Hey! Theere's another use not terribly obvious, covering up antique Swedes.
Human CheckI am still waiting.
At least I found your post, Eagle doesn't even know it was a reply to a quote from you, lol. "Did the hijackers need cells?" brought this responce "EVERY SINGLE 911 topic agrees that it was not the hi-jackers that were doing the out-calls." It could be considered blunt or even a bit rude but just what muddled about the response?Actually if you look at what I said, it's easy to see why MHz 's muddled mind mistook what I meant. I didn't put it very well. lol
So? Most of what you've offered has been nothing but supposition and conjecture. You haven't put together a reasonable tale of what actually happened yet. So the gov't version has one up on you, so far. You just seem to see a piece of the jigsaw, grab it and throw it on the table expecting the pieces to miraculously fit themselves together. Sorry, but all you have posted so far is a jumble of unaligned facts (some) and guesses. It doesn't look like a picture, it looks like a heap of jigsaw pieces.Human Check
At least I found your post, Eagle doesn't even know it was a reply to a quote from you, lol. "Did the hijackers need cells?" brought this responce "EVERY SINGLE 911 topic agrees that it was not the hi-jackers that were doing the out-calls." It could be considered blunt or even a bit rude but just what muddled about the response?
Having you two agree back and forth is not something I am going to take as being proof of anything, let alone something like 911. You could give me something that would be acceptable to a jury of 12, that I would have to accept as being the 'way it was'.
Quit being a mental runt. I saw at least 2 posts where Anna succinctly said she doesn't swallow the gov't version. But she's not swallowing your tinfoil hat version either and neither are other people.The rest of the post was an example of the dribble you two put our, empty endless words. Oh well, I'm seeing some new vids and articles on a subject that I have read about over the last few years, that's my reason for being on the thread, yours seems to be the endless parroting on it's true because the Gov said so. The same ones who have spent unlimited amounts of taxpayer money, all the while not being accountable to the taxpayers because things they do can be classified as being a secret. lol And a lot of people cheer that sort of action. Would everybody suddenly die if all government doors were opened to the taxpayer, (no more closed meetings) and the 'elected people' could be closely monitored by those same tax-payers? That is the alternative, the ones in power now will never let something like that happen.
In the link to 'Secrecy', all that happened. I don't have to put anything together for you or anybody else. The links I reference tell a story that is either fact or fiction. If they can be shown to be factual then you have to fit in in with what you see as being the big picture. So that 'heap' has to be put in place by you not me, of course you have to see the point as being valid first and to do that you have to consider it be true and what changes would that mean in the big picture.So? Most of what you've offered has been nothing but supposition and conjecture. You haven't put together a reasonable tale of what actually happened yet. So the gov't version has one up on you, so far. You just seem to see a piece of the jigsaw, grab it and throw it on the table expecting the pieces to miraculously fit themselves together. Sorry, but all you have posted so far is a jumble of unaligned facts (some) and guesses. It doesn't look like a picture, it looks like a heap of jigsaw pieces.
The subject is 8 years old, just how gigantic a post would you like? At Anna's defense again eh, oh well. That is true, what was missing was any detail at all about that point. I'm not selling 'my version' to anybody, that's why it is my version, doh. All I'm doing is showing you a few parts that I considered before I had a version I could call mine. lolQuit being a mental runt. I saw at least 2 posts where Anna succinctly said she doesn't swallow the gov't version. But she's not swallowing your tinfoil hat version either and neither are other people.
Have another toke, or bottle, or snort, or whatever it is that you use.
Anything you have posted as far as an alternate story goes has been full of holes and yet you insist on thinking that I or anyone else says the official story is the reality of the issue. Sorry, you are wrong. I don't think the official story is a good one, but I do think its a better one than you've come up with. So you just keep sticking to your silly story in spite of being shown that its full of holes. Pathetic. Chew another psilocybin.In the link to 'Secrecy', all that happened. I don't have to put anything together for you or anybody else. The links I reference tell a story that is either fact or fiction. If they can be shown to be factual then you have to fit in in with what you see as being the big picture. So that 'heap' has to be put in place by you not me, of course you have to see the point as being valid first and to do that you have to consider it be true and what changes would that mean in the big picture.................
Wrong. So far most of my posts have been simply poking holes in your "version".Again you forgot to say what parts of the official story you disagree with. So far your posts still pin it on somebody from Afghanistan etc.
Human Check
At least I found your post, Eagle doesn't even know it was a reply to a quote from you, lol.
Scroll back you lazy lout. You said steel won't bend under that low of heat and I showed that was a wrong assumption. You said there shouldn't have been lots of smoke if it was a hot fire and I showed where plastics smoke like crazy even if the fire is hot. And so on & so forth.Yawn....so what parts about that do you disagree with since both those points are part of the 'official version'.
I have no idea what you are babbling about here. I never said anything about plane routes, the CIA, arresting someone, etc. And you say I'm addled? roflmaoSo those planes didn't take those routes? What was their flightpath then, a link would be more helpful rather than a 'because I say so' type of reply.
If already wanted why didn't the CIA arest him when they saw him in July '01?
That is how you poke holes in my version, saying I'm silly is skating around the issue of why he was allowed to remain free. Do you even consider little points like that? I'm beginning to think things like that just bounce off you.
Oh yeah, and don't forget the remote control idea. lmaoOh...poor Mhz... can't put together a logical story of his version of events so now he has to resort to idiocy.
Tell me... was that really worth an "lol"?
You have failed and another truther has been outed because he cannot put down what really happen. He can only babble on...
"Fire can't melt steel"
"It was explosives"
"Hijackers are still alive"
Blah, blah, blah.
What happened oh Bright One?
isn't lol the lowest reply that indicates a state of laughter? Certainly more like a quiet chuckle that the lol in all caps, (or some of it's relations) which supposidly denotes some sort of authority, often in imagination only.Tell me... was that really worth an "lol"?
I have no idea what you are babbling about here. I never said anything about plane routes, the CIA, arresting someone, etc. And you say I'm addled? roflmao
Scroll back you lazy lout. You said steel won't bend under that low of heat and I showed that was a wrong assumption. You said there shouldn't have been lots of smoke if it was a hot fire and I showed where plastics smoke like crazy even if the fire is hot. And so on & so forth.
Why would I? I am not trying to get some story right. For the umpteenth time, I am simply poking holes in whatever stories I hear or read. I am not an engineer, airline pilot, architect, firefighter, etc. I am a bystander and wait till the people that know about this stuff come up with a plausible scenario. I am not the one leaping from ASSumption to conjecture to guess to supposition, you are.I'll back just because it's you. Someday you should, those are events that surround 911, the more you know the better chance you have it right. You also never said anything about Iraq that was in post #428.
wow It's a fact that structural steel can start to warp in temperatures as low as oven temperature, especially under stress. The stress would be that various parts of the structural steel would be at different temperatures (differences in expansion/contraction) and another stress would be 15 floors of mass on top of weakened steel.Just where did you show me a structure built just as the core was (both steel and concrete) would buckle and crumple with low temp fires.
Are you saying the jet fuel had burned up and the black smoke from later on was from (melted) plastics. No doubt other articles in the offices initially hit also held flammable materials, many of which gave off large volumes of smoke.
Obviously. You really think a low temp fire can damage something as strong as the core. Look at all the cross bracing, that would have to be the first thing to fail, it is barely under any load.I am not trying to get some story right.