Semptember the 11th

13. "We were down about a block from the base of the World Trade Center towers about an hour ago. And there was a great deal of concern at that time, the firemen said building number 7 was going to collapse, building number five was in danger of collapsing. And there's so little they can do to try to fight the fires in these buildings, because the fires are so massive. And so much of the buildings continues to fall into the street. When you're down there, Dan, you hear smaller secondary explosions going off every 15 or 20 minutes, and so it's an extremely dangerous place to be."
–CBS-TV News Reporter Vince DeMentri http://terrorize.dk/911/witnesses/911.wtc.secondary.explosions.wmv

14. Well, they said that's (7) fully involved at this time. This was a fully involved building. I said, all right, they're not coming for us for a while. Now you're trapped in this rubble, and you're trying to get a grasp of an idea of what's going on there. I heard on the handy talky that we are now fighting a 40-story building fully involved.

Now you're trapped in the rubble and the guys who are there are fighting the worst high-rise fire in the history of New York or history of the world, probably, I don't know, 40, story building fully involved, I guess that was probably the worst.

I was, needless to say, scared to death that something else was going to fall on us, that this building was going to come down and we were all going to die, after surviving the worst of it. [Note: I deleted the link this account, and searching the net for the text doesn’t turn up anything. This sounds like an account from north tower stairwell B survivor. Anyone who knows for sure, let me know.]

15. And 7 World Trade was burning up at the time. We could see it. ... the fire at 7 World Trade was working its way from the front of the building northbound to the back of the building. There was no way there could be water put on it, because there was no water in the area. –Firefighter Eugene Kelty Jr.
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110261.PDF

16. The time was approximately 11a.m. Both of the WTC towers were collapsed and the streets were covered with debris. Building #7 was still standing but burning. ...We spoke to with a FDNY Chief who has his men holed up in the US Post Office building. He informed us that the fires in building 7 were uncontrollable and that its collapse was imminent. There were no fires inside the loading dock (of 7) at this time but we could hear explosions deep inside. –PAPD P.O. William Connors http://www.thememoryhole.org/911/pa-transcripts/pa-police-reports04.pdf page 69

17. "There's number Seven World Trade. That's the OEM bunker." We had a snicker about that. We looked over, and it's engulfed in flames and starting to collapse.

We're kind of caught in traffic and people and things, and everything's going on. We hear over the fire portable, "Everybody evacuate the site. It's going to collapse." Mark Steffens starts yelling, "Get out of here! Get out of here! Get out of here! We've got to go! We've got to go! It's going to collapse." I turned around, and I piped up real loud and said, "Stay in the frigging car. Roll the windows up. It's pancake collapsing. We'll be fine. The debris will quit and the cloud will come through. Just stay in the car." We pulled the car over, turned around and just watched it pancake. We had a dust cloud but nothing like it was before. –Paramedic Louis Cook http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110103.PDF

(Building 7 fire makes rescuer of NT stairwell victim’s route impassable, just before collapse):

I remember it was bad and I'm going to get to a point where we came back that way on the way up. We couldn't even go that way, that's how bad the fire was, but by the time I was coming back it was rolling, more than a couple of floors, just fully involved, rolling.
...So now it's us 4 and we are walking towards it and I remember it would have at one point been an easier path to go towards our right, but being building 7 -- that must have been building 7 I'm guessing with that fire, we decided to stay away from that because things were just crackling, falling and whatnot. So as I’m going back, that fire that was on my right is now on my left. I’m backtracking and that fire is really going and on the hike towards there, we put down our masks, which at this point started to realize maybe it would have been good thing if we had this mask on the way back, but then again between the fire and about halfway when I was on the way back, I got a radio call from the guys that we left and it was Johnny Colon the chauffeur of 43, who was effecting a different rescue. He was carrying somebody out.

He had called me and said “Hey Jerry don’t try and get back out the way you went in which was big heads up move because he said that building was rolling on top of the building that we were passing. That building was on fire and likely to collapse more too.

Between Picciotto asking me are you sure we can get out this way because it really didn’t look good with that fire and my guy telling me that you better not because of the area we crawled in was unattainable now too. ...we started going back the other way

Q: Would that be towards West Street?

A: That would have been back towards what I know is the Winter Garden....[west] –Firefighter Gerard Suden http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110022.PDF

18. I remember Chief Hayden saying to me, "We have a six-story building over there, a seven-story building, fully involved." At that time he said, "7 has got fire on several floors." He said, "We've got a ten-story over there, another ten-story over there, a six-story over there, a 13-story over there." He just looked at me and said, "**** 'em all. Let 'em burn." He said, "Just tell the guys to keep looking for guys. Just keep looking for the brothers. We've got people trapped. We've got to get them out." –Lieutenant William Ryan http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110117.PDF

19. I walked around the building to get back to the command post and that's when they were waiting for 7 World Trade Center to come down. ...They had three floors of fire on three separate floors, probably 10, 11 and 15 it looked like, just burning merrily. It was pretty amazing, you know, it's the afternoon in lower Manhattan, a major high-rise is burning, and they said 'we know.' –FDNY Chief Thomas McCarthy
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110055.PDF

20. We were champing at the bit," says WCBS-TV reporter Vince DeMentri of his decision to sneak behind police barricades and report from 7 World Trade Center a half-hour before it collapsed. "I knew the story was in there." But after he and his cameraman slipped past officers, they lost all sense of direction. "From outside this zone, you could figure out where everything was," he says. "But inside, it was all destruction and blown-out buildings, and we had no clue. I walked into one building, but I had no idea where I was. The windows were all blown out. Computers, desks, furniture, and people's possessions were strewn all over." He found a picture of a little girl lying in the rubble. Then he realized that No. 7, aflame, was about fifteen to twenty feet ahead of him. "I looked up Barclay Street," he says. "There was nobody out. No bodies, no injured. Nobody. There were mounds of burning debris. It was like opening a broiler." http://nymag.com/nymetro/news/sept11/features/5183/index.html

21. They are worried that number 7 is burning and they are talking about not ceasing operations. –Deputy Commissioner Frank Gribbon http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110167.PDF

22. There were hundreds of firefighters waiting to -- they were waiting for 7 World Trade Center to come down as it was on fire. It was too dangerous to go in and fight the fire. –Assistant Commissioner James Drury http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/9110098.PDF

23. We assisted some FDNY personnel who were beginning to attempt to fight the fire at 7 WTC. We assisted in dragging hose they needed to bring water into the building. –Kenneth Kohlmann PAPD P.O. http://www.thememoryhole.org/911/pa-transcripts/pa-police-reports04.pdf page 26

24. My first thoughts when I came down a little further into the site, south of Chambers Street, was, "Where am I?" I didn't recognize it. Obviously, the towers were gone. The only thing that remained standing was a section of the Vista Hotel. Building 7 was on fire. That was ready to come down. –Charlie Vitchers, Ground Zero Superintendent http://www.pbs.org/americarebuilds/profiles/profiles_vitchers_t.html

25. The whole south side of Seven World Trade had been hit by the collapse of the second Tower, and there was fire on every floor." – Fire Captain Brenda Berkman (Susan Hagen and Mary Carouba, Women at Ground Zero, 2002, p. 213)

26. At that point, Seven World Trade had 12 stories of fire in it. They were afraid it was going to collapse on us, so they pulled everybody out. We couldn't do anything. – Firefighter Maureen McArdle-Schulman (Susan Hagen and Mary Carouba, Women at Ground Zero, 2002, p. 17)

Originally posted by DarkC
Yes, I saw. I'm not blind, thank you very much.

You sure? I thought you was who said that the two Bin Ladens in the photos were the same

I think I'll debate.

Then do so, but make sure you use common sense and logic first. Thats important.

What acting? You are, from what you've shown us.

Yeh im the bad guy who never recieves abuse. We get it.

Hmmm, and how many times have this insulting-you affair resulted from you hurling out a barb first?

Rarely. Show me the rare occasions where i have insulted someone first and then i'll show you 20 posts where people have made fun of my posts and threads.

Originally posted by KharmaDog
Please do. Please post any false statements or distorted information or outright lies that I have posted. PLease also (as I do when I call you on your bullsh*t) back your argument up with solid information.

I look forward to you doing this. But there better be:
A/ a few examples
B/ no backing your arguments up from conspiracy websites
C/ direct references and quotes from me with no creative editing.
D/ an effort to show the validity or lack of credibility of both my sources and the sources you choose to back your info up.

I wager that you back down or fail to make a good case.

oh believe me i could do that kharma. i can show you are no different than me. but im not here to start more petty arguments.

Originally posted by DarkC
*snort* He just backed up one of his arguments in "Screw Loose Change" with a government paranoia website.

oh of course. any website that isnt official gets called paranoia. Genius🙂

your bias sites are ok though right?

Originally posted by lord xyz
🤨 I'm CLEARLY not saying that. I'm saying you're a spammer who doesn't review sources like a real researcher would do. You're information is far from credible. I have woken up, you need to grow up, and slow down.

I don't spam and you havent grown up though. its clear

oh i like your sig, when did i say 'inglish' though? spreading Dis-info there xys? you would be good in the government.

and xyz you wally. you can say and post what you want but at the end of the day, small fires, or large fires dont bring down modern buildings. ESPECIALLY in that small amount of time

we dotn need facts here people. only common sense. common sense. common sense. logic. common sense.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/911/wtc7.htm

After This Fiasco, How Can We Trust Anything They Told Us About 9/11?
.............

'The fiasco of a BBC journalist reporting in advance that Building 7 had collapsed as it loomed large behind her strikes at the very root of how the media were complicit in acting as facilitators for the official myth that was manufactured on 9/11. After this debacle, how can we trust anything we were told about September 11?'

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/february2007/270207trustanything.htm

5 reasons to deny 9/11. decribes most people on here perfectly

1.Comfort.

Comfortable people do not dissent. They rarely question authority, unless overwhelmed by fleeting pangs of conscience or momentary madness. Why would any self-satisfied comfortable person want to discomfort themselves? The whole purpose of a comfortable person is to acquire more comfort or to ensure a perpetual state of comfort. Why would comfortable people, contented with their place in the world--a comfortable home, a well-paid job, respect within their community--want to upset that equilibrium? Why would any comfortable person question his government about circumstances he cannot control? Why risk discomfort, disapproval, suspension from work and community scorn simply to question something like 911 that cannot be changed? To a comfortable person, that makes no sense at all.

2. Complacency.

Complacent people rarely make waves, create dissension, cause an uproar. They prefer not to talk about politics and religion, nor to do any independent thinking. Because a complacent mind is a safe mind. Complacent people prefer "to get along to go along," to swim with the tide, to run with the herd, to blow with the wind. They like to mind their own business which, on the face of it, seems like common sense and the safe thing to do. Because to get passionately involved in any cause or belief (aside from sports) would require a lapse of complacency. Complacency, unlike comfort, requires a more practiced inertia. To accept the state or the status quo, with mild complaint--but only the mildest, acceptable complaint--and plod along like herd animals. To dare question the state, or debate popular consensus, is not only foolish and insane but borderline treasonable to the complacent citizen.

3. Cowardice

Cowardice is the most understandable of denials of 911. It is convenient to deny 911 out of fear, because to do otherwise, to look at the evidence presented by the most powerful empire in the world, requires a heretical leap of independent thought. A mental insurrection worthy of revolutionaries, pioneers, patriots and outraged citizens. But cowards cannot sift the evidence and arrive at an independent conclusion. They have been beaten and cowed and, at most, can only cringe and howl in derision from the rear. At every original thought or contrary opinion (contrary to the state and the corporate media that is), they howl and scurry away, anonymously. At best, their children may lead them, by example, into a braver realm of thought.

4. Conviction

Conviction--to be convinced of one's rightness---and the courage to assert it, is admirable even if one is proven wrong eventually. A great many believers (in the official story) are as convinced of the Kean Commission version of 911, as we skeptics are of their error. These believers claim, with many, many intelligent professionals to back up their claims, that steel does weaken and melt from fuel fires and big buildings do indeed collapse, that falling concrete does indeed pulverize into micro-sized dust particles, that incompetence does not necessary indicate evil. We truthers, in turn, claim the mass of incriminating evidence overwhelms the experts and trumps their testimony. So who is more right? Time will tell. But the only way we will ever convince these true believers (our co-workers, friends and family) of the falsity in the official, government version of 911 is to show them what a lying, poisonous, murderous, mercenary, fear-mongering, war-mongering, fascistic group they have put their faith in. And every day more and more disgruntled citizens are becoming convinced we may have a point.

5. Collusion

A secret activity undertaken by two or more people for the purpose of FRAUD. The definition of collusion. The US media colludes every day. They collude with the White House or Pentagon or State Department to perpetrate some fraud or other. And many of us collude right along with them. The smallest group of 911 deniers, numbering several million, which I call the Colluders, includes many who have worked for the US government, still work for the US government, receive huge chunks of money from that government to fund their work, depend on contracts from the US government and, more often than not, support the official US government line. Many of them, working high in the US government--NSA, FBI, CIA, Pentagon officials---know exactly what happened on 911 but keep quiet. Colluding all the way to the bank. Privately they may not agree with many aspects of the official version but, publicly, they will NOT utter a single statement, will NOT go on record, publicly, with a single dissenting word. Not while there is money to be made. And so, of all the 911 deniers, they are most complicit with the crime.
Comfort. Complacency. Cowardice. Conviction. Collusion. And sometimes a combination of all of them.
Footnote: A tip of the cap to those activists at 911Blogger.com Not only do I read the columns posted there but the remarks (an addiction) and sneers from the trolls. This column is dedicated to the 911 activists everywhere, in recognition of the five types of people you run up against every day--and I mean against.
Aging iconoclast, antiwar leftist, touchy-feely environmentalist and admirer of pioneers, eccentrics and free thinkers, Douglas Herman wrote the slow-moving crime novel, The Guns of Dallas, available at

Originally posted by Deano
I don't spam and you havent grown up though. its clear

oh i like your sig, when did i say 'inglish' though? spreading Dis-info there xys? you would be good in the government.

last post of this page.

Originally posted by Deano
5 reasons to deny 9/11. decribes most people on here perfectly

[b]1.Comfort.

Comfortable people do not dissent. They rarely question authority, unless overwhelmed by fleeting pangs of conscience or momentary madness. Why would any self-satisfied comfortable person want to discomfort themselves? The whole purpose of a comfortable person is to acquire more comfort or to ensure a perpetual state of comfort. Why would comfortable people, contented with their place in the world--a comfortable home, a well-paid job, respect within their community--want to upset that equilibrium? Why would any comfortable person question his government about circumstances he cannot control? Why risk discomfort, disapproval, suspension from work and community scorn simply to question something like 911 that cannot be changed? To a comfortable person, that makes no sense at all.

2. Complacency.

Complacent people rarely make waves, create dissension, cause an uproar. They prefer not to talk about politics and religion, nor to do any independent thinking. Because a complacent mind is a safe mind. Complacent people prefer "to get along to go along," to swim with the tide, to run with the herd, to blow with the wind. They like to mind their own business which, on the face of it, seems like common sense and the safe thing to do. Because to get passionately involved in any cause or belief (aside from sports) would require a lapse of complacency. Complacency, unlike comfort, requires a more practiced inertia. To accept the state or the status quo, with mild complaint--but only the mildest, acceptable complaint--and plod along like herd animals. To dare question the state, or debate popular consensus, is not only foolish and insane but borderline treasonable to the complacent citizen.

3. Cowardice

Cowardice is the most understandable of denials of 911. It is convenient to deny 911 out of fear, because to do otherwise, to look at the evidence presented by the most powerful empire in the world, requires a heretical leap of independent thought. A mental insurrection worthy of revolutionaries, pioneers, patriots and outraged citizens. But cowards cannot sift the evidence and arrive at an independent conclusion. They have been beaten and cowed and, at most, can only cringe and howl in derision from the rear. At every original thought or contrary opinion (contrary to the state and the corporate media that is), they howl and scurry away, anonymously. At best, their children may lead them, by example, into a braver realm of thought.

4. Conviction

Conviction--to be convinced of one's rightness---and the courage to assert it, is admirable even if one is proven wrong eventually. A great many believers (in the official story) are as convinced of the Kean Commission version of 911, as we skeptics are of their error. These believers claim, with many, many intelligent professionals to back up their claims, that steel does weaken and melt from fuel fires and big buildings do indeed collapse, that falling concrete does indeed pulverize into micro-sized dust particles, that incompetence does not necessary indicate evil. We truthers, in turn, claim the mass of incriminating evidence overwhelms the experts and trumps their testimony. So who is more right? Time will tell. But the only way we will ever convince these true believers (our co-workers, friends and family) of the falsity in the official, government version of 911 is to show them what a lying, poisonous, murderous, mercenary, fear-mongering, war-mongering, fascistic group they have put their faith in. And every day more and more disgruntled citizens are becoming convinced we may have a point.

5. Collusion

A secret activity undertaken by two or more people for the purpose of FRAUD. The definition of collusion. The US media colludes every day. They collude with the White House or Pentagon or State Department to perpetrate some fraud or other. And many of us collude right along with them. The smallest group of 911 deniers, numbering several million, which I call the Colluders, includes many who have worked for the US government, still work for the US government, receive huge chunks of money from that government to fund their work, depend on contracts from the US government and, more often than not, support the official US government line. Many of them, working high in the US government--NSA, FBI, CIA, Pentagon officials---know exactly what happened on 911 but keep quiet. Colluding all the way to the bank. Privately they may not agree with many aspects of the official version but, publicly, they will NOT utter a single statement, will NOT go on record, publicly, with a single dissenting word. Not while there is money to be made. And so, of all the 911 deniers, they are most complicit with the crime.
Comfort. Complacency. Cowardice. Conviction. Collusion. And sometimes a combination of all of them.
Footnote: A tip of the cap to those activists at 911Blogger.com Not only do I read the columns posted there but the remarks (an addiction) and sneers from the trolls. This column is dedicated to the 911 activists everywhere, in recognition of the five types of people you run up against every day--and I mean against.
Aging iconoclast, antiwar leftist, touchy-feely environmentalist and admirer of pioneers, eccentrics and free thinkers, Douglas Herman wrote the slow-moving crime novel, The Guns of Dallas, available at [/B]

That's irrelevant, because it's not evidence whatsoever of anything. It's, once again, calling people who disagree with him idiots/sheep/ignorant.

And Deano, WTC7 was missing part of it's foundation, in addition to being on fire.

Originally posted by Kinneary
That's irrelevant, because it's not evidence whatsoever of anything. It's, once again, calling people who disagree with him idiots/sheep/ignorant.

And Deano, WTC7 was missing part of it's foundation, in addition to being on fire.

Originally posted by Black Dalek
God, why can't people just accept pissed off muslims caused 9-11? Well I do remember 1/4 the population IS retarded..

Why do people keep bringing back this old dead thread?
Because its obviously a fairy tale invented by the government thats why. 🙄 the population that accepts THAT wild theory are the retarded ones.

oh and Deano,why are you still bothering with these sheep who live in denial about the truth?they dont want to hear the truth and its already been proven countless of times by others on this thread many pages back they are in denial,dont bother with them.you just end up having to repeat the same thing over and over to them because they choose to conviently ignore evidence and facts.

Originally posted by Deano
5 reasons to deny 9/11. decribes most people on here perfectly

[b]1.Comfort.

Comfortable people do not dissent. They rarely question authority, unless overwhelmed by fleeting pangs of conscience or momentary madness. Why would any self-satisfied comfortable person want to discomfort themselves? The whole purpose of a comfortable person is to acquire more comfort or to ensure a perpetual state of comfort. Why would comfortable people, contented with their place in the world--a comfortable home, a well-paid job, respect within their community--want to upset that equilibrium? Why would any comfortable person question his government about circumstances he cannot control? Why risk discomfort, disapproval, suspension from work and community scorn simply to question something like 911 that cannot be changed? To a comfortable person, that makes no sense at all.

2. Complacency.

Complacent people rarely make waves, create dissension, cause an uproar. They prefer not to talk about politics and religion, nor to do any independent thinking. Because a complacent mind is a safe mind. Complacent people prefer "to get along to go along," to swim with the tide, to run with the herd, to blow with the wind. They like to mind their own business which, on the face of it, seems like common sense and the safe thing to do. Because to get passionately involved in any cause or belief (aside from sports) would require a lapse of complacency. Complacency, unlike comfort, requires a more practiced inertia. To accept the state or the status quo, with mild complaint--but only the mildest, acceptable complaint--and plod along like herd animals. To dare question the state, or debate popular consensus, is not only foolish and insane but borderline treasonable to the complacent citizen.

3. Cowardice

Cowardice is the most understandable of denials of 911. It is convenient to deny 911 out of fear, because to do otherwise, to look at the evidence presented by the most powerful empire in the world, requires a heretical leap of independent thought. A mental insurrection worthy of revolutionaries, pioneers, patriots and outraged citizens. But cowards cannot sift the evidence and arrive at an independent conclusion. They have been beaten and cowed and, at most, can only cringe and howl in derision from the rear. At every original thought or contrary opinion (contrary to the state and the corporate media that is), they howl and scurry away, anonymously. At best, their children may lead them, by example, into a braver realm of thought.

4. Conviction

Conviction--to be convinced of one's rightness---and the courage to assert it, is admirable even if one is proven wrong eventually. A great many believers (in the official story) are as convinced of the Kean Commission version of 911, as we skeptics are of their error. These believers claim, with many, many intelligent professionals to back up their claims, that steel does weaken and melt from fuel fires and big buildings do indeed collapse, that falling concrete does indeed pulverize into micro-sized dust particles, that incompetence does not necessary indicate evil. We truthers, in turn, claim the mass of incriminating evidence overwhelms the experts and trumps their testimony. So who is more right? Time will tell. But the only way we will ever convince these true believers (our co-workers, friends and family) of the falsity in the official, government version of 911 is to show them what a lying, poisonous, murderous, mercenary, fear-mongering, war-mongering, fascistic group they have put their faith in. And every day more and more disgruntled citizens are becoming convinced we may have a point.

5. Collusion

A secret activity undertaken by two or more people for the purpose of FRAUD. The definition of collusion. The US media colludes every day. They collude with the White House or Pentagon or State Department to perpetrate some fraud or other. And many of us collude right along with them. The smallest group of 911 deniers, numbering several million, which I call the Colluders, includes many who have worked for the US government, still work for the US government, receive huge chunks of money from that government to fund their work, depend on contracts from the US government and, more often than not, support the official US government line. Many of them, working high in the US government--NSA, FBI, CIA, Pentagon officials---know exactly what happened on 911 but keep quiet. Colluding all the way to the bank. Privately they may not agree with many aspects of the official version but, publicly, they will NOT utter a single statement, will NOT go on record, publicly, with a single dissenting word. Not while there is money to be made. And so, of all the 911 deniers, they are most complicit with the crime.
Comfort. Complacency. Cowardice. Conviction. Collusion. And sometimes a combination of all of them.
Footnote: A tip of the cap to those activists at 911Blogger.com Not only do I read the columns posted there but the remarks (an addiction) and sneers from the trolls. This column is dedicated to the 911 activists everywhere, in recognition of the five types of people you run up against every day--and I mean against.
Aging iconoclast, antiwar leftist, touchy-feely environmentalist and admirer of pioneers, eccentrics and free thinkers, Douglas Herman wrote the slow-moving crime novel, The Guns of Dallas, available at [/B]

It sure does describe most people here on this thread.This post hits the nail right on the head about them. 👆

Originally posted by KharmaDog
Please do. Please post any false statements or distorted information or outright lies that I have posted. PLease also (as I do when I call you on your bullsh*t) back your argument up with solid information.

I look forward to you doing this. But there better be:
A/ a few examples
B/ no backing your arguments up from conspiracy websites
C/ direct references and quotes from me with no creative editing.
D/ an effort to show the validity or lack of credibility of both my sources and the sources you choose to back your info up.

I wager that you back down or fail to make a good case.

Originally posted by Deano
oh believe me i could do that kharma. i can show you are no different than me. but im not here to start more petty arguments.

What a lame attempt to get out of putting your foot in your mouth.

If you are acusing me of having posted as you said, it's pretty much your respopnsibility to back it up. I say you knowingly post post lies, misinformation and totally unreliable sources. I say that, and then post how they are lies, I post how they are unreliable, I post evidence that shows your complete lack of research.

You say I post lies and such, yet you don't back it up. This isn't about a petty argument, this is about credibility. I, among others, have posted plenty to put yours in question. You on the other hand are just throwing accusations.

If you are unwilling to back up your statements, then you are a coward or you are aware that they are complete bullsh*t. If you are unable to, well you just prove my point regarding your credibility at any level.

you have spouted bullshit all the time kharma. every post of it. why? you support the official version of events so therefore any argument you bring up which involves that subject, it is full of lies. but of course i would say that. and therefore of course you would say the same about me.

see the problem?

I see him pointing out the actual fallicies of your argument, while you don't do the same for him. You just SAY it's full of crap, without ever pointing out exactly WHAT is the BS.

Originally posted by Deano
You sure? I thought you was who said that the two Bin Ladens in the photos were the same

Originally posted by Deano
Then do so, but make sure you use common sense and logic first. Thats important.

Originally posted by Deano
Yeh im the bad guy who never recieves abuse. We get it.

Originally posted by Deano
Rarely. Show me the rare occasions where i have insulted someone first and then i'll show you 20 posts where people have made fun of my posts and threads.

Originally posted by DarkC
[B]No, I'm sharp enough to realise that lighting, tint, camera angles and quality can really make someone look obscenely different. Have you ever been at a model shoot? Didn't think so.

no you're just rather blind.

Hahahahaha, telling yourself what to do there. You've thrown common sense and logic out the window a while ago.

In your reality

Good to hear.

Im sure

Rarely? Gosh, I wonder why you have made yourself such an infamous presence on these boards then!

yeh rarely. people who tell the truth to ignorant people often leave a infamous presence. 🙂

Originally posted by Deano
no you're just rather blind.

When are you going to come up with a good argument? Oh right. Never..

Originally posted by Deano
In your reality

Go figure.

Originally posted by Deano
yeh rarely. people who tell the truth to ignorant people often leave a infamous presence. 🙂

Argument negated. Oh, my mistake. That nonsense wasn't even an argument.

Originally posted by Deano
you have spouted bullshit all the time kharma. every post of it. why? you support the official version of events so therefore any argument you bring up which involves that subject, it is full of lies.

You have no idea what I believe, even though I've stated my postition multiple times, you have never tried to read any of my posts because you are too busy spouting your stupidity. I am hoping xyz comes along and corrects you as he and I havetalked about this subject and he has read what I have had to say.

Once again, you are misinformed, or suffer from willful ignorance.

Originally posted by Deano
see the problem?

Yes I do, unfortunately, you don't.

Originally posted by DarkC
[B]More petty insulting? Very formal, I'm sure. You're calling me blind because I don't think the photos are absolutely two different people. You have no good argument whatsoever, other than "The guy has a huge nose!".

yes thats why you are blind you see. or ignorant. choose.
yes the guy has a huge nose, and also the fact that everything else is different about him. oh you did no Bin Laden Told Hamza Al-Qaeda that he was not behind 9/11?

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/january2007/180107notbehind.htm

When are you going to come up with a good argument? Oh right. Never..

in your reality you woudnt see it if i did.

No, it's just reality period. You're immersing yourself in your own sightseeing world and putting the reality warping goggles on.

its you who has the blinkers on. the world is ****ed and going down hill. ask yourself why. its not just down to incompetence. its ran by a group of bloodline familys who are hell bent on controllign every last one of us.

Um, no. As far as I'm concerned you're the only one believing this. You think Stalin, Mussolini and Hitler were telling the truth to ignorant people? No.

Argument negated. Oh, my mistake. That nonsense wasn't even an argument.

i havent got an agenda to take over the world though have i? lets hope not.

but one thing i agree with a nazi is:

If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”

so damn true

Originally posted by KharmaDog
[B]You have no idea what I believe, even though I've stated my postition multiple times, you have never tried to read any of my posts because you are too busy spouting your stupidity. I am hoping xyz comes along and corrects you as he and I havetalked about this subject and he has read what I have had to say.

Once again, you are misinformed, or suffer from willful ignorance.

dont talk to me about ignorance

i do know what you believe, its very obvious.haha i can imagine you two talking about me, figuring ways out to try and trap me. . how very sad. i must really upset you. sorry

and yes hopefully more ignorance will come and back up ignorance. you would like that.

yes kharma i have read your posts. and i disagree with 98% of everything you say.

Originally posted by Deano
i do know what you believe, its very obvious.

Prove it, what is it exactly that I believe?

Originally posted by Deano
haha i can imagine you two talking about me, figuring ways out to try and trap me. . how very sad. i must really upset you. sorry

Not only do you flatter yourself, you are lost in self importance, Plus there is no need to trap you, you do that yourself.

Originally posted by Deano
yes kharma i have read your posts. and i disagree with 98% of everything you say.

Once again, you don't even know my position. ANd once again, you have failed to back up any of the claims you have made against me.

You are, once again, worthy of pity.