Cycling and bicycle racing discussion forums.   View New Forum Topics
Today's Forum Topics

Set as homepage


Go Back   Cycling Forums > Other Stuff > Your Bloody Soap Box
User Name
Password
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Welcome to CyclingForums.com

You are currently viewing our website as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions. You will have to register before you can post to this thread.

By joining our free online community you will have access to post new topics, communicate privately with other cyclingforums.com members (PM), respond to polls, upload photos and access other special features like product reviews and classifieds.


9/11 Panel Suspected Deception by Pentagon

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 18-08.-2006, 10:22 AM   #46
Ike90
Registered User
 
Ike90's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 88
Default Re: 9/11 Panel Suspected Deception by Pentagon

Quote:
The problem here, as is usual for Repig-supporters, is that you have no reasonable defense for your heroes' heinous and despicable crimes


Once again, you totally miss the mark, but hey, don't let reason stand in your way.

I am in no way a Bush supporter; quite the opposite, it's just that what you quantify as "heinous crime" is nothing but pure fantasy.

You really should put your efforts into something productive, rather than clinging to overwrought BS insinuation.

If you don't think the failure of the Bush administration's "they have WMDs" garbage isn't going to hurt the G.O.P, and badly, you're pathetically mistaken. Look at yourself, you're hanging your frickin' hat on Jeb! That makes you more of a Gomer than he is.
Ike90 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 18-08.-2006, 11:52 AM   #47
davidmc
Registered User
 
davidmc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: metro dc USA
Posts: 3,394
Default Re: 9/11 Panel Suspected Deception by Pentagon

just "chiming in"
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:  sack.jpg
Views: 7
Size:  41.1 KB  Click image for larger version

Name:  rogers.gif
Views: 7
Size:  43.2 KB  Click image for larger version

Name:  trall060817.gif
Views: 8
Size:  50.1 KB  
__________________
I'm completely in favor of the separation of Church and State. My idea is that these two institutions screw us up enough on their own, so both of them together is certain death.
George Carlin
US comedian and actor (1937 - )
davidmc is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 18-08.-2006, 04:38 PM   #48
Eldron
Registered User
 
Eldron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa
Posts: 826
Default Re: 9/11 Panel Suspected Deception by Pentagon

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wurm

[/i]Now that I've responded to your presumptions - tell us, what WAS your stand on apartheid? (THIS oughta be good... )


My stance on apartheid is much like your "we killed indians years ago and I had nothing to do with it" stance. Apartheid was instituted decades before I was born and ended when I was still a teenager...

Do I agree with it? No.

I was barely 18 when a referendum was held in SA asking if we (the whites) wanted democratic elections. I voted yes for what is was worth. The result of the referendum was an overwhelming yes which pretty much proves that whites in this country wanted apartheid to end.

I still find it ironic that most of the world poo poos apartheid when they (the US, AUS etc) wiped out the indigenous population to make themselves the majority. People in glass houses and such....

Anyway - I'm in too much of a good mood to get bogged down by politics (again!). So carry on - have a blast - swallow the conspiracy theory rubbish - I'll swallow my common sense rubbish.

86kg eh - you fat bastard! Now we know who et all the pies...
Eldron is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 19-08.-2006, 02:20 PM   #49
Wurm
Registered User
 
Wurm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 2,148
Default Re: 9/11 Panel Suspected Deception by Pentagon

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eldron

I was barely 18 when a referendum was held in SA asking if we (the whites) wanted democratic elections. I voted yes for what is was worth. The result of the referendum was an overwhelming yes which pretty much proves that whites in this country wanted apartheid to end.
Well, at least you got off yerass and posted a reply. Whether it's true or not is another thing...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eldron
I still find it ironic that most of the world poo poos apartheid when they (the US, AUS etc) wiped out the indigenous population to make themselves the majority. People in glass houses and such....
So do I. But why are you harping this at me? I had nothing to do with it, nor have I ever supported the mindset.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eldron
86kg eh - you fat bastard! Now we know who et all the pies...
I like pies. I like green eggs n' ham too. But I can still beat yerass on any ride you'd like to try with me.
__________________
"Bush is the first President to admit to an impeachable offense."

- John Dean, former Counsel to the President (Nixon)

The aim of big corporations is to separate fools from their money all of the time and ordinary folks from their money most of the time. The rest of us must fend for ourselves.
Wurm is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 19-08.-2006, 02:32 PM   #50
Wurm
Registered User
 
Wurm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 2,148
Default Re: 9/11 Panel Suspected Deception by Pentagon

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ike90
Once again, you totally miss the mark, but hey, don't let reason stand in your way.

...it's just that what you quantify as "heinous crime" is nothing but pure fantasy.
Really? That's not what the judge just said about Bu$hCo's illegal domestic spying.

I wouldn't talk about "reason" if I were you, since you've shown here that you have no ability to use it. Proof gets presented...you deny it without countervailing evidence, but only with invective. You continue to skirt the issues just like any "in no way a Bush supporter" does.

Get a grip Ike, and if/when you can come back and have a sensible, logical debate - I'll talk with ya.
__________________
"Bush is the first President to admit to an impeachable offense."

- John Dean, former Counsel to the President (Nixon)

The aim of big corporations is to separate fools from their money all of the time and ordinary folks from their money most of the time. The rest of us must fend for ourselves.
Wurm is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 21-08.-2006, 02:32 AM   #51
Ike90
Registered User
 
Ike90's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 88
Default Re: 9/11 Panel Suspected Deception by Pentagon

Quote:
Proof gets presented


Speaking of invective....

Your so-called "proof" consists of things like "puffs of smoke" providing "evidence" of demolition charges?

You know, if you're "theory" weren't so ghastly and sinister, it would almost be preferable to the reality of 9/11.

At least in your world, it was a malevolent American scheme that duped us all; we didn't simply get caught with our proverbial pants around our ankles by a handful of fanatics who had nothing more than a few flying lessons and some box cutters.

Who doesn't have a grip?
Ike90 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 21-08.-2006, 07:44 AM   #52
Wurm
Registered User
 
Wurm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 2,148
Default Re: 9/11 Panel Suspected Deception by Pentagon

Anything to deny the visible evidence, eh Ike??

Let me ask you for the record: exactly what type of evidence/proof would you need to be satisfied that the gov'ts version of events is not true - short of a high-ranking member of Bu$hCo standing up and revealing that he/she had a part in the planning & execution of 9-11??

As far as I can tell, there is extant nearly every kind of evidence that would be accepted in a court of law in the US: eyewitness tesimony/accounts, scientific/expert, video, audio, various circumstantial, and proof of deleted, hidden, or confiscated evidence that has not been allowed to come forth.

Please explain why you cannot accept the mountain of data that shows 9-11 was an inside job.
__________________
"Bush is the first President to admit to an impeachable offense."

- John Dean, former Counsel to the President (Nixon)

The aim of big corporations is to separate fools from their money all of the time and ordinary folks from their money most of the time. The rest of us must fend for ourselves.

Last edited by Wurm : 21-08.-2006 at 07:55 AM.
Wurm is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 22-08.-2006, 08:22 AM   #53
Ike90
Registered User
 
Ike90's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 88
Default Re: 9/11 Panel Suspected Deception by Pentagon

Quote:
The omission of the fact that fire has never, before or after 9/11, caused steel-frame buildings to collapse.


Quote:
6. The omission of the fact that the fires in the Twin Towers were not very big, very hot, or very long-lasting compared with fires in several steel-frame buildings that did not collapse.


Quote:
The claim that the core of each of the Twin Towers was "a hollow steel shaft" — a claim that denied the existence of the 47 massive steel columns that in reality constituted the core of each tower and that, given the "pancake theory" of the collapses, should have still been sticking up many hundreds of feet in the air.


Okay, here are a few of your "facts" which by their very wording clearly aren't fact at all (other than supposedly documenting an omission), and they attempt to draw a comparison between buildings of an entirely different design.

Once again, the towers were not a steel frame "box-on-box" design, and there are literally no other structures quite like them from which to draw any comparisons.

The "hollow steel shafts" were in fact each comprised of the 47 vertical beams, but again, the physics of the collapse can only be speculated, just like the temperatures of the fires. We simply don't know, and saying "it shouldn't have happened like that" isn't factual. We do know that simply measuring the effect of burning jet fuel on steel isn't enough. There was an inconceivable amount of cumbustible material in those towers, and physical forces were at work which we can only partially comprehend. That doesn't add up to demolition charges.

If you've looked at the video, it's fairly obvious that the south tower was struck by an aircraft moving considerably faster than the one that struck the north tower. The plane that struck the south tower was also more steeply banked, and therefore its impact affected more floors. Those two factors alone could have resulted in the south tower collapsing first.

In truth, there's a lot we don't know, but unanswered questions don't validate conspiracy theories.

One last thing: How is it that you can credit UN weapons inspectors with "trumping" Bush? Are they somehow immune from your conspiracy theories? And if George had "found" WMDs, do you think his approval rating would be in the tank as it is now? I guarantee ou that it wouldn't.

You brush off all of the terribly negative beatings the GOP is presently taking, at almost every political level, as though those losses won't matter at all, (and believe me, they will matter at the polls) while simultaneously accusing them of a heinous plot that, if true, has completely failed anyway.

It's senseless; I'm done with ya.
Ike90 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 22-08.-2006, 02:57 PM   #54
Wurm
Registered User
 
Wurm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 2,148
Default Re: 9/11 Panel Suspected Deception by Pentagon

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ike90


The "hollow steel shafts" were in fact each comprised of the 47 vertical beams, but again, the physics of the collapse can only be speculated, just like the temperatures of the fires.
"Speculated"? How much speculation is required to know the actual temperature of burning jet fuel?

"There was an inconceivable amount of cumbustible material in those towers, and physical forces were at work which we can only partially comprehend."

That is speculation. While there may have been an "inconceivable amount of cumbustible material in those towers", the fact is very little of it actually combusted. Certainly not enough (and not hot enough) to "melt" the steel structures to the point of nearly perfect pancake collapse.

"That doesn't add up to demolition charges."

Maybe you should investigate for yourself the many eyewitness accounts of people who were in the buildings before they fell, including police and fire officials. You may be surprised at what they heard and saw.

"If you've looked at the video, it's fairly obvious that the south tower was struck by an aircraft moving considerably faster than the one that struck the north tower. The plane that struck the south tower was also more steeply banked, and therefore its impact affected more floors. Those two factors alone could have resulted in the south tower collapsing first."

In truth, that is a ridiculous assertion, but is indicative of how desperate you are to explain your belief in the gov'ts version of events.

"One last thing: How is it that you can credit UN weapons inspectors with "trumping" Bush?"

I thought that was pretty self-explanatory. In other words:

1. There had never been any WMD's found, nor delivery systems to use them prior to Bu$hCo's invasion.
2. Iraq was bottled up by the N. & S. No-Fly Zones.
3. Iraq's military was very weak.
4. Economic sanctions had been applied for years, which created a poor infrastructure.

Thus, Iraq was not a threat and Bu$hCo had no legitimate reason to invade. Period.

"You brush off all of the terribly negative beatings the GOP is presently taking, at almost every political level, as though those losses won't matter at all, (and believe me, they will matter at the polls)..."

That's assuming fair elections and accurate vote counts will take place. The past 3 elections, ('04, '02. and '00) were anything but.

"...while simultaneously accusing them of a heinous plot that, if true, has completely failed anyway."

As for getting the invasion of the sovereign nations of A'stan and Iraq that the Neo Cons have wanted for years, their plots have succeeded well for them. Not to mention the Constitution-crushing "Patriot" Act, enormous & unprecedented tax breaks for the wealthy, corporate welfare, and $8 Billion/month going to the military/industrial complex.
__________________
"Bush is the first President to admit to an impeachable offense."

- John Dean, former Counsel to the President (Nixon)

The aim of big corporations is to separate fools from their money all of the time and ordinary folks from their money most of the time. The rest of us must fend for ourselves.
Wurm is offline  
Reply With Quote

Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump



All times are GMT +10. The time now is 09:17 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin Copyright © 2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2001 - 2006 cyclingforums.com

Links to websites we like:
Pezcyclingnews | Cyclingnews.com | Wine Zone | iinet