Loose Change - Part II

Status
Not open for further replies.
To anyone wishing to use in-line images in their posts please check Rule 4 of your Membership Agreement. I've edited quite a few posts in this thread that I believe breached Rule 4 and I have not so far issued any warnings regarding those breaches however if Members continue to breach Rule 4 I will start to issues warnings which could lead to further action being taken including suspension or banning.

If you are unsure whether an image is copyrighted and/or not available for general use or whether a particular site does explicitly allow hotlinkingWP then I suggest you play safe and merely include a link to the image you wish to draw Members' attention to.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Darat
 
Mutton-Head said:
I'm contending that a high-rise steel structure has never collapsed "pancake-style."

That is my challenge. If any body is up for it, throw your submissions into the ring.
Click to expand...

I'm still interesting in your response to my post: Why do you think that precedents cannot exist ?

Mutton-Head said:
Manny, honestly, stop with the accusations. I know that 343 firmen were murdered. I don't believe all of the perpetrators were accounted for. Or at the very least, all of the pertinent details have been published by the NIST. Do you think that I'm lying? I'm sorry if you do.
Click to expand...

Not lying. Just wrong.
 
Mutton-Head said:
Yes, thank you Huntsman, you did answer the question exactly 100% correct. Thank you.

The “challenge” comment was just a playful metaphor. But I'm beginning to get the feeling that we speak different languages. I think this will only serve to further exacerbate all of us. So, since Huntsman and I just reached probably the only agreement that we ever will, I will bid adieu.

Good-bye from the Mutton-Head
Click to expand...

Now that's what I call a combative personality.

"Well, if this 'debating' means people won't agree with me, I'm out!!"
 
Shrinker said:
That's a corner, not a side.
Click to expand...

Its not building 7 either. LOL! You can even see the crane in the photo!

Go to the site he posted go under
NY City Pictures - Page 4 (Ground Zero)

You can see another picture zoomed back further.
 
Last edited:
Kent1 said:
Its not building 7 either. LOL! You can even see the crane in the photo!

Go to the site he posted go under
NY City Pictures - Page 4 (Ground Zero)

You can see another picture zoomed back further.
Click to expand...

Its hard to get good photos of the south side showing damage because of the large amound smoke coming out of the building.
But yes they do exist.
 
Kent1 said:
Its not building 7 either. LOL! You can even see the crane in the photo!
Click to expand...
Nice catch Kent! Yet another blatant lie from the "truth" movement.

BTW, since Kent can't post links yet the pics are here.
 
Don't mess with me, CT-people. I'm your worst ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ nightmare... :D

  • Hillingsø is given a higher rank than he has, to give his (unverified) statement more weight.
  • The speaker is quoted incorrectly - misleading, so it makes the unsuspecting reader thinking that he is advocating the idea that the towers fell because of bombs.
  • The demolition expert is quoted incorrectly. Not once, but twice. All to support the idea that the towers fell because of bombs.
  • The demolition expert is contradicting those who claim the towers were brought down by many small bombs.

People, we are not looking at sloppy investigation here. We are looking at a pattern of deliberate fraud.
 
CFLarsen said:
People, we are not looking at sloppy investigation here. We are looking at a pattern of deliberate fraud.
Click to expand...

Fraud and libel. If I was Deb Burlingame I'd be on these creeps so fast it would make your head spin.
 
Kent1 said:
Its not building 7 either. LOL! You can even see the crane in the photo!

Go to the site he posted go under
NY City Pictures - Page 4 (Ground Zero)

You can see another picture zoomed back further.
Click to expand...

The boarded up windows are another pretty good clue. Not sure exactly what building that is, but it's certainly not WTC 7.

Greetings to all, I am Pat from the Screw Loose Change blog. Thanks for this wonderful thread. You guys have given us the inspiration for many posts. Thanks especially to Gravy for his amazing Loose Change Viewer Guide, which has meant that I don't have to listen to Dylan's annoying voice every time I want to pinpoint the time of something in the film.

Quick question: Is Paul Isaac, Jr., really a Truther? I saw the video of him arguing with Bermas at Ground Zero and thought the guy was a hero for standing up to the Loosers, telling them how inappropriate their behavior was. There's no possibility that somebody's spoofing his support for the "Truth" movement as a way to get back at him?
 
CFLarsen said:
Don't mess with me, CT-people. I'm your worst ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ nightmare... :D

  • Hillingsø is given a higher rank than he has, to give his (unverified) statement more weight.
  • The speaker is quoted incorrectly - misleading, so it makes the unsuspecting reader thinking that he is advocating the idea that the towers fell because of bombs.
  • The demolition expert is quoted incorrectly. Not once, but twice. All to support the idea that the towers fell because of bombs.
  • The demolition expert is contradicting those who claim the towers were brought down by many small bombs.

People, we are not looking at sloppy investigation here. We are looking at a pattern of deliberate fraud.
Click to expand...

The photo on the paper alone is misleading - it's showing the impact of the second plane.
 
Brainster said:
The boarded up windows are another pretty good clue. Not sure exactly what building that is, but it's certainly not WTC 7.

Greetings to all, I am Pat from the Screw Loose Change blog. Thanks for this wonderful thread. You guys have given us the inspiration for many posts. Thanks especially to Gravy for his amazing Loose Change Viewer Guide, which has meant that I don't have to listen to Dylan's annoying voice every time I want to pinpoint the time of something in the film.

Quick question: Is Paul Isaac, Jr., really a Truther? I saw the video of him arguing with Bermas at Ground Zero and thought the guy was a hero for standing up to the Loosers, telling them how inappropriate their behavior was. There's no possibility that somebody's spoofing his support for the "Truth" movement as a way to get back at him?
Click to expand...

Yes he is

BTW, Hows it going, it's me Scott
 
Kent1 said:
Its not building 7 either. LOL! You can even see the crane in the photo!

Go to the site he posted go under
NY City Pictures - Page 4 (Ground Zero)

You can see another picture zoomed back further.
Click to expand...
Yep.
http://www.edgehillfire.com/wtc/wtc6.jpg

(geggy, you found a picture that was 7th in a series of Ground Zero. Just because you find a picture called "wtc7.jpg" when you do a Google image search, doesn't mean it's a picture of 7 World Trade Center. You're really not good at this. You might want to consider pursuing a different hobby.)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom