TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- Do you believe there is a U.S. government cover-up surrounding 9/11?
Pages (162): « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 [16] 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 »

quote:

Originally posted by ogvh5150 It's amazing that a few anti-conspiracy nuts forget that over TWO THIRDS of TA's believe there was a cover-up

well, i guess the obvious counter to that is most TA's are morons?

man what to believe? the TA moral majority or Popular Mechanics? jeez! GOD!! WHY HAVE YOU FORSAKEN ME!!!!!!!!

god, if i had to go throughout every day gauging my decisions against the intelectual "establishment" of TranceAddict then maybe life would make a little more sense. hmmm...naaahhh f**k that!

quote:

Originally posted by Q5echo man what to believe? the TA moral majority or Popular Mechanics?

I know huh? What a decision...... hmmmmm,

quote:

Originally posted by Q5echo well, i guess the obvious counter to that is most TA's are morons? man what to believe? the TA moral majority or Popular Mechanics? jeez! GOD!! WHY HAVE YOU FORSAKEN ME!!!!!!!! god, if i had to go throughout every day gauging my decisions against the intelectual "establishment" of TranceAddict then maybe life would make a little more sense. hmmm...naaahhh f**k that!

nice.

when youre not busy on your knees felating ol' george W youre a pleasure to read mate

quote:

as for proving the government wasnt complicit, i think you just need to understand how many people would be required to keep this all a secret. think about it.

just as in the 777 bombings... So called �training exercises� went live

*****************************************************************

Wargames Were Cover For the Operational Execution of 9/11




Alex Jones & Paul Joseph Watson | September 8 2004

For almost three years since 9/11 independent researchers have stockpiled individual smoking guns which prove that the official version of events was not only a lie but operationally impossible.

However, no single smoking gun has yet been forwarded to explain why air defenses categorically reversed Standard Operating Procedure and failed to respond to hijacked jetliners.

Until now. More and more individuals are looking at the facts and highlighting exercise drills that took place on the morning of 9/11.

It is clear that at least five if not six training exercises were in operation in the days leading up to and on the morning of 9/11. This meant that NORAD radar screens showed as many as 22 hijacked airliners at the same time. NORAD had been briefed that this was part of the exercise drill and therefore normal reactive procedure was forestalled and delayed.

The large numbers of 'blips' on NORAD screens that displayed both real and 'drill' hijacked planes explain why confused press reports emerged hours after the attack stating that up to eight planes had been hijacked. Click here for that article.

The drill scenario also explains a comment made by air traffic control personnel which was featured in a July 2004 BBC television report. Click here for that video clip and article. The controller is told that a hijacked airliner is heading for New York and responds by saying, "is this real world or an exercise?"

Alex Jones was one of the first to highlight the wargames in his documentary film 'Masters of Terror', which was released in August 2002. Click here to watch a video clip. Alex explains why the Associated Press later had to admit the fact that the CIA were running drills of crashing planes into buildings on the morning of 9/11.

What were the drills called and what was their nature?

1) OPERATION NORTHERN VIGILANCE: This was planned months in advance of 9/11 and ensured that on the morning of 9/11, jet fighters were removed from patrolling the US east coast and sent to Alaska and Canada, therefore reducing the amount of fighter planes available to protect the east coast.

2) BIOWARFARE EXERCISE TRIPOD II: Alex Jones first reported on this back in May when Rudolph Giuliani let the details of it slip in his testimony to the 9/11 Commission. FEMA arrived in New York on September 10th to set up a command post located at Pier 29 under the auspices of a 'biowarfare exercise scheduled for September 12. This explains why Tom Kenney of FEMA's National Urban Search and Rescue Team, told Dan Rather of CBS News that FEMA had arrived in New York on the night of September 10th. This was originally dismissed as a slip of the tongue. Giuliani was to use this post as a command post on 9/11 after he evacuated WTC Building 7. As we reported back in January , Giuliani knew when to leave WTC 7 because he got advanced warning that the Trade Towers were about to collapse. "We were operating out of there when we were told that the World Trade Center was gonna collapse," Rudolph Giuliani told Peter Jennings of ABC News. How did Giuliani know the towers were about to collapse when no steel building in history had previously collapsed from fire damage?

3) OPERATION VIGILANT GUARDIAN: This exercise simulated hijacked planes in the north eastern sector and started to coincide with 9/11. Lt. Col. Dawne Deskins, NORAD unit's airborne control and warning officer, was overseeing the exercise. At 8:40am she took a call from Boston Center which said it had a hijacked airliner. Her first words, as quoted by Newhouse News Service were, "It must be part of the exercise." This is another example of how the numerous drills on the morning of 9/11 deliberately distracted NORAD so that the real hijacked planes couldn't be intercepted in time.

4) OPERATION NORTHERN GUARDIAN: The details of this exercise are still scant but it is considered to be part of Vigilant Guardian, relating to simulating hijacked planes in the north eastern sector.

5) OPERATION VIGILANT WARRIOR: This was referenced in Richard Clarke's book 'Against All Enemies'. It is thought to have been the 'attack' component of the Vigilant Guardian exercise.

Another example of how air defenses were purposefully kept preoccupied so they couldn't protect New York was reported by this website in December of 2003. The Air National Guard's 177th Fighter Wing, based at Atlantic City International Airport in Pomona, were just eight minutes away from New York and could have intercepted both Flight 11 and Flight 175.

Under NORAD procedures that date to the Cold War, two F-16 fighters from the 177th were parked around the clock on the Atlantic City runway. Pilots waited in a nearby building, ready to scramble.

But on the morning of 9/11, the F-16's were performing bombing runs over an empty stretch of the Pine Barrens near Atlantic City after being decommissioned from their usual role of protecting the skies of the east coast.

It was only after both trade towers were hit that the two F-16s landed and were refitted with air-to-air missiles, then sent aloft.

Now that we have established how NORAD were confused, delayed and distracted by the numerous wargames, the next question to ask is who if anyone was aware of which planes were 'real world' and which planes were 'exercise'? The answer to this question will provide us with the name of the individual who ran the operatonal execution of the 9/11 attack.

Dick Cheney.

Cheney was initially taken by the secret service to an underground bunker in the White House called the Presidential Emergency Operations Center.

From there, according to CNN , Cheney directed the US government's response to the unfolding attack.

Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta was in the Presidential Emergency Operating Center with Vice President Cheney as Flight 77 approached Washington, D.C. On May 23, 2003 in front of the 9/11 Commission, Secretary Mineta testified:

"During the time that the airplane was coming in to the Pentagon, there was a young man who would come in and say to the Vice President, "The plane is 50 miles out." "The plane is 30 miles out." And when it got down to "the plane is 10 miles out," the young man also said to the Vice President, "Do the orders still stand?" And the Vice President turned and whipped his neck around and said, "Of course the orders still stand. Have you heard anything to the contrary?"

As the plane in question hit the Pentagon, what else can we conclude but that the 'order' was not to shoot down the aircraft and to let it find its target.

Mineta stated that he did not know what the 'order' was because he wasn't there when it was made.

After the Pentagon was hit, Cheney was transfered to another bunker in what the Philadelphia Daily News describes as 'the underground Pentagon'.

Site R, a highly secure complex of buildings inside Raven Rock Mountain near Blue Ridge Summit, Pa., close to the Maryland-Pennsylvania state line and about seven miles north of Camp David, is a 53-year-old facility conceived at the start of the Cold War as an alternate command center in the event of nuclear war or an attack on Washington.

The bunker is built into a mountain hillside and is virtually camouflaged to the naked eye. The location betrays itself by the vast gaggle of satellites, microwave towers and antennae that festoon the perimeter. Inside the facility there are computer filled caverns and communication and tracking technology that would put a James Bond movie to shame.

The entire facility is guarded by heavily armed military police.

Within hours of 9/11 unfolding, five choppers had landed on the facility's helipad and top officials such as Paul Wolfowitz were ushered in to join Cheney in the command bunker.

Site R - also known as Raven Rock or the Alternate Joint Communications Center is from where vice-President Dick Cheney ran the aftermath of the 9/11 attack. Cheney's command superceded the orders of the Pentagon, the FAA or the White House. He is the number one suspect in the murder of nearly 3,000 innocent people.

In May of 2001, by presidential order, Cheney was handed direct control of all wargame and drill operations. This meant he was solely in charge of the overlapping NORAD drills and wargames on the morning of 9/11, that prevented Standard Operating Procedure from being implemented, and any of the hijacked planes being intercepted.

The smoking guns of 9/11 are no longer disparate jigsaw pieces that serve to just raise more questions than they answer. We now have a coherent and plausible explanation of how the events unfolded, why there was no air defense response, and a prime suspect as to who executed these actions. The facts fit this version of events.

The 9/11 truth movement has just taken a giant leap towards dismantling the lies of September 11and finally offering justice for those who lost their lives on that terrible day.

link

The people here have spoken no matter what other trolls say.

If one were to ACTUALLY READ THE DAMN POST they will also see a THIRD of Americans in THAT poll BELIEVE in a cover up.

For those that skipped MATH CLASS it means ONE in THREE.

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN http://www.popularmechanics.com/sci...se/1227842.html http://www.ccdominoes.com/lc/LooseChangeGuide.html that should be enough to get you started. as for proving the government wasnt complicit, i think you just need to understand how many people would be required to keep this all a secret. think about it.

quote:

Debunking The [Propaganda Mechanics] Debunkers by Eric Hufschmid In regards to the issue of NORAD, I think the best response is the public hearing in which Norman Mineta mentions that Dick Cheney and others were watching an airplane fly towards the Pentagon. They were not describing a mysterious airplane with its transponder off. Rather, they were observing it as if they knew where it was going and had no concern : NATIONAL COMMISSION ON TERRORIST ATTACKS UPON THE UNITED STATES Public Hearing, Friday, May 23, 2003 MR. MINETA: No, I was not. I was made aware of it during the time that the airplane coming into the Pentagon. There was a young man who had come in and said to the vice president, "The plane is 50 miles out. The plane is 30 miles out." And when it got down to, "The plane is 10 miles out," the young man also said to the vice president, "Do the orders still stand?" And the vice president turned and whipped his neck around and said, "Of course the orders still stand. Have you heard anything to the contrary?" -------------------------- I have some specific responses below. The red color is from Popular Mechanics article. A general remark about the Popular Mechanics article is: There are a lot of silly remarks about 9-11 on the Internet, some from children, and some for amusement only, such as the possibility that Martians destroyed the World Trade Center towers. The article in Popular Mechanics has selected some of the sillier arguments. If they were serious researchers, they would address the issues that are brought up by Jimmy Walter and Eric Hufschmid. Jimmy Walter is offering this information at low cost to help educate the population. -------------------------- THE WORLD TRADE CENTER The collapse of both World Trade Center towers--and the smaller WTC 7 a few hours later--initially surprised even some experts. But subsequent studies have shown that the WTC's structural integrity was destroyed by intense fire as well as the severe damage inflicted by the planes. Where are these "subsequent studies"? The FEMA report about the collapse of the buidings admits that they could not figure out why Building 7 collapsed. The FEMA report is proof that there are still unsolved mysteries. Therefore, Popular Mechanics is foolish to claim that the issue has been resolved. -------------------------- "The jet fuel was the ignition source," Williams tells PM. "It burned for maybe 10 minutes, and [the towers] were still standing in 10 minutes. It was the rest of the stuff burning afterward that was responsible for the heat transfer that eventually brought them down." What is this "rest of the stuff" that was burning? The floors were concrete, and the frame was steel, so what was burning? Carpeting, styrofoam cups, and office paper? The fire in the South Tower was so small that it did not even spread from one side of the floor to the other. This issue is covered in detail in Chapter 4 of Painful Questions. Figure 4-1 on page 27 even shows a woman standing in the hole created by the airplane. How hot could these fires have been if people are walking around in the crash zone? (click the photo for more perspective) -------------------------- Like all office buildings, the WTC towers contained a huge volume of air. As they pancaked, all that air--along with the concrete and other debris pulverized by the force of the collapse--was ejected with enormous energy. "When you have a significant portion of a floor collapsing, it's going to shoot air and concrete dust out the window," NIST lead investigator Shyam Sunder tells PM. Those clouds of dust may create the impression of a controlled demolition, Sunder adds, "but it is the floor pancaking that leads to that perception." If the floors slid down like pancakes, then there should be a large pile of flooring on the ground, with office furniture, people, and carpeting squashed between the floors. Figure 5-4 is a diagram to show this dilemma. There is nothing in the rubble that suggests any floor fell down in one piece. The reports from the firemen and the photos, such as Figure 5-19, prove that every floor disintegrated into tiny pieces, and the pieces were scattered hundreds of feet. Besides, the diagram in Figure 5-22 shows even if a floor fell down like a pancake, it would create a corresponding vacuum above it. Therefore, the air that was pushed out the windows would be sucked up through the windows above. The air would be displaced, it would not be thrown hundreds of feet out the windows at extreme velocity. The explusion of dust and the lack of a corresponding suction implies that gas was being created, such as from explosions. The floors were not simply falling down. Another serious problem with the Pancake Theory is that photos, such as Figure 5-10, show that the top of the South Tower broke off and tipped over, and fell onto Building 4. None of the government reports mention that the top of the South Tower broke off, nor do they explain why the entire base of the South Tower would disintegrate after the top fell off. Are the editors of Popular Mechanics getting their information from the government? If so, it is no wonder that they are na�ve about the 9-11 attack. They should get the packet of books and DVDs that Jimmy Walter offers before they write any more articles. Since nobody has explained the mysteries of the South Tower, only a fool would say that this issue has been resolved. -------------------------- FACT: Many conspiracy theorists point to FEMA's preliminary report, which said there was relatively light damage to WTC 7 prior to its collapse. With the benefit of more time and resources, NIST researchers now support the working hypothesis that WTC 7 was far more compromised by falling debris than the FEMA report indicated. "The most important thing we found was that there was, in fact, physical damage to the south face of building 7," NIST's Sunder tells PM. "On about a third of the face to the center and to the bottom--approximately 10 stories--about 25 percent of the depth of the building was scooped out." NIST also discovered previously undocumented damage to WTC 7's upper stories and its southwest corner. Where are the photos that prove 25% of Building 7 was scooped out? The photos published in reports, and those available on me Internet do not show anything other than trivial damage, such as some broken windows. Tom Franklin, a professional photographer for a New Jersey newspaper, traveled quickly to the World Trade Center to get photographs. According to his own report, he was standing in front of Building 7 at about 4 p.m.. He took lots of photos, but where are his photos of Building 7? Why would he ignore a skyscraper with 25% of its first 10 floors scooped out? -------------------------- NIST investigators believe a combination of intense fire and severe structural damage contributed to the collapse, though assigning the exact proportion requires more research. Where is evidence that there was an intense fire in Building 7? The photos taken in the afternoon do not show intense fires. Just because a few investigators believe something, that does not make it true. They need evidence to support their beliefs. -------------------------- Second, a fifth-floor fire burned for up to 7 hours. "There was no firefighting in WTC 7," Sunder says. Investigators believe the fire was fed by tanks of diesel fuel that many tenants used to run emergency generators. Most tanks throughout the building were fairly small, but a generator on the fifth floor was connected to a large tank in the basement via a pressurized line. Says Sunder: "Our current working hypothesis is that this pressurized line was supplying fuel [to the fire] for a long period of time." How can a fire burn for seven hours without spreading to other offices or other floors? Perhaps some diesel fuel was dripping from a supply pipe. Since the fire was small, and since the building had a steel frame with concrete floors, the fire could not travel to other offices. So how could such an insignificant fire bring down an entire skyscraper? -------------------------- FACT: When American Airlines Flight 77 hit the Pentagon's exterior wall, Ring E, it created a hole approximately 75 ft. wide, according to the ASCE Pentagon Building Performance Report. Where is a photograph that shows a hole 75 feet wide? All the photos available in reports and the Internet show only small holes. What are we to believe, one person's wild speculation, or the photographs? -------------------------- Why wasn't the hole as wide as a 757's 124-ft.-10-in. wingspan? A crashing jet doesn't punch a cartoon-like outline of itself into a reinforced concrete building, says ASCE team member Mete Sozen, a professor of structural engineering at Purdue University. In this case, one wing hit the ground; the other was sheared off by the force of the impact with the Pentagon's load-bearing columns, explains Sozen, who specializes in the behavior of concrete buildings. Nobody expects an airplane to create a cartoon-like outline of itself when it hits a building. However, if one wing hit the ground, where are the photographs of that wing? The photographs do not show anything resembling a wing. -------------------------- What was left of the plane flowed into the structure in a state closer to a liquid than a solid mass. Did the passengers and their luggage also turn into a liquid state and flow into the building? After they got into the building, did they solidify back into a solid state? What sort of physics is this? How were they able to identify human parts when metal melts at temperatures far beyond that necessary to reduce flesh to nothing buy carbon ash? When airplanes crash in other locations, every piece of the plane can be found, even if it is in small pieces. Pieces of the passengers and their luggage can also be found. How is it that when a plane hits the Pentagon, everything suddenly changes and the plane is liquefied?

Complete 911 Timeline
All Day of 9/11 Events

i really do feel sorry for you people

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN i really do feel sorry for you people

If you have nothing objective to say then troll some other forums with your tripe.

As regards the condition of the hemispheres themselves, an alert state of the nervous system is absolutely essential for the formation of a new conditioned reflex. If the dog is mostly drowsy during the experiments, the establishment of a conditioned reflex becomes a long and tedious process, and in extreme cases is impossible to accomplish. The hemispheres must, however, be free from any other nervous activity, and therefore in building up a new conditioned reflex it is important to avoid foreign stimuli which, falling upon the animal, would cause other reactions of their own. If this is not attended to, the establishment of a conditioned reflex is very difficult, if not impossible.
Conditioned Reflexes: An Investigation of the Physiological Activity of the Cerebral Cortex
Ivan P. Pavlov

Bell rings.
Dog responds.

ogvh5150's dog:

like i said before, when you trolls are presented with evidence you just resort to personal attacks. seriously, are you an undercover agent of Bush sent out to spread propoganda? i wouldn't be suprised.

quote:

Originally posted by Haunted like i said before, when you trolls are presented with evidence you just resort to personal attacks.

]

we've been debating in this thread (plus a couple others) well before you decided to drop in einstein, so how bout *you* go troll somewhere else? it has merely degenerated to this level coz we get tired of the same old shit all the time. i approached the subject with a mostly open mind, i read the links and watched the videos and theyre bullshit, asking lots of questions without providing any answers. so fuck you, you presumptious twit.

quote:

Originally posted by Haunted seriously, are you an undercover agent of Bush sent out to spread propoganda? i wouldn't be suprised.

and this is the kindve stuff im talking about. moronic conspiracy idiocy that misses all the logic of the bigger story. ive asked ogv time and time again to give me his version of events, (the how, why etc) and he's never provided anything but more links to bullshit websites. so get back to watching oliver stone's JFK or pick a debate that doesnt rely on some weirdo's abject fantasies

the point is to ask questions. no one knows what really happened, how the hell is anyone supposed to give you that kind of information "omgzz if u dont know what really happened you're stooopid and shoudl just accept what the gov't tells you" nice argument.

How can you say no-one knows what happened? If it is not a conspiracy, the whole world knows what happened. If it is a conspiracy, then someone must know what happened, and in fact alot of people would need to know what happened because to pull off such a large operation would require alot of organising. it would certainly take more than one or two brains to achieve it successfully.

if everyone knows exactly what happened there wouldn't be conspiracy,
a conspiracy arises when there are missing peices in the story told

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN i really do feel sorry for you people

I feel more sorry for the vast majority of the family members of the victims that are part of the 9-11 truth movement, because the goverment can't give an honest answer (which is a huge understatement). I guess eyewitness accounts and accounts from people like William Rodriquez, who were rescuing people from the buildings before they collapsed, all talking about bombs going off in the buildings is irrelevant? And I guess whistle blowers from the intelligence agencies (amonsts other federal agencies, not just in the US btw) such as CIA analyst Ray McGovern, who briefed to Regan/Bush administrations, amongst many others, who all agree that the official story is a whitewas and are pretty sure it was a false flag operation also have no credibility or understanding of how things work right?

Or maybe I am to deny my knowledge of physics and believe the official pancake theory, or defy common sense and accept the official conspiracy theory presented by the goverment which has the weakest supporting evidence (and even the official FEMA report concluded had a very unlikely probibility, and it was the only hypothesis they cosidered, I wonder why?). Isn't it convenitent that they ILLEGALY got rid of all of the evidence (i.e. melted majority the steel and sold it to China)? BTW, Prof Steven Jones, a reputable BYU physics Prof, found themate in samples from the steel support beams. That's signature controlled demolition explosives. (You would know that if you've done you're research, which I doubt you have).


And please don't respond if you're going to resort to name calling or ad hominem attacks.

EDIT=minor corrections

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z And please don't respond if you're going to resort to name calling or ad hominem attacks.

That is not something you can expect him to do every post has to do with attacks nothing else.

I don't see why people don't get it. Three thousand Americans to the government means nothing to them as the millions of dollars they can make from declaring a war I don't get why people don't understand that.

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z I feel more sorry for the vast majority of the family members of the victims that are part of the 9-11 truth movement, because the goverment can't give an honest answer (which is a huge understatement). I guess eyewitness accounts and accounts from people like William Rodriquez, who were rescuing people from the buildings before they collapsed, all talking about bombs going off in the buildings is irrelevant? And I guess whistle blowers from the intelligence agencies (amonsts other federal agencies, not just in the US btw) such as CIA analyst Ray McGovern, who briefed to Regan/Bush administrations, amongst many others, who all agree that the official story is a whitewas and are pretty sure it was a false flag operation also have no credibility or understanding of how things work right? Or maybe I am to deny my knowledge of physics and believe the official pancake theory, or defy common sense and accept the official conspiracy theory presented by the goverment which has the weakest supporting evidence (and even the official FEMA report concluded had a very unlikely probibility, and it was the only hypothesis they cosidered, I wonder why?). Isn't it convenitent that they ILLEGALY got rid of all of the evidence (i.e. melted majority the steel and sold it to China)? BTW, Prof Steven Jones, a reputable BYU physics Prof, found themate in samples from the steel support beams. That's signature controlled demolition explosives. (You would know that if you've done you're research, which I doubt you have).

oh shaolin, im so disappointed in you

look, as im not a structural engineer i dont feel as though im all that qualified to critique all the evidence. all im saying is the debunking sites ive read are more compelling than the conspiracy sites. if youre going to tow the conspiracy line, imo you need to provide more of an analysis, i think the conspiracy arguments ask questions, but ignore the massive gaping wounds in logic that exist.

the only argument im willing to accept at this stage is that the US government were complicit in allowing the attacks to happen. to suggest otherwise youd have to suggest the government pre-planted explosives at the exact spot just below where the planes hit, and thats just not credible.

quote:

Originally posted by metalgearsolid That is not something you can expect him to do every post has to do with attacks nothing else. I don't see why people don't get it. Three thousand Americans to the government means nothing to them as the millions of dollars they can make from declaring a war I don't get why people don't understand that.

ive been posting in the PDD well before you turned up so dont try and label me as anything child. i show a great deal of respect for the regular users in here that present well-constructed arguments. i attack you coz youre stupid, your spelling & grammar is terrible, the 'arguments' you present are laughable and generally reading your posts are a waste of time.

oh, and please tell me exactly how the american government is making 'millions and millions' of dollars from any war. this is what im talking about- you have no understanding of virtually anything youre talking about. go back to school or at least pick up a book. honestly, im embarrassed for you.

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN I've been posting in the PDD well before you turned up so don't try and label me as anything child. I show a great deal of respect for the regular users in here that present well-constructed arguments. I attack you coz you're stupid, your spelling & grammar is terrible, the 'arguments' you present are laughable and generally reading your posts are a waste of time. Oh, and please tell me exactly how the American government is making 'millions and millions' of dollars from any war. This is what I'am talking about- you have no understanding of virtually anything you're talking about. Go back to school or at least pick up a book. Honestly, I'am embarrassed for you.

That is great you have been posting here longer than me, I'am impressed. You want to talk about grammar look above to yours. You are silly little boy. I didn't want to bother with fragmented sentences, but feel free to continue saying I have bad grammer skills compare to you. I laugh every time. Never has a PDD member made so many grammar errors until you post. Every time you are the only one who makes the most grammar errors of all the PDD members.

Every time you post another record(held by you previously) is broken by you for being blatantly ignorant, stupid, and unnecessarily beligerant. Not that I'am an angel I don't pretend to be one, though.

But please do me a favor, no do us all a favor, before you want to talk down to someone make sure you are at least smarter, if not equilivant, than he is. What makes me laugh are twats like you can only attack because you don't know shit or you are so retardely ill that you automatically dislike anybody who hasn't been on Ta for as long as you. Or you won't respect them until they kiss your ass.

quote:

Originally posted by metalgearsolid That is great you have been posting here longer than me, I'am impressed. You want to talk about grammer look above to yours. You are silly little boy. I didn't want to bother with fragmented sentences, but feel free to continue saying I have bad grammer skills compare to you. I laugh every time. Never has a PDD member made so many grammer errors until you post. Every time you are the only one who makes the most grammer errors of all the PDD members. Every time you post another record(held by you previously) is broken by you for being blatantly ignorant, stupid, and unnecessarily beligerant. Not that I'am an angel I don't pretend to be one, though. But please do me a favor, no do us all a favor, before you want to talk down to someone make sure you are at least smarter, if not equilivant, than he is. What makes me laugh are twats like you can only attack because you don't know shit or you are so retardely ill that you automatically dislike anybody who hasn't been on Ta for as long as you. Or you won't respect them until they kiss your ass.

I believe it's spelled "grammar"

quote:

Originally posted by Psionic I believe it's spelled "grammar"

Well, I couldn't see without my glasses. Thanks though.

quote:

Originally posted by metalgearsolid That is great you have been posting here longer than me, I'am impressed. You want to talk about grammer look above to yours. You are silly little boy. I didn't want to bother with fragmented sentences, but feel free to continue saying I have bad grammer skills compare to you. I laugh every time. Never has a PDD member made so many grammer errors until you post. Every time you are the only one who makes the most grammer errors of all the PDD members. Every time you post another record(held by you previously) is broken by you for being blatantly ignorant, stupid, and unnecessarily beligerant. Not that I'am an angel I don't pretend to be one, though. What makes me laugh are twats like you can only attack because you don't know shit or you are so retardely ill that you automatically dislike anybody who hasn't been on Ta for as long as you. Or you won't respect them until they kiss your ass.

asides from the fact that i try not to use punctuation (when im at work using my proxy bypass \" & ' often end up with a / in the middle of the word) there is absolutely nothing wrong with what you have brought to my attention. once again youre showing your lack of education. and grammar doesnt have an 'e' in it, moron. even some of your corrections make no sense. what exactly is i'am?

'every time i post another record' ?
'retardely ill' ?
'equivilent' ?
'bad grammer skills compare to you' ?

i respect any user who can construct a reasonable argument. and people like you that dont even realise they cant, annoy me. i dont care how long youve been registered, was merely pointing out that your suggestion i only ever attack people (as opposed to arguments) is thoroughly untrue, and someone thats been posting here for more than 5 minutes would realise that. and to criticise my paragraph with your own diatribe filled with poor writing and spelling mistakes is just funny. the fact you cant see that though is merely sad.

quote:

Originally posted by metalgearsolid But please do me a favor, no do us all a favor, before you want to talk down to someone make sure you are at least smarter, if not equilivant, than he is.

without a doubt hope you hold on dearly to that highschool certificate. its the only one youll ever get.

quote:

Originally posted by metalgearsolid Well, I couldn't see without my glasses. Thanks though.

oh, for some reason your glasses make your spelling better? idiot.

Right, my point being that you make excuses for being a fucking loser who rather debating a topic you make it your goal to attack someone.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.