9/11, 7/7, Covid-1984 & the War on Freedom :: View topic - Were explosives in the twin towers for years?

FAQ

Memberlist

Chat

Usergroups

Calendar

Profile

Were explosives in the twin towers for years?
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 Next

9/11, 7/7, Covid-1984 & the War on Freedom Forum Index -> General

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author

Message

chipmunk stew
Moderate Poster

Joined: 19 Jul 2006
Posts: 833

Posted: Mon Jul 24, 2006 2:19 pm Post subject:

blackcat wrote:

Quote:

his paper on the WTC collapse in which he posits demolition by thermate was never submited for peer review. One wonders why?

A blatant lie and you know it. This has been covered elsewhere in this forum.
* off shill - you aren't worth the time. Go talk with your peers behind bars.

As far as I know, Jones' work has been reviewed by his peers (other 9/11 Scholars) but that's not what people generally mean when they talk about "peer review" in the academic sense.

Peer review involves submittal to an independent board of reviewers with expertise in the field of study of the subject of the paper, who then endorse the paper (signing their names to it as reviewers) and publish it, along with their review, in a reputable journal--or they reject it.

IronSnot
Relentless Limpet Shill

Joined: 07 Jul 2006
Posts: 595
Location: Australia

Posted: Mon Jul 24, 2006 2:32 pm Post subject:

Well that's not really an option just now then is it?

kbo234
Validated Poster

Joined: 10 Dec 2005
Posts: 2017
Location: Croydon, Surrey

Posted: Mon Jul 24, 2006 2:52 pm Post subject:

Jay Ref wrote:

I'm staying just for you. Needling stupid neo-Nazi's is fun. Sorry, I'm guilty of a redundancy in that last sentence. Can you find it?

Most people on this site loathe Zionist creeps like you. If you are looking to identify 'Nazis' as Zionist-haters then I will have to plead guilty to the charge.

However, I put it to you that a much fairer test of what constitutes the popular perception of a Nazi is to seek out Nazi-style behaviour.

You know the sort of thing.....imprisoning a particular racial group in a ghetto, destroying their very means of survival, randomly massacring them from the air, bulldozing their homes down on top of them, destroying their water supply, starving them.

....or despoiling an entire country, massacring hundreds of innocents in retribution for the capture of 2 soldiers.

That's my idea of Nazi.

Guessed who I'm talking about yet? Yes, you know and what makes me mad is not dribblers like you but the fact that Zionist money power has such a hold on this country that I, through my Zionist-controlled government, am a party to this evil.

Fun wouldn't be the word but it is at least satisfying to come across the likes of you and say what I think, knowing that the only reason you are here is to put your finger in the dam to prevent the truth about your fellows getting out.

The only way they will stand a chance of concealing their guilt will be to start a nuclear war.....Oops, it looks like they've had that idea already and are hard at work on the project. Iran are going to get it whether they like it or not, aren't they? Then, in come China....then it's curtains for everyone?

When we're all dead and bankers lord it over the ashes I suppose you can deem your Zionist venture a great success.

chipmunk stew
Moderate Poster

Joined: 19 Jul 2006
Posts: 833

Posted: Mon Jul 24, 2006 2:56 pm Post subject:

IronSnot wrote:

Well that's not really an option just now then is it?

Smoke

Why not?

IronSnot
Relentless Limpet Shill

Joined: 07 Jul 2006
Posts: 595
Location: Australia

Posted: Mon Jul 24, 2006 3:07 pm Post subject:

chipmunk stew wrote:

Why not?

Peer group pressure.

chipmunk stew
Moderate Poster

Joined: 19 Jul 2006
Posts: 833

Posted: Mon Jul 24, 2006 3:39 pm Post subject:

IronSnot wrote:

chipmunk stew wrote:

Why not?

Peer group pressure.

Handy excuse.

Jay Ref
Moderate Poster

Joined: 20 Jul 2006
Posts: 511

Posted: Mon Jul 24, 2006 4:05 pm Post subject:

John White wrote:

Jay Ref wrote:

John White wrote:

Very pretty: but your not too smart yourself if you consider that evidance

I'm not usually pedantic; but if one wishes to cast aspersions upon another's intelligence one should take care to use the correct words. I believe the word you would have used had you been educated in something more than a budget-depressed public school with an indolent staff is "you're" which is a contraction of the words "you" and "are" as in the following example:
Even among brain-dead conspiracy theorists you're known to be a dim bulb.

Also "evidance" is actually spelled: "evidence". Usually one must go to a bus station to meet people of your apparent intelligence.

Quote:

Me, I'm very much of the school of thought that a plane hit the pentagon, or at least will be convincingly proved to have done so. I certainly dont consider a clump of pixels 90% hidden from view on one frame to be the best evidance available, should the US gov choose to make it public...and wheres the motive for holding back?

Glad to hear that. Perhaps there is hope for you after all. Sadly though amongst most reasonably intelligent people the phrase:
" I'm very much of the school of thought that a plane hit the pentagon..."
Is rather akin to the phrase:
I'm very much of the school of thought that the earth is round.

Quote:

However, let us assume that everything happened as shown in the presentation (im sure others will be along with their own POV):

What level of skill would a pilot have to have to pull it off? How far did that plane travel just a bare few feet from the deck? How feasable is that?

So the question boils down to: "What level of skill would a pilot have to have to (crash a plane)?"

The short answer is: Minimal. Now landing on a short runway at night with a 30 knot crosswind? There is where skill comes in handy. Pilots who crash planes into buildings are not generally thought of as particularly skillful.

But playing devil's advocate for a moment...what do you think more likely? That the object which struck the Pentagon was:
A. a cruise missile.
B. a drone
C. a commercial 757 taken by force
D. a controlled demolition
E. a UFO
F. a fighter plane (as posited by LC2E)

Before you answer you may wish to peruse this [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_Razor] link. [/url] entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem
(BTW: "Peruse" means to go have yourself a good old butcher's hook mate.)

Quote:

Do you think you could have controlled that plane? Or just anyone? Who'd never actually flown a large plane before? Thats credible to you?

Yes I do. I am a licensed pilot. I only have a private certificate, but yes, even I could fly a 757 in an unsafe manner. Mr. Boeing makes some pretty stout airplanes.

Quote:

Now a pilot of consumate skill and years of experiance...well I suppose there is some vague possibility with a low % factor

And you say this because you are a pilot? An aeronautical engineer? Just what expertise besides looking at internet videos and posting on message boards do you have exactly?

Quote:

A computer on the other hand...well computers can do wonderful things

Its wonderful when one wants to believe

So I guess you are saying it was a drone of some kind? Please now go back and look at that link again and think on the meaning of: entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem if you have the capacity to do so that is.

-z

If a million people "believe" a thing it doesn't make it magically come true. Belief is not wonderful; reality is.

Your attitude is outrageous

Your criticising me based on your presumptions about my education and my "social class???"

"You're" is the correct word.

Quote:

Mate, your a BIG part of the problem

"You're" is the correct word.

Quote:

I will answer your question: B) Drone (which could well have been the hijacked jet under computer control)

Okay...and your evidence for this is? Please note...there are very few extant facilities that handle the drone conversion. I only know of one facility that converts old F4's and F100's into QF4 and QF100 target drones. That would be AMARC @ Davis-Monthan AFB. The conversion of 4 passenger jets would involve the work of many techs over the span of at least 1 year.

Now back to my post. Remember my link to Occam's Razor? You should have read it. The rules of logic dictate that when no evidence to the contrary exists one should always seek the most parsimonious explanation. That is; never add unneccessary layers of complexity. You have just added many layers of complexity...and possess no evidence that such complexity should be considered. This is why I think you are rather slow.

Your conspiracy now involves many hundreds of people to create, hide, control, and coverup. The official conspiracy involves 19 men with minimal training and lots of opportunity who take their orders from a remote terrorist org. Now, which theory fits Occam? Which does not?

Quote:

I'm not going to debate if the technology exists, it clearly does

Sure it does...but not to the degree you think it does.

Quote:

So your a pilot? And your telling me you could pull off a terrorist strike? Great: I wont say good for you

Like I said...a private pilot. Don't take my word for this stuff...go ask the guys who frequent www.airliners.net

Those guys aren't in the "truth movement". They actually know aeroplanes. They'll tell you what they know without having an agenda to push a bogus "movement".

Quote:

In your arrogance you seem to have missed the fact that the vast majority of people never fly jumbo jets, regardless if they believe the official story or question it

That's why I direct you to airliners.net forum. Many of the people who post there actually DO fly jets. When you are in doubt you should turn to an expert in the field...not a conspiracy theorist.

Quote:

The balance of probability is what all humans have to deal with to define "reality": it exists nowhere else but inside our heads

That's great advice. So when a doctor tells you that you have cancer, just think happy thoughts and all will be well.

Quote:

However:

1) You havnt addressed how low this plane is supposed to have flown from the deck into the side of the Pentagon (or that magnificant turn the plane had to make to "line up" for the strike): Pilot or not (and it would be good to see proof of that) your not convincing me there

The plane was surely overspeeded which means it is carrying a great deal of lift potential...it was also in ground effect. Look that up and it may help you to understand that it was no great feat of skill to crash this airplane.

Quote:

2) You havnt addressed the low credibility of why that one quality still is what has been presented as the evidance for the strike, or why, when better footage must exist

Do you have any proof that better footage does exist? Why must it exist? The Pentagon (I worked there in room 5A910 from 1980 to 1982 BTW) has live security. That means there aren't cameras covering all areas outside the bldg. There's no need of them. They place these things where they are needed. This camera was at a traffic control point and hence was pointed at the place where cars are halted and inspected. It wasn't meant to capture a 757 moving at nearly 800ft per second. It's pretty amazing that it caught anything at all!

Quote:

And good luck getting over yourself

I'm not the one who believes that they're smarter than all the world's "sheeple"....you folks are the one spinning a tale in which you play the "real heroes"...so don't even start with me.

-z
_________________
"Knowledge is good"
-Emil Faber

"God in heaven. Here's the hard-headed, evidence-only freak who will not, like we CTers, indulge himself in self-inflating, utterly misconceived fantasies." -kbo234 (who is NOT a nazi) briefly makes sense

gypsum
Moderate Poster

Joined: 29 Mar 2006
Posts: 211
Location: Scotland

Posted: Mon Jul 24, 2006 4:15 pm Post subject:

Jay Ref wrote:

John White wrote:

Very pretty: but your not too smart yourself if you consider that evidance

Jay Ref, last time I checked this site was for people who want to discuss issues on 9/11, it's not for people like you to come and complain about peoples spelling!! Please remember that the majority of people on this site (including me) struggle to keep their opinions on people like you to themselves, but if you're going to come on here and try to insult people like that then you may notice that some peoples patience may start to wear thin. Get a grip ffs Mad

Jay Ref
Moderate Poster

Joined: 20 Jul 2006
Posts: 511

Posted: Mon Jul 24, 2006 4:23 pm Post subject:

gypsum wrote:

Jay Ref wrote:

John White wrote:

Very pretty: but your not too smart yourself if you consider that evidance

I will remind you that "John Smith" took time out from his busy day of fighting the illuminati, the Global Elite, and the NWO in order to go out of his way to call me "not too smart". It's even right there in the quote you made of me being a bad boy...yet you somehow seemed to overlook that fact. I will repeat; when some fool elects to insult my intelligence, said fool can at least take a moment and SPELL properly. Don't you think?

-z
_________________
"Knowledge is good"
-Emil Faber

"God in heaven. Here's the hard-headed, evidence-only freak who will not, like we CTers, indulge himself in self-inflating, utterly misconceived fantasies." -kbo234 (who is NOT a nazi) briefly makes sense

Jay Ref
Moderate Poster

Joined: 20 Jul 2006
Posts: 511

Posted: Mon Jul 24, 2006 4:28 pm Post subject:

kbo234 wrote:

Jay Ref wrote:

I'm staying just for you. Needling stupid neo-Nazi's is fun. Sorry, I'm guilty of a redundancy in that last sentence. Can you find it?

Most people on this site loathe Zionist creeps like you. If you are looking to identify 'Nazis' as Zionist-haters then I will have to plead guilty to the charge.

...and just what is a "Zionist"? Hmm? Also who on this board directed me to a "historian" who is actually a lawyer who works for the Aryan Nations thugs? why you did didn't you? Why not admit what you are? Or are you even ashamed of telling the truth about yourself to your troother friends?

Inquiring minds wanna know. Smile

-z
_________________
"Knowledge is good"
-Emil Faber

"God in heaven. Here's the hard-headed, evidence-only freak who will not, like we CTers, indulge himself in self-inflating, utterly misconceived fantasies." -kbo234 (who is NOT a nazi) briefly makes sense

IronSnot
Relentless Limpet Shill

Joined: 07 Jul 2006
Posts: 595
Location: Australia

Posted: Mon Jul 24, 2006 4:34 pm Post subject:

Jay Ref wrote:

facility that converts old F4's and F100's

plurals don't require the apostrophe. Don't feel bad about it though, it's a very 'common' mistake.

Quote:

The plane was surely overspeeded

overspeeded?

Quote:

airplane.

It was an aeroplane above, now it's an airplane, and you say you're a pilot, but you're not consistent in your spelling of the very thing pilots fly?

Jerk.

kbo234
Validated Poster

Joined: 10 Dec 2005
Posts: 2017
Location: Croydon, Surrey

Posted: Mon Jul 24, 2006 5:06 pm Post subject:

Quote:

="Jay Ref

...and just what is a "Zionist"? Hmm? Also who on this board directed me to a "historian" who is actually a lawyer who works for the Aryan Nations thugs? why you did didn't you? Why not admit what you are? Or are you even ashamed of telling the truth about yourself to your troother friends?

I thought that many of us, including me, have struggled hard on many threads to try and answer that question (the Zionist thing).

Remind me what the article and who this lawyer is. I just read an article and agree or disagree with it. In this case I obviously thought the guy was getting it right.
By the way, just because people agree about a diagnosis does not mean they neccessarily agree about a cure. Surely you understand that?

I will have to stop insulting you. You are obviously a sensitive flower like the rest of us.

The reason I take objection to your positions is that I am absolutely convinced that 9/11 was an inside job. I have spent a great deal of time reading around the subject and, although I might be a fool, I have an Honours Degree in Physics that says I ain't.

If 9/11 was an inside job, it follows that those who are apologists for the group that carried it out are also apologists for mass murderers. It is hard to like such a person. It is impossible for me, having seen the style of argument of determined 'conspiracy theory debunkers', to believe that they(you) are engaging with the issues honestly.

If anyone really thinks, having seriously studied all the evidence, that no group within the US government had anything to do with the murders of 9/11 then, how can I put it, it is really beyond me to understand the mind of such an individual.

However, it is really easy to understand that the criminal forces (who have all the money they could ever wish for) who carried out this crime would be very determined to prevent the evidence of their wickedness reaching the public domain. This group would almost certainly pay people to propagandise in favour of their case and against their accusers. This is the simple and obvious explanation that occurs to the decent people that use this site for support, to disseminate information and to organise...in our penniless little way.

I really do try hard to respect everybody Jay_Ref but sometimes it feels like a hard thing to do.

John White
Site Admin

Joined: 27 Mar 2006
Posts: 3187
Location: Here to help!

Posted: Mon Jul 24, 2006 5:32 pm Post subject:

The only person making intelligence any kind of issue is Jay Ref: clearly some kind of insecurity But as far as I'm concerned he can take his "rules" for how people should of shouldnt express themselves and shove it: its pettyfogging irrelevance I will give him a clue about footage: Gas station: Hotel And I maintain that if his interpretation is correct, there must be a lot more evidance than what has been revealed, and it stinks of cover up... and his beloved occams razor would say cover up= reason for a cover up Classic educated idiot _________________ Free your Self and Free the World

Jay Ref
Moderate Poster

Joined: 20 Jul 2006
Posts: 511

Posted: Mon Jul 24, 2006 5:46 pm Post subject:

John White wrote:

The only person making intelligence any kind of issue is Jay Ref: clearly some kind of insecurity

But as far as I'm concerned he can take his "rules" for how people should of shouldnt express themselves and shove it: its pettyfogging irrelevance

I will give him a clue about footage:

Gas station: Hotel

And I maintain that if his interpretation is correct, there must be a lot more evidance than what has been revealed, and it stinks of cover up... and his beloved occams razor would say cover up= reason for a cover up

Classic educated idiot

How many petrol stations do you know of that point their security cameras at the building next door or down the street? No, sad, simple, boring truth be told...they point at the pumps, cash register, etc. What do you expect to see?

Hotels? They point cameras at that which is their property. They don't spend $$ on security systems in order to surveil the building down the street. If they do happen to catch anything, it's in the far distance and by accident not design.

Lastly, do you really think it wasn't a 757 that crashed at the Pentagon? Really? I used to work at that building. I now work downtown. I saw the Pentagon on 9/11 from about 100 yards away from the crash site. I saw the wreckage and there was plenty. I personally know one of the EMT's who responded to the site that day. She saw lots of shredded airplane parts and lots of human remains including remains of AA crew uniforms.

If all that remains true (and it does) and you refuse to accept it then do you expect me to believe that a hotel or petrol station video would convince you that it was actually a 757? No. You lot have lots of excellent quality video from many sources on the second crash into the WTC...still I hear how it "wasn't a 767-200"..."had a missile pod under the wing"....etc...etc...ad-infinitum.

You folks clearly never listen...it's simply because you are after your truth,...you have no interest in the actual truth. That makes you dishonest....and your noble search for truth a sham.

-z
_________________
"Knowledge is good"
-Emil Faber

"God in heaven. Here's the hard-headed, evidence-only freak who will not, like we CTers, indulge himself in self-inflating, utterly misconceived fantasies." -kbo234 (who is NOT a nazi) briefly makes sense

kbo234
Validated Poster

Joined: 10 Dec 2005
Posts: 2017
Location: Croydon, Surrey

Posted: Mon Jul 24, 2006 6:04 pm Post subject:

Jay Ref wrote:

I saw the Pentagon on 9/11 from about 100 yards away from the crash site. I saw the wreckage and there was plenty.

How come the news reports and photos taken at the time don't show any significant wreckage? Well, none that I've seen anyway. It beggars belief that such evidence existed but with all the OTHER evidence that has reached the public domain this evidence somehow didn't make it.

You've got to try to be fair here. No one is going to argue with significant convincing material evidence. People on this site don't believe in an outrageous crime because we want to. We believe it because it seems to us that the EVIDENCE points entirely in that particular direction.

Interesting that you used to work in the Pentagon though.

Jay Ref
Moderate Poster

Joined: 20 Jul 2006
Posts: 511

Posted: Mon Jul 24, 2006 6:23 pm Post subject:

kbo234 wrote:

Jay Ref wrote:

I saw the Pentagon on 9/11 from about 100 yards away from the crash site. I saw the wreckage and there was plenty.

Actually they do. You aren't looking. Go back to the post where I linked to the computer aided analysis of the Pentagon strike. Stay with it, towards the end there are many pictures of the wreckage.

Quote:

You've got to try to be fair here.

Look, when you go and find actual structural engineers, or other experts who agree that there's a case for the "inside job" I'll moderate my tone. But really why must I be docile and "fair" when you folks are getting your so called answers from crackpots, conmen, anarchists, neo-Nazis, and every other malcontent under the sun?

Quote:

No one is going to argue with significant convincing material evidence.

That's the most unintentionally funny thing I've ever seen!

Quote:

People on this site don't believe in an outrageous crime because we want to. We believe it because it seems to us that the EVIDENCE points entirely in that particular direction.

What evidence? What part of Loose Change, Who Killed John O'Neil, In Plane Sight, etc..etc.. rises to the level of "evidence"? Tell me. I want to know! I'd really like to see it!

Quote:

Interesting that you used to work in the Pentagon though.

Why? The Pentagon is HUGE! When I worked the midnight shift we used to have electric cart races around the 5th floor "A" ring. (It's the largest and innermost corridor.) I was a young SP4 communications tech.

You may find it "interesting" but there are likely hundreds of thousands of living ex-GI's who can make the same claim as myself. It's not that interesting.

-z
_________________
"Knowledge is good"
-Emil Faber

"God in heaven. Here's the hard-headed, evidence-only freak who will not, like we CTers, indulge himself in self-inflating, utterly misconceived fantasies." -kbo234 (who is NOT a nazi) briefly makes sense

kbo234
Validated Poster

Joined: 10 Dec 2005
Posts: 2017
Location: Croydon, Surrey

Posted: Mon Jul 24, 2006 7:24 pm Post subject:

Jay Ref wrote:

Quote:

No one is going to argue with significant convincing material evidence.

That's the most unintentionally funny thing I've ever seen!

This is coming from the guy who thinks that WTC7 melted.....and the spontaneous pulverisation of hundreds of tons of concrete and the instantaneous shearing in thousands of places of massive steel columns ocurred WHILE two skyscrapers were falling almost without resistance with no other cause than the free-falling itself.

Hey, Jay_Ref, you know 'Alice in Wonderland'?

That really happened.

Jay Ref
Moderate Poster

Joined: 20 Jul 2006
Posts: 511

Posted: Mon Jul 24, 2006 7:33 pm Post subject:

kbo234 wrote:

Jay Ref wrote:

Quote:

No one is going to argue with significant convincing material evidence.

That's the most unintentionally funny thing I've ever seen!

Then it should be quite easy for you to link to my post where I said these things.

Your choices now;

Admit you are misrepresenting me.
Produce the quotes that prove I said those things and claim victory.
Ignore me.
Call me a "zionist" and or other names.

There is only one option that will earn you a shred of respect, one is impossible, and the others are cowardly. Can you guess which is which?

-z
_________________
"Knowledge is good"
-Emil Faber

"God in heaven. Here's the hard-headed, evidence-only freak who will not, like we CTers, indulge himself in self-inflating, utterly misconceived fantasies." -kbo234 (who is NOT a nazi) briefly makes sense

chipmunk stew
Moderate Poster

Joined: 19 Jul 2006
Posts: 833

Posted: Mon Jul 24, 2006 7:39 pm Post subject:

kbo234 wrote:

Jay Ref wrote:

Quote:

No one is going to argue with significant convincing material evidence.

That's the most unintentionally funny thing I've ever seen!

This is coming from the guy who thinks that the WTC planes were holograms, that a cruise missile hit the Pentagon, that a bomb was detonated in Shanksville, and that all the passengers and planes are hidden in a secret Cleveland airport bunker, being experimented on with avian flu.

How's my strawman coming along, kbo234?

Gravy
Minor Poster

Joined: 19 Jul 2006
Posts: 65

Posted: Mon Jul 24, 2006 8:06 pm Post subject:

blackcat wrote:

Fact 1

Cheney announces he cannot account for $2.3 Trillion missing from the Pentagon budget over previous 4 years. This on 8/112001. Easily checked as CBS covered the story.

False.

Quote:

Fact 2

The area of the Pentagon which was hit housed the bookkeeping and accounting department of the Pentagon and most killed there were bookkeepers and accountants. Easily checked - look up the list of those killed that day.

False.
Someone needs to do their homework before declaring something a "fact."

xxThe_Dice_manxx
Minor Poster

Joined: 31 May 2006
Posts: 42
Location: Northern Ireland

Posted: Mon Jul 24, 2006 8:14 pm Post subject:

Greetings Would Mr.Gravy and co just state why you are here and what you want to achieve please. _________________ MAD BAD AND DANGEROUS TO KNOW

kbo234
Validated Poster

Joined: 10 Dec 2005
Posts: 2017
Location: Croydon, Surrey

Posted: Mon Jul 24, 2006 8:17 pm Post subject:

Jay Ref wrote:

Your choices now;

Admit you are misrepresenting me.
Produce the quotes that prove I said those things and claim victory.
Ignore me.
Call me a "zionist" and or other names.

There is only one option that will earn you a shred of respect, one is impossible, and the others are cowardly. Can you guess which is which?

-z

Can't be bothered with this I'm afraid. Life's too short. See Terrifying Speculation.

Jay Ref
Moderate Poster

Joined: 20 Jul 2006
Posts: 511

Posted: Mon Jul 24, 2006 8:19 pm Post subject:

Gravy wrote:

blackcat wrote:

Fact 1

Cheney announces he cannot account for $2.3 Trillion missing from the Pentagon budget over previous 4 years. This on 8/112001. Easily checked as CBS covered the story.

False.

Quote:

False.
Someone needs to do their homework before declaring something a "fact."

Gravy,
The very fact that you can engage these guys in a serious manner shows an admirable amount of self control.

That said, I'll give these guys one thing that puts them head and shoulders above Dylan et al...they don't do blanket bannings!

-z
_________________
"Knowledge is good"
-Emil Faber

"God in heaven. Here's the hard-headed, evidence-only freak who will not, like we CTers, indulge himself in self-inflating, utterly misconceived fantasies." -kbo234 (who is NOT a nazi) briefly makes sense

chipmunk stew
Moderate Poster

Joined: 19 Jul 2006
Posts: 833

Posted: Mon Jul 24, 2006 8:19 pm Post subject:

xxThe_Dice_manxx wrote:

Greetings

Would Mr.Gravy and co just state why you are here and what you want to achieve please.

As for me, look through my posting history, and you'll find your answer.

chipmunk stew
Moderate Poster

Joined: 19 Jul 2006
Posts: 833

Posted: Mon Jul 24, 2006 8:20 pm Post subject:

kbo234 wrote:

Jay Ref wrote:

Your choices now;

Admit you are misrepresenting me.
Produce the quotes that prove I said those things and claim victory.
Ignore me.
Call me a "zionist" and or other names.

There is only one option that will earn you a shred of respect, one is impossible, and the others are cowardly. Can you guess which is which?

-z

Can't be bothered with this I'm afraid. Life's too short. See Terrifying Speculation.

Option 3. I believe that belongs in the "cowardly" category.

Jay Ref
Moderate Poster

Joined: 20 Jul 2006
Posts: 511

Posted: Mon Jul 24, 2006 8:21 pm Post subject:

xxThe_Dice_manxx wrote:

Greetings

Would Mr.Gravy and co just state why you are here and what you want to achieve please.

Why, we're here to ask for EVIDENCE OF THE TROOTH!!!

Hey, like, you know, we're just asking questions....

-z
_________________
"Knowledge is good"
-Emil Faber

"God in heaven. Here's the hard-headed, evidence-only freak who will not, like we CTers, indulge himself in self-inflating, utterly misconceived fantasies." -kbo234 (who is NOT a nazi) briefly makes sense

blackcat
Validated Poster

Joined: 07 May 2006
Posts: 2376

Posted: Mon Jul 24, 2006 8:22 pm Post subject:

Gravy wrote:

blackcat wrote:

Fact 1

Cheney announces he cannot account for $2.3 Trillion missing from the Pentagon budget over previous 4 years. This on 8/112001. Easily checked as CBS covered the story.

False.

Quote:

False.
Someone needs to do their homework before declaring something a "fact."

Those things are FACTS and simply saying they are false does not make them false. I have done my homework - you on the other hand are lying. You know these are facts you * evil shill.

Jay Ref
Moderate Poster

Joined: 20 Jul 2006
Posts: 511

Posted: Mon Jul 24, 2006 8:25 pm Post subject:

chipmunk stew wrote:

kbo234 wrote:

Jay Ref wrote:

Your choices now;

Admit you are misrepresenting me.
Produce the quotes that prove I said those things and claim victory.
Ignore me.
Call me a "zionist" and or other names.

There is only one option that will earn you a shred of respect, one is impossible, and the others are cowardly. Can you guess which is which?

-z

Can't be bothered with this I'm afraid. Life's too short. See Terrifying Speculation.

Option 3. I believe that belongs in the "cowardly" category.

Noted.

Can't say I didn't see that one coming! Wink

I wonder if Randi would...naw...I don't suppose so... Sad

chipmunk stew
Moderate Poster

Joined: 19 Jul 2006
Posts: 833

Posted: Mon Jul 24, 2006 8:25 pm Post subject:

blackcat wrote:

Gravy wrote:

blackcat wrote:

Fact 1

Cheney announces he cannot account for $2.3 Trillion missing from the Pentagon budget over previous 4 years. This on 8/112001. Easily checked as CBS covered the story.

False.

Quote:

False.
Someone needs to do their homework before declaring something a "fact."

Those things are FACTS and simply saying they are false does not make them false. I have done my homework - you on the other hand are lying. You know these are facts you * evil shill.

As the person presenting the claim, kindly present the evidence.

Jay Ref
Moderate Poster

Joined: 20 Jul 2006
Posts: 511

Posted: Mon Jul 24, 2006 8:27 pm Post subject:

blackcat wrote:

Gravy wrote:

blackcat wrote:

Fact 1

Cheney announces he cannot account for $2.3 Trillion missing from the Pentagon budget over previous 4 years. This on 8/112001. Easily checked as CBS covered the story.

False.

Quote:

False.
Someone needs to do their homework before declaring something a "fact."

Those things are FACTS and simply saying they are false does not make them false. I have done my homework - you on the other hand are lying. You know these are facts you * evil shill.

Sir or Madame,

If you show Gravy (aka Evil Shill) your source material and/or evidence instead of irrational anger I'm sure the debate could move onward. As it is you have conceeded defeat by way of ad-hom attack.

Ta,
-z
_________________
"Knowledge is good"
-Emil Faber

"God in heaven. Here's the hard-headed, evidence-only freak who will not, like we CTers, indulge himself in self-inflating, utterly misconceived fantasies." -kbo234 (who is NOT a nazi) briefly makes sense

Display posts from previous:

	9/11, 7/7, Covid-1984 & the War on Freedom Forum Index -> General	All times are GMT Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 Next
Page 6 of 9

Jump to:

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 can download files in this forum