Collapse vs Demolition
in [Motorcycles]
|
From: * US on 18 Jul 2010 16:23 On Sat, 17 Jul 2010 23:14:29 -0700 (PDT), Iarnrod <iarnrod(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >... kooks ... You really believe that Bush and Cheney would hesitate to have thousands of US citizens murdered.
From: * US on 18 Jul 2010 16:24 On Sat, 17 Jul 2010 23:12:28 -0700 (PDT), Iarnrod <iarnrod(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >... kookers ... You can't explain what PNAC's agenda was, much less how 9/11 helped it along.
From: Henry on 19 Jul 2010 08:42 Curly Surmudgeon wrote: > On Fri, 16 Jul 2010 11:26:03 -0700, Twibil <nowayjose6(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Jul 15, 11:48� pm, rfisc...(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote: >>> You're insane, aren't you? >> It took you this long to figure it out? >> Poor Henry has been a textbook case of a perfectly normal guy who >> slipped into psychosis over an extended period of time, and he did so >> right before everyone's eyes on Usenet. He's no longer able to >> distinguish reality from his fanatsies, and unfortunately he gets worse >> and worse as time goes on. So don't bother debating with him or getting >> mad (unless you enjoy that sort of thing): it's a waste of time. Yet of course, twitbull can't tell us what these alleged fantasies are, because the only place they exist are in twitbull's delusions. Also, twitbull has no idea what would happen if he attempted to address the actual facts, evidence and expert research, because he has never done that. Twitbull's "intellect" limits him to hiding behind his killfile and making a fool of himself by spewing moronic lies. >> He isn't responsible for what he posts, and actually believes the things >> he says: twitbull claims that I work as a janitor and that my mother smoked crack. Twitbull is a a liar, a fool and a coward who disgraces himself by spewing his insanity while hiding an cowering behind his killfile. twitbull appears to be menatlly ill. >> even when you show him what he himself said two posts ago he >> will blandly deny that he ever said such a thing, But of course, when challeged to cite an example of this, twitbull fails, and proves that he is *simply* lying again. >> and he will believe it 100%. >> He will also claim that you said things you never even suggested, >> and will continue making those claims for years afterwards, even though >> everyone knows that he's simply inventing his facts as he goes along. >> It's sad, but this sort of thing happens to people from time to time, >> and so far as I'm aware there is no cure. > From the bleachers it appears that you and Ray are the wackos. They have demonstrated that quite convincingly, haven't they? Classic case of projection. <g> > Henry sticks to the issues, you two engage in character assassination. > Whether Henry be right or wrong you two have shot yourselves in the > collective foot by your behavior and responses. This is typical behavior for many followers of the government's 9-11 fairy tale. They absolutely refuse to address the facts, hard evidence, and expert research. twitbull is an extreme case, as he came completely undone when his beliefs were challenged,and went into hiding behind his killfile, from where he's been spewing moroinc lies about what I've written (which he claims he doesn't read), what I do for a living, and even my deceased mother. Ray hasn't gone into hiding yet, but he spews equally moronic lies and is also incapable of addressing the facts or defending his absurd fairy tale. -- "Condemnation without investigation is the height of ignorance." -- Albert Einstein. http://911research.wtc7.net http://www.journalof911studies.com/ http://www.ae911truth.org
From: Henry on 19 Jul 2010 08:47 Ray Fischer wrote: > Curly Surmudgeon <CurlySurmudgeon(a)live.com> wrote: >> From the bleachers it appears that you and Ray are the wackos. >> Henry sticks to the issues, you two engage in character assassination. > In one post he claimed that the building couldn't not collapse as fast > as it did because stell columns were designed to support "several > times [their] own weight". I said the steel frame was designed to support several times the weight of the structure, and that's exactly correct. It's also typical. > The her referred to the "melted and > vaporized steel columns" in the wreakage. Right. That was the result of demolition. Here's a link. http://wtc.nist.gov/media/AppendixC-fema403_apc.pdf Here's proof that fires couldn't have caused it. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VvQDFV1HINw&feature=player_embedded > Those two statements are mutually incompatible. How do you figure that, and what do you "think" produced the molten and vaporized steel? -- "Condemnation without investigation is the height of ignorance." -- Albert Einstein. http://911research.wtc7.net http://www.journalof911studies.com/ http://www.ae911truth.org
From: Henry on 19 Jul 2010 08:52
Ray Fischer wrote: > Henry <9-11truth(a)experts.org> wrote: >> Ray Fischer wrote: >>> Henry <9-11truth(a)experts.org> wrote: >>>> Ray Fischer wrote: >>>>> Henry <9-11truth(a)experts.org> wrote: >>>>>> Ray Fischer wrote: >>>>>>> Henry <9-11truth(a)experts.org> wrote: >>>>>>> You claim that "melted and vaporized steel columns" could >>>>>>> support "several times [their] own weight". >>>>>> No, I never made that claim. >>>>> And once again you retreat behind lies. >>>> Your reading comprehension has failed you again. I'm challenging >>>> you to back up your lie with a quote. >>> I did quote you. Your words are still present above. >> You wrote that, not me. You're lying and you failed to >> produce a quote. But that was expected, you being a confused, >> weak minded imbecile, and a blatant liar. Your ilk rarely >> backs up its rants with any quotes or facts. That requires >> intelligence and integrity. Thanks for proving my point, >> nut job... <chuckle> >> Look at some of the presentations on this website. The author is a >> physics teacher and presents the information very articulately. >> Let us know if you disagree with any of his research. It's been peer >> reviewed, and so far, no one has been able to find any errors. >> http://www.911speakout.org/ > I don't accept your premise. >> Do you disagree with any of the research on the website? If so, >> can you tell us what and why, exactly? > You're insane, aren't you? Do you disagree with any of the research on the website? If so, can you tell us what and why, exactly? You become even *more* helpless, stupid, frustrated, and confused when you're challenged to read, think, and defend your insanity, don't ya, nutter? Rhetorical, btw - have someone look it up for ya... <chuckle> -- "Condemnation without investigation is the height of ignorance." -- Albert Einstein. http://911research.wtc7.net http://www.journalof911studies.com/ http://www.ae911truth.org |