[Moderated]175 did NOT hit the South tower.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Rolfe said:
Well, I can't speak for others, but I've had to clock up a lot of views just trying to keep up with the train wreck which is Malcolm's attempt at arguing his case. And so often when I do catch up I find that others have nailed him to the floor before I can get a word in edgeways.

One thing has struck me quite forcefully - his extreme reluctance to find anything out for himself. This is seen often in simple little questions like "OP???" He doesn't realise that OP stands for "opening post", and rather than work it out for himself or find out some other way, he simply asks. Some of these queries have been so naive as to mark him out as an extreme newbie in any discussion thread. The habit would be endearing in anyone with even a tiny scrap of humility, but combined with Malcolm's extreme arrogance it merely points up his laziness.

This has extended several times to outright requests to posters knowledgeable about aviation and related matters to supply him with information he thinks he needs or wants to support his case. Which again is jawdroppingly naive. Obviously, if even a tiny part of the reply seems to favour his fantasy world, he trumperts that the knowledgeable poster is agreeing with him, but there's still zero chance that he'll take on board any information which doesn't suit him, no matter how expert the informant.

The now-infamous assertion that Dubya had never before staged a photo-op with a primary school class is just an extreme example. He was guessing. He had no idea. But a flashy offer to donate to charity soon had others finding his information for him. Of course, no donation. But if there had been no evidence of a prior visit, then something else for Malcolm to load on his house of cards, for virtually no effort on his part.

If the reneging on the donation shows nothing else, it shows that he was lying about being "loaded", and having a "lorra dosh" or "loadsa dosh", I forget now which he decided was the correct usage. (Hah, Malcolm and correct usage - now there's another whole barrel of laughs!) I wouldn't describe my finances in the above terms, but I've given that amount to charity on a number of occasions - £1,000 (pounds not dollars) on one occasion. If Malcolm were really so rich, such a donation would be small change.

I have to say I do wonder about the genuineness of a poster who manages to be so wrong about virtually everything, so consistently. Ordinary chance would suggest anyone just guessing would be right more often than he is! However, speculating on his trollishness is liable to get this post edited, so I won't. Whichever way, the spectacle is certainly entertaining!

The main point I's like to come back to is the one about the inability of fire to heat steel to the point where it will bend. Did Malcolm ever take on board the points about forging swords and so on? If fire doesn't heat steel to the point where it will bend under pressure, how did the mediaeval smiths make these masterly weapons, Malcolm?

Closer to home - I suppose I didn't see the local blacksmith take a srtaight bar of cold steel and heat it in the fire of his forge so that he could easily bend it into a shoe for my pony? I mean, a fire can't heat steel to the point where an old man could bend it just by banging it with a hammer, obviously. So I must have imagined it. I wonder where my pony got his shoes from, then?

Rolfe.
Click to expand...

How many old men with hammers and air assisted fires would it take to dismember 500,000 tons of interlocked steel?
 
CptColumbo said:
What does that have to do with your proven dishonesty? Except to show that you know nothing about those quotes.
Click to expand...

How about answering the question ?
If you don't like the original question, then try this,
Do you find anything the least bit odd about a passer by on 9/11, the first person the MSM talks to, saying,
"Then I saw the towers collapse, mainly due to structural failure, because the fires were just so intense" ?
 
MRC_Hans said:
Neither. The subjective assessement of some passer by is uninteresting, and the FDNY officer could only assess what fires he could observe from the inside, which were on the lowest affected floor. He couldn't possibly know what it looked like on higher floors.

It is notable, however, that they didn't GET those lines up there. The fires burned on unchecked.

Hans
Click to expand...
They didn't get the lines up there because the perps pressed the button on whatever HE blew the tower up.
 
pomeroo said:
Yes, the fountain of lies never runs dry.

Incidentally, neither Warren Buffet nor Offutt AFB have anything whatever to do with the events of 9/11/01.
Click to expand...

Buffet's invitation savedmore than one life (his breakfast date, whatever her name is). His invitation also saved the lives of other 'high flyers' who should have been at work in the twins that morning.
What's to stop, a few months later, those high flyers getting an anonymous phone call, reminding them that their life was saved that morning and now they 'owe'.
Now, they repay in someway or otherwise the next time, they won't get an invite. The next time, they won't be so lucky. That's how gangsters operate is it not ?
 
malcolm kirkman said:
Buffet's invitation savedmore than one life (his breakfast date, whatever her name is). His invitation also saved the lives of other 'high flyers' who should have been at work in the twins that morning.
What's to stop, a few months later, those high flyers getting an anonymous phone call, reminding them that their life was saved that morning and now they 'owe'.
Now, they repay in someway or otherwise the next time, they won't get an invite. The next time, they won't be so lucky. That's how gangsters operate is it not ?
Click to expand...

So we finally have some proof then kirkman? I mean you must have actual proof of these threatening phonecalls mustn't you? Otherwise you wouldn't be saying this would you? You're not the kind of person who would just make stuff up, are you?

The whole premise is almost as ludicrous as Ace Baker's no-plane nonsense and the only reason I say "almost" is because your nonsense involves actual aeroplanes.
 
malcolm kirkman said:
They're also a bit more clued up on the truth of 9/11.
The inside job that murdered innocent office workers going about their daily work. The more than 1,000 vapourised bodies of which no trace has been found.
The sweeping up of the crime scene (itself a crime) by Ghouliani himself. A Bankster lackey who is now running for president.
Anybody thinking of voting for that cross dresser should check out what the FDNY think of him.
Click to expand...

Interesting. Right after posting a link of conjecture, you say this.

Basically: "I THINK 9/11 was an inside job, therefore it WAS."
 
Rolfe said:
One thing has struck me quite forcefully - his extreme reluctance to find anything out for himself. This is seen often in simple little questions like "OP???" He doesn't realise that OP stands for "opening post", and rather than work it out for himself or find out some other way, he simply asks.
Click to expand...

Come on, Rolfe. "OP" could mean any number of things. If he doesn't know, he should ask, instead of just speculating on what it means or feigning to know in order to not look like a fool.
 
malcolm kirkman said:
it's infinitely more than anything you've shown me to indicate that the planethat hit tower 2 was flight 175.
Click to expand...

Conjecture is infinitely better than video and physical evidence ??

Ladies and gentlemen, truther logic.

This thread has gone beyond me talking to true patriots who can't bring themselves to believe their government did it and who are not fully au fait.
Click to expand...

Don't delude yourself. Your theory is not so obvious that only dishonest shills could disagree with it.

I didn't lie. I changed my mind, so what?
Click to expand...

Changed your mind about a challenge. Isn't that a tad convenient ?
 
Belz... said:
Come on, Rolfe. "OP" could mean any number of things. If he doesn't know, he should ask, instead of just speculating on what it means or feigning to know in order to not look like a fool.
Click to expand...

Perhaps that was a poor example, but there have been quite a few of these posts where Malcolm simply repeats a word he doesn't recognise, then adds a few question marks. Enough to add up to a picture of someone who isn't nearly so au fait with his material as he'd like us to believe.

malcolm kirkman said:
How many old men with hammers and air assisted fires would it take to dismember 500,000 tons of interlocked steel?
Click to expand...


OK, so we've agreed that steel can be heated up by fire sufficiently to allow it to bend under pressure. You're now simply disputing that the weight of what was it - 20 floors of office block - was enough to bend it?

Come on!

Rolfe.
 
malcolm kirkman said:
Pull my finger.
There is nothing 'grand' about elements within a government conspiring to and then actually murdering their own citizens, watching them go to work inside a primed ready to explode giant bomb, locking the doors to the roof, turning off the sprinklers and allowing hundreds of firemen and police to go to their deaths in a vain rescue attempt.
Click to expand...

You continually quote a post, ignore it, and simply ramble on about your delusion. You do this to ruffle feathers and get the attention you crave. You are continually caught making mistakes and telling lies, and your response is always to simply ignore your mistakes and respond with futher nonsense.

I, for one, am done playing with you, Malcolm. If you are an honest-to-goodness conspiracy nut, then let me tell you what I tell the others:

This is just a game to you and nothing more. Ten, twenty, thirty years from now, the globe will still be spinning and not much will have changed. No FEMA death camps. No NWO. No Freemasons ruling the world. No revolution in the US by the 'truthers'. There will still be good politicians and corrupt ones. There will still be wars, poverty, famine, religion, and everything else that you see on the nightly news.

In the meantime, you will continue your rants about Ouffit, about Rockefeller, and possibly about "verb transitives". You will still use dispicable tactics (such as offering money to a charity and then not honoring it) to try to give weight to your weak arguments. You will waste your time finding connections where none exist. You will spend hours a day posting nonsense on internet forums. You will still be deluded enough to think that you are somehow making a difference, when in fact you are doing nothing more than dancing on the graves of helpless victims to help you believe your fairy-tale is true.

You aren't here to learn. You aren't even here to teach. You are here to stir up a hornet's nest and brag about the how much attention you received. Don't be too quick to be flattered though Malcolm; the attention you get isn't because your 'theories' are sound or even intelligable. In a conspiracy forum with very few 'truthers', you are simply the ugly girl who walks by the all-boy's school.

I highly doubt you are who you've claimed. You aren't married, or a business man, or even an adult - too much of your writing style and language reveal your true age. So, Malcolm, find another hobby, one that doesn't make a mockery of innocent victims. The adults will still be here to talk to when you are ready for a grown-up conversation.
 
VespaGuy said:
You will still be deluded enough to think that you are somehow making a difference
Click to expand...

That's one thing with truthers. Somehow they think that ranting about it on the 'net is making a big difference; that their voice is being heard and that their time is coming.

It's like writing a letter to someone and thinking it makes a difference to anyone but the one reading it.
 
malcolm kirkman said:
TRUTH being the operative word.
Click to expand...
I guess you don't know the difference between truth and "Truth." The truth is based on facts and reality. The "Truth" is based on speculation, congecture and lies. We know the truth. You only know the "Truth."
 
malcolm kirkman said:
How about answering the question ?
If you don't like the original question, then try this,
Do you find anything the least bit odd about a passer by on 9/11, the first person the MSM talks to, saying,
"Then I saw the towers collapse, mainly due to structural failure, because the fires were just so intense" ?
Click to expand...
You seem to keep avoiding our questions, very poorly. For example, why should we waste anymore time discussing these events with a proven liar and poor researcher, such as yourself?

You seem to have done no research on your own, and are relying on the JREF to do it for you.
 
Spitfire:

Has Malcolm sent you the $1000 cheque/check yet? I can't wait to see it...the charity you provided could really use the money I am sure.

TAM:)
 
MRC_Hans said:
Neither. The subjective assessement of some passer by is uninteresting, and the FDNY officer could only assess what fires he could observe from the inside, which were on the lowest affected floor. He couldn't possibly know what it looked like on higher floors.

It is notable, however, that they didn't GET those lines up there. The fires burned on unchecked.

Hans
Click to expand...

Is that right?
Seeing as you say it is, you won't mind producing some evidence, will you?
 
malcolm kirkman said:
Is that right?
Seeing as you say it is, you won't mind producing some evidence, will you?
Click to expand...

Evidence? Start with the extensive interviews conducted by Firehouse magazine Editor-in-Chief Harvey Eisner and published in that magazine. Then read Dennis Smith's "Report From Ground Zero". Follow up by reading "102 Minutes" by Dwyer and Flynn.

If for some reason that's not enough evidence and you are still not convinced that Chief Palmer, "..couldn't possibly know what it looked like on higher floors." And that "...they didn't GET those lines up there. The fires burned on unchecked." I would be glad to introduce you to some of the guys in Batallion 7 who could provide the evidence you need. Would you like to meet FF McArdle of HMS Unit 1S? I trained with him, and I think he'd be willing to talk to you about actual fire conditions in WTC 2.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom