big red bulls eye on the wtc in 9/11

Trippy said:
Firstly, at this point I strongly doubt you're sufficiently qualified to consider yourself my peer. Generally I expect plebs who wish to address me formally to address me as 'Sir' 'Master' or 'Lord and Saviour'.
Click to expand...


It is reasonable for me to want to settle the issue of whether we are dealing with a regular human being with their regular human opinions, or, whether we are dealing with a delusional fellow who believes that it is Satan.

The only persona in common human experience that wants to be addressed in such a fawning way as described in post 378, is the devil Satan.

Is Trippy desiring to be known as Satan? Yes. or, No.
 
Uno Hoo said:
It is reasonable for me to want to settle the issue of whether we are dealing with a regular human being with their regular human opinions, or, whether we are dealing with a delusional fellow who believes that it is Satan.

The only persona in common human experience that wants to be addressed in such a fawning way as described in post 378, is the devil Satan.

Is Trippy desiring to be known as Satan? Yes. or, No.
Click to expand...

I personally believe Trippy is not Satan.
 
trippy said:
sa has racial conotations.
I've already outlined in plain english the titles that i consider appropriate for you to address me by.

And as far as your 'plainly worded question' goes, i had not deemed it worthy of an answer, mostly because you have yet to demonstrate how it is even remotely implied by anything i've said, or, for that matter, relevant to the thread.

Prove relevance to anything i've said.
Then prove relevance to the thread, and i will reconsider further response.
Click to expand...

uno hoo said:
it is reasonable for me to want to settle the issue of whether we are dealing with a regular human being with their regular human opinions, or, whether we are dealing with a delusional fellow who believes that it is satan.

The only persona in common human experience that wants to be addressed in such a fawning way as described in post 378, is the devil satan.

Is trippy desiring to be known as satan? Yes. Or, no.
Click to expand...

qed
 
MacGyver1968 said:
I personally believe Trippy is not Satan.
Click to expand...

Thanks - consider your contract shredded.

Oh wait, this was supposed to be a PM?

lgmp0163+homer-simpson-doh-the-simpsons-mini-poster.jpg
 
mike47 said:
I gonna sleep. May I say good night to all of you now ?.
Good night and sweet dreams .
Click to expand...

Really they are fakes so I guess the aliens pressuring Bush into a war with AQ was not real either then.....

Come on as he said there are easier ways tom start a war then making a fake tape and staging a masive coverup involving thousands of people if not hundreds of thousands. Hell they could not keep the lid on a handful of soldiers treating pirsoners of war badly. How the hell do you think they they could pull this off.
 
Uno Hoo said:
You have totally failed to provide any references, any sources, any proof of any nature, to back up your wild assertion about the maneuverability of the airplane types associated with twin tower 9/11. I guess that means, according to your own dictates, that you are a scum and must swim back into your own cesspool. Remember to keep your mouth shut or you will get cess in your mouth.
Click to expand...

uno, Ive got my own sources, prove them wrong, or shut the f*ck up. Stop crying uno and man up and prove me wrong.
 
Uno Hoo said:
It is reasonable for me to want to settle the issue of whether we are dealing with a regular human being with their regular human opinions, or, whether we are dealing with a delusional fellow who believes that it is Satan.
Click to expand...
will you shut the fuck up with this satan shit?

edit:
my best bet is to put you on . . . well nevermind.
 
mike47 said:
I did see no evidence from the Administration and their media who kept giving us propaganda with zero fact .
Click to expand...

I see no evidence from twofers who keep giving us their media and disinformation with zero fact.
 
Trippy said:
I see no evidence from twofers who keep giving us their media and disinformation with zero fact.
Click to expand...
I see no facts from you for sure . Believing the Administration and the media propaganda has never been known as a fact factor has it ?!!!.:shrug: .
 
mike47 said:
I see no facts from you for sure . Believing the Administration and the media propaganda has never been known as a fact factor has it ?!!!.:shrug: .
Click to expand...
I see no facts from you for sure . Believing the twofers and their propaganda has never been known as a fact factor has it ?!!!.:shrug:
 
Thanks for another evidence free moment Mike. Trippy has been excellent in posting volumes of facts. He does an excellent job. Mike, you have provided nothing. Why is that?
 
fedr808 said:
uno, Ive got my own sources, prove them wrong, or shut the f*ck up. Stop crying uno and man up and prove me wrong.
Click to expand...

You are already doing such a good job of proving yourself wrong that you don't need my help or help of anybody else. Go, girl!
 
fedr808 believes that a trained pilot is unable to steer a state of the art airplane into a building 200 feet wide, presenting, taking Pythagorean geometry into account, a target about as wide as a football field is long. 300 feet.

Two airplanes ran into two 300 (relatively) foot wide buildings (roughly 1,ooo feet high) on 9-11. de facto, fedr808 is as wrong as Hell. The airplanes hit the buildings. Pure luck? According to fedr808.

Did the airplanes make the buildings fall down? fedr808 has said; it must be true because the two things happened only hours apart!

fedr808 might be wrong. fedr808 might be right. But fedr808 has not produced one sentence of convincing proof that there is a causal effect between the plane crashes and the building demise.

The building(s) structural design was revolutionarily strong. The building(s) were designed to stand after being struck by an aircraft of the type that crashed.

fedr808 has not said one word that is convincing that the aircraft could not have been piloted to hit the buildings. fedr808 has said not one word that is convincing that the crashes were able to cause the fall of buildings designed to resist such assaults.

I am not a man that suffers fools gladly. I am not a man that has very important time to waste arguing with morons.

Figure it out for yourselves.
 
Uno Hoo said:
fedr808 believes that a trained pilot is unable to steer a state of the art airplane into a building 200 feet wide, presenting, taking Pythagorean geometry into account, a target about as wide as a football field is long. 300 feet.

Two airplanes ran into two 300 (relatively) foot wide buildings (roughly 1,ooo feet high) on 9-11. de facto, fedr808 is as wrong as Hell. The airplanes hit the buildings. Pure luck? According to fedr808.

Did the airplanes make the buildings fall down? fedr808 has said; it must be true because the two things happened only hours apart!

fedr808 might be wrong. fedr808 might be right. But fedr808 has not produced one sentence of convincing proof that there is a causal effect between the plane crashes and the building demise.

The building(s) structural design was revolutionarily strong. The building(s) were designed to stand after being struck by an aircraft of the type that crashed.

fedr808 has not said one word that is convincing that the aircraft could not have been piloted to hit the buildings. fedr808 has said not one word that is convincing that the crashes were able to cause the fall of buildings designed to resist such assaults.

I am not a man that suffers fools gladly. I am not a man that has very important time to waste arguing with morons.

Figure it out for yourselves.
Click to expand...

El-wrongo again-o.

What Fedr808 stated here was that he didn't think it was possible for someone piloting an aircraft that size at that speed to hit a specific floor of the WTC, the best they could do was aim for a specific third.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top