World trade centre collapse, 9/11 conspiracy

Then repeat for 20 years (cue Jackie Chan WTF image).

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

http://www.sciforums.com/posts/3684072
You did not read - and respect - that recent (allowing for the week ban you imposed with malice) post? Well you for sure would have read it. But chose to maliciously defamed me above, and thus provoke me to come back in. That much is mission accomplished.
Responding in detail to your malicious lies and half-truths just provides yet another excuse for you to keep engaging in your perverse mind-games fav 'hobby'. Also known as shit stirring.

Continue solo if you like.

 

So in other words you are unable to support your own conspiracy theory.

 

I find it amusing that you, as a (foul mouthed - p27 #540) 'pious' believer in a supernatural god who, probably on the basis of a single NT verse, will save to eternal life all somehow-qualifying-as-humans-with-'souls', regardless of their level of exhibited willful evil, has earlier labeled ME as a believer in 'woo' (p28 #553)! My my. Time for self-reflection!?

Think about, rather than reflexively react to, my answer to JR earlier, and earlier again posts this thread. Be reminded, if that were at all needed, of the link posted e.g. here:
http://www.sciforums.com/threads/wo...e-9-11-conspiracy.160979/page-26#post-3683939

If you are too lazy or too committed/opinionated to do some objective checking of the evidence presented there, just leave off.
Otherwise - please DO try and convincingly critique any particular categorized segment there. Best of luck!
Some of us, many more than your ilk would like to acknowledge, do NOT proscribe to truth determined by a vote of hands. Or controlled MSM endlessly promoted 'official story' aka 'Official Conspiracy Theory'.
Pushing water uphill is normally a losing proposition. The slick trick is to keep the illusion going long enough that truth no longer matters.

 

The key of course is that - whatever he may or may not believe in - he doesn't post it here as an objective claim and then make an idiot of himself trying to defend it.

There nothing wrong with you believing in whatever you want. But this is a discussion board, and you're a fool if you post it as if objective fact and think it won't be dismantled.

This is basic stuff, Q. You're either socially-stunted, or simply more interested in trolling than problem-solving.

 

You imo habitually make way too many carte blanche accusations. I invite to you the same opportunity as given to James R and billvon. Objectively critique the substance of so-called 'antisemitic' claims made in that Wikispooks article.
Any sub-category of your choosing. Failing to do so, what exactly is the strength of your 'antisemitic' charge against me?
Criminals are criminals, regardless of the stigma they impute to those exposing them.

 

So dismantle it! I'm referring to that go-to Wikispooks article no-one here has tackled other than by ignoring outright, or at best dismissing with a wave of the hand as 'antisemitic'.
Try MUCH harder than that! Hint - it can't be done - not objectively.

 

Look, if you are going to flounce, try harder. You don't have anything to say. This happened 20 years ago and you're still joining the dots and making a gigantic pile of manure.

 

Nonsense. I endorse all the essentials presented in that Wikispooks article. No 'flouncing' from me. Start with the very first section fingering 'lucky' Larry Silverstein as way too 'lucky' by far. He obviously had prior knowledge, and high-level direction and assistance/facilitation from fellow tribal insiders. It's utterly appalling he and kin enormously profited financially and got away scot-free while thousands (later - millions in ME) of innocents died terrible deaths.

Go ahead Dave C - super shill. Make your best case Larry's multiple cases of extraordinary 'luck' (timely purchases, miraculous absence on the day) was just rolling 'good fortune'. Nothing special.
Since you claim I'm the crazy conspiracy theorist with no real evidence - explain why Larry's luck was 'really just normal' - in objective-not-cheap-rhetorical DETAIL!

 

I never said anything like that, nor do I believe anything like that.

Do you think stating a falsehood will benefit your argument? Why do you think that? In general, habitual liars are less likely to be believed, not more likely. They think "gee, if he's lying about that, he's probably lying about his other arguments, too."

Or did you just intend to make that a personal insult, hoping to "put me in my place" or something like that? Again, people who lash out angrily with insults and personal attacks when they are challenged are less likely to be believed than someone who can make a rational argument.

Like I said, if you have any valid argument at all, post it. Not "read this woo and refute it it you can!" Not just "well everyone knows . . ." Explain YOURSELF what you believe and why - or shut the f*ck up. Your flouncing is boring.

 

Is that so? Guess I have to apologize for somehow completely misunderstanding your post here:
http://www.sciforums.com/posts/3663878
Perhaps you can reconcile what you wrote above, with what you wrote in linked to post. I can't.

See my above. Who is it actually lashing out in anger here btw?

That Wikispooks article is my go-to re chief culprits masterminding/facilitating/covering-up 9-11 'unforeseeable terrorist event'. The invite to 'demolish it's credibility' remains.

 

"Too much time spent responding to disingenuous posters. I'm out."

Forum flounce. Best you run along now, find something better to do.

 

Carefully omitting any reference to my #564. Well done. And further accolades for soundly debunking the entirety of my go-to Wikispooks article re 9-11. NOT.
The entire absence of any effort to do so speaks volumes. Checkmate.

 

Sure. I consider myself a Christian because I was raised that way and I believe in the teachings of Christ. (See the Sermon on the Mount for an example.) I don't buy most of the rest of the hoopla that the various churches have constructed over the years - heaven, hell, Popes, indulgences, supernatural beings etc.

You are.

I don't think you understand it at all, because you can't even describe it, or argue from its points. You're like one of the anti-vaxxers who can't say anything about why they oppose vaccination; they just post links to Youtube videos.

 

An atheist Christian then. I like many others would, find that oxymoronic but ok each to their own beliefs. Enough there.

Because you say so huh? Your own previous post #573 says otherwise. Whatever., a distraction.

Rubbish. To repeat, Wikispooks "9-11 - Israel Did It!", nicely categorized and mostly in time order of events, is my go-to reference nailing the web of criminals involved in 9-11 2001.

If you are too lazy to even read it, or too scared to face the abundance of strong evidence provided, that's your not my problem.
If it was an easy task to pick out a host of glaring falsehoods/omissions, one of you chronic avoiders would have gleefully done so well before this.
Best to just toe the Official Line by endorsing the Official Conspiracy Theory. That way, you keep getting likes not mindless flack.

 

Well you mod/admin folks have the power to claim whatever you want and do whatever you want.
Denying me the opportunity to argue a reasonable case that would inevitably undermine the most sacred of sacred cows in the so-called freedom-loving Western Democracies.
So be it. The SF way of things displayed here as a (hopefully) permanent record.

I'm happy to leave it alone at that. And if a life ban notice is on the way as a final notification, so be that too.