quote:

Originally posted by occrider There has never been a time, in any of my 5 years on this forum, that I have been unwilling to debate, argue, or discuss an argument in an intelligent manner. I thought that would be a virtue on this forum unless you're looking for a forum of sicophants who repeat every word you say. If said person seems to think that the best way to discredit me is to argue behind my back as opposed to addressing my arguments directly than I genuinelly feel sorry for that person. I shall be the bigger man ... feel free to criticize me directly if you disagree with me and tell me why ... I won't bite. I will try to be as understanding as possible while addressing your arguments. Otherwise feel free to continue discussing me behind my back because I'm not threatened by that type of behaviour in any way whatsoever.

I wasn't arguing with you in any way. I just thought it was funny, that's all.

I appreciate your posts, don't get me wrong. It's just that you do tend to take a somewhat naive stance in regards to what our government is and isn't capable of doing.

In this case, since the direct evidence is severely lacking (as it is in most cover-ups), you have to take a more profound look at the bulk of circumstantial evidence.

BTW - while not trying to stray too far from the topic, you never did watch that video I recommended to you, did you?

http://www.tranceaddict.com/forums/...112#post5102112

edit: anal-retentive spelling correction

Last edited by Trancer-X on Dec-10-2005 at 09:15

quote:

Originally posted by Trancer-X I wasn't arguing with you in any way. I just thought it was funny, that's all. I appreciate your posts, don't get me wrong. It's just that you do tend to take a somewhat naive stance in regards to what our government is and isn't capable of doing. In this case, since the direct eveidence is severely lacking (as it is in most cover-ups), you have to take a more profound look at the bulk of circumstantial evidence. BTW - you never did watch that video I recommended to you, did you? http://www.tranceaddict.com/forums/...112#post5102112

My argument was not directed at you in any way whatsoever. Just to be clear

edit: and no I didn't watch your video at all, however I shall now. Can we discuss it after I'm done with Stevie's arguments? I would like to remain focused until the current argument reaches a sufficient conclusion.

___________________
Retro ...

quote:

Originally posted by occrider My argument was not directed at you in any way whatsoever. Just to be clear

Gotcha. However, maybe you should take it as a compliment that some people might feel a little bit intimidated in trying to argue with you in this forum. Not everyone finds articulating their thoughts (into words) as the easiest task. For a long time I know that I sure didn't. (For many of us it actually takes a bit of practice.)

quote:

Originally posted by occrider I would like to remain focused until the current argument reaches a sufficient conclusion.

No problem. I'm actually kind of eager to see what comes of this one.

quote:

Originally posted by {b.s.e.} grab some sense. PM your email, I'll send you this file and we'll see what you think after.

A thread can never be made about this sort of stuff. People are too ignorant and can't see the shit that has been shoved in their face.

I've been interested in UFO's my whole life and I am a huge conspiracy theory freak. I believe 9/11 was fake, as was the London bombings. I also have done some research on Dulce and some other Government crap.

Only the people who have done research and have been interested in it will give normal thoughtful responses. All others will laugh and continue to random bullshit about something else they have no clue about.

But i'm sure you already know this.

___________________

Ok my reply...

I watched a documentaty. I'm pretty sure it was the 9/11 one you can pick up in your local movie store. The firefighters were going in the building and an explosion went off in the machinery room in the lobby or close to it. There was dust, sut and debris all over the place. A man walked out of there with literally all of his skin burned and hanging off.

How does a plane 80+ stories up, create an explosion in the lobby?

Also in the documentary:

Firefighters were talking about how they had recieved information on their radios about explosions on floors 7 and 8 AFTER the planes hit.

That should be enough to just proove a fake right there.

Good job on bringing this thread back on topic!

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by occrider Ok! Sorry it took so long to respond

Great stuff and I will actually take even longer to reply because I have to study for finals next week. Trust me I will address those issues and more, until then...I'll be back.

quote:

Originally posted by Trancer-X No problem. I'm actually kind of eager to see what comes of this one.

Yea I don't like to not respond to people's arguments in a timely fashion and with work sucking the life out of me I only have so much time for serious disucssions that require research so I only like to do them one at a time nowadays.

quote:

Great stuff and I will actually take even longer to reply because I have to study for finals next week. Trust me I will address those issues and more, until then...I'll be back.

No worries. I've taken breaks from long drawn out arguments that have lasted a week or so at times. I'm not going anywhere.

Btw, if anyone would like to argue the specifics fo anything I've said please quote me in your replies so I know you're talking to me. I don't come into this thread much because I don't enjoy talking about 9/11 so that would help.

Fuck I'm hungover.

___________________
Retro ...

Way to use a sledgehammer to kill a fly Occ. You could have just asked for something other than meaningless conjecture and he'd have been stumped.

quote:

Originally posted by Arbiter Way to use a sledgehammer to kill a fly Occ. You could have just asked for something other than meaningless conjecture and he'd have been stumped.

LOL - IMO, an errantly swung sledghammer that really hasn't proven anything.

I'm curious as to how we can explain WTC 7 and the fact that the government won't admit that it was "pulled." How did that one go down? It definitely wasn't because of any burning pools of jet fuel, as WTC 7 only sustained auxiliary damage and was never hit by a plane.


http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/attack/wtc7.html

Last edited by Trancer-X on Dec-10-2005 at 22:04

Now I'm also wondering why there has been so little reported on the fact that the WTC fire of 1975 had supposedly burned more intensely, but did so little damage to the buildings infrastructure.

quote:

A combination of an uncontrolled fire and the structural damage might have been able to bring the building down, some engineers said. But that would not explain steel members in the debris pile that appear to have been partly evaporated in extraordinarily high temperatures, Dr. [Jonathan] Barnett, [professor of fire protection engineering at the Worcester Polytechnic Institute] said. http://www.underreported.com/module...order=0&thold=0