissons of what "does/should happen" which do not exist, or where none can be made, your argument is 100% invalid and rediculous.


:disgust :disgust

one last time... and PLEASE pay attention, that's all I ask of you with reading disabilities

a) Fire has *NEVER* brought down a MODREN skyscraper. I don?t have to be a fucking engineer to know that SINGLE FACT. Ya dig me fucking faggot? Well, I know you do in that way, but that?s not really what I?m referring to so get your eyes off my cock. Oh and please pay close attention to b, you'll get a kick out of it I'm sure.

b) Ok, please, for the love of whatever fucking god you believe in do NOT POST if you CANNOT FUCKING READ THE MOTHER FUCKING THREAD IN THEIR ENTIRETY (for other fucktard, that was ?yelling!?). Building #7 DOES NOT EQUAL the WTC. It did NOT get hit by jets, Building #7 would have LOGICALLY (since you love using logic of course!) suffered about the same or less damage than buildings closest to the WTC, none of which fell. Oh yeah, suck cock.

c) Already answered, this isn?t about the WTC, this is about Building #7. So one more time for you stupid fucker: BUILDING #7 IS NOT THE WTC.

d) Whatever, go suck some more dick faggot.

being an angry and hot tempered conspiracy theorist puts you only a couple steps away from blowing up a government building yourself.

haha... get some help.

:1orglaugh :1orglaugh :1orglaugh

Ok, so planted explosives brought down #7... What makes people think the US govt did it when Al Qaeda has already admitted to the attacks?

What a great response there bud. At least I can tell buildings apart you stupid fuckbag.

WTC7 fell in 6.4 seconds. Thats is free fall speed.

Dunno, I don't think #7 was brought down by the US govt at all but rather a group that was to gain financially. The kind of work necessary to 'plant' the explosives in #7 would have really been impossible by Al Qaeda. Those that think the US Gov. is behind it though are more than titled to their opinions.

Well since it takes at least a month of planing and prep work to plant all the explosivies. Someone would have to have given the key to the building to Al Qaeda.

Or maybe they used box cutters to open up the doors.

They could have fired a missle at it.

:thumbsup At least that makes more sense than it falling to fire damage :P

Maybe so, but for a 4 cornered building to fall straight down. That takes specially placed charges thru out the building. And to have those charges placed you need access to the building 3-4 week in advance.

Agreed it is up to me. And I know what I meant and said what I meant. The fact that you have convinced yourself that no modern skyscrapper can be bought down by fire simply means you cannot accept what I mean so you believe what you want it to mean. Your delusions are the issue. Not my statement.


Have been through this already. Refer previous posts.

Yes I did say that about the sun and given the distance of stars from Earth and the size of yellow dwarf stars I would be impressed that we have directly observed the life cycle of yellow dwarf stars. That aside and if you wish to try and play this game then okay here we go again.

'I have observed buildings and have evidence of other buildings destroyed by fire ergo all buildings can be destroyed by fire' is the same as saying 'I have not observed modern skyscrappers destroyed by fire and have no evidence of modern skyscrappers destroyed by fire ergo no modern skyscrappers can be destroyed by fire'.

Observational assumptions based on what has happened or equally based on what has not happened is not quite the evidence or confirmation that you seem to think it is. For you to understand this you need to abandon your prejudice and preconceptions and actually think it through logically.

Your standards of hygiene are on a par with your standard of logical analysis

So 'modern skyscrappers cannot be destroyed by fire' is not hardcore proof? So why the fuck do you keep quoting it like it was?

Again have already answered this. Try and respond with intelligence rather than using the word 'magic' or references to 'Gamera' of whom I have never heard and suspect that I do not wish to either.

So the reasons given are completely unsubstantiated and leads you to believe the collapsing was setup in advance. Why? There is no linkage between the two statements.

Again big of you

What like say the hi-jackers perhaps?

I agree its healthy. So far I have questioned your intial statements and virtually every answer you have given and find them all wanting. Your response is to ignore the points raised and indulge in tedious abuse.

Millions have died over the centuries in the cause of various religions. Excluding suicides (you know the Gov/Aliens/Giant Lizards are coming to get me but I'll thwart their evil plans aargh!) I would say roughly zero people have died in the name of conspiracy. In short religion is taken far more seriously.This should tell you something about the relevant merits of conspiricy theories compared to religious ones.

The variation in font size and the urge to capitilize - is that the equivalent of writing in green ink?

You call people faggots because you can okay I get that. Its dull but okay. Just curious though what do you mean by '(and others)'. People we have covered so who else do you call faggots? Aliens? Your invisible friend perhaps. It would explain a lot if you helped out with this one

stupid possibly.... but at least, still living in reality.

if you have to end every sentence with a personal attack, its to deflect attention from the weakness of the "points" you think you are making.

Ask yourself this, who benefited from 9/11? I can't think of anyone except the Bush admin. After 9/11 Bush's popularity soared, he was able to take almost complete control of the country and pass any law in the name of terror. He used the fear of terror as an excuse to invade Iraq, he used the fear of terror to pass the Patriot Act, he used the fear of terror as a reason to tap phone lines without warrants, and he has used terror to accomplish just about everything else he has done (inlcuding being re-elected). To this day he still does not make speeches without using the word terror.

He mentions terror constantly but has not mentioned bin Ladens name in 3 years, doesnt that seem odd to anyone? And for anyone to think its beyond them to take out 3000 of its own citizens yet its okay to take out 200,000 Iraqi's better think twice.

Putting all the things about 9/11 that don't add up aside I would still question it. I firmly believe this admin (especially Cheney and Rumsfeld) have learned quite a few things from the Nazi's and how they were able to take complete control of a country and have applied them to this govt. The Nazi's were very proficient at using propaganda through the media, this administration has attempted to do the same thing with paying off reporters, making its own news stories and sending them to the media, and there's FOX News. The Nazi's were able to sway the German people by also using fear and patriotism (sound familiar?). In 1933 the German Parliament was burned to the ground. The Nazi's blamed the Communists (terrorists) and immediately declared a state of emergency and suspended their constitution (one month after 9/11 came the Patriot Act). It was later discovered that the Nazi's were behind the fire.

The bottom line is there is no better way to control people than through fear. Bush and company fully realize it and have used it to constantly since 9/11. Imagine if Clinton would have done the same after the OKC bombing, the republicans would have went berserk.

Bin Laden actually admitted having nothing to do with 911. also, FBI recently admits they have no hard evidence linking bin laden to 911.

Infact, the FBI *refuses* to say Bin Laden was involved.

Yeah, ?my delusions?. I have not convinced myself of anything, the evidence has done that little tommy. No modern skyscraper has been brought down by fire. None. Zero. Zip. Nada. It?s hardly delusional when there hasn?t been ONE SINGLE SKYSCRAPER brought down by flames. Furthermore, structural engineers seem to be saying the same thing (that fire alone could *never* bring down a modern skyscraper) including those commissioned by FEMA. Ya got that little buddy? =)


Getting pretty pathetic there tommy boy. Buildings close to WTC didn?t suffer the same fate that #7 did? why? Again, because of magic? Luck? Jesus?s second coming? Maybe Mohammed asked them politely to not please fall even though they suffered essentially the same identical conditions that #7 did? Damn that Mohammed, he?s a pretty powerful playah? I guess.



You are a fucking moron. I call you out on your stupid fucking ?analogy? or whatever the hell you pretended you were trying to prove. We have ?observed? the life cycle of yellow dwarf stars directly based on what we understand about stellar events. It?s not like we have a telescope/camera system powerful enough to say zoom in to even the closest star, but based on the observational characteristics scientists have came up with a pretty decent working THEORY as to their life cycle. Sorry if I didn?t make it that clear for you tommy boy, I know you have that whole issue with reading and comprehending. Don't feel that bad about it tom tom, I have a problem with flatuence!

Don't feel that bad about your disorder though tom tom, I myself have a problem with flatulence!


Wow? what a load of faggot shit. It?s hardly the same thing; normal buildings are easily destroyed by fire ? most buildings are not made with such finesse as a STEEL SKYSCRAPER is. However, many buildings that suffer fire damage are not destroyed, including homes primarily made of wood, but that?s another matter. STEEL SKYSCRAPERS on the other hand CANNOT be destroyed by fire alone. It is technically impossible and has been stated as such by structural engineers. Even the structural engineers who were hired by FEMA consent to that point ? they themselves say it is IMPOSSIBLE for fire alone to have destroyed a skyscraper. They claim that #7 was destroyed due to structural instability from falling debris from the WTC in combination with intense fire. Since buildings much closer to the WTC were exposed to the SAME FALLING DEBRIS, the SAME INTENSE FIRE, and did NOT fall, we can take FEMA?s report dubious at best. So get this through your head my dear faggot: It is I M P O S S I B L E for a STEEL SKYSCRAPER to be destroyed by fire based on FACTUAL DATA.


Yes, my hygiene is identical to my logical analysis? lmao, nice try faggy one. Fire cannot destroy a steel skyscraper friend. I hope you realize this by now. If not, I feel so sorry for you tommy boy.


No, I have no hardcore proof in what I believe who/what group took down Building #7. There is plenty of proof to support that modern STEEL SKYSCRAPERS cannot be destroyed by fire.


You haven?t heard of Gamera you stupid faggot fuck? Jesus Christ, that?d be funny if it wasn?t so depressing. Gamera is a giant turtle who defends those who cannot defend themselves, another great pop-icon from Japan. I would recommend watching a few Gamera movies but I?m sure you?ll start screaming halfway through NO THIS IS NOT LOGICAL GIANT TURTLES THAT BIG CANNOT EXIST LOL EVEN THOUGH I HAVE NOT OBSERVED A GIANT TURTLE ROFL.


*sighs* Fema claims building was taken out by fire + structural damage, which is fairly unsubstantiated. This leads me to believe then that the collapse of #7 was setup in advance by another entity since Al Qaeda could not have done it without hundreds of hours of prep work + inside help. Simple enough for you shit for brains?


Thanks boy! Keep your eyes off my cock though please. It?s making me kind of nervous and I can?t perform well when I?m nervous :(


Lmao, yeah, box-cutting maniacs were the true and only masterminds behind this operation all right. ?Oh dear god he has a box-cutter! Whatever shall a plane full of people do??? Oh my god, the box-cutter, it?s so scary!?. Go back to sucking cock, you are really good at that. Not so much at debunking conspiracy theories though. =(


I have responded every point you have raised you mother fucking faggot while you sit back and continue to jerk off. I have debunked just about everything thus far you have said using analytical thinking and just pure logic. You on the other hand keep spewing nonsense such as ?just because you haven?t seen it doesn?t mean it?s not possible LMAO?. I have not seen a giant knife wielding gorilla serial killer running around looking for his next victim either but I guess to you that?s possible eh? Guess that?s ?logic? to you? stupid fucking faggot. Oh I?m sorry, you think that?s tedious abuse. Maybe this will be a bit better for you: Guess that?s ?logic? to you? you inferior closet-concealed troll.


*claps!* The little guy finally agrees that one of his statements was horrendously stupid. Yaaaah! Only a few dozen left to go and I can call it a night.


That?s a big negatory captain re-re, it?s mainly getting the unimportant statements out of the way to keep you focused. I know that you have a reading disorder so I try to make it as easy as possible for ya assclown.


*yawns* Really reaching there kid. You are the one that said ?and others? so I was just reiterating what you said. But because of your reading disability, it?s to be expected you missed that.

Anything else my little cum guzzler?

fire alone did not bring down the WTC. two huge fucking passenger jets flew right through them.

your tin foil hat is on too tight.

The twin towers were designed to take many impact from jumbo jets...

Each tower was designed to survive the impact and fire from a collision by a 707-340 carrying 23,000 gallons of fuel. The similar- sized 767-200s that hit the towers were each carrying about 10,000 gallons of fuel.

Each tower was supported by both a palisade of columns forming its outer wall and a bundle of 47 massive steel columns in its core structure. Like all large engineered structures, the towers were over-engineered to support many times anticipated loads, to survive severe and improbable events, including bombings and fires. The plane crashes severed about 33 of the North Tower's and 24 of the South Tower's 240 perimeter columns. The South Tower impact trajectory suggests its core structure was barely damaged. Absent severe winds and earthquakes, each tower should have easily survived damage to even a majority of its columns. Each tower's crash and fire damage was limited to an asymmetrical minority of columns and a few floors. Yet each tower collapsed

Didn't I just get through saying to you on page 2 that I have NOT BEEN TALKING ABOUT THE WTC you stupid MOTHER FUCKER? I am talking about Building #7, one last time for you god damn STUPID mother fucker, BUILDING #7 IS NOT THE WORLD TRADE CENTER, can I make this any simpler for you pal? God damn you are one STUPID MOTHER FUCKING IDIOT.

This whole thing is like arguing politics and religion...

The two beliefs will not change.. no matter who says what...

You have 3 buildings that fell at freefall speed.. all near each other.. all within minutes apart.. and are the first in the history of steel frame buildings to fall from fire.. Coincidence?

And speaking of the fire... even after the arguments that jet fuel doesn't burn hot enough to do as claimed, it can be seen by the photo posted in this thread that most of the fuel exploded outside the building.. and the fires lasted a very short period of time.. but there are those who will not be convinced of anything other than the fires brought em down..

Who was involved... There are those that know the facts, which will come out some day..

But til that happens, threads like this will be full of opinions, references, slams, yada yada.. and nothing will change.. Those who think it was more than the gov't is saying will still be labeled as conspiracy nuts, and those who believe the gov't will still be sheep..

Then in a month or so, another thread will pop up and the same scenario will take place.. and again.. nothing will change...

As for me.. I'm still trying to figure out how a plane with a 135' wing span and 2, 6 ton engines slammed into a building at 500 mph and managed to get through a 16 foot hole.. Some of the explanations given by the gov't and other folks are hillarious.. :)

Myself, I'm wondering how a plane got close enough to the Pentagon to do that damage. The whitehouse has a missile defense system on it's roof. What does the Pentagon have... a cannon that fires liberal hippies? Seriously, why the fuck wasn't that jet shot down ASAP? It's scary to think that the PENTAGON was hit due to government ineptness if anything.

I think this 2 minute video says it all

https://youtube.com/watch?v=rVLhE7JjMZ8&NR

what does building 7 have to do with skyscrapers burning and collapsing due to fire??
your meds are wearing off possibly?

thats not at all true. they had no concept of planes that big when the buildings were designed. if i recall correctly, they were designed specifically to withstand imapcts from 707's.

It's time to tell the truth about Notabook. Although not without overlap and simplification, I plan to identify three primary positions on Notabook's initiatives. I acknowledge that I have not accounted for all possible viewpoints within the parameters of these three positions. Nevertheless, to get even the simplest message into the consciousness of what I call dour knuckle-draggers, it has to be repeated at least 50 times. Now, I don't want to insult your intelligence by telling you the following 50 times, but Notabook's teachings should be labeled like a pack of cigarettes. I'm thinking of something along the lines of, "Warning: It has been determined that Notabook's vaporings are intended to generate alienation and withdrawal." Many of Notabook's cop-outs have been criticized for being slanted in favor of a particular stance. And that's the honest truth.