Nine Eleven
passing by

Salina, KS

#25 Jul 28, 2014
bunny wrote:
Most people actually are not arguing against this anymore.
Because, other than for its amusement value, most folk find it best to leave y'all to your delusions.
bunny wrote:
It is mainly only shit for brains internet trolls who do not know that
it has long since stopped being funny to try to denounce "truthers"
as being dumb.
You aren't a dumb bunny, just one who doesn't spend much time in the company of rational and logical thought.
bunny wrote:
Eventually shit for brains asshats like you just die,
then people who are now in single digits of years they have been here
among the living upon the face of the earth and those to be born in the
coming years from now, some day int he future, years from now, will
be willing to face the truth for what it is, and acknowledged that we did it.
Which mutually exclusive "it" would that be, dumpling?
bunny wrote:
What kind of jackass does it take to believe the official lies as the truth of what happened?
Because bunny, none of you thus far have proved their "truth" a lie, even in part. The "official version" is accepted with a grain of salt, that it is a bit of a whitewash over our government's dysfunctional incompetence that allowed for their "truth" to happen.
bunny wrote:
Okay, it is not just jackasses, it is lots of people who cannot handle the truth.
It is too hard to take to realize that it could have happened that way.
Most people are more willing to deliberately disbelieve the truth, when it is too hard to handle.
Cognitive dissonance.
I'm a big fan of truth dear, but the truths that I like best are ones that are rational, logical and supported by available facts. What you don't seem to get is there are millions of possible ways that this COULD have happened, but there is only one way in which it actually did. The existence of millions of "possible" alternatives is not disproof of the one they claim is true. Our governments have proved themselves of capable of engaging in actions cloaked in official secrecy that the vast majority of their fellow Americans wouldn't approve of if they knew what was going on, but they have also proved themselves completely incapable of keeping these secrets secret for long. You credit our then and current governments with a competence that neither of them have ever proved to be all that good at.

Don't you hate it when you run into opposition that thinks?
capN fapN

Virginia Beach, VA

#26 Jul 28, 2014
passing by wrote:
<quoted text>Your proof of that would be what exactly? You can proclaim anything you want dear, but that doesn't mean that you have proved it to be true. You do know that, don't you?
Proof that someone makes a vacuous statement? What kind of shit for brains asshat are you?

I am asserting what is my personal point of view and it means it is my opinion, as such, "proof" does not sensibly apply at all, jackass!

You have proved what an insubstantial and lame ass troll you are.

Still my opinion, and still way more stupid for you to talk as if proof is needed to say it.
butt burp

Virginia Beach, VA

#27 Jul 28, 2014
I'm passing gas, but(t) at least I have something more substantial to offer than "passing by".

Seriously, "passing by", you have earned my ignore now, you are worthless and do not deserve any more replies from me after this one.

You can post some wise ass crap to try to make you feel better or to try prove to other trolls you may have won something, but, you are just trash, imo.

It does not mean I have to "prove" you are trash, that's how much of an asshat you are that you may think so, and I don't have to prove you are an asshat, either.

Jackasses like you really do represent how "good" the criticism of "truthers" really is.
andet1987

Chicago, IL

#28 Jul 28, 2014
butt burp ?:) he he
passing by

Salina, KS

#29 Jul 29, 2014
capN fapN wrote:
Proof that someone makes a vacuous statement? What kind of shit for brains asshat are you?
Pudding, it's not my fault that you aren't intellectually up to the challenge, that would be yours, so there is no need for you to get so childishly defensive.
capN fapN wrote:
I am asserting what is my personal point of view and it means it is my opinion, as such, "proof" does not sensibly apply at all, jackass!
That's right sweetie, you made an unfounded assertion, not a statement of fact. Since you are unable to even remotely prove your assertion, that would mean that your "opinion" is decidedly wrong. get it now?
capN fapN wrote:
You have proved what an insubstantial and lame ass troll you are.
Your proof of that would be what? or are you just going to stick with silly assertions that you can't prove?
capN fapN wrote:
Still my opinion, and still way more stupid for you to talk as if proof is needed to say it.
Honeybunch, if you would stop confusing baseless and unprovable assertions with statements of fact, you might come across as less of a moron.
passing by

Salina, KS

#30 Jul 29, 2014
butt burp wrote:
I'm passing gas, but(t) at least I have something more substantial to offer than "passing by".[?QUOTE]I really don't mind breaking this to you dear, but groundless assertions, speculations that can't be supported by facts, mutually exclusive possibilities and an ongoing hissy fit aren't substance, they are brain farts devoid of reason and logic,[QUOTE who="butt burp"] Seriously, "passing by", you have earned my ignore now, you are worthless and do not deserve any more replies from me after this one.
Declaring "victory" after you have humiliated yourself this badly, too funny.
butt burp wrote:
You can post some wise ass crap to try to make you feel better or to try prove to other trolls you may have won something, but, you are just trash, imo.
That's sweet of you bunny, I just wish my opinion of you was as high as yours is of me. In my humble opinion, you are a complete embarrassment to the human species.
butt burp wrote:
It does not mean I have to "prove" you are trash, that's how much of an asshat you are that you may think so, and I don't have to prove you are an asshat, either.
Jackasses like you really do represent how "good" the criticism of "truthers" really is.
You lost, get over it. Feel free to leave anytime you want bubeleh, but if you are going to continue to spout nonsense on this thread, i will still be here to point out to anyone who cares what a pathetic waste of intellect you really are.
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#31 Jul 29, 2014
bunny wrote:
How about people pointing out what a real plane crash site actually looks like in reality? We have examples to show for what these things really look like in the aftermath of a airliner type airplane that has actually crashed in reality. There is substantial plane wreckage!
False, 19 examples that prove you wrong!

http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/analysis...
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#32 Jul 29, 2014
Cock Chainey wrote:
Remember that small hole in the Pentagon wall before it collapsed?
That is consistent with a missile rather than an airliner hitting it.
That was the D ring, not the outer ring, 100's saw a plane in broad daylight, no one saw a missile.

ELAINE McCUSKER: "Traffic is normally slow right around the Pentagon [...]. I don't know what made me look up, but I did and I saw a very low-flying American Airlines plane that seemed to be accelerating. My first thought was just 'No, no, no, no,' because it was obvious the plane [...] was going to crash."

MIKE WALTER: "I saw this plane, a jet, an American Airline's jet [...it] slammed right into the Pentagon."

OMAR CAMPO: "It was a passenger plane. I think an American Airways plane. I was cutting the grass and it came in screaming over my head. I felt the impact. The whole ground shook and the whole area was full of fire."

RYAN JAMES: "When I looked up on my left [...] I see an American Airline plane. A silver plane. I can see 'AA' on the tail. I noticed that the landing gear were up.[...then] he hit full gas [...] and went straight in [to the Pentagon ...] I recognized it immediately as a passenger plane."

JAMES CISSELL: "Out of my peripheral vision I saw this plane coming in and it was low - and getting lower. I thought,'This isn't really happening. That is a big plane.' Then I saw the faces of some of the passengers on board."

STEVE RISKUS: "I took these pictures seconds after the plane hit the pentagon. I was traveling on route 27 towards 395 when the plane crossed my path from the right about 100ft in front of me and crashed into the pentagon."

CBS News Special Report (CBS News transcripts, 9/11/01): Witness: The plane "clipped this pole over here. Hit this other pole and slammed right into the building. Huge explosion and then utter pandemonium, as you might imagine. I mean, everybody was screaming,'Oh, my God.'[...] There was no doubt about it, it was American Airlines, slammed right into the building. And there was no doubt about it, whoever was piloting that plane was aiming for the Pentagon."

KOVR 13 News Tonight, KOVR-TV (Video Monitoring Services of America abstract, 09/11/01): "Interview - Jennifer Brower, witness, says she can't believe she saw an American Airlines plane crash into The Pentagon."

NBC News Special Report (NBC News Transcripts, 09/11/01): "Now, according to eyewitnesses, it was a American Airlines 757 that came sort of from the direction of National Airport."

MSNBC Special Report (transcript 091100cb.455, Sept 11, 2001): REP. BRIAN BAIRD (D), WASHINGTON: "We had been watching the coverage in New York [...] Maybe a minute later, my staff was looking out the window and said,'You know, there are not supposed to be any airplanes in the air, but there's an airplane.' She looked and said,'Hey, everybody, there's an airplane out here. What's going on?' And the next minute, she looked out the window said,'My God, it hit the Pentagon.'"

TV 6 Prime Time News WITI-TV (Video Monitoring Services of America abstract, 09/11/01) "Interview - Mike Walter, witness to Pentagon attack, saw American Airlines jet coming."

NBC Nightly News (Video Monitoring Services of America abstract, 09/11/01): "Interview - Unidentified woman, witness, says she say a commercial plane go right into the side of the Pentagon."

The Press Association Limited (09/11/01): "A woman eyewitness told CNN of the plane crashing into the Pentagon:'A commercial plane came in. It was coming too fast, too low and then I saw the fire that came up after that.'"
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#33 Jul 29, 2014
All false, which one would you like me to debunk first or would you just like to go here to see your post debunked item by item.

Start here and read post after post of your points debunked!

http://www.topix.com/forum/topstories/TSBMT04...
Cock Chainey wrote:
Almost all of the downed steel at the NYC site was shipped away as quickly possible out of the country mainly to China, rather than what would be required of a crime scene, to keep it to be able to investigate it.
Building 7 was not hit by any plane and only had a few very small fires and it also free fall collapsed.
The hottest that jet fuel can burn is 1800 degree Fahrenheit, but steel does not soften to be able to deform until a temperature of 2750 degrees Fahrenheit.
Pools of molten metal at very high temperatures in the basements of the twin towers for weeks after the event that can not be possible by the official lies/story.
Immediately the hijackers were known by their Identifications having survived intact after the crash of planes and the burning building and their collapse at the site in NYC. Absurd!
Bin Laden family members were granted special permission and ability to fly out of country exactly when there was no flying in the few days right after 9/11!
Know about the group of people who made the document known as PNAC? They said what they wanted, and they got it!
Know what that swine Philip Zelikow basically was an expert at? The creation of modern myths.
Only one account of men using boxcutters in the airplanes as part of how they hijacked them. Called in by a cell phone in an airplane at altitude, and the duration of the call was ZERO seconds. And who did it? The wife of the attorney who helped George W. Bush take the election. She died in the plane.
Some of the supposed hijackers seen alive long after 9/11.
Know about the Carlisle group? Do you know anything?
andet1987

Chicago, IL

#34 Jul 29, 2014
9/11 is better to read than
nine eleven.

nine eleven can be confused with seven eleven
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#36 Jul 29, 2014
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
Has there ever been any discussion on this thread about WTC 6 ?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =a4FkO5ry1uoXX
Anyone care to comment ?
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
Yea, It was hit by a big chunk of the North Tower along with WTC7, see all that debris on the roof, did it just float up there.

http://thewebfairy.com/killtown/images/wtc6/w...

The severe damage to Building 6 is often cited as evidence of the alleged explosion. However there is another explanation for the damage that much better accounts for its features documented by aerial and satellite photographs of the building's exterior, such as the one on the right, and by interior photographs, such as the one on page 93 of Painful Questions. They show that the damage consisted primarily of a series of holes with the following features:

Run almost the height of the building
Have vertical walls, where the different floors have virtually identical damage profiles
Are mostly rectilinear in shape
Show metal pieces hanging down and bent down but not up
Mimic the profile of the North Tower's footprint, which is parallel to and has about the same length as the rectangle formed by combining the two holes.(Remains of the North Tower are visible immediately left of the two holes in Building 6.)

The last feature is a dead give-away of the real cause of the damage: primarily the thousands of tons of steel from the North Tower's northeast perimeter wall falling from as high as 1300 feet.

http://911review.com/errors/wtc/b6_explosion....
passing by

Salina, KS

#37 Jul 29, 2014
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
Has there ever been any discussion on this thread about WTC 6 ?
Not yet, the idiot that started this thread is obsessed with pictures of airline crashes not looking like those that occurred on 9/11.
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
Anyone care to comment ?
About a building that had large pieces of a 110 story building crash through its roof and the floors below? why?

Maybe you're up to the challenge that the Virginia Beach Mensa Chapter that started this thread isn't man enough to deal with. Can you give a coherent and cogent alternative explanation as to what 'really' happened on 9/11? i seriously doubt it, but i ask it for laughs.
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#39 Jul 29, 2014
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
<quoted text>
Just for a good laugh I would ask you for your coherent and cogent alternative explanation as to what 'really' happened on 9/11?
If you're up to it of course.
Clearly not this one where you take things out of context!

WHY WAS THE COMMISSION SET UP TO FAIL? THE BOOK (PAGE 15) EXPLAINS:

"Both of us were aware of grumbling around Washington that the 9/11 Commission was doomed--if not designed--to fail: the commission would splinter down partisan lines; lose its credibility by leaking classified information; be denied the necessary access to do its job; or alienate the 9/11 families who had fought on behalf of its creation."

BUT THE PARAGRAPH CONTINUES:

"WHAT WE COULD NOT HAVE ANTICIPATED WERE THE REMARKABLE PEOPLE AND CIRCUMSTANCES THAT WOULD COALESCE WITHIN AND AROUND THE 9/11 COMMISSION OVER THE COMING TWENTY MONTHS TO ENABLE OUR SUCCESS."

Uh Huh Eh !
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
<quoted text>
"LEE AND I WRITE IN OUR BOOK, that uh, we think that the Commission in many ways was set up to fail."
Direct quote from Thomas H. Kean, 9/11 Commission Chairman at the National Press Club 9/11/2006.
https://www.youtube.com/watch ...
There is no context here. THIS IS NOT FROM ANY BOOK.
You can not deny he said this on camera.
Sure he might have said words before and after he said this sentence.
Uh Huh Eh !
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#40 Jul 29, 2014
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
<quoted text>
Just for a good laugh I would ask you for your coherent and cogent alternative explanation as to what 'really' happened on 9/11?
Or this one were you just make crap up!

Dr_Zorderz claiming WTC 1 & 2 were in full freefall but the calculations that say otherwise are wrong because they omitted air resistance.
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
<quoted text>
Yeah, resistance of the air. That always slows down falling buildings. Just look at any controlled demolition. See how the air slows down the falling debris?
So you are saying there is no air outside the building where these objects are falling faster than the building?

http://www.tampabay.com/resources/images/dti/...

I would say there is a direct correlation between your inbreeding and stupidity!
passing by

Salina, KS

#41 Jul 29, 2014
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
Just for a good laugh I would ask you for your coherent and cogent alternative explanation as to what 'really' happened on 9/11?
If you're up to it of course.
Pudding, every last one of the alternative explanations for 9/11 that I have read are nothing more than bad political science fiction, neither cogent nor coherent. It is why I find you self-professed truthers such an amusing lot.

PS, I knew you weren't up to the challenge even before I made it to you, there wasn't any need, aside from masochism on your part, for you to tell me I was right. Thanks for playing, but you really aren't any good at this.
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#43 Jul 30, 2014
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
Is this building falling ? Or is it exploding from the top down ?
http://www.tampabay.com/resources/images/dti/...
Falling. You might want to look here to see why it is way outside it's footprint (this week), next week you will go back to saying they feel in their own footprint,

http://www.ascertainthetruth.com/att/images/9...

“Truth is unthinkable.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#44 Jul 30, 2014
passing by wrote:
<quoted text>Pudding, every last one of the alternative explanations for 9/11 that I have read are nothing more than bad political science fiction, neither cogent nor coherent. It is why I find you self-professed truthers such an amusing lot.

PS, I knew you weren't up to the challenge even before I made it to you, there wasn't any need, aside from masochism on your part, for you to tell me I was right. Thanks for playing, but you really aren't any good at this.
When are you going to explain how you locked your Topix account to one pc that is now in storage in your attempt to explain why you are not using different nics to falsely appeal to popularity?

You are here to enlighten people, right? Or are you just here because

Insults Are Easier
Charlie Sheen

Lincoln, NE

#45 Jul 30, 2014
Incest Is Easier wrote:
<quoted text>
When are you going to explain how you locked your Topix account to one pc that is now in storage in your attempt to explain why you are not using different nics to falsely appeal to popularity?
You are here to enlighten people, right? Or are you just here because
Incest Is Easier
Are you crying sock boy, Would you like a blanket?
passing by

Salina, KS

#48 Jul 31, 2014
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
Is rick really passing by in Kansas ?
Or is he a mod or dis-info specialist ?
I'm a radical-leftist who has been better at capitalism than hard-line capitalists, 52 year-old single f****t with a public education and wee bit better than average IQ. I "retired" a couple of years ago, comfortably in the 2%. I worked on Wall Street in the late 80's and early 90's among an assortment of other endeavors. I had ADD/HD before it had a name..

On 2/26 (remember 1993?), I was talking to someone on the 105th floor of the North Tower, when the truck bomb blew up in the parking garage. I had a 17th floor skybox seat from 388 Greenwich (CNN was based on their roof on 9/11). I heard a what was that?, the fire alarm go off in the background and then an I'll call you back. Five minutes later I heard back that they had been told that there had been an explosion, but only areas immediately effected needed to evacuate and it was starting to get a little smoky. He spent the night in the hospital for smoke inhalation after his 105 story trip down stairs.

On 2/25, I had been in the parking garage, dropping off a rental car. They WERE located by the entrance to the Marriott, just as you came in off the West St level lobby to the towers. They left their little surprise package about 10 car lengths behind where you dropped off rentals. I had been in the Trade Center many, many times over the years .

I knew a number of people who died on 9/11, had friends who worked for Salomon Bros at WTC 7 and others who were in the towers. Do you know anybody that was actually there? Because none of the survivors I know are truthers.
passing by

Salina, KS

#49 Jul 31, 2014
That should read, better than your average hard-line capitalist. I'm a mid-level 2 percenter not a 1.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
The Christian Atheist debate (Jun '15) 2 min NoStress4me 38,200
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 6 min Steve III 641,590
News Viagra May Help Women (Jul '08) 11 min Gentleness Unders... 12
Poll If you're Christain what kind are you? (Oct '07) 12 min WasteWater 18,700
Poll Is homosexuality a sin? (Oct '07) 14 min Just Think 104,697
Play "end of the word" part 2 24 min andet1987 1,726
Jehovah's Witnesses are true disciple of Jesus ... (Mar '07) 30 min good true observa... 44,388
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 1 hr The Hangman 969,969
More from around the web