9-11, 19 insanely motivated Saudis with pocket knives, nothing else

[candycorn]

WOW! somebody needs a vacation....

To the funny farm. Where life is beautiful all the time and he'll be happy to see those nice young men in their clean white coats and they're coming to take him away, ha-haaa!!!!!

They're coming to take him away, ha-haaa, they're coming to take him away, ho-ho, hee-hee, ha-haaa.

To the happy home. With trees and flowers and chirping birds and basket weavers who sit and smile and twiddle their thumbs and toes and they're coming to take him away, ha-haaa!!!

Anyone wanting to see what a truly disgusting piece of shit is like needs look no further than the fuck named Mr. Jones.

Still a nice post.

 

[Patriot911]

Danny is actually pretty cool.. I spoke with him and his wife several times Mark and Danny are now on good terms and shook hands

Why ANYONE would want ANYTHING to do with a piece of shit like you is beyond me. Danny's handling of the truthtard was classic though!

because.... I AM WAY COOL

Well, like everything else, you're both wrong and delusional. Keep dreaming though. Do you pretend when people spit on you that they are really congratulating you on a job well done?

 

[Patriot911]

I see my previous post about the mental condition of sickcos like you
hit home to the both of you, so now you are pairing up...what a nice couple you two make!! A real fag team... I mean tag team!

It is funny how you 2 always troll in tandem., and are always there for each other to um..cover each others asses What a soap opera your PM Inbox topics must be!!

Anyone else notice the irony of Jones crying like the little bitch he is about homocentric insults being used and then he turns right around and uses them? What a piece of shit douchbag. Anyone else need more proof that fucktards like Jones believe the rules don't apply to them even when they are their own rules?

To help those who have come across your displays of mental illness better understand why people like you 'troll' you first have to understand mental illness. Trolling is a sign of someone who is mentally ill, or who is emotionally unbalanced and angry at normal people for some reason or other. The following descriptions fit the 2 posters above like a glove on a TSA agents hand.

Maybe you should look up the definintion of troll; someone who makes posts that do not contribute to the discussion at hand. Wow! Fits you to a tee along with a lot of your other truthtard buddies. Yet you never attack them. Another sign of the hypocricy of the traitorous fucks known as truthtards.

And remember..19 insanely motivated Saudis with pocket knives?
NEVER PROVEN

Wrong yet again. They had to prove it in a court of law in order to charge and convict Moussaoui. They did so. So your claim is absolute, total bullshit. I know it. You know it. Everyone else knows it. Now wipe that shit off your face and beg forgiveness for being such a scumbag ****.

 

[eots]

Why ANYONE would want ANYTHING to do with a piece of shit like you is beyond me. Danny's handling of the truthtard was classic though!

because.... I AM WAY COOL

Well, like everything else, you're both wrong and delusional. Keep dreaming though. Do you pretend when people spit on you that they are really congratulating you on a job well done?

I am delusional ?...I think the delusional one would be the one given to having little imaginings of what takes place in my life outside of a messageboard
I was fortunate to meet them both and I enjoyed my conversation with both of them and found them to both to be interesting intelligent colorful gentlemen

 

[eots]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dvzlFBgbHVE]YouTube - Danny Bonaduce Meets Mark Dice...again.[/ame]

 

[Triton]

Great video, I wonder if Danny will come out and admit that WTC7's total symmetrical free fall collapse was not caused by sporadic fires on 7-8 floors

 

[Mr. Jones]

Great video, I wonder if Danny will come out and admit that WTC7's total symmetrical free fall collapse was not caused by sporadic fires on 7-8 floors

I doubt he knows what that means or even cares. Just shut up and support your lying POTUS

 

[SFC Ollie]

Great video, I wonder if Danny will come out and admit that WTC7's total symmetrical free fall collapse was not caused by sporadic fires on 7-8 floors

LOL you so funny.......

There was not a total Symmetrical free fall collapse of any building on 9-11-01.

And there were raging fires on more than just floors 7 and 8.

But you are free to keep believing the falsehoods.

 

[Gamolon]

Great video, I wonder if Danny will come out and admit that WTC7's total symmetrical free fall collapse was not caused by sporadic fires on 7-8 floors

Wrong.

Symmetrical. Entire building comes down at once.
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fHQOqnaIce0]YouTube - ‪Building Implosion Controlled Demolition Compare WTC 7 9/11‬‏[/ame]

Non-symmetrical. First one side, then progresses to the left.
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Ia9xoGDzIE]YouTube - ‪Roosevelt House Building Demolition in Atlanta, GA‬‏[/ame]

Get it yet? By the way. The second video is the one you agreed was non-symmetrical.

 

[Triton]

Great video, I wonder if Danny will come out and admit that WTC7's total symmetrical free fall collapse was not caused by sporadic fires on 7-8 floors

LOL you so funny.......

There was not a total Symmetrical free fall collapse of any building on 9-11-01.

And there were raging fires on more than just floors 7 and 8.

But you are free to keep believing the falsehoods.

WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG

You sir , are WRONG

 

[Patriot911]

Great video, I wonder if Danny will come out and admit that WTC7's total symmetrical free fall collapse was not caused by sporadic fires on 7-8 floors

LOL you so funny.......

There was not a total Symmetrical free fall collapse of any building on 9-11-01.

And there were raging fires on more than just floors 7 and 8.

But you are free to keep believing the falsehoods.

WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG

You sir , are WRONG

And that is all Triton has; whining like a little bitch that everyone else is wrong, yet he can't figure out why they are wrong and he is right. I've seen two year olds with better cognative ability and better debate skills.

 

[SFC Ollie]

Great video, I wonder if Danny will come out and admit that WTC7's total symmetrical free fall collapse was not caused by sporadic fires on 7-8 floors

LOL you so funny.......

There was not a total Symmetrical free fall collapse of any building on 9-11-01.

And there were raging fires on more than just floors 7 and 8.

But you are free to keep believing the falsehoods.

WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG

You sir , are WRONG

Yes you are. Show me the explosions. Show me the free fall. Show me sporadic fires on just 2 floors.

You are so wrong you will never see what is right.

 

[Mr. Jones]

LOL you so funny.......

There was not a total Symmetrical free fall collapse of any building on 9-11-01.

And there were raging fires on more than just floors 7 and 8.

But you are free to keep believing the falsehoods.

WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG

You sir , are WRONG

Yes you are. Show me the explosions. Show me the free fall. Show me sporadic fires on just 2 floors.

You are so wrong you will never see what is right.

Near-freefall collapse violates laws of physics. Fire induced collapse is not consistent with observed collapse mode.


Nathan Lomba P.E., S.E., M.ASCE, states:

"I began having doubts about, so called, official explanations for the collapse of the WTC towers soon after the explanations surfaced. The gnawing question that lingers in my mind is: How did the structures collapse in near symmetrical fashion when the apparent precipitating causes were asymmetrical loading? The collapses defies common logic from an elementary structural engineering perspective. “If” you accept the argument that fire protection covering was damaged to such an extent that structural members in the vicinity of the aircraft impacts were exposed to abnormally high temperatures, and “if” you accept the argument that the temperatures were high enough to weaken the structural framing, that still does not explain the relatively concentric nature of the failures."
source-A&EFor 9-11 truth

The NIST report does not explain the collapse of WTC 7 in any credible scientific manner.

 

[Mr. Jones]

LOL you so funny.......

There was not a total Symmetrical free fall collapse of any building on 9-11-01.

And there were raging fires on more than just floors 7 and 8.

But you are free to keep believing the falsehoods.

WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG

You sir , are WRONG

And that is all Triton has; whining like a little bitch that everyone else is wrong, yet he can't figure out why they are wrong and he is right. I've seen two year olds with better cognative ability and better debate skills.

LOL this coming from a bald face caught redhanded lying troll!?
How many honest credible people and sources does one have to show you that there is REASONABLE DOUBT that the NIST and OCT is FULL OF SHIT Parrot?
Washington's Blog

BTW have you guys straightened out the little rift you guys caused by saying the fires melted the steel? After all the subscribe to your OCT don't they??
Oh wait, you guys changed the story? Oh I see, got caught in another lie so you had to say it only weakened the steel.
Gee maybe they should have investigated it first before going on TV and blasting it like it was a proven fact.
You OCTASSes are so full of shit, but entertaining none the less!

 

[P F Tinmore]

WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG

You sir , are WRONG

Yes you are. Show me the explosions. Show me the free fall. Show me sporadic fires on just 2 floors.

You are so wrong you will never see what is right.

Near-freefall collapse violates laws of physics. Fire induced collapse is not consistent with observed collapse mode.


Nathan Lomba P.E., S.E., M.ASCE, states:

"I began having doubts about, so called, official explanations for the collapse of the WTC towers soon after the explanations surfaced. The gnawing question that lingers in my mind is: How did the structures collapse in near symmetrical fashion when the apparent precipitating causes were asymmetrical loading? The collapses defies common logic from an elementary structural engineering perspective. “If” you accept the argument that fire protection covering was damaged to such an extent that structural members in the vicinity of the aircraft impacts were exposed to abnormally high temperatures, and “if” you accept the argument that the temperatures were high enough to weaken the structural framing, that still does not explain the relatively concentric nature of the failures."
source-A&EFor 9-11 truth

The NIST report does not explain the collapse of WTC 7 in any credible scientific manner.

Funny, those were my first thoughts when I saw the collapse.

 

[Patriot911]

WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG

You sir , are WRONG

Yes you are. Show me the explosions. Show me the free fall. Show me sporadic fires on just 2 floors.

You are so wrong you will never see what is right.

Near-freefall collapse violates laws of physics. Fire induced collapse is not consistent with observed collapse mode.


Nathan Lomba P.E., S.E., M.ASCE, states:

"I began having doubts about, so called, official explanations for the collapse of the WTC towers soon after the explanations surfaced. The gnawing question that lingers in my mind is: How did the structures collapse in near symmetrical fashion when the apparent precipitating causes were asymmetrical loading? The collapses defies common logic from an elementary structural engineering perspective. “If” you accept the argument that fire protection covering was damaged to such an extent that structural members in the vicinity of the aircraft impacts were exposed to abnormally high temperatures, and “if” you accept the argument that the temperatures were high enough to weaken the structural framing, that still does not explain the relatively concentric nature of the failures."
source-A&EFor 9-11 truth

The NIST report does not explain the collapse of WTC 7 in any credible scientific manner.

The NIST report did an excellent job of explaining the collapse. You dumbshits couldn't understand anything scientific no matter how much hand holding anyone does.

 

[Patriot911]

WRONG WRONG WRONG WRONG

You sir , are WRONG

And that is all Triton has; whining like a little bitch that everyone else is wrong, yet he can't figure out why they are wrong and he is right. I've seen two year olds with better cognative ability and better debate skills.

LOL this coming from a bald face caught redhanded lying troll!?

That would be you. You tried to brand me a liar and got your ass kicked so hard you should be tasting shit.

How many honest credible people and sources does one have to show you that there is REASONABLE DOUBT that the NIST and OCT is FULL OF SHIT Parrot?
Washington's Blog

COULD the NIST be wrong? Sure. Do your bullshit theories make any sense or fit the facts? Not by a long shot and everyone knows it. Have any of you lazy fuckers ever presented an actual study that has been peer reviewed like the NIST study was? I didn't think so.

BTW have you guys straightened out the little rift you guys caused by saying the fires melted the steel? After all the subscribe to your OCT don't they??

See, unlike you immature retards who take everything said on the conspiratard sites at face value no matter when written, we look at the facts and adjust to the known evidence. That is why you will always be the bitch and I will always be the bull. You'll never know what it is like to be a man.

Oh wait, you guys changed the story? Oh I see, got caught in another lie so you had to say it only weakened the steel.

I've NEVER said the steel melted. I wouldn't have said it even back then. See, you silly fucks pretend anything said by anyone who believes the government story speaks for all of us. Yet another reason nobody believes a word out of your lying shithole.

Gee maybe they should have investigated it first before going on TV and blasting it like it was a proven fact.

Yeah, that's why you had to take quotes from the days and weeks right after 9/11. Your childish antics don't fool anyone. You're still just a piece of shit traitorous liar.

You OCTASSes are so full of shit, but entertaining none the less!

Well, you would be the expert on being full of shit seeing as how you are, but you're also a known proven liar so everyone will automatically assume you're lying now as well, which you are.

Ever decide how everyone who saw molten metal can automatically determine that it is indeed molten steel instead of some other metal? No? Surprise surprise.

 

[Patriot911]

Yes you are. Show me the explosions. Show me the free fall. Show me sporadic fires on just 2 floors.

You are so wrong you will never see what is right.

Near-freefall collapse violates laws of physics. Fire induced collapse is not consistent with observed collapse mode.


Nathan Lomba P.E., S.E., M.ASCE, states:

"I began having doubts about, so called, official explanations for the collapse of the WTC towers soon after the explanations surfaced. The gnawing question that lingers in my mind is: How did the structures collapse in near symmetrical fashion when the apparent precipitating causes were asymmetrical loading? The collapses defies common logic from an elementary structural engineering perspective. “If” you accept the argument that fire protection covering was damaged to such an extent that structural members in the vicinity of the aircraft impacts were exposed to abnormally high temperatures, and “if” you accept the argument that the temperatures were high enough to weaken the structural framing, that still does not explain the relatively concentric nature of the failures."
source-A&EFor 9-11 truth

The NIST report does not explain the collapse of WTC 7 in any credible scientific manner.

Funny, those were my first thoughts when I saw the collapse.

Did you ever bother to read the NIST report to find out how it was possible? I know none of the other truthtards have despite their claims. It does explain a lot if you're willing to approach it with an open mind instead of believing it to be crap before you even try.

 

[eots]

near-freefall collapse violates laws of physics. Fire induced collapse is not consistent with observed collapse mode.


Nathan lomba p.e., s.e., m.asce, states:

"i began having doubts about, so called, official explanations for the collapse of the wtc towers soon after the explanations surfaced. the gnawing question that lingers in my mind is: How did the structures collapse in near symmetrical fashion when the apparent precipitating causes were asymmetrical loading? the collapses defies common logic from an elementary structural engineering perspective. “if” you accept the argument that fire protection covering was damaged to such an extent that structural members in the vicinity of the aircraft impacts were exposed to abnormally high temperatures, and “if” you accept the argument that the temperatures were high enough to weaken the structural framing, that still does not explain the relatively concentric nature of the failures."
source-a&efor 9-11 truth

the nist report does not explain the collapse of wtc 7 in any credible scientific manner.

funny, those were my first thoughts when i saw the collapse.

did you ever bother to read the nist report to find out how it was possible? I know none of the other truthtards have despite their claims. It does explain a lot if you're willing to approach it with an open mind instead of believing it to be crap before you even try.

still pretending you read the nist report

 

[P F Tinmore]

Near-freefall collapse violates laws of physics. Fire induced collapse is not consistent with observed collapse mode.


Nathan Lomba P.E., S.E., M.ASCE, states:

"I began having doubts about, so called, official explanations for the collapse of the WTC towers soon after the explanations surfaced. The gnawing question that lingers in my mind is: How did the structures collapse in near symmetrical fashion when the apparent precipitating causes were asymmetrical loading? The collapses defies common logic from an elementary structural engineering perspective. “If” you accept the argument that fire protection covering was damaged to such an extent that structural members in the vicinity of the aircraft impacts were exposed to abnormally high temperatures, and “if” you accept the argument that the temperatures were high enough to weaken the structural framing, that still does not explain the relatively concentric nature of the failures."
source-A&EFor 9-11 truth

The NIST report does not explain the collapse of WTC 7 in any credible scientific manner.

Funny, those were my first thoughts when I saw the collapse.

Did you ever bother to read the NIST report to find out how it was possible? I know none of the other truthtards have despite their claims. It does explain a lot if you're willing to approach it with an open mind instead of believing it to be crap before you even try.

I've read some of it. They did not address a symmetrical collapse.