One for the frenchperson

#1
...and the conspiracy loons are off again:

http://www.i-am-bored.com/bored_link.cfm?link_id=32616

Does anyone seriously expect a building that was it by an airliner to sit nice and quietly until the fire weakens it and it collapses? Secondary explosions etc are surely to be expected. I've seen a shed fire with multiple booms, pops and flashes of flame. I would expect nothing BUT secondary explosions from an office building when you consider the services, stores and materials contained within.

Would still love to know how one of the worst leaking administrations on the planet could keep this lot a secret but I'm sure Frenchperson and his cohorts will be along to "explain" shortly :roll: :roll:


Awaiting incoming and a visit from the black ops boys to silence me. :threaten:
 
#4
Why would they then go to the lengths of killing themselves by crashing a hijacked airliner into the buildings? Anyone who says that explosives were there has a very wrong idea of the ease of hiding large amounts of explosive material.
 
#6
Closet_Jibber said:
I thought it was a given that terrorists may have also planted explosives on site???
I'll requote myself and highlight a word.

I do say that as sadly unlike you lot I was not involved or even in the USA at the time so don't know the full facts!
 
#7
Of course it is a given that they 'may' have planted explosives, in exactly the same way they 'may' have been waving to George Bush out the window or they 'may' have visited the moon on their way there.

There were no explosives.
 
#8
I do say that as sadly unlike you lot I was not involved or even in the USA at the time so don't know the full facts!

Hah! They ALL say that, don't they? What's to say you weren't whispering a codeword down the phone to them to activate their previously-stored-under-hypnosis automaton actions, eh?

We know what you lizard-people are up to..................
 
#9
jew_unit said:
Of course it is a given that they 'may' have planted explosives, in exactly the same way they 'may' have been waving to George Bush out the window or they 'may' have visited the moon on their way there.

There were no explosives.
and you know this as you were inside both towers at the time of the attacks.

Fair one! I should have realised that the chances of somebody being present (Who is qualified enough to say without doubt) at the time on 9/11 would be kind enough to survive, then come and post on arrse.

So please PM me your evidence that no explosives were used. As I thought that was something that could never be ruled out as the buildings fll in on themselves and crushed most of the evidence.
 
#10
Closet_Jibber said:
jew_unit said:
Of course it is a given that they 'may' have planted explosives, in exactly the same way they 'may' have been waving to George Bush out the window or they 'may' have visited the moon on their way there.

There were no explosives.
and you know this as you were inside both towers at the time of the attacks.

Fair one! I should have realised that the chances of somebody being present (Who is qualified enough to say without doubt) at the time on 9/11 would be kind enough to survive, then come and post on arrse.

So please PM me your evidence that no explosives were used. As I thought that was something that could never be ruled out as the buildings fll in on themselves and crushed most of the evidence.
I think the COs should open another forum ' Tw@ts Reunited' for all the throbbers joining recently.
 

Sixty

ADC
Moderator
Book Reviewer
#11
Don't suppose one of the Mods could hoop this shite on sight before the usual mentally ill fucktards show up?

Thanks in advance.
 
#14
Pronto_Mike_Uniform said:
...and the conspiracy loons are off again:

http://www.i-am-bored.com/bored_link.cfm?link_id=32616

Does anyone seriously expect a building that was it by an airliner to sit nice and quietly until the fire weakens it and it collapses? Secondary explosions etc are surely to be expected. I've seen a shed fire with multiple booms, pops and flashes of flame. I would expect nothing BUT secondary explosions from an office building when you consider the services, stores and materials contained within.

Would still love to know how one of the worst leaking administrations on the planet could keep this lot a secret but I'm sure Frenchperson and his cohorts will be along to "explain" shortly :roll: :roll:


Awaiting incoming and a visit from the black ops boys to silence me. :threaten:
Yes, the World Trade Center was just like hundreds of garden sheds stacked on top of each other. Most of the casualties were hit by falling lawnmowers and old bikes. :roll:
 
#15
Guns said:
I believe that JFK was shot by Elvis's alien love child but other than that I am fine. Honest
Don't be daft! In 1963, Elvis's alien love child was not old enough to have shot JFK. You must be getting confused with Teddy Kennedy's assassination some 4 1/2 years later, in 1968.
 
#16
Joe_Private said:
Guns said:
I believe that JFK was shot by Elvis's alien love child but other than that I am fine. Honest
Don't be daft! In 1963, Elvis's alien love child was not old enough to have shot JFK. You must be getting confused with Teddy Kennedy's assassination some 4 1/2 years later, in 1968.
That would be Robert Kennedy's assassination AFAIK Ted's still alive (or is he an alien replacement??????)
 
#18
Closet_Jibber said:
jew_unit said:
Of course it is a given that they 'may' have planted explosives, in exactly the same way they 'may' have been waving to George Bush out the window or they 'may' have visited the moon on their way there.

There were no explosives.
and you know this as you were inside both towers at the time of the attacks.

Fair one! I should have realised that the chances of somebody being present (Who is qualified enough to say without doubt) at the time on 9/11 would be kind enough to survive, then come and post on arrse.

So please PM me your evidence that no explosives were used. As I thought that was something that could never be ruled out as the buildings fll in on themselves and crushed most of the evidence.
What is you'r claim? Make it and I will try and find evidence.
 
#20
So please PM me your evidence that no explosives were used. As I thought that was something that could never be ruled out as the buildings fll in on themselves and crushed most of the evidence.
Rather than demand someone prove a negative, could you explain how you think large quantities of explosives were brought into a building where 100,000 people worked, without anyone noticing?
 

Latest Threads