Debunker says what?

NASA executed the Apollo moon missions flawlessly and people still "question" (make up stupid **** based on ignorance) the moon landings.

Truther logic at its finest.
 
Yes, building fires started by a conflagration of jet fuel. A fire that heated and weakened steal beams stripped of their fire resistant coating by impact with a jet crash.

You dont just get to hand wave away the jet impact. It IS what caused the initial damage and eventual collapse.

:mad: is this some sort of game to you?
 
Wow, so many pages based on nothing at all. This thread is a perfect representation of the entire truth movement.
 
MikeW said:
Wow, so many pages based on nothing at all. This thread is a perfect representation of the entire truth movement.
Click to expand...

And it's a perfect representation of the truth movement's target audience. They know they appeal to working class heroes like Homeland Insurgency. The problem is the higher education in the U.S. is so expensive, many people live paycheck to paycheck since they're sixteen and don't have an opportunity to gain any skills. Poor saps like HI end up being ignorant on just about every subject there is to be ignorant about. And they get suckered in by any YouTube video by Joe Blow. One can make a good case based on HI's posts that the U.S. should socialize higher education and make it mandatory so grown adults don't grow up to be so clueless. One might say that the taxes would be too high but I say it'd be worth it if you don't have to run into the sad and bizarre rants of the likes of Homeland Insurgency.
 
Last edited:
Homeland Insurgency said:
What shape charges?
Click to expand...

You really seem to be flip flopping on whether there were explosives used on 9/11.Please, for clarity's sake, give us a quick rundown on what part, if any, you think smuggled explosive played in the destruction of the buildings on 9/11.

Did planes hit the building in your scenario,where were the initial collapse zones,how do explosives survive for an hour in a fire without burning or otherwise degrading,were the smuggled bombs incendiaries to help spread the fire,over what period were the bombs smuggled in,is there any evidence of explosives use in the remains of the buildings?

I think we'd all find it very helpful if you could clearly state your beliefs rather than just throwing around a confusingly random assortment of claims and questions.
 
You know, all this back and forth nonsense makes me almost miss the quaint psychotic ravings of Macolm K.

Almost.
 
Reactor drone said:
You really seem to be flip flopping on whether there were explosives used on 9/11.Please, for clarity's sake, give us a quick rundown on what part, if any, you think smuggled explosive played in the destruction of the buildings on 9/11.

Did planes hit the building in your scenario,where were the initial collapse zones,how do explosives survive for an hour in a fire without burning or otherwise degrading,were the smuggled bombs incendiaries to help spread the fire,over what period were the bombs smuggled in,is there any evidence of explosives use in the remains of the buildings?

I think we'd all find it very helpful if you could clearly state your beliefs rather than just throwing around a confusingly random assortment of claims and questions.
Click to expand...

We're not talking about my beliefs. I don't claim to know what happened on 9/11. That would be you.
 
Foolmewunz said:
What sort of playground taunting are you up to now. The towers were nearly 100% occuppied. YOU stated there were empty floors. I'm waiting for YOU TO PROVE IT.

You do not know the number of, condition of, sizes or capacity of the freight elevators in the WTC complex. You do not know that there were not just freight elevators, but also construction elevators, and that both had elevator operators, do you? (Add a few more people to the impossibly vast conspiracy.... various elevator operators for the construction elevators.)

So you have the work plans for WTC 1 and 2 for the two months prior to 9/11, then? You'll be posting them momentarily and showing us which elevators were supposedly out of service.

Alternate theory: You don't know what you're talking about and are flinging as much poop as possible hoping that some small amount will stick to the wall. This probably works real well in RPG forums of teenagers. You may not have noticed, but you're hanging out with adults, now.

We just demand that you prove a single word you're saying.

(Hey, how's it going with the Slate article by the lady who knows a guy who met a guy who said he knew all about K-9 security? Or did the inconvenient arrival of someone who actually knows the topic set you back onto another course?)
Click to expand...



It is interesting to me that not another peep about k9's has come forth out of him.
He certainly is not the first to pee his pants when faced off against my 4 legged friends!
 
doobiedoright said:
It is interesting to me that not another peep about k9's has come forth out of him.
He certainly is not the first to pee his pants when faced off against my 4 legged friends!
Click to expand...

http://web.israelinsider.com/Articles/Briefs/4884.htm

One of the most alarming attributes of TATP is that it cannot be detected by bomb-sniffing dogs, making it easier to smuggle into airports and onto airplanes. It is also very easy to synthesize in clandestine labs, using readily available chemicals.

Say whaaa....?

lol
 
Homeland Insurgency thinks Interpol is involved in a global conspiracy to hide the truth of 9/11 from the masses. There is no arguing with such profound paranoia. It's best to leave his psychotic ravings echoing impotently in cyberspace rather than engage such sad, desperate attempts for attention.
 
I don't claim to know the government or Interpol were behind 9/11 and never said as much.

I claim debunkers don't know what happened on 9/11 anymore then I do they just pretend they do.

Now I just wonder why someone would lie about what I said to support their faith. Bitter?

Why not quote me?
 
HI is a no-claimer. He knows that he can't prove his inside jobby job fantasies so just claims that everybody else is as clueless as he is and asks really stupid questions pretending he has called the "official story" into question. I don't know if he manages to fool himself with this crap but he certainly doesn't fool anybody else.
 
dtugg said:
HI is a no-claimer. He knows that he can't prove his inside jobby job fantasies so just claims that everybody else is as clueless as he is and asks really stupid questions pretending he has called the "official story" into question. I don't know if he manages to fool himself with this crap but he certainly doesn't fool anybody else.
Click to expand...

See? There goes the debunkers contradicting themselves once again. I'm a no-planer who thinks Interpol was in on 9/11 but at the same time I'm a no-claimer.

Do you people ever make up your minds? Is there any kind of consensus amongst debunkers?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom