T1B

e wrote:what the hell did you think they were going to be, lutheran?

Hey, some of us Lutherans are pretty hard core. :D

Luther wrote: Aua Ae Ai, oo Ai, aa ua Ai, aee uai, ai uai, ai uai, Ua Ia, aee aai, Aa Aua a, aee Aaa a, Oa A ai, Au uee ae, ai au, uae Ua aiue, Aa aa, Iai aa, Ai Ai ai, ai oae Ui, a aee aa.

Play that really loud on the beach and I bet Din's women will start beaching themselves.

Jsc810 wrote:What the hell happened at the Pentagon? Go ahead, tell us.

I don't know. It was off radar for 36 minutes. You say it showed up 6 min to impact. What does that have to do with the physical evidence?

Now your turn. What happened to WTC 7?

JCT wrote:

Luther wrote: Aua Ae Ai, oo Ai, aa ua Ai, aee uai, ai uai, ai uai, Ua Ia, aee aai, Aa Aua a, aee Aaa a, Oa A ai, Au uee ae, ai au, uae Ua aiue, Aa aa, Iai aa, Ai Ai ai, ai oae Ui, a aee aa.

Play that really loud on the beach and I bet Din's women will start beaching themselves.

You just can't Rack this kinda "stuff" enough........

ever....

Nishlord wrote:Me too. Judgement reserved.

I shouldn't worry about your missus, warren. She's probably working her way through a Toblerone the size of a man's arm in a lounge, bored out of her skull.

Don't worry DoucheLord, I have a Reese's big enough to satisfy even your fat assed pile of Northern slime.

Fuck you and the rest of your English trash, she love's it here more than there, and we will only be there for your funeral and my decision on slitting your limey throat.

Oh, and by the way she's fucking HOT!

RACK freaking Lthr .... again.

The bank released the following names: Abdula Ahmed Ali, Cossor Ali, Shazad Khuram Ali, Nabeel Hussain, Tanvir Hussain, Umair Hussain, Umar Islam, Waseem Kayani, Assan Abdullah Khan, Waheed Arafat Khan, Osman Adam Khatib, Abdul Muneem Patel, Tayib Rauf, Muhammed Usman Saddique, Assad Sarwar, Ibrahim Savant, Amin Asmin Tariq, Shamin Mohammed Uddin, and Waheed Zaman.

The oldest person on the list, Shamin Mohammed Uddin, is 35. The youngest, Abdul Muneem Patel, is 17

There were allegedly 50 people involved.....BUT

According to the ACLU Website Racial Profiling is any police or private security practice in which a person is treated as a suspect because of his or her race, ethnicity, nationality or religion. This occurs when police investigate, stop, frisk, search or use force against a person based on such characteristics instead of evidence of a person's criminal behavior. It often involves the stopping and searching of people of color for traffic violations, known as "DWB" or "driving while black or brown." Although normally associated with African Americans and Latinos, racial profiling and "DWB" have also become shorthand phrases for police stops of Asians, Native Americans, and, increasingly after 9/11, Arabs, Muslims and South Asians.

Racial profiling can also involve pedestrian stops, "gang" databases, bicycle stops, use of police attack dogs, suspicion at stores and malls, immigration worksite raids, and in the 2000 presidential election in Florida, harassment on the way to polls, "voting while black or brown". Customs and other airport officials also engage in racial profiling of passengers.

So anyone not fitting the Muslim profile will be detained for interrogation..

If you do not fit the Muslim profile, please report to your local police station for interrogation!

Moving Sale wrote:TWIS,
I was serious. What was the weight of the wings (with engines) in relation to the fuselage? It is a pretty easy question to answer. And if you don't know, how can you be sooooo sure you are right that 77 hit the pentagon?

You're only serious about being a stubborn asshole who will not, under any circumstances believe in the truth (it's also the most logical explination). Several links have been provided that explain in great detail what happened, you just refuse to accept it. I have yet to see what your alternate scenerio is, not to mention any "proof" of such.

btw - here's a list of some of the sites I read ...
http://www.rense.com/general32/phot.htm
http://www.thenewamerican.com/artman/pu ... 1253.shtml
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/911_p ... esses.html
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/pages/911 ... dence.html

Of course the big question I have for you and the rest of the "conspiracy" crowd is "why?" Why would our govt do it or be involved? Money? War? Oil? Why would they go to all that trouble if those are the reasons? I could think of several ways to "fabricate" evidence to convince the American people (and the rest of the world) that the US "needed" to fight a war on terror. I have yet to hear anything that makes sense that would justify a conspiracy of this magnitude.

Jsc810 wrote: I didn't say any such thing. Did you read The 9/11 Commission Report? The flight was tracked the entire time.

Bullshit. "American 77 traveled undetected for 36 minutes...{footnote144}" You said your defense was the 911 report, the 911 report said it was missing for 36 min, therefore YOU said it was off radar for 36 min. How am I suppose to take you seriously if you don't even know what your own evidence says?

And the bodies of the passengers and the wreckage of the plane were in the Pentagon. With witnesses.

Name one.

And passengers in the plane on the phone with relatives.

That is a whole other subject. One you probably know nothing about, if your knowledge of other parts of what happened that day is any indication.

Are you now claiming that something other than the planes flying into the buildings caused them to fall? If so, what?

Fuck you are a tard. WTC 7 did not have a plane crash into it. NOBODY but you says that. Do you know ANYTHING about 911?

The Whistle Is Screaming wrote:You're only serious about being a stubborn asshole who will not, under any circumstances believe in the truth.

The same could be said of you. How about WTC 7? What happened to it? Why did it fall? Do you believe it's owner when he said it had to be 'pulled?' WTF is that? How was it 'pulled?'

Of course the big question .... justify a conspiracy of this magnitude.

First off, motive is not an element of conspiracy.
Second, PNAC saying their goals would be easier to achieve if there was a 'new PH' is not good enough to explain why? Them saying they 'wanted' 911 is not enough? And you say I'M dense and obtuse? Get a grip.

Moving Sale wrote:Bullshit. "American 77 traveled undetected for 36 minutes...{footnote144}"

So in 36 minutes, they landed, got everybody off the plane, stuck this guy
behind the controls, and had him fly it... where? Into the Pentagon, of course, since that's where the radar track showed it going. Or did they fake that too?

WTC7? I'm not really up on which building had which number. Was 7 one of the buildings that was destroyed when ONE OF THE FUCKING TWIN TOWERS FELL ON IT when it came down?

Moving Sale wrote:

The Whistle Is Screaming wrote:You're only serious about being a stubborn asshole who will not, under any circumstances believe in the truth.

The same could be said of you. How about WTC 7? What happened to it? Why did it fall? Do you believe it's owner when he said it had to be 'pulled?' WTF is that? How was it 'pulled?'

We are not talking about WTC 7, distractions won't help you.

Of course the big question .... justify a conspiracy of this magnitude.

Yes, give me a reason as to why. People, like the folks in PNAC, don't do anything without a reason.

Moving Sale wrote:First off, motive is not an element of conspiracy.

Moving Sale wrote:Second, PNAC saying their goals would be easier to achieve if there was a 'new PH' is not good enough to explain why?

So you're saying that motive isn't needed, but out of the other side of your mouth, you're telling me their motives. Your logic is dizzying and yet still weak.

http://www.newamericancentury.org/state ... ciples.htm

Where do they talk of this "new PH"? Or is it (more likely) that you interpret their bullshit to mean what you want?

Moving Sale wrote:Them saying they 'wanted' 911 is not enough?

I'll take a link to that quote. It better be clear and concise, not one of your bullshit interpretations of their bullshit non-sense.

Moving Sale wrote:And you say I'M dense and obtuse? Get a grip.

No, I called you a stubborn asshole, but I guess I can live with dense and obtuse as well.

Cuda wrote:

Moving Sale wrote:Bullshit. "American 77 traveled undetected for 36 minutes...{footnote144}"

So in 36 minutes, they landed, got everybody off the plane, stuck this guy
behind the controls, and had him fly it... where? Into the Pentagon, of course, since that's where the radar track showed it going. Or did they fake that too?

WTC7? I'm not really up on which building had which number. Was 7 one of the buildings that was destroyed when ONE OF THE FUCKING TWIN TOWERS FELL ON IT when it came down?

No, Cuda, WTC 7 was not damaged by the falling towers. It was seemingly untouched. The only problem it had was a mysterious explosion in its basement just prior to the order to drop it. A vast amount of government intelligence offices were in the building. The destruction of this undamaged building is only one of the variety of glaring suspicious aspects to the official story.

Meanwhile, I call BULLSHIT on this whole British plane-bomb conspiracy.

Initially the reason offered for moving in yesterday on the arrests was that the cover for the surveillance was about to be blown.

Later in the day we're told that the arrests, Code Red, etc., were necessary because the plot was going to go down in the "next three days."

Okay, if these British Pakis were actually going to strike within a week--or a month--there must be some actual EVIDENCE, right?

Like some of these explosive liquids and sophisticated detonation devices, right?

LET'S SEE SOME EVIDENCE!!

After all, the Bush cabal has a long track record of outright lies, fabrications, exaggerations, smears, and omissions when it comes to whipping up a scared public.

And really, with Lieb the Hebe getting shown the door with a foot in his ass, and the Israeli wermacht eager to ramp up their blitz, this was a perfect time to go CODE RED.

I CALL BULLSHIT!!

Here's a perfect convention meeting site for TVO, LTS, and similarly-minded folks to discuss their views on the War on Terror:

Good one, Mike. Oh, and here is a picture of their audience.

Rip City

CAL?

Meds ain't gonna like that one bit.

LTS TRN 2 wrote: LET'S SEE SOME EXPLOSIONS!!

The Whistle Is Screaming wrote:We are not talking about WTC 7, distractions won't help you.

We are now. Answer the question?

So you're saying that motive isn't needed, but out of the other side of your mouth, you're telling me their motives. Your logic is dizzying and yet still weak.

I saying motive is not an element, but if it makes YOU feel better to know what their motive might be then YOU might want to look at the PNAC doc for it.

Where do they talk of this "new PH"?

Page 51, but if you have to ask you are too uninformed at this point to be talking about who did what to whom on 911 anyways.

Or is it (more likely) that you interpret their bullshit to mean what you want?

Go fuck yourself. That or educate yourself.

I'll take a link to that quote.

Because you are too ill-informed to already know it.

It better be clear and concise, not one of your bullshit interpretations of their bullshit non-sense.

" Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor."

So let me get this straight YOU have no idea about the PNAC doc or about WTC 7 and I am suppose to listen to you about what happened on 911?

Luther wrote: Good one, Mike. Oh, and here is a picture of their audience.

Rip City

Hey dumbass, just becasue 95% of this board is on your side does not mean that the latest polls don't show 35+% of Americans think you are full of shit.

'Dolt City' might be a better tag line for you.

Mike the Lab Rat wrote:Here's a perfect convention meeting site for TVO, LTS, and similarly-minded folks to discuss their views on the War on Terror:

Mike,
Have you looked at the science of 911? Can you really tell me it makes sense? WTC 7? The only building of its kind in human history to fall from fire? The pancake theory for tower 1 and 2 really flies with you? The pentagon math really works out for you?
I'd be willing to bet that what you think about 911 is based on your feelings and not on a hard look at the science involved.

mvscal wrote:Is that north or south of Suck Cock Much City?

I don't know, but it appears to be a suburb of "Stupid Racist Fuck City."

Moving Sale wrote: Have you looked at the science of 911? Can you really tell me it makes sense? WTC 7? The only building in of it kind in human history to fall from fire?

How many buildings have been hit by commercial airliners first?

m2 wrote:

Moving Sale wrote: Have you looked at the science of 911? Can you really tell me it makes sense? WTC 7? The only building in of it kind in human history to fall from fire?

How many buildings have been hit by commercial airliners first?

Hey dumbass WTC 7 was not hit by a plane!

Does ANYBODY who believes the Bush Cabal's Conspiracy theory have ANY idea as to WTF they are talking about?

Moving Sale wrote:Does ANYBODY who believes the Bush Cabal's Conspiracy theory have ANY idea as to WTF they are talking about?

88 wrote:

Moving Sale wrote:35+% of Americans

Would not be able to find Iowa on a map of the United States;
Eat at McDonald's three times or more each week;
Actually believe that professional wrestling is a real sport; and
Keep voting for Democrats, unless it rains or there is something good to watch on TV.

So what? It is a 'lie' of sorts to imply that nobody is in the audience of people who do not believe Bush's Conspiracy Theory when it is closer to 35%.
I am not using it as an argument that 77 did not hit the pentagon only that it not true which makes it pretty WEAK for you to imply different.

And your science degree is in what 88?

Mike,
Nice fallacy. I'll take that to mean you used emotion and not science to make up your mind.

mvscal wrote: ...no sense.

When you get past your idea that Black's are GP2V, get back to me.

Nice try though you stupid racist fuck.

88 wrote: What just whizzed over your head was not the missing American Flight 77. It was that your reference to "35+% of Americans" proves absolutely nothing. 60% of children under the age of 8 believe in Santa Claus. Should I?

Hey dumbass. It 'proves' Luth is full of shit when he implies that nobody believes the government's 911 story.

Can you even read? Let me get this straight, you can't even follow a simple concept like that and yet I'm suppose to take your word about what happened on 911?

You are one stupid fuck.

Moving Sale wrote:Mike,
Nice fallacy. I'll take that to mean you are used emotion and not science to make up your mind.

You love that "fallacy" word. You use it a lot.

I have absolutely no intention of going around and around over the same crap, bringing in the same links, etc. that others have done. Despite the numerous links from reputable scientists, it's never good enough for you. You are utterly convinced that a " Bush cabal" has, for some shadowy reasons, allowed thousands of of American citizens to die and that only you and a few other tinfoil-hatted folks are on to them.

Right.

There is absolutely no reason for me to believe that scientists and law enforcement folks would cooperate and perpetuate a treasonous plot as you've proposed.

88 wrote:

Moving Sale wrote:And your science degree is in what 88?

Chemistry

A B.S. in Chemistry?

Mike the Lab Rat wrote: I have absolutely no intention ... perpetuate a treasonous plot as you've proposed.

The question was: 'have YOU looked at the science?' I don't need you to link to anything to answer the question. Sounds like you have not looked at the science, but are relying on others to make up your mind for you. Nice going science boy.

88 wrote:

Moving Sale wrote:You are one stupid fuck.

But 95% of the posters on this board think you are the stupid fuck. Weird.

And 100% of welovebushscockinourass.com bloggers think I am full of shit. So what?
It says more about the # of right wing wackos that post on this board than anything else.

Again, so what?

Since we know you, do we get any subscription discounts?

Rip City

Jsc810 wrote: If this was a criminal trial where Bush had to prove what happened beyond a reasonable doubt, then yeah, your approach might make sense.

That is the level of proof I demand for myself. I'm not asking you to have as a high a bar.

But this isn't a criminal trial, and you cannot win this argument by continuously changing topics, nitpicking, and other obfuscation.

I have tried to stay on a topic. Like what happened to WTC7? YOU have not answered the question and changed the topic to my BoP and such. That is not my fault. If YOU would just answer the question....

Those who do not wear tin foil hats believe that the damages of 9/11 were caused by the terrorists.

[fallacywatch]Poison the well much? [/fallacywatch]

What does that statement even mean?

Although you have asked many questions, you have yet to provide any answers.

The answer is '77 did not hit the pentagon.'

If it wasn't the terrorists, then what happened? Did Bush, Rove, or members of the Trilateral Commission conspire with Osama bin Laden? Did the CIA plant bombs in WTC 7 or the Pentagon?

[fallacywatch]That is not relevant.[/fallacywatch]
How can we even get there if you won't look at the physical evidence?

I believe 9/11 is accurately explained in The 9/11 Commission Report, and that no agent of our government was involved. What do you believe?

You don't even know what it SAYS how could you believe what it contained in it?

Thanks for not answering my question and then expecting me to answer yours.

No worries I'll play... I believe that 77 did not hit the pentagon. What DID hit it? I don't know, but how can we even go there till YOU get past your belief that it did?

Blah, blah...

Look, the Project For The New American Century had a tremendous interest in the "Pearl Harbor" of 9/11. So did the Chimp n' Cheney--as their BEST FRIEND Ken Lay was about to get flayed--leaving the Chimp dead in the water in his first year.

As for the 9/11 Commission Report being some sort of satisfactory explanation, what a fucking joke!

If you actually read it, you can see plain and clear that they offer NO EXPLANATION for the astonishing STANDDOWN of NORAD that fateful day.

Moreover, the Cheney/Chimp cabal exerted MAXIMUM resistance to the Commission in the first place, and and fought it every step of the way.

WAKE THE FUCK UP!!


And where's the fucking EVIDENCE for this latest Homeland ScareUs Agency desperate diversion?

LTS TRN 2 wrote: If you actually read it, you can see plain and clear that they offer NO EXPLANATION for the astonishing STANDDOWN of NORAD that fateful day.

I don't think that is true. Didn't it say the stand-down was due to a test that day and that NORAD was thinking it was not real? I'm not saying it is a good explanation but it WAS there right?

Mike the Lab Rat wrote:

Moving Sale wrote:Mike,
Nice fallacy. I'll take that to mean you are used emotion and not science to make up your mind.

You love that "fallacy" word. You use it a lot...

He means "phallus", and, yes, it's on his mind constantly. He just can't spell for shit

Jsc810 wrote: How then did the wreckage of 77 and the remains of the passengers get inside the Pentagon?

I'm not stipulating that they did. The pics I've seen of plane parts point to something other than 77. As for the remains of the passengers, I have seen no pics of the remains of the passengers.

And if 77 didn't hit the Pentagon, then what happened to it, and what happened to the passengers?

One step at a time? "{Y}ou cannot win this argument by continuously changing topics."

Moving Sale wrote:The question was: 'have YOU looked at the science?' I don't need you to link to anything to answer the question. Sounds like you have not looked at the science, but are relying on others to make up your mind for you. Nice going science boy.

Nice going yourself, there, shyster boy - you seem to have forgotten that we already did this entire go round on this very topic many moons ago, and YES I did read the "science" as you call it and I agree with the official reports. Your nitpicking obscure points at that time showed an appalling dependence on conspiracy site interpretations...which then get debunked by various sites people put up.

Your paranoia with regards to the government, and this administration in particular have completely colored your views.

I'm no fan of GW. I think that Dumbya is perhaps the single stupidest person to ever draw breath in the Oval Office. In my opinion, Cheney and Rove leave a trail of slime wherever they go. However, I don't for a frigging second believe in some wild, unsubstantiated fantasy that has those guys deliberately having Americans die by the thousands for some sinister end.

Unfortunately for you, one of the ways in which I (and probably many others 'round these parts) judge the "message" is by looking at the "messenger." You haven't exactly helped your own case, insinuating that people didn't really die in that plane that hit the Pentagon - what, are the people in some super secret "holding cell?" Have they all been given new identities like mobsters in a witness protection program? Were they whisked away by frigging aliens?

I already know your usual response: "Have YOU seen the bodies?!?!?! Has anybody?!?! Give me the names of those who have!!!"

You know what? I believe firmly that man landed on the moon, that the Earth is round, that the Freemasons are just a bunch of old dudes who wear funny clothes and get drunk a lot, and that adrenalin freaks like you get some sort of thrill and fulfillment not otherwise gotten in their lives by believing that you are one of the truly anointed, smart fellahs who cracked the big secrets. If that's what gets you through the day - just dandy. But as for me, I don't need fantasies about being "in" on vast secret conspiracies to make me feel better about myself.

Aleister Crowley & RA Wilson made a lot of money off of folks like you.