Caught with their pants down, very far down. Now lets find out who wired the BBC that WTC7 was going to collapse due to bullshit fires before it actually happened.
This is big, very BIG.
words cannot express just how fucking stupid you are.
Posted by metalgearsolid on Feb-28-2007 22:49:
quote:
Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
words cannot express just how fucking stupid you are.
Don't get offended. Its just an upset Aussie because the only threat to Australia are those damn kangoroos. You know they attack people?
Posted by pkcRAISTLIN on Feb-28-2007 23:56:
quote:
Originally posted by metalgearsolid
Don't get offended. Its just an upset Aussie because the only threat to Australia are those damn kangoroos. You know they attack people?
no, its an upset aussie that gets pissed off with morons that cant do research good enough to satisfy a highschool assignment. regurgitating fallacious crap that has been examined and dealt with 100 times Posted by metalgearsolid on Mar-01-2007 00:04:
I get kicks watching this:
Posted by culorut on Mar-01-2007 01:00:
quote:
Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
no, its an upset aussie that gets pissed off with morons that cant do research good enough to satisfy a highschool assignment. regurgitating fallacious crap that has been examined and dealt with 100 times
Upset about an issue that was just discovered and not discussed a hundred times is more like it.
If you bothered to actually read through the links you would realize the BBC's reply to this now lost footage was only a day or two ago. This is far from re-hashing fallacious crap.
You seem to be the one that is full of it. Want some peanuts?
Posted by culorut on Mar-01-2007 01:18:
quote:
Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
words cannot express just how fucking stupid you are.
The BBC have lost footage of one of the worlds most important events in the last 60 years. (sure they did)
Words cannot explain how stupid the general populace must be if they fall for "we lost the tapes" story again.
You are the fucking idiot no doubt if you believe this bullshit.
Posted by pkcRAISTLIN on Mar-01-2007 01:22:
keep clinging to your fantasy world!
fight the power!
but feel free to explain this "issue" for us. just for a laugh. tell me, in your own words, exactly what the BBC has to do with any of this. im really keen to see how far your imagination is willing to go! hahahahahaha.
Posted by culorut on Mar-01-2007 01:36:
Clever another tinfoil hat picture trying to underline the message instead of arguing actual facts.
For one I do not think the BBC was in on it, they where reporting on what information was sent to them. What is important is they announced it (3-4 times) on live TV that WTC7 had collapsed almost half an hour before it actually happened. They had everything down to a tee regarding the collapse but it did not actually happen yet in real time.
Pretty mind fucking blowing if you ask me.
Now where did the BBC get this info from and why has the archive footage been suddenly lost?
Posted by pkcRAISTLIN on Mar-01-2007 01:43:
quote:
Originally posted by culorut
Pretty mind fucking blowing if you ask me.
why is this any more mind blowing than any other mistaken report from that day (of which there were dozens).
quote:
Originally posted by culorut
Now where did the BBC get this info from and why has the archive footage been suddenly lost?
exactly. tell me where the BBC got the info from? give me a hint. coz honestly, youre making massive leaps of illogical faith. because the BBC reported something in error is not evidence of anything. you add far too much belief into a situation that actually requires FACTS. you have nothing to support your assertion that they knew beforehand that the government was going to detonate their supposed explosives.
and the FACT is everyone at the site knew WTC7 was going to collapse. if you bothered to read the fireman's quotes you would know this.
the simple explanation: someone from the BBC misunderstood info regarding the state of WTC7 and reported that the near-collapsing building had already collapsed. perhaps you can tell me why its so weird a building torn apart by debris and fire isnt expected to collapse after burning for 5+ fucking hours Posted by culorut on Mar-01-2007 02:01:
Caught you red handed.
First try watching the clip moron. This footage shows the BBC announcing 3-4 times that WTC7 had collapsed, the last time they mention it in the clip they have live footage of WTC7 still standing in the fucking background.
It is rather obvious they are reading from a script. If they bothered to look at the screen they would have seen the building was still standing.
There is huge difference between it has collapsed and we think it will collapse due to some petty fires.
They mention in great detail on how it happened on top of things.
The building did not collapse until 23 minutes after they reported it did. The archive tapes have gone missing, google and youtube pulled it faster than ben johnson on steriods but you still think everything is fine?
Go have some peanuts.
Posted by pkcRAISTLIN on Mar-01-2007 02:14:
quote:
Originally posted by culorut
Caught you red handed.
First try watching the clip moron. This footage shows the BBC announcing 3-4 times that WTC7 had collapsed, the last time they mention it in the clip they have live footage of WTC7 still standing in the fucking background.
It is rather obvious they are reading from a script. If they bothered to look at the screen they would have seen the building was still standing.
There is huge difference between it has collapsed and we think it will collapse due to some petty fires.
They mention in great detail on how it happened on top of things.
The building did not collapse until 23 minutes after they reported it did. The archive tapes have gone missing, google and youtube pulled it faster than ben johnson on steriods but you still think everything is fine?
Go have some peanuts.
right. so someone makes a mistake and suddenly its conspiracy time? love your thinking there.
obviously reading from a script. hmmmm. so who wrote this script and why did they tell the BBC? tell me that. you list all these apparent anomalies, crying "conspiracy" but you dont provide a single bit of reasoning to explain it. its as bad as you idiots ignoring the fact it would have taken weeks, if not months to plant demo charges in the WTC buildings. the larger, macro necessities required for your outlandish claims are never properly explored.
youre not answering my questions. you have to tell me the hows and whys of it all. pointing at an innocuous error and then infering some hidden meaning isnt evidence. christ, its like youre in highschool.
google and youtube pulling it. so, despite the hundreds of films out there alleging US govt involvement in 911 that exist, quite freely, all over the fucking place, the US govt got stuck into google and made them withdraw it. seriously dude, you have no fucking idea how this planet works.
Posted by culorut on Mar-01-2007 02:25:
I would reply to your post but you seem to be arguing over something which you have not even looked at all.
Huff an puff all you want pkc, the BBC announced the building collapsed in great detail before it happened. The archives have gone missing from the BBC, google and youtube have pulled it.
Seems like you nor anyone else can debunk this. Caught with their pants down, end of story.
Your on my ignore list until you start reading and looking at the information posted before shooting your mouth off.
Posted by pkcRAISTLIN on Mar-01-2007 02:26:
oh gee! look what i found!
the BBC report on youtube! yep, those government agents sure have been deleting this report everywhere!!
cant even bother to do 5 seconds of research can you child?
Originally posted by culorut
I would reply to your post but you seem to be arguing over something which you have not even looked at all.
Huff an puff all you want pkc, the BBC announced the building collapsed in great detail before it happened. The archives have gone missing from the BBC, google and youtube have pulled it.
Seems like you nor anyone else can debunk this. Caught with their pants down, end of story.
Your on my ignore list until you start reading and looking at the information posted before shooting your mouth off.
again, not answering any of my questions.
oh yeah, they pulled it alright! amateur reseacher- the biggest contributing factor to 9/11 conspiracy theories. idiots the lot of you.
Posted by shaolin_Z on Mar-01-2007 02:58:
quote:
Originally posted by culorut
Your on my ignore list until you start reading and looking at the information posted before shooting your mouth off.
LOL, I had to do that to at one point, for the same reason. I got a little tired of him sidestepping every point made and then proceed to insult me when he didn't know how to respond and ran out of his copy paste arguments. If I were you, I wouldn't waste my time arguing him as it's utterly pointless and you might end up reducing yourself to his level.
Posted by Magnetonium on Mar-01-2007 03:08:
WOWOWOWOW..... you guys gotta see this ... I stumbled into a video clip which talks about WTC 7 collapsed, while its clearly still standing in the background of the video, LOL
To be clear, the Salomon Brothers Building is just a different name for Building 7 or WTC 7. Skip forward to around the 14:30 minute mark.
LOL, conspiracy theory, eh???
Posted by shaolin_Z on Mar-01-2007 03:13:
LOL!!! Thanks Magnetonium. That's just made my day .
Posted by pkcRAISTLIN on Mar-01-2007 03:14:
quote:
Originally posted by shaolin_Z
LOL, I had to do that to at one point, for the same reason. I got a little tired of him sidestepping every point made and then proceed to insult me when he didn't know how to respond and ran out of his copy paste arguments. If I were you, I wouldn't waste my time arguing him as it's utterly pointless and you might end up reducing yourself to his level.
people in glass houses shaolin...
interesting that you didnt respond to a single "copy paste" argument. you were almost as bad as culurut with your "no steel building has ever fallen because of fire" until i stomped that one into the ground.
you never did come back with an answer to why you ignore all the fireman testimony regarding WTC7 and the MASSIVE fires it had. but you'll pay attention to minute zero, panicked comments about there being bombs in the buildings. or that witnesses supposedly heard bombs going off. you know, because uneducated, panicked civilians are the best source for distinguishing explosives from explosions or architecture falling apart.
you completely dismissed the article from one of the world's leading demolition teams, as if they were somehow co-opted into saying the WTC buildings werent brought down by demolitions, yet put all your stock in a physics professor that wouldnt know the first thing about engineering and explosives, and whose paper STILL hasnt received a peer review (you know, the FIRST step in getting scientific acceptance for research).
none of you have ever dealt with how much time it would have taken to plant charges in all 3 buildings. completely prohibitive of a clandestine secret plan. you ignore the fact that not a single explosive compound has been suggested that could have been used to bring those towers down. yet, we're still seeing the same, tired thermite arguments from all the professional crazies.
you ignore the fact that the collapse of WTC1&2 arent even close to resembling a controlled demolition. you ignore engineering experts from around the world that have examined this issue.
the reason i ended up insulting you was because you were ignoring anything i had to say. plenty of your arguments are repeated known fallacies and you werent paying attention when i was pointing that out to you. (hey, just like culorut ignoring how youtube hasnt deleted the footage he claims). i never pretended to have the answers to all the arguments you presented, but thats more to do with focus than anything. i prefer to limit the discussion to things that need no inference, such as the buildings fell down. we could go round in circles about what one particular paragraph of the PNAC document is supposed to mean. again, thats not evidence and the amount of weight you and others put in such ambiguous (out of context) sentences borders on the embarrassing.
as for culorut, he has merely posted the same, tired bullshit that has been dealt with 100s of times, without even realising how fucking stupid he is. im pretty sure he even posted an article including questions about why the pentagon missile battery didnt fire on the incoming plane (assuming there was a plane of course!) completely ignoring the fact that pre 9/11 the pentagon had no such system.
but hey, i think its commendable you stick up for your fellow crazies. its kinda cute in a way. please file away the BBC report in your "things that absolutely show 100% that the US government bombed their buildings" file Posted by shaolin_Z on Mar-01-2007 03:16:
Sorry, but I really can't be bothered to read anything you post about this subject anymore since you do nothing but assert your claims instead of arguing and call me crazy.
Posted by pkcRAISTLIN on Mar-01-2007 03:21:
quote:
Originally posted by shaolin_Z
Sorry, but I really can't be bothered to read anything you post
hey, its like old times! Posted by Magnetonium on Mar-01-2007 03:59:
quote:
Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
hey, its like old times!
thats the same video cretinrot posted a couple pages back.
Posted by Magnetonium on Mar-01-2007 04:05:
quote:
Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
thats the same video cretinrot posted a couple pages back.
And what do you think of it? LOL
Posted by pkcRAISTLIN on Mar-01-2007 04:11:
quote:
Originally posted by Magnetonium
And what do you think of it? LOL
nothing special. im certainly not seeing what you people are seeing. the fact that it repeats the falsehood regarding "no steel building" doesnt do a lot for its credibility.
.
