there was no moon landing .... discus

[beorhthelm]

if you were face to face with my sister in law and she said to you explain exactly what i saw crash into the south tower? how would you answer?

I don't quite understand what your saying here.

If I met your sister in Law, I would ask her what company she worked for in the WTC.

and the relevence of this is? face it you have nothing.

 

[KZNSeagull]

and the relevence of this is? face it you have nothing.

There is no relevance. Clearly, when meeting an eye witness, the first thing he would do is accuse them of being part of a cover up/hoax. I am not sure that I have the words to describe someone who would do that and I just hope I never meet anyone like that.

 

[readingstockport]

and the relevence of this is? face it you have nothing.

The relevance is another favourite load of bollocks peddaled by the conspiracy nutters. That there were no employees in the centres that day and that over time all the offices had been emptied and the companies had moved out but the buildings were kept on as a sham by the US government and the port authorities inorder to perpertrate this great big hoax.

Face it, colinz is talking utter utter shite.
He has been unable to counter any of the science put to him using REAL science (as opposed to his barely understood pseudo science from the wing nut websites).
He regurgitated shite about aircraft and when confronted by someone who actually flies planes, albeit light aircraft not wide bodies, resorted to the ususal ad hominem.
And someone has now confronted him with evidence of a living breathing witness to the events of that day and instead of addressing the question he throws up a straw man and runs and hides like a good little deludo.

 

[colinz]

The relevance is another favourite load of bollocks peddaled by the conspiracy nutters. That there were no employees in the centres that day and that over time all the offices had been emptied and the companies had moved out but the buildings were kept on as a sham by the US government and the port authorities inorder to perpertrate this great big hoax.

Face it, colinz is talking utter utter shite.
He has been unable to counter any of the science put to him using REAL science (as opposed to his barely understood pseudo science from the wing nut websites).
He regurgitated shite about aircraft and when confronted by someone who actually flies planes, albeit light aircraft not wide bodies, resorted to the ususal ad hominem.
And someone has now confronted him with evidence of a living breathing witness to the events of that day and instead of addressing the question he throws up a straw man and runs and hides like a good little deludo.

You really are over sensitive, you regard being called Biggles & suffering cognitive dissonance as an ad hominem attack.

You can't handle the fact that those eye witnesses were obviously actors (bad ones at that), and the footage is faked.

You can't explain how the plane disappears inside the building, how the Nose cone can exit the building unscathed, and I'm suppose to believe you are a pilot.

One thing in your favour is at least your starting to read my posts on the other threads, so at least your starting to learn something.

 

[colinz]

and the relevence of this is? face it you have nothing.

Nothing about what ?
Show me some authentic footage of something crashing into the tower.
Instead of taking the word of some anonymous person posting on a footy forum, talking about their sister in law.

 

[pastafarian]

Instead of taking the word of some anonymous person posting on a footy forum, talking about their sister in law.

says the anonymous person posting on a footy forum

 

[pastafarian]

[/QUOTE]If I met your sister in Law, I would ask her what company she worked for in the WTC.[/QUOTE]

incredibly irrelevant to the original question that was put to you.
if you are incapable of answering the question just admit it..... there is no need to go off on a different tangent

 

[Pevenseagull]

f***ing hell, idiots who support any kind of World Trade Centre conspiracy has hijacked the thread. IDIOT FEST!!

 

[Pevenseagull]

By the way ..... I've got some bad news for some of you morons regarding alien abductions


you might not like it



but then you might just be f***ing morons

 

[beorhthelm]

Nothing about what ?
Show me some authentic footage of something crashing into the tower.
Instead of taking the word of some anonymous person posting on a footy forum, talking about their sister in law.

thankfully it happens very rarely. there were thousands of witnesses and wreakage of the plane on the ground, not to mention i watched the second one live. i know you think that was faked, but considering the whole incident is far fetched enough the idea they would splice into the TV feed with fake footage is ridiculous. it would be noticed, mainly by the tens of thousands on the ground who didnt see a plane. their silence on the issue is deafening.

 

[readingstockport]

You really are over sensitive, you regard being called Biggles & suffering cognitive dissonance as an ad hominem attack.

You can't handle the fact that those eye witnesses were obviously actors (bad ones at that), and the footage is faked.

You can't explain how the plane disappears inside the building, how the Nose cone can exit the building unscathed, and I'm suppose to believe you are a pilot.

One thing in your favour is at least your starting to read my posts on the other threads, so at least your starting to learn something.

Ahh, so in a sideways way you finally answered him. You would tell his siter in law she is lying and a bad actor.

Well at least we know.

Now f*** off and die moron.

And I've not read any other shite you have posted anywhere, on this board or elsewhere. There is nothing you can teach me except the necessity of a proper science education, even for the developmentally challenged.

 

[colinz]

Ahh, so in a sideways way you finally answered him. You would tell his siter in law she is lying and a bad actor.

Well at least we know.

Now f*** off and die moron.

And I've not read any other shite you have posted anywhere, on this board or elsewhere. There is nothing you can teach me except the necessity of a proper science education, even for the developmentally challenged.

Now f*** off and die moron

& that is not an ad hominem attack ?

There is nothing you can teach me except the necessity of a proper science education, even for the developmentally challenged

What so I can learn how aeroplanes fly through buildings.

 

[Pat McCrotch]

 

[colinz]

If I met your sister in Law, I would ask her what company she worked for in the WTC.[/QUOTE]

incredibly irrelevant to the original question that was put to you.
if you are incapable of answering the question just admit it..... there is no need to go off on a different tangent[/QUOTE]

It's not an irrelevant question, because I'd need to know where her location was & you've not yet said what company she worked for.

 

[readingstockport]

& that is not an ad hominem attack ?

Nope, I and others have quite clearly illustrated your lack of knowledge and understanding BEFORE moving on to attacking yourself as a moron. Ergo, not ad hominem.

What so I can learn how aeroplanes fly through buildings.

Nope, in the hope that you can actually movve away from your childish understanding of science and begin to function in the real world with adults who understand these things.

Congratulations, you have joined looney and dwayne on the ignore list.

 

[colinz]

Nope, I and others have quite clearly illustrated your lack of knowledge and understanding BEFORE moving on to attacking yourself as a moron. Ergo, not ad hominem.



Nope, in the hope that you can actually movve away from your childish understanding of science and begin to function in the real world with adults who understand these things.

Congratulations, you have joined looney and dwayne on the ignore list.

Ahh! diddums poor little Biggles has thrown his toys out of his cot.

 

[pastafarian]

If I met your sister in Law, I would ask her what company she worked for in the WTC

It is completely and utterly irrelevant. She was outside.So stop stalling and just answer the original question......or do you need to know what she was wearing?

im half expecting you to ask exactly where outside.....but you cant be that stupid........can you??

 

[One Love]

It is completely and utterly irrelevant. She was outside.So stop stalling and just answer the original question......or do you need to know what she was wearing?

im half expecting you to ask exactly where outside.....but you cant be that stupid........can you??

To be fair it can't be that difficult for you to find out what firm she was working for, so please find out, tell us and shut the guy up.

 

[colinz]

It is completely and utterly irrelevant. She was outside.So stop stalling and just answer the original question......or do you need to know what she was wearing?

im half expecting you to ask exactly where outside.....but you cant be that stupid........can you??

This is your original post where you said your sister in law worked at the WTC.

well i have a credible witness [MENTION=17480]colinz[/MENTION] my sister in law worked at the WTC complex and saw the second plane hit the WTC.She knows what she saw,its etched on her brain for the rest of her life,she doesnt like to talk about it,but i have seen her have a run in with a "truther" before and it made her cry.so i have a question for you,

if you were face to face with my sister in law and she said to you explain exactly what i saw crash into the south tower? how would you answer?

Are you now saying that she worked at the WTC, but was not at work at the time because she'd been evacuated,

or on her way to work,

or had the day off but lived in the area, or was doing some shopping in the area on her day off.

As for what she claims to have seen, all I could tell her is that it wouldn't have been a Boeing 767.

 

[Frutos]

As for what she claims to have seen, all I could tell her is that it wouldn't have been a Boeing 767.

I genuinely cannot believe the arrogance of this quote.