Page 3 of 4
Posted: Tue Jun 14, 2005 9:39 pm
by Coreiel
that didnt make any sense i am sure. just as yours didnt really make any sense to me.
Posted: Tue Jun 14, 2005 10:29 pm
by Coreiel
wow. failed yet again
Posted: Tue Jun 14, 2005 10:29 pm
by Coreiel
and for eveyone that missed what duhard did, he posted a link to a picture and fucked it up. for that post deleting faggot.
http://cafe.rapidus.net/gira0024/wanker.bmp
Posted: Tue Jun 14, 2005 10:31 pm
by The HavoX
Not Found
The requested URL /gira0024/wanker.bmp was not found on this server.
Posted: Tue Jun 14, 2005 10:31 pm
by Duhard
Thanks for the heads up...here's the deal wanker...
...suck on this.
Posted: Wed Jun 15, 2005 6:04 am
by [xeno]Julios
http://www.arcticbeacon.com/articles/ar ... /27302.htm
Former Bush Team Member Says WTC Collapse Likely A Controlled Demolition And 'Inside Job'
Highly recognized former chief economist in Labor Department now doubts official 9/11 story, claiming suspicious facts and evidence cover-up indicate government foul play and possible criminal implications.
June 12, 2005
Posted: Wed Jun 15, 2005 9:01 am
by Geebs
Freakaloin wrote:hmm...he saw the first plane hit the tower on tv? thats weird...video of the first tower impact wasn't shown until later that day or the next...not anytime close to the attacks...
Bollocks. It was on the BBC.
Posted: Wed Jun 15, 2005 9:58 am
by 4days
Geebs wrote:Freakaloin wrote:hmm...he saw the first plane hit the tower on tv? thats weird...video of the first tower impact wasn't shown until later that day or the next...not anytime close to the attacks...
Bollocks. It was on the BBC.
aye, i remember that - they were about to show VT of the first plane when the second one hit - but didn't 'power of nightmares' show that bush was in the classroom as it all happened?
geoff, have you got the 'power of nightmares' series? makes for much better viewing than that tinfoil clad idiot who talks like a WWF challenger.
Posted: Wed Jun 15, 2005 12:13 pm
by Freakaloin
the first crash wasn't shown until after 6 pm est on television...morons...
Posted: Wed Jun 15, 2005 12:34 pm
by R00k
That's true. They didn't have footage of the first crash until they found somebody on the street who had recorded it.
Posted: Wed Jun 15, 2005 12:34 pm
by R00k
[xeno]Julios wrote:http://www.arcticbeacon.com/articles/ar ... /27302.htm
Former Bush Team Member Says WTC Collapse Likely A Controlled Demolition And 'Inside Job'
Highly recognized former chief economist in Labor Department now doubts official 9/11 story, claiming suspicious facts and evidence cover-up indicate government foul play and possible criminal implications.
June 12, 2005
http://www.quake3world.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=6170
Posted: Wed Jun 15, 2005 12:35 pm
by plained
i dislike loose change very much.
i dont like bills iether.
Posted: Wed Jun 15, 2005 1:07 pm
by Freakaloin
and this happened cuz of fires on 2 floors and a diesel fuel tank...lol...how perfect...
http://thunderbay.indymedia.org/uploads/wtc7-divx3.avi
Posted: Wed Jun 15, 2005 2:11 pm
by Freakaloin
look at this...
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGE ... n.nj.1.wmv
now look at it zoomed...why would that happen at the base of the tower, if the collapse began way up there? oh wait...its obvious...
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGE ... _smoke.wmv
Posted: Wed Jun 15, 2005 2:29 pm
by MKJ
what exactly is obvious?
i mean you always post a link or summat with some insinuation, yet you never give an actual theory or anything
only stuff like "any question? its so obvious, if you believe your govt youre a moron".
tell us, in detail, what exactly is 'so obvious'? what really happened?
lets hear it
Posted: Wed Jun 15, 2005 2:41 pm
by Freakaloin
smoke flying up 15 stories high at the base of tower...its obvious explosives were used...r u really that stoopid?
Posted: Wed Jun 15, 2005 2:46 pm
by MKJ
im not that stoopid, im just wondering what it is that youre always trying to prove. you never post more than 3 words to 'make your point'. give as un extensive essay on what you think (or know, or think to know) what went on. without the trailing sentences and 'rofl obvious'

Posted: Wed Jun 15, 2005 2:48 pm
by Freakaloin
why? u too stoopid? obviously...
Posted: Wed Jun 15, 2005 2:51 pm
by MKJ
no, cause you never have anything else to say but "rofl moron its so obvious".
but i see youre a brick wall. so much for credibility :icon14:
Posted: Wed Jun 15, 2005 2:53 pm
by Freakaloin
this has nothing to do with me...but
when the facts are against you argue the logic...when the logic is against you argue the facts...when both the facts and logic are against you, call the opposition bad names.
obviously...thats all u know...good try no0b...
Posted: Wed Jun 15, 2005 2:54 pm
by MKJ
i dont argue anything, im just wondering. old skool curiousity
and i never called anyone bad names

Posted: Wed Jun 15, 2005 2:58 pm
by Freakaloin
CRUSHED again as usual...
Posted: Wed Jun 15, 2005 2:59 pm
by MKJ
i see when logic, facts and reason are against you you just stop making sense

:icon14:
Posted: Wed Jun 15, 2005 3:04 pm
by Freakaloin
whats logic, facts or reason is against me? explain moron...
Posted: Wed Jun 15, 2005 3:09 pm
by MKJ
lol.. its obvious... unless youre a moron.. CRUSHED...