South Park did something that no one ever could

Wow. Not only are you a tool, you're a hypocrite. Twisting things and giving half-truths is all your "theories" have to offer. It's easy to make stories up if you're not going give all the information or the complete story. IE think Michael Moore, who runs a business of convincing the gullible/ignorant/retards of the world.

Oh, and if you dare answer me that I'm:

a)retarded

b)need to open my eyes

c)need to read more

d)all of the above

You definitely need to start listening when sensible people try to give you an opinion. Or else, whatever, have fun in your basement
 
see yesterday someone went number 2 instead of number 1, add 2 and 1 to 911 and you get 914, drop the 4 and you get th score kyle got on his spelling test 12 days after 9/11, who had the most to gain from 9/11, Kyle. Who was no where to be found the morning the towers fell, Kyle. Who dropped a duce in the Urinal, Kyle.
 
I can't believe you actually take this bullshit site seriously.

They claim "Osama Bin Laden worked for the CIA as Tim Osman."

You honestly believe that?

I'm glad south park ripped on 9/11 conspiracists, they have it coming to them. They'll believe even the most clearly biased sites (like the one quoted.)

I'm no fan of president bush, but your retarded if you think he was behind 9/11. Clues were probably neglected over the past decade, but theories of direct government involvment in 9/11 is just ridiculous.
 
davepooponyou.jpg
 
haha i was hella blazed last night and saw it for the first tim e it confused me hella but it was hella funny when Mr. Mackey was like mmmmmmk you think its funny to leave a little mud monkey in the urnal? hhahahahhaaha o maaan im still laughing about that
 
i agree. i love fucking up these conspiracy theorists, and proving to them that they have no basis to their logic. i can't wait until they all admit defeat and kill themselves.
 
and then admit that they but their butt over the urinal, used thier hands to spread their cheeks and left a chocolate monkey for every one to see
 
that was a light single engine prop plane hitting an apartment building. how the fuck can you make any comparison to a 757 hitting the pentagon?
 
let me just say that i subscribe to some of the 9/11 conspiracy stuff, but i feel that the govt. simply let it happen as a way to invade afghanistan.

they didnt have to orchestrate this whole plot because enough people hate the US that they would give us a reason to.
 
your retarted because you believe it happened the way the governemnt claims simply because you cant fathom it being an inside job even though there is motive,evidence, thousands of experts, including politicans and former generals who believe it was an inside job. the only way a 757 and that plane lidle was flying are similar is that they are both planes. they have no other simalarities.
 
good fucking god you just keep going. you only bring up points that other lunatics (a bit extreme, I know) bring up, but you FAIL to refute pretty much anything else that you cannot find on these obsured websites.

all that you have presented is speculation, and manipulation of words, evidence, and pretty much anything else.

You always try to state something, and when it is refuted (sometimes quite successfully), you misconstrued what they said in effort to back up your claim. Then when you finally give up, you just move on to another point. And when a bunch of those are shot down (once again, quite well), you just lump everything you said into a catagory of fact, like you just did in this instance.

 
The physics are the same dumbass.

Look at at the picture, read what I said, try to come up with some stupid anti-conservatist link. It won't happen because you can't contest what I just said. That's what happens when a plane crashes into a building. It creates a central hole unless the building is like the wtc...glass windows. If it is anything solid (hmm pentagon, bricks, pretty solid.).

Nice try though.
 
There are FAR many more "experts", generals, politicians (just using this conspiracy to their advantage), etc that believe the real truth.

Politicans are just trying to sway this argument to gain popularity and votes.

Again, you're a dumbass.
 
Actually the body-wings weight ratio is a lot closer on the smaller plane. That would mean it would have a better chance of creating a "plane" shape in the building.
 
Excellent job reading my friend! As you can see in my previous post, I explained why there was a print on the WTC, but alas you will still misunderstand what I say.
 
Haggard got it right

it may not be direcly by the goverment but he atleast let that come by so like that he can have more power and shit...

 
Yeah it does you fucking idiot because structually they are the same. The only difference is size and engines. All planes have essentially the same construction. Try and argue with me im a pilot and you know nothing.
 
nope your wrong. A wing is constructed like this on any plane. A main spar which carries the load and gives the wing strength is located about 2/3 forward in the wing it goes from wingtip all the way through the fuselage where it is bolted on and continues to the other wingtip. Mounted on the spar are ribs which create the shape of the wing. There are stringers that run from wingtip across each rib and to the fuselage where they stop. This keeps the ribs from twisting. A skin is than placed on top of the ribs to cover the wing and create the required surface area to generate lift. Fuselage construction Is also the same minus the spar.
 
no one took them seriously in the first place...just go read quinny's thread. he destroyed their logic from the inside out.
 
Fuck off Mi(Scratch), seriously, I'm tired of reading your bullshit. Just because you talked to someone face to face, means they are right? And where are all of these links to all these engineering teams reports you speak of? You act like everything that you think is right, and everyone's else theory is wrong, cause you talked to some random guy about it. Get over yourself.

The fact is, the buidling(s) fell at free fall speed (the speed of gravity), only demolition causes buildings to fall that fast. And how exactly did WTC 7 fall if it wasn't demolition? Why didn't the buildings topple over, instead of falling directly on top of themselves?

BTW, Mi(scratch), change your peice of shit icon. For god's sake, that is like the shittiest quality icon I've ever seen.
 
Haha, easy buddy.

Why don't you read what I write and think about it. Rather than dismiss it because it doesn't apply to your stupid conspiracy theory. I have answered both of those stupid questions several times.

The engineering reports are easy to find. Popular Mechanics has links to engineering teams and so do many university websites. I never said I was right solely because I talked to someone face to face, you shouldn't twist my words around, it just makes you look dumb.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top