IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 13th November 2012, 12:40 PM   #41
Starving for Truth
Thinker
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 194
Meanwhile, we may notice Oystein kinda slither back onto the scene and strive to turn the discussion, however philosophically advanced, back into any specific area that does not have full focus on the censorship.

The contextual stealth of the censorship is still being disregarded and ridiculed with every new post that PsyOp shills are swift enough to type. The truth is being buried behind pixel-sucking (staged) performances, debates between alpha shills and beta shills posing as fake truthers, just to keep the deception going.

Last edited by Starving for Truth; 13th November 2012 at 12:47 PM.
Starving for Truth is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th November 2012, 12:40 PM   #42
tfk
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 3,454
Chuck,

First things first. Thanks for your service. I hope all goes well for you.


Originally Posted by Chuck Guiteau View Post
Maybe I'm missing something here and, if so, just chalk it up to the fact that I possess no degrees in mechanical engineering or any related field, but I fail to see where any of this makes a whit's worth of difference.
It just seems to me that regardless of what initiated the collapse, after the first hundredth of a second or so everything would react in the same manner.
If the floor gave way due to loss of structural integrity due to fire/plane damage, or explosives/death rays/tiny ninjas with miniature lasers, gravity would affect the building in exactly the same manner with exactly the same results.
Have I missed something here?
If not then it all comes back to: what caused the floor(s) to lose their integrity to begin with?
I've seen no evidence of explosives ( and I AM experienced in their application).
I've seen no compelling evidence for thermite ( which I've used on a number of occasions), or even a reasonable method to employ the compound in such a manner as to cause a building collapse resembling the WTC collapse.
I've yet to see any footage of a death ray destroying a skyscraper.
That pretty much leaves us with either:
A. Damage from collision/fire.
or
B. Tiny ninjas.
Call me silly, but I'll go with option A.

The only thing that you are missing is the historical path that the CD claims traveled.

Initially, truthers claimed that the twin towers collapsed "at free fall speed". Some still make this silly claim. Mostly they were confusing the fall of the debris that was thrown clear of the footprints & really did fall "at free fall acceleration" for the crush down of the towers themselves. Rather than the true initial acceleration (until the top disappears into the cloud) of about 0.7g.

Many truthers, including Steven Jones, were still laboring under this delusion 3 - 4 years after the event, when Jones came up with the concept of thermite to explain the lack of sounds of explosives.

But the implication of the misunderstanding that the towers crushed the whole way "at G" is that ALL the floors had to be cut in exquisitely timed sequence: not too late (thereby slowing down the collapse) & not too early (thereby causing the tower to collapse from the bottom).

You can still google an interview between Steven Jones & Leslie Robertson on a Colorado radio station where Robertson said "you can't mean this. That'd mean they'd have to cut every floor" & Jones giggles an evasive but affirmative answer.

Then, in quick succession, Jones changed his "absolute, no doubt about it" assertion from thermite, to thermate (higher temp, easier to ignite), back to thermite (no barium found), to nanothermite (not enough energy), to super-nanothermite (somebody uncovered a patent).

Now, both Jones & Harrit agree on two things:

1) super nanothermite used as an igniter, with tons of high explosives doing the heavy lifting. Thereby ignoring the key observable fact ("no BOOMs") that drove this whole nonsense in the first place.

and

2) they've got better things to do, so they're not going to spend much more time on this issue.

How conveeeeeeeeient for them ...


Tom

Last edited by tfk; 13th November 2012 at 12:45 PM.
tfk is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th November 2012, 03:52 PM   #43
tsig
a carbon based life-form
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 39,049
Originally Posted by Starving for Truth View Post
Meanwhile, we may notice Oystein kinda slither back onto the scene and strive to turn the discussion, however philosophically advanced, back into any specific area that does not have full focus on the censorship.

The contextual stealth of the censorship is still being disregarded and ridiculed with every new post that PsyOp shills are swift enough to type. The truth is being buried behind pixel-sucking (staged) performances, debates between alpha shills and beta shills posing as fake truthers, just to keep the deception going.
Could you link to the thread you're reading?
tsig is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th November 2012, 09:35 PM   #44
Chuck Guiteau
Graduate Poster
 
Chuck Guiteau's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 1,846
Originally Posted by tfk View Post

Now, both Jones & Harrit agree on two things:

1) super nanothermite used as an igniter, with tons of high explosives doing the heavy lifting. Thereby ignoring the key observable fact ("no BOOMs") that drove this whole nonsense in the first place.
I guess that would sound plausible to anyone unfamiliar with explosives. But to someone who had any training it would sound ridiculous.
Thermite is an incendiary, and a very effective one, but most high explosives (including C4, TNT,Dynamite,Astrolite,etc.) are initiated by shock, not heat. Using thermite as an initiator would produce exactly the opposite effect. Namely, it would set fire to the HE which, in turn, would just burn itself out. As a matter of fact, that is the recommended way to dispose of them.
I am not that familiar with "super-thermite" but from what I gather rapid deflagration occurs at relatively low temperatures, and the subsequent velocity of the pressure wave exceeds 1100 fps, which would make it useless if the object was to produce a "silent" explosion (which is,IMO, an oxymoron). Standard non-electric detonators initiated by shock tube would be more suitable.
Additionally, blowing successive floors would seem to be pointless as there were 40 odd floors above the collapse point, providing more than enough force to destroy the entire building. Not to mention that the videos of the collapse show no evidence of explosives detonating. Trust me, you shoot hundreds of pounds of HE and it will do a lot more than just puff out a few windows, especially with no prep. And to top it off, blowing dozens of floors sequentially would require an incredibly complicated firing order, violating the KISS principle.
It just doesn't make sense.
Chuck Guiteau is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th November 2012, 10:45 PM   #45
threadworm
Graduate Poster
 
threadworm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,801
Originally Posted by Starving for Truth View Post


I guess I did explain that with posts I made in the past few weeks which you are now helping other shills to push off of the map. Which has the overall effect of old-style censorship but without it appearing to be censorship.

It is keeping those of us who know the truth, virtually ISOLATED from one another, both in the "real time" here, and hence in our real lives as we try to find time to connect the dots or puzzle pieces of the NWO plan for ourselves.
Psychological Operations intrinsically depends on the media. Of which internet forums are now a valuable part. It is difficult enough for new truth seekers on the scene to realize how much the media has clouded their entire value system(s) throughout their lives.

Make no mistakes. The censorship was never designed to be noticed.
Aaah the perennial favourite of the defeated: you'd have seen my argument was correct if all those people hadn't replied to it proving me wrong.

How dare people respond in a thread and hide your genius!!

If you want your nonsense to be unchallenged, get yourself a blog.
threadworm is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th November 2012, 03:59 AM   #46
Dog Town
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 6,862
Originally Posted by Chuck Guiteau View Post
It just doesn't make sense.
It is the Twoof!
Dog Town is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th November 2012, 04:29 AM   #47
000063
Philosopher
 
000063's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 5,398
Originally Posted by Chuck Guiteau View Post
...
That doesn't sound very logical. I've seen numerous videos of the collapse, and none of them showed anything like what I'd expect to see in a timed, sequential detonation. Just comparing the videos with other videos of buildings taken down in this manner would show the obvious differences.
Which is exactly why Truthers never honestly do so.
000063 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th November 2012, 06:31 AM   #48
ProfJoey223
New Blood
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 21
You guys STILL discussing 9/11?

You've GOT to be the only people on the planet who have NOT accepted the simple, verifiable fact that the events of 9/11 were orchestrated by rogue elements within our own government.

Come on, guys.
ProfJoey223 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th November 2012, 07:04 AM   #49
tfk
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 3,454
Chuck,

Thanks for that info. Very interesting.

Originally Posted by Chuck Guiteau View Post
Additionally, blowing successive floors would seem to be pointless as there were 40 odd floors above the collapse point, providing more than enough force to destroy the entire building.
Fewer stories than that. About 12 stories (incl hat truss) plus antenna for North Tower, & 25 stories (incl hat truss) for South Tower.

Neither Jones nor Harrit, the originators of thermite claims, made the claim that "there wasn't enough force". They didn't say much of anything (that I recall) about the required amount of force.

Jones made the CORRECT claim that "IF they crushed down at EXACTLY free fall acceleration, then NO work was done breaking components."

Which has, as a corollary: "IF the towers crushed down NEAR free fall acceleration, then LITTLE work was done breaking components."

The problem is that his premise was wrong. The towers themselves did NOT come down at, or even near, free fall acceleration. They came down, while observable, at an acceleration of ~0.7G. Which means that they resisted the collapse with an average force of ~0.3W (where W = eight of upper block, which was a massive amount of force).


Originally Posted by Chuck Guiteau View Post
I guess that would sound plausible to anyone unfamiliar with explosives.
The fundamental story of the Truth Movement: "Amateurs making assertions that 'seem obvious' to themselves, and who refuse to listen when experts tell them that 'what seems obvious to you happens to be wrong.' "

Originally Posted by Chuck Guiteau View Post
But to someone who had any training it would sound ridiculous.
Thermite is an incendiary, and a very effective one, but most high explosives (including C4, TNT,Dynamite,Astrolite,etc.) are initiated by shock, not heat. Using thermite as an initiator would produce exactly the opposite effect. Namely, it would set fire to the HE which, in turn, would just burn itself out. As a matter of fact, that is the recommended way to dispose of them.
That is very interesting.

Originally Posted by Chuck Guiteau View Post
It just doesn't make sense.
Ain't this the truth.
tfk is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th November 2012, 07:14 AM   #50
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 17,791
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
Excellent proposal and offer, and I wish JM would take it up, but I know that he won't
...
Actually, I don't know this, and he may respond after all.
Oystein is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th November 2012, 07:26 AM   #51
MileHighMadness
Muse
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Just Southeast of Hell
Posts: 694
Originally Posted by ProfJoey223 View Post
You've GOT to be the only people on the planet who have NOT accepted the simple, verifiable fact that the events of 9/11 were orchestrated by rogue elements within our own government.

Come on, guys.
Evidence?
MileHighMadness is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th November 2012, 07:59 AM   #52
Chuck Guiteau
Graduate Poster
 
Chuck Guiteau's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 1,846
To tfk,
You're welcome. Every grunt in VN (myself included) carried a chunk of C4 in his rucksack. Not for blowing things up, but for heating his C-rations. The "heat tabs" the Army provided were damned hard to light up in the rainy season since you had to hold a lit match to them for a couple of seconds, but a little ball of C4 (about the size of a marble) could be ignited with a lit cigarette and would produce a nice hot flame.

Originally Posted by MileHighMadness View Post
Evidence?
I had the evidence, gosh darn it! A photo of George Bush lighting the fuse in front of the WTC. He even signed it with his NWO ID number.
But a tiny ninja disguised as my dog chewed it up and peed on it. I had it, I tell you, I had it! And now, for some reason, nobody believes me.
Probably those ninjas again.
Chuck Guiteau is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th November 2012, 08:02 AM   #53
BasqueArch
Graduate Poster
 
BasqueArch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,871
Originally Posted by ProfJoey223 View Post
You've GOT to be the only people on the planet who have NOT accepted the simple, verifiable fact that the events of 9/11 were orchestrated by rogue elements within our own government.

Come on, guys.
You mean this group?
That's Cheney on the tuba and Bush with skirt on the piccolo.
And Silverstein behind the drapes.

And you misspelled rogue elements - it's rouge elements.
__________________
In Your Guts You Know They're Nuts. "There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn't true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true." -Kierkegaard . "The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane. "- Marcus Aurelius
A Truther is a True Believer convinced by lies. You can't reason someone out of a thing they weren't reasoned into.There's a sucker born every minute-Barnum
BasqueArch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th November 2012, 09:36 AM   #54
twinstead
Penultimate Amazing
 
twinstead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 12,374
Originally Posted by ProfJoey223 View Post
You've GOT to be the only people on the planet who have NOT accepted the simple, verifiable fact that the events of 9/11 were orchestrated by rogue elements within our own government.

Come on, guys.
Perhaps we just have different definitions of "simple, verifiable fact".
__________________
You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your INFORMED opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant. -- Harlan Ellison
twinstead is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th November 2012, 10:11 AM   #55
Ape of Good Hope
Graduate Poster
 
Ape of Good Hope's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,501
Originally Posted by profjoey223 View Post
you've got to be the only people on my planet who have not accepted the simple, verifiable fact that the events of 9/11 were orchestrated by rogue elements within our own government.

Come on, guys.
ftfy
Ape of Good Hope is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th November 2012, 02:45 PM   #56
EventHorizon
Atheist Tergiversator
 
EventHorizon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 3,103
Originally Posted by ProfJoey223 View Post
You've GOT to be the only people on the planet who have NOT accepted the simple, verifiable fact that the events of 9/11 were orchestrated by rogue elements within our own government.

Come on, guys.
My sarcasm detector must be broken. I thought you were being serious when I first read this.
__________________
"One of the hardest parts of being an active skeptic - of anything - is knowing when to cut your losses, and then doing so."
-Phil Plait
EventHorizon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 14th November 2012, 03:23 PM   #57
dafydd
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 35,398
Originally Posted by EventHorizon View Post
My sarcasm detector must be broken. I thought you were being serious when I first read this.
He/she may well be serious. It's hard to spot the difference between real twoofers, trolls and poes.
dafydd is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th November 2012, 02:39 AM   #58
000063
Philosopher
 
000063's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 5,398
Originally Posted by ProfJoey223 View Post
You've GOT to be the only people on the planet who have NOT accepted the simple, verifiable fact that the events of 9/11 were orchestrated by rogue elements within our own government.

Come on, guys.
Good one. Rather convincing.
000063 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 15th November 2012, 03:57 PM   #59
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 26,079
911 truth post and run.
Originally Posted by ProfJoey223 View Post
You've GOT to be the only people on the planet who have NOT accepted the simple, verifiable fact that the events of 9/11 were orchestrated by rogue elements within our own government.

Come on, guys.
Which rogue elements? Who? What? 911 truth can't name names, they only spew idiotic claims, fantasy, and insane nonsense.

Nothing has changed, 911 truth started due to ignorance and remains in ignorance. 911 truth is failure, and fraud.

Got some more similes which fooled you? Got anything to go with 911 truth's 11 years of pathetic failure? No

Last edited by beachnut; 15th November 2012 at 04:00 PM.
beachnut is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th November 2012, 07:20 AM   #60
Tony Szamboti
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 4,976
Originally Posted by BasqueArch View Post
You mean this group?
That's Cheney on the tuba and Bush with skirt on the piccolo.
And Silverstein behind the drapes.

And you misspelled rogue elements - it's rouge elements.
http://www4.samford.edu/belltower/09...arine_band.jpg
No, ProfJoey223 had it right, unless you think those pulling it off were all red as in your photo, where they then could possibly be called rouge rogues.

Rogue definition is

1. a dishonest, knavish person; scoundrel.

2. a playfully mischievous person; scamp.

3. a tramp or vagabond.

4. a rogue elephant or other animal of similar disposition.

5. Biology . a usually inferior organism, especially a plant, varying markedly from the normal.


Rouge definition is

1. any of various red cosmetics for coloring the cheeks or lips.

2. a reddish powder, chiefly ferric oxide, used for polishing metal, glass, etc.


I think we can all agree that those who pulled off 911 were dishonest scoundrels, regardless of who you think they actually were.

Last edited by Tony Szamboti; 16th November 2012 at 07:28 AM.
Tony Szamboti is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th November 2012, 07:45 AM   #61
NoahFence
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Patriot Nation
Posts: 22,131
We don't "think" anything. We know who did it.
NoahFence is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th November 2012, 08:35 AM   #62
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 17,791
Originally Posted by Tony Szamboti View Post
...
Rogue definition is

1. a dishonest, knavish person; scoundrel.
...
I think we can all agree that those who pulled off 911 were dishonest scoundrels, regardless of who you think they actually were.
As a matter of fact, while I agree with knavish and scoundrel, I am not sure they were, on a top level, dishonest. Terrorism works best if you are totally sincere and honest about who you are, what you do and why.
Of course to achieve success you have to employ dishonesty along they way, for example when misleading immigration officers or flight instructors about your plans. But that is merely an operative consideration. In the end, these particular scoundrels were very frank about their heinous act: We have some of their videos and confessions.
Oystein is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th November 2012, 09:35 AM   #63
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
 
jaydeehess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,843
Originally Posted by Tony Szamboti View Post
No, ProfJoey223 had it right, unless you think those pulling it off were all red as in your photo, where they then could possibly be called rouge rogues.

.
You possibly missed the fact that BA was being sarcastic with his play on words.

"rouge elements" OMG! were the French in-on-it too?
jaydeehess is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th November 2012, 11:59 AM   #64
beachnut
Penultimate Amazing
 
beachnut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 26,079
Originally Posted by Tony Szamboti View Post
No, ProfJoey223 had it right, ...

I think we can all agree that those who pulled off 911 were dishonest scoundrels, regardless of who you think they actually were.
19 terrorists, dead on impact. You missed it, like your missing jolt?

You can't figure out 911 after 11 years, it takes minutes.
beachnut is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th November 2012, 02:49 PM   #65
BasqueArch
Graduate Poster
 
BasqueArch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,871
Originally Posted by Tony Szamboti View Post
No, ProfJoey223 had it right, unless you think those pulling it off were all red as in your photo, where they then could possibly be called rouge rogues.

Rogue definition is

1. a dishonest, knavish person; scoundrel.

2. a playfully mischievous person; scamp.

3. a tramp or vagabond.

4. a rogue elephant or other animal of similar disposition.

5. Biology . a usually inferior organism, especially a plant, varying markedly from the normal.


Rouge definition is

1. any of various red cosmetics for coloring the cheeks or lips.

2. a reddish powder, chiefly ferric oxide, used for polishing metal, glass, etc.


I think we can all agree that those who pulled off 911 were dishonest scoundrels, regardless of who you think they actually were.
"rouge" is the French word for "red".
C'mon tomato ketchup.
__________________
In Your Guts You Know They're Nuts. "There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn't true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true." -Kierkegaard . "The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane. "- Marcus Aurelius
A Truther is a True Believer convinced by lies. You can't reason someone out of a thing they weren't reasoned into.There's a sucker born every minute-Barnum
BasqueArch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th November 2012, 06:17 PM   #66
twinstead
Penultimate Amazing
 
twinstead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 12,374
If I could only have one attribute, it would be a sense of humor
__________________
You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your INFORMED opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant. -- Harlan Ellison
twinstead is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th November 2012, 11:26 AM   #67
tfk
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 3,454
Originally Posted by Tony Szamboti View Post
No, ProfJoey223 had it right, unless you think those pulling it off were all red as in your photo, where they then could possibly be called rouge rogues.

Rogue definition is

1. a dishonest, knavish person; scoundrel.

2. a playfully mischievous person; scamp.

3. a tramp or vagabond.

4. a rogue elephant or other animal of similar disposition.

5. Biology . a usually inferior organism, especially a plant, varying markedly from the normal.


Rouge definition is

1. any of various red cosmetics for coloring the cheeks or lips.

2. a reddish powder, chiefly ferric oxide, used for polishing metal, glass, etc.


I think we can all agree that those who pulled off 911 were dishonest scoundrels, regardless of who you think they actually were.

Sure thing, Tony.

For that subset of "dishonest scoundrels" who fit the description of "willful, calculating mass murders who intentionally killed thousands of innocent men, women & children who never did them the slightest harm, who succeeded in igniting fear, hatred & war that killed hundreds of thousands more, and who adamantly wanted to (but fortunately failed to) ignite world-wide religious wars that would have decimated nations for decades & led to the horrific deaths of tens to hundreds of millions."

You sure you want to go all the way out on that "knavish, playfully mischievous" branch?

Ya know, Tony, this is one of those innumerable times over the last years when I've been convinced that this is all a big, insincere game to truthers...

Last edited by tfk; 17th November 2012 at 11:28 AM.
tfk is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:55 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.