RE: The Big Lie! (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid



Message


Real0ne -> RE: The Big Lie! (5/12/2007 1:55:18 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: swtnsparkling

Kurzon

You got Mail



hey wheres mine?  LOL




Kurzon -> RE: The Big Lie! (5/12/2007 2:00:33 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kurzon

I have read reports and seen interviews with the builders - and in them they all state that they did not think a fully fueled plane would ever be an issue so never crunched those numbers


you still have the problem of all those bombs that went off hey?  I mean we can argue the fires all day long, there for all intents and purpurposes were none.   If the planes would have knocked it down they would have done it in minutes not hours after the impact.

frankly this is the same old ground, how anyone can think that fires or the crash brought them down in light of all the bombs is beyond me.


I could understand your position BEFORE the release of all the bomb testimony in 2005 through the FOIA, but to argue fires and crashes at this point is pretty moot imo in light of the evidence to the contrary.



well as I have seen no proof of bombs - and I understand how hot jet fuel burns, and how heat weakens steel, and how collapsing steel and concrete can sound like an explosion to the uneducated I do not understand how anyone could be foolish enough to not understand what happened




swtnsparkling -> RE: The Big Lie! (5/12/2007 2:10:05 PM)

Real

You got mail




Real0ne -> RE: The Big Lie! (5/12/2007 2:27:04 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kurzon
well as I have seen no proof of bombs - and I understand how hot jet fuel burns, and how heat weakens steel, and how collapsing steel and concrete can sound like an explosion to the uneducated I do not understand how anyone could be foolish enough to not understand what happened


so you feel that the testimonies are from people who would not knwo the difference then?  Have you even watched any of those videos?  i mean its pretty unfair to not watch them or not read testimopny then come out here and say you have not seen any of it LOL




luckydog1 -> RE: The Big Lie! (5/13/2007 1:53:40 AM)

Wrong I have posted plenty of pictures of the wtc being blown all to hell, being blown all to hell means it was demolished.   i have not posted one pic of anything on the wtc grounds that pancaked.  That is your dreamboat.    No every video of the collapses shows the collapse started at the impact point, and then down floor by floor, to assert otherwise is nonsense
 
Idustry jargon is not put in a standards manual.  Incorrect, and further more, neither the Fire chief nor Silverman are in the demolition bussiness so would not be using jargon, you just read this on a web site, its a lie
 
Yeh send in the it! No, "send in the crew" LMFAO  Try call them them your stuttering like a fool an it sometime and when you get the "its" size 13 firmly implanted in your ass maybe you will wake up. How can a crew wear a size 13 shoe?  An individual wears a shoe and is a he/she, not an it.   A crew is a unit of individuals
 
Oh thats right, I forgot, the bigger the building the less strength it needs to support it, so now i understand, thats why fire brings down bigger buildings they are required to build them so they cave in.   No the weakened steel had to support more weight

You aleady agreed in an earlier post that the crash did not bring it down or it would not have stood as long we it did so why are you bringing that into it again?  More obsfuscation?  YOu are now stuck with fire bringing it down as the only thing left for your case and i did not see any on wtc.  this is where you show your true lack of logic and comnprehension.  It was not any single thing that brought down the buildings, but a combination of several factors.  You simply can't grasp that the impact and shifting weakened the structure, which failed in the fire.  The building in Madrid was much smaller, and to scale was much stronger, and it was not hit by a several ton object at 600+MPH.  Do you know what scale means Real?  Lets pretend that the WTC was 10x bigger than that Madrid building( it was much more than that, but 10 is a nice round number and lower than the actuall figure).  If they were the same but a different scale the beams in the WTC would be almost 10 feet thick.  they are not.  you are comparing apples and oranges.

da wtc is bigger!  right?  fucking spare me.  Do you have any idea how tired this is getting?   Uh the WTC was much bigger, why are you pretending its not?  just another lie on your part.  I am not tired at all.  I will refute your lies everytime you post them

you have yet to provide ANYTHING substantial and we both know you do not intend to provide ANYTHING substantial but but more of your same armchair buillshit. 
No, that is another Lie on your part real, I have posted http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html  many times.  It clearly lays out how 2 aircraft hitting the towers could cause them to fail.  that you are pretending I have not taken a position in this is nonsense and an absolute lie on your part. 
Why dont you shit or get off the pot?  What?   Either bring something into this that can be chewed I have asked you several direct questions which you have refused to answer, you can't they expose your lieson or tell your armchair bullshit to yourself man, at least there will be one person who believes you,
actually aproximatley 87% of us do.   And your 13% believe 4 different things.   You might find a dumbass who believes you and is willing to invest in some Norfed Money.





Real0ne -> RE: The Big Lie! (5/13/2007 1:58:28 PM)

sigh...

Lucky how much are you getting paid for turning everything into an ignoramous fuckfest?   Does the gov pay you like a buck for every line you write and you follow everyone around who does not buy into the propaganda?  LOL

Pull it is slang for pull it down, its in any fucking dictionary LMAO  you will not find the usage pull it refering to people because people are not its, without even looking i am sure you will find pull it down refering to destroying, if her were refering to people it would have been said pull them out and we watched them come out, again not pull it and we watched it fall down.  he said pull it then we watched it fall, since pull it down refers to demolition only a complete moron would argue them equals it LMAO

oh what the fuck;
pull down
1. To demolish; destroy: pull down an old office building.

you know lucky? pull it? as in pull "IT" down! DUH!  LMFAO

As i continue to point out you need to go back to the 5th grade and learn how to comprehend what you read.  you must enjoy making a fool out of yourself.

Listen to:
Charles Goyette! 
He eats Popular Mechanics 9/11 myth expert for breakfast


The interview features Charles Goyette vs a self-proclaimed 9/11 mythbuster from Popular Mechanics magazine, which is owned by the Hearst Corporation. Goyette does not become ‘blinded by science’, and instead snags Popular Mechanics with basic reasoning and questions.
http://www.911podcasts.com/files/audio/A003I060823-am-c3.MP3

This is fucking hilarious, this guy sounds just like lucky!  Listen to Goyette BUNK the debunker!  LMFAO

Ok so lets look at your "peer reviewed" PM magazine.

Popular Mechanics (Hearst Corporation)
focused on hoaxes, real evidence ignored
http://www.oilempire.us/popular-mechanics.html

The March 2005 issue of Popular Mechanics (PM) plumbs new depths of nepotism and Hearst-style "yellow journalism" with its cover story about 9/11. PM's senior researcher, 25-year-old Benjamin Chertoff, (now here is an experienced researcher still in diapers!) authored a propagandistic cover story entitled "Debunking 9/11 Lies" (Now i see, lucky was told they were lies by a 25 yo kid in diapers, now i understand the mentality), which seeks to discredit all independent 9/11 research that challenges the official version of events.

"Conspiracy theories can't stand up to the hard facts," the cover reads. "After an in-depth investigation, PM answers with the truth," it says.

But the article fails to provide evidence to support its claims and doesn't answer the key question: What caused the collapses of the twin towers and the 47-story World Trade Center 7?

The lead editorial by James Meigs, Editor-in-Chief of PM carries the title "The Lies Are Out There."(yes they certainly are!)

But who is Benjamin Chertoff, the "senior researcher" at Popular Mechanics who is behind the article?

American Free Press has learned that he is none other than a cousin of Michael Chertoff, the new Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security.  (DAYUM WHO'D A THUNK IT????)

Benjamin's mother Judy said, "Yes, of course, he is a cousin."

"DISINFORMATION AND DECEPTION"

"Ninety-five percent of the work of intelligence agencies around the world is disinformation and deception," Andreas von B|low, former parliamentary official responsible for the budget for Germany's intelligence agencies, told American Free Press in December 2001.

Like Nazi Germany of 1933, American newsstands today carry a mainstream magazine dedicated to pushing the government's truth of 9/11 while viciously smearing independent researchers as extremists who peddle fantasies and make poisonous claims.

It is often said that USA Today is controlled by the CIA, which, like the paper, is based in McLean, Virginia. The little-known fact that Black is married to Thomas E. Harvey, an obscure lawyer who became a White House Fellow in 1977 and served as special assistant to the Director of Central Intelligence (DCI), provides substance to these rumors. Black's corporate biography does not mention her husband.

President Jimmy Carter made Harvey a White House Fellow in May 1977. "In that capacity," Harvey's biography reads, he "served as special assistant to the Director of the C.I.A. Following that he held senior appointed positions within the Department of Defense."

ref: Exclusive to AFP

WASHINGTON —  Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff is defending the Bush administration's review of an international shipping deal two days after one company in the Port of Miami sued to prevent an Arab-owned firm from taking over port operations.

WASHINGTON —  Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff defended his agency's response to Hurricane Katrina, saying Wednesday that the federal government paid close attention and quickly reacted to the disaster, despite some missteps.(OH YEH THATS THE TRUTH TOO!!!)

"We were acutely aware of Katrina and the risk it posed," Chertoff told the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.

ref: Fox news

#  Popular Mechanics' Deceptive Smear Against 9/11 Truth
# Popular Mechanics Attacks Its "9/11 LIES" Straw Man

  * "It gives the false impression that these claims, several of which are clearly absurd, represent the breadth of challenges to the official account of the flights, the World Trade Center attack, and the Pentagon attack. Meanwhile it entirely ignores vast bodies of evidence showing that only insiders had the means, motive, and opportunity to carry out the attack."(sounds exactly like luckys tactics)

Chertoff is secretive about his childhood, perhaps to avoid discussing the intense Talmudic and Zionist upbringing he received in a family in which all the men were rabbis and scholars of the Talmud.

"My childhood was...average...Nothing stands out. It all kind of blends into the murky past," he told The Star Ledger in March 2001. Pressed for more details, Chertoff "reclined in his chair" and said, "I'll take the Fifth."  (Now thems some good debunkin credentials!!)

Michael's father, Gershon, was the first child of Paul Chertoff from Russia, and Esther Barish, from "Roumania," according to the 1930 U.S. Census. Gershon graduated as a teacher of the Talmud at age 20, in May 1935.

In 1930, the immigrant couple lived in a $90 rented apartment in Brooklyn and had three children, Gershon, Naomi, and Mordecai. Imbued in the Talmud, the Chertoff children became ardent Zionists.

Chertoff's father, Gershon, was a rabbi and teacher of the Talmud, as was his uncle Mordecai. Their father, Paul, was a "teacher" of the Talmud at the Jewish Institute (yeshiva) in New York. When the elder Chertoff died in 1966, he was described as an "Ex-professor of Talmud" in the New York Times.

Look at your america folks, the one lucky is arguing for!

MALICE EXPOSED -
Bollyn Prosecuted for "anti-Israel" Views

Bollyn Trial
Video Evidence Destroyed
by Christopher Bollyn
29 March 2007

      Who is more to be pitied, a writer bound and gagged by policemen or one living in perfect freedom who has nothing more to say?
      - Kurt Vonnegut in Bluebeard (1987)

Yesterday, I spent several hours at the Rolling Meadows (Chicago, Illinois) Cook County Circuit Court (3rd District). My lawyer had filed a motion to either dismiss the charges against me or to disallow the state from presenting any evidence of the events that would have been captured in the police video tapes of their assault and TASERing of me in my front yard on August 15, 2006.

This motion was filed because this video evidence, which would have shown what happened during the police assault, was destroyed by the police in clear violation of their own policies and procedures.

The judge, the Hon. Hyman I. Riebman, denied the motion saying that I had not filed an order to preserve the evidence. The fact that I had filed a FOIA with the police requesting a complete record and manifest of my arrest was not reason enough to preserve the evidence, Riebman said.

Plese note: Bollyn trial has postponed from April 23 until May 31

Police Destroyed Video Evidence of Assault and TASERing

Every police dashboard video that documented the arrest of Bollyn was destroyed!    
The police should have several videos,
like the one below, to prove their innocence!

  First of all, I want to thank the many people who have supported me in my ongoing legal struggle. It is only thanks to their concern and kindness that I have been able to challenge the unjustified police assault and malicious prosecution I have been subjected to since August 15, 2006. This ordeal has been a tremendous burden on my family - financially and emotionally.

Alex Jones also interviewed Christopher Bollyn of the American Free Press. Bollyn blew the whistle on the cosy Chertoff Homeland Security family. (Oh yeh baby now those are lucky's GOOD GUYS)

Popular Mechanics' March 2005 front cover story was entitled 'Debunking 911 Lies' and has since become the bellwether reference point for all proponents of the official 911 fairytale. LMAO! 

The arguments presented in the article have been widely debunked by the 911 truth community as an example of a straw man hatchet job - whereby false arguments are erected, attributed to 911 skeptics, and then shot down.  ( So lucky is your last name chertoff or meigs?)

One of the most glaring errors in the Popular Mechanics hit piece appears in the 'Intercepts Not Routine' section where it is claimed that, "In the decade before 911, NORAD intercepted only one civilian plane over North America: golfer Payne Stewart's Learjet, in October 1999."

As Jim Hoffman points out in his excellent rebuttal, "This bold assertion flies in the face of a published report of scramble frequencies that quotes the same Maj. Douglas Martin that is one of PM's cited experts!"

NORAD scrambled jets 67 times from September 2000 to June 2001


Yes we are in fact surrounded by lots of lies, lucky dogs lies.  With these kinds of credentials we all know that lucky is telling the truth, so we should just accept the governments version and go home and sleep well knowing that we are all safe and sound.

While dissenters are being set up and peoples constitutional right are being stomped on.

you should be ashamed of yourself buddy.




luckydog1 -> RE: The Big Lie! (5/13/2007 2:43:09 PM)

Yes everyone take a look at reals last post.  They are JEWS damn it, they must have destroyed the towers.

Please also take note that Steven Jones (reals big source)has concluded there is absolute proof that Jesus visited America as well as there being absolute proof that the Gov did 911.

So real you do not grasp the distinction between Norad intercepting 1 civilian plane, and them scrambling planes in general?
that is the only problem you can cite with the PM article.

Please show where the Pm article is wrong on anything.  If you can.  Not just someone on a UTUBE video claiming it.  Quote the PM article and then refute the point.  you can't.  You can just scream about the damn Jews.  Pathetic and Racist, but that sums you up pretty well




Real0ne -> RE: The Big Lie! (5/13/2007 3:58:39 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: luckydog1

Yes everyone take a look at reals last post.  They are JEWS damn it, they must have destroyed the towers.

Please also take note that Steven Jones (reals big source)has concluded there is absolute proof that Jesus visited America as well as there being absolute proof that the Gov did 911.

So real you do not grasp the distinction between Norad intercepting 1 civilian plane, and them scrambling planes in general?
that is the only problem you can cite with the PM article.

Please show where the Pm article is wrong on anything.  If you can.  Not just someone on a UTUBE video claiming it.  Quote the PM article and then refute the point.  you can't.  You can just scream about the damn Jews.  Pathetic and Racist, but that sums you up pretty well


i will have you know that if my fiancee did not die of cancer i would fucking be married to a jew right now.  get a life lucky calling me a racist now, its called any port in a storm wioth your sinking boat.

at least i am not a government chill who cant fucking read that supports the dismantling of the constitution like certain others whos name i do not need to mention. 

Here listen to your boy get his ass kicked around again:

http://www.911podcasts.com/files/audio/A003I060823-am-c3.MP3




luckydog1 -> RE: The Big Lie! (5/13/2007 4:10:37 PM)

Real the central thrust of your previous post was that Chertoff is a jew and that is evidence that the towers were pre wired and loaded with explosives.  How is that anything other than being Anti Jew/racist.  At, least termin8tor openly admits he is a racist.  Most of the sources you use are racist.  Pretty hard to conclude otherwise.  I give you a list of evidence (neatly packaged in a sourced web site), you scream they are connected to Chertoff and hes a Jew.

How about you pick any point in the PM site and debunk it.  Lets actually debate.  Or are you scared?




Real0ne -> RE: The Big Lie! (5/13/2007 4:20:05 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: luckydog1

Real the central thrust of your previous post was that Chertoff is a jew WRONG and that is evidence that the towers were pre wired and loaded with explosives.  WRONG AGAIN How is that anything other than being Anti Jew/racist.  At, least termin8tor openly admits he is a racist.  Most of the sources you use are racist.  Pretty hard to conclude otherwise.  All the sources you use are shills and government propaganda mouthpeices!  I give you a list of evidence (neatly packaged in a sourced web site), you scream they are connected to Chertoff and hes a Jew.

How about you pick any point in the PM site and debunk it.  Lets actually debate.  Or are you scared?


No im not scared cuz my daddy is bigger than your daddy!  nah nah neener neener nah nah...

So how childish shall we get here lucky? 

I cant help but wonder if CM should start doing an identity check for age there is no fucking way you are over 18.






ModeratorEleven -> RE: The Big Lie! (5/13/2007 8:20:03 PM)

Grow up kiddies or it's corner time for the both of you.

XI




luckydog1 -> RE: The Big Lie! (5/14/2007 1:09:41 AM)

Real I take it that since you are unwilling to debate any of the points in the PM article,  you accept that you can't because its true.  The question is why all the lies on your part?




Real0ne -> RE: The Big Lie! (5/14/2007 4:48:46 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: luckydog1

Real I take it that since you are unwilling to debate any of the points in the PM article,  you accept that you can't because its true.  The question is why all the lies on your part?


what a joke.   you cannot even use 8th grade math to tell me the simple differences in millers calculations and your assertions and you want to call this a debate?  your pm mag has NO credibility what so ever any more than you do who would argue 10 pages over something as rediculously simple as "pull it" and you have the gall or ignorance to call this a debate.  use pm magazine as your mouthpiecce so you can tell me that "pm magazine said so" as your proof. 

you can just continue to call everyone a liar and i will be sure to refer them to this thread to make my case that neither can you read, neither can you accept live witness testimony, neither can you accept live video but you certainly can accept "ANYTHING" the government and the governments mouth pieces "TELLS" you and that is your gospel.

We know the history of pm mag we know who wrote those articles and why, they already have been debunked as nothing more than a mouth piece for the "official story" by several including goyette who eats your pm researcher for breakfast and showed them up for the fools that they are on his live radio show as i have shown you to be.   Nothing more needs to be discussed.

i am not willing to dance with you lucky, you have proven that you cannot debate this but only parrot the work of others, and you have proven yourself to be a child, which is frankly what i would expect from someone who comes on here and calls people liars, which included the firefighters and emt workers on the scene of all people.

Everything i need to refute you has already been said in the previous 10 pages.

My absence is not a concession but a decision to no longer deal with you.

[Mod Note:  flame removed, some people just don't seem to get it]




Real0ne -> RE: The Big Lie! (5/14/2007 6:06:05 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
[Mod Note:  flame removed, some people just don't seem to get it]


agreed!




luckydog1 -> RE: The Big Lie! (5/14/2007 9:17:14 AM)

Nope, as I have said many times, there were lots of explosions, in the fire and collapse.  I am not calling the firemen liars for saying they heard explosions.  I called you a liar for claiming the building fell "nice and neatly" when in fact it damaged buildings blocks away, among other things.  You are unable to debunk a single point in the offical story, you just claim they are Jew connected shills.  So walk away if you have nothing else to say....  Or preferably actually debate a point.




luckydog1 -> RE: The Big Lie! (5/14/2007 6:10:13 PM)

And your refusal to actually debate any point in the offical story is indeed a concession.




thompsonx -> RE: The Big Lie! (5/15/2007 10:58:52 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: luckydog1

For an example of the way Real thinks take a look at post 109.  I stated in post 107 that I did not give any validity to the calculations Real, Thompson
I have done no calculations about the quantity of energy necessarey to bring down the buildings... I asked you and real0ne to do that.  Neither of you seems interested in doing that.

and rule did in these forums on how much explosive force it would take to bring down the building.  I read the thread a few months ago, when they did the "calculations" and pointed out ( along wiht others) why they were wrong.  Not that thier Math was wrong, but the guestimates they used.  GIGO.  Garbage In Garbage Out.  Real comes out in post 109, and attempts to claim that the man who designed the buildings agrees with thier calculations.  An absolute lie.  Perhaps some reading this thread are not smart enough to notice he is falsley claiming that the man who designed the building agrees with his calculations.  The reason I call Real a liar, is perfectly illustrated in post 109, he is indeed a liar.

Real you have never given me anything to do math on.  And you do not seem to understand that if you use bad data, the calculations mean nothing. 




thompsonx -> RE: The Big Lie! (5/15/2007 11:08:42 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kurzon

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kurzon

I have read reports and seen interviews with the builders - and in them they all state that they did not think a fully fueled plane would ever be an issue so never crunched those numbers


you still have the problem of all those bombs that went off hey?  I mean we can argue the fires all day long, there for all intents and purpurposes were none.   If the planes would have knocked it down they would have done it in minutes not hours after the impact.

frankly this is the same old ground, how anyone can think that fires or the crash brought them down in light of all the bombs is beyond me.


I could understand your position BEFORE the release of all the bomb testimony in 2005 through the FOIA, but to argue fires and crashes at this point is pretty moot imo in light of the evidence to the contrary.



well as I have seen no proof of bombs - and I understand how hot jet fuel burns,
How hot does naturally aspirated jet fuel burn?


and how heat weakens steel,
How hot does steel have to get to fail?

and how collapsing steel and concrete can sound like an explosion to the uneducated
Which of the uneducated firemen do you feel unqualified to tell the difference between an explosion and breaking concrete?  Isn't this what they do for a living?  Isn't this the nature of fire science?


I do not understand how anyone could be foolish enough to not understand what happened
Me too.





luckydog1 -> RE: The Big Lie! (5/15/2007 11:09:03 AM)

No thompson you asked us to figure out how much energy was released in the burning jet fuel, for some reason you thought  the energy released by the jet fuel would be the same as the energy released in the fire.  You said the amount of explosive force to bring down had previously been calculated by the "brain trust" in here, and stated as "we calculated".  And wanted to compare the 2 values.  Did I mistakenly asociate you with the previous conversation based on you refering to your part in doing them?  If so I retract. 

And that is correct, I have no intrest in doing calculations based on wild estimates, that have no bearing on the question.




luckydog1 -> RE: The Big Lie! (5/15/2007 11:17:15 AM)

Thompson, what part of the official story do you have a problem with.  I would be happy to debate any of the points in it, if you think they are false.




Page: <<   < prev  7 8 [9] 10 11   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
5.078125E-02