• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

[Moderated]175 did NOT hit the South tower.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Myriad said:
I agree. In order to guarantee that no facts are confused with conjecture, we should leave all facts out of this discussion and state only conjecture.

Which, of course, is what you've been doing all along. I respect that, and I've been doing my best to follow suit in my responses.

And you're wrong about the explosives in the towers. The collapses were triggered by 100-ton iron deadweights (non-explosive bombs) dropped from high-altitude Zeppelins and laser-guided to impact the buildings' cores. The deadweights had thermite cores with delayed fuses to melt them down and destroy the evidence after the collapses. That explains the lack of detonation sounds (no explosions), the molten metal, the subterranean hot spots, the thermite residue, the lack of explosive damage or residue, the lack of witnesses of anyone planting explosives, the collapse of WTC7 even though it was not hit by a plane, the willingness of that rocker feller (you mean Bono, don't you?) to sign off on the plan (if the planes missed the towers, the bombs could be aborted or used on different buildings, with none of the risk of discovery that planted explosives have).

I just imagined asking Bono whose plan was better, your planted demolition charges or my Zeppelins, and he said mine had much lower risk, and that you should take your orders from me from now on.

Respectfully,
Myriad
Click to expand...
I'll gladly start taking orders from you, just as soon as you stop using 'and' next to a comma and stop starting a sentence with 'And', never mind a paragraph.
You know how hard it can be, taking orders from someone, who is clearly not as well educated as yourself.
 
Mobyseven said:
A few posts ago, you were telling us that it was a special military plane that hit the WTC, and that was how it got through the wall.

Now you're saying it was a standard 757, but it had a missile in a pod.

We should put a sign up over the forums saying "One conspiracy theory per person at any one time."
Click to expand...

No,
It was an ex military bad boy, with a pod and a missile and a homing device, to lock onto the beacon, on the computer floor.
See how everything fits, when you read things slowly.
 
Use a comma + a little conjunction (and, but, for, nor, yet, or, so) to connect two independent clauses, as in "He hit the ball well, [FONT=Arial, Helvetica]but[/FONT] he ran toward third base."
Contending that the coordinating conjunction is adequate separation, some writers will leave out the comma in a sentence with short, balanced independent clauses (such as we see in the example just given). If there is ever any doubt, however, use the comma, as it is always correct in this situation.
One of the most frequent errors in comma usage is the placement of a comma after a coordinating conjunction. We cannot say that the comma will always come before the conjunction and never after, but it would be a rare event, indeed, that we need to follow a coordinating conjunction with a comma. When speaking, we do sometimes pause after the little conjunction, but there is seldom a good reason to put a comma there.
Click to expand...
http://grammar.ccc.commnet.edu/grammar/commas.htm
 
Hokulele said:
That's what a kaishakunin is for.

(Says the jap.)
Click to expand...

Arkan_Wolfshade said:
That's the guy playing backup, in case you screw up seppuku, right?
Click to expand...

Hokulele said:
You got it in one.
Click to expand...

Arkan_Wolfshade said:
Scout's honor I didn't google it.
Click to expand...



Just in case any of you are thinking about it, after dealing with this thread, might I humbly suggest....






Satisfaction guaranteed, or your money back.

:cool:


ETA: Oh, crap, was that too many commas? Does anyone else here know how to use a sword?
 
Last edited:
malcolm kirkman said:
No,
It was an ex military bad boy, with a pod and a missile and a homing device, to lock onto the beacon, on the computer floor.
See how everything fits, when you read things slowly.
Click to expand...

Could you just clarify exactly what the differences are between a standard everyday 767 and an "ex military bad boy" 767, please?
 
HawksFan said:
Could you just clarify exactly what the differences are between a standard everyday 767 and an "ex military bad boy" 767, please?
Click to expand...

My pleasure, one is very heavily armoured. I leave you to work out which is which.
If you require further and better details of that armour, let me refer you to my previous posts.
 
I'm going to go out on a limb and predict that Malcolm believes that a military 757/767 is made out of different materials than a civilian 757/767.

Go ahead, MK, say it.

ETA: Damn! I'm too slow! Which of your previous posts detailed the armor used?
 
malcolm kirkman said:
My pleasure, one is very heavily armoured. I leave you to work out which is which.
If you require further and better details of that armour, let me refer you to my previous posts.
Click to expand...
Armour? Is that like Armour Boulevard in North Kansas City? That's where North Kansas City Hospital is! Are you a nurse there? Do you know my cardiologist? He works there. He's not as nice as you are, because he doesn't tell me fairy tales like you do. He must let you use the special pills in his cabinet. Is that where you get the fairy tales from?
 
CurtC said:
I'm going to go out on a limb and predict that Malcolm believes that a military 757/767 is made out of different materials than a civilian 757/767.

Go ahead, MK, say it.

ETA: Damn! I'm too slow! Which of your previous posts detailed the armor used?
Click to expand...
A miltary 757/767 is made out of different materials thana civilian 757/767.
There is not much call for armour plating, when you are ferrying civilians about.
 
malcolm kirkman said:
If you are anything like your photograph, you'll have some experience of lifting a baby out of a pushchair. Maybe your sister's or a friend's baby.
Now lift a 16 stone man out of a chair and we'll take it from there.
Click to expand...
Once again, you are referring to the mechanics of the hijacking. That is not what we were discussing.

I want to know what made it improbable or impossible for the aircraft to have been navigated to New York City. We can discuss the mechanics of taking over the aircraft after we have dispensed with the navigation issue.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom