Thread: 9/11 was an inside job

no offense terry, you are a nice guy and I mean no harm or disrespect

but if I wanted an expert for a missile attack or a military expert in warfare, I wouldn't go ask for advice to the bakery shop, or even my favorite pattiserie store

now, to answer your silly question about the missing plane, I told you already, it's missing where the space aliens hides with the tooth fairy

that little logic trick will probably be lost on you like it was for Quack Quack and that other thick Australian who claim to have an education

UA Flight 93 11th September 2001.

Air traffic control and ground shots of a small hole in the ground at Shankesville.

Tower 1 WTC 8.46 am 11th Sept 2001

Airliner, jet, or drone?

Another view of Tower 1 with analysis.

Just for government stooges, a quick rundown of 9/11 events.

Originally Posted by ENT

So far, no evidence of exists of a strike on the Pentagon building.

Thank you for finally admitting that. Case closed.

Originally Posted by ENT

Moe ron the "missing" planes.

Thank you, also, for admitting to being a moron.

More sheer stupidity from EMP.....the empty creature who needs to troll in order to find some degree of fulfillment.

and like worms, Quack Quack and Latin Dancer crawl out of their hole

An excellent article which compares the "cookie cutter" profile seen on WTC 1(South tower) with that of a Boeing 767-223 and a drone .

The angle of attachment of wings to fuselage in both aircraft differ.

A Boeing 767 could not have made the cut into the tower shown.

Eye witnesses described the first plane as a jet or Cessna, not an airliner.

Flight 11 Unveiled - The X-11 Drone WTC 911

Yet another stupendously stupid and worthless article from EMP, retard extraordinairre and forum fvckwit.

Originally Posted by Latindancer

I am retard extraordinairre and forum fvckwit.

There, fixed that for ya fella.

Those two trolls along with Terry filled three pages of this thread with sheer meaningless bullshit yesterday.

Both Latindancer and Cthulhu, self declared claimed experts in science, doing their best to screw up the French language and Terry the flagellant fireman throwing in his ten cents worth of bolix.

Terry and LD, both Ockers. and Cthwack-quack a likely sepo, all in their desperately menopausal 50's, haven't got a brain between them.
Do you practice firelighting tricks. Terry? If so, you could rub up against those two boy scout mates of yours and get a conflagration going by giving them a good rub together. After all, the've got wooden heads. Then after a confabulation you cold all flagelate each other happily

The three of them are obvious right wing working class sheep, normaloids with no hope but to follow official guidlines, not a glimmer of independent thought in their lives.

Sad sack government wannabe brown-nosers.

Originally Posted by Latindancer

What makes you think I'm trying to reason anymore ? (see my last post)

No one reading your posts believe that you're capable of reasoning at all.

Here's a quick and detailed breakdown of ENT's tenuous grasp of physics, as explained by this blog:

Truthers and Looney Tune Physics « Deep Thoughts on Business, the Internet, Politics – Lorien1973.Com

"Truthers and Looney Tunes Physics"


For some reason, I spend time debating with Truthers about 9/11. One of their points of contention is the Pentagon and that it was not hit by a plane. One of the primary reasons they claim this is that there is no wing hole in the wall of the pentagon and only the fuselage seemed to make any damage to the wall.

I tell them, usually, their knowledge of physics should not be based off of cartoons. In a cartoon, if Wile E Coyote hit a wall, this happened:



But this is not reality. When a plane hits a wall, it will not look like this:



Why you ask? Makes sense doesn't it? There are wings, they should leave an impression right? Quite simply, planes are meant to travel through the air, not concrete. The mass of a plane is in the fuselage, so when it hit the pentagon you aren't going to see holes in the wall where they hit.

But we saw them on the WTC towers. And? The WTC's front face was a facade - very thin. When the plane hit the steel supports, the planes disintegrated, as you'd expect. Purdue University has a great series of pictures on what happened to Flight 77 when it hit the pentagon.

It makes for great reading. Unless you are Daffy Duck and want to believe the Looney Tunes are a true representation of reality. But, I have a feeling that the truth and the Truthers do not intersect too often, so this is the only image we'll see of them:

Being a complete fool with absolutely no scientific knowledge or training you let the cat out of the bag re. your claims to such by using the word scientistic instead of scientific.

Your claims to such a background are totally fraudulent.

Referring to your above comment concerning planes leaving an impression upon impact, read the explanation given in my above post # 786
Flight 11 Unveiled - The X-11 Drone WTC 911

You refer to Daffy Duck (aka quack-quack), your previous nik on this forum.

Quote Cthulhu, above; "It makes for great reading. Unless you are Daffy Duck and want to believe the Looney Tunes"

Yup, you're still as loony as you ever were, troll.

Excellent, and appropriately titled blog about dissecting "truther" utter BS:

More "Truther" BS Exposed « Truthers are Sanity Challenged

"Tuthers are Sanity Challenged"

In it, the various "truther" argumentative strategies are exposed, particularly their lies, and misdirection a (they really *do* all read from the same script, it turns out).

Entertaining reading - an no worries, ENT will never click on that link to actually read it.

Oh, ENT, thank you so much for continuously confirming your Asperger's diagnosis -- seriously, you should never have stopped taking those meds.

Great scientistic comments and link, dumbo.

Originally Posted by Cthulhu

Quite simply, planes are meant to travel through the air, not concrete.

That's probably the most intelligent thing you've said - well done daffy.

Originally Posted by Cthulhu

The WTC's front face was a facade - very thin.

Yup, no building regulations up that high.

Originally Posted by Cthulhu

Unless you are Daffy Duck

Finally you see the light.

Originally Posted by ENT

Great scientistic comments and link, dumbo.

I'll let you in on a secret....

Ready?

scientistic was some beautiful bait I dangled in front of you, along with the verbage and style of the rest of those posts - you never even noticed that I was pulling your leg with my tangents on time-differences, distances to Mars, etc....

Oh, and by the way, despite you repeating that I said scientistic ad nauseam, I actually *never* said that word. In fact, the word I used was scientistically, and it was packed into an entire sentence, using verbiage "like Numbers and stuff", meant to be easily interpreted by any socially *normal* person as *SATIRE*.

This may be the time to remind you that people with Aspergers have difficulty with:

Figurative language
Metaphor and simile
Sarcasm
Facial expressions
Body language

I can only imagine how entertaining you must be in person, with your inability to interpret facial expressions and body language - undoubtedly, I think it's plain to see why your family members have distanced themselves... at lightspeed.

Let me guess, you're well-known now as "that crazy uncle". Right?

"It's just a flesh wound!"

Originally Posted by ENT

Those two trolls along with Terry filled three pages of this thread with sheer meaningless bullshit yesterday.

No I didn't, made fok all posts and I resent that accusation.

I'm telling DD on ya.