The Ultimate Con

[KenH]

Good one, carpro. :laugh:

 

[James_Newman]

He is to busy soaking up everything Ronnie says. I find it interesting that those on this board who support these nutball theories also support ronnie,

Why do you find it interesting? It is painfully obvious that 'Ronnie' is the only Republican candidate on the stage who is not bought and paid for. Some folks can recognize the genuine article when they see it, others just look at labels.

 

[2 Timothy2:1-4]

Why do you find it interesting? It is painfully obvious that 'Ronnie' is the only Republican candidate on the stage who is not bought and paid for. Some folks can recognize the genuine article when they see it, others just look at labels.

I can agree with all of that. That doesn't make him correct.

 

[KenH]

I can agree with all of that. That doesn't make him correct.

Now that you agree with Congressman Paul about pulling our troops out of Iraq, what issue(s) do you disagree with him on?

 

[Ed Edwards]

Trailer of KenH: //The Libertarian Party - The Party of Principle
Smaller Government...Lower Taxes...More Freedom
www.lp.org
Ron Paul for President!(1988 LP Presidential Candidate & I Hope In 2008 As Well)
www.ronpaul2008.com //

Amen, Brother KenH :thumbs:

Recall that I voted for the LP in 2000 and not for G.W.Bush.
I voted for Dubya in 2004 cause in 2002 He took the
Fight to Afganistan and in 2003 took the Fight to
Iraq. Shooting terrorists in Iraq sure beats terrorists
shooting at my friends in the USofA, England, France,
Australia, Russia, Armenia, etc.

 

[2 Timothy2:1-4]

Now that you agree with Congressman Paul about pulling our troops out of Iraq, what issue(s) do you disagree with him on?

I agree we need to leave based on the recent Parliment actions and not much else. The President should tell Iraq to cmoe back to work or we will leave. This makes me angry enough I cannot articulate.

His thoughts on why we are attacked by terrorists are fatally flawed and very dangerous. So is the notion that terrorism should be a police matter. He holds to isolationsits policies that I will never agree to.

I like his ideas on less government except when it comes to the military. I believe it should be the biggest and most sophisticated in the world.

I like his ideas on getting rid of income taxes and less government.What I am suspicious of is that the Bill promised less government when he ran and the only thing he reduced was the unnecessary and dangerous cuts to the military and the CIA. What an idiot.

 

[KenH]

He holds to isolationsits policies that I will never agree to.

Ron Paul is a non-interventionist. George W. Bush has practiced isolationism in his conduct of foreign policy.

 

[poncho]

So what?

What caused the explosions? You automatically assume they were caused by devices planted by someone. Prove it.

Iraq war veteran and experienced demolitions expert blows the cover on 9/11 inside job.

 

[KenH]

Wow, poncho, wow. That article causes me to mourn for my country. :tear:

 

[Ed Edwards]

At this place cited above:

http://nationalwriterssyndicate.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=128&Itemid=2

called: Iraq war veteran and experienced demolitions expert blows the cover on 9/11 inside job.

it says:

... With his demolitions experience, he immediately knew those towers could not have fallen like that without explosives. ...

I've see a dozen building fall (on TV, of course)
with controlled demolitions including when
the Downtown Oklahoma City Federal
Building (AKA: Murrah Building) was put down.
WTC1 and WTC2 (the second I saw live)
both appear to have collapsed from
the inpact zone down -- unlike a controlled
demolition. Only WTC7 looked like
a controlled demolition -- from the ground up.

 

[poncho]

“For the towers to fall at so close to free fall speed, over 110,000 separate and independent structural support points had to fail simultaneously. 'Pancake theory' does NOT explain the failure of the cores.” Torin explains passionately, obviously upset with the lies being told to the American people. "Nothing is holding the building up - No resistance. 110,000 structural failures at the same time."

In this day of high powered computer technology a demolition from the top down isn't impossible if it's done right, I reckon. Either that or it's all a big coincidence that all the structural supports in all three buildings failed the same way "simultaneously".

 

[2 Timothy2:1-4]

Ron Paul is a non-interventionist. George W. Bush has practiced isolationism in his conduct of foreign policy.

\

That is just Ronnie coolaid.

 

[carpro]

Iraq war veteran and experienced demolitions expert blows the cover on 9/11 inside job.

I'll say this. He may be a step above the other nutballs, but he is still just another nutball conspiracy theorist with no proof, just cockeyed conclusions.

 

[poncho]

I'll say this. He may be a step above the other nutballs, but he is still just another nutball conspiracy theorist with no proof, just cockeyed conclusions.

“For the towers to fall at so close to free fall speed, over 110,000 separate and independent structural support points had to fail simultaneously."

Shoo away the gnats and look up half an inch.

 

[KenH]

That is just Ronnie coolaid.

No, it is reality -which is something you seem to have a hard time admitting. But if you want to live in a political fantasy land you are free to do so.

 

[carpro]

“For the towers to fall at so close to free fall speed, over 110,000 separate and independent structural support points had to fail simultaneously."

Shoo away the gnats and look up half an inch.

I saw them fall,too(as did millions of others, some of whom had to be as expert as your resident nutball) and there is no indication of a "simultaneous" collapse. Even the firemen in your filmclip said it was a top down collapse and my eyes tell me the same thing.

Find another wacko. This one is toast.

"A hijacking not by Bin Laden, not by Al Qeada, but by a group of tyrants that orchestrated and benefited from 9/11."

Indeed!

"Torins insight as a combat nurse reveals that the actual amount of dead troops numbers around 15,000-17,000, not the 3,500 we have been told."

Torins is a real first class nutball. The best you've dug up so far.

 

[Ed Edwards]

I'll say this. He may be a step above the other nutballs, but he is still just another nutball conspiracy theorist with no proof, just cockeyed conclusions.

Amen, Brother Carpro! :thumbs:

First Axiom of Conspiracy Theory:

(s)he who does know does not tell
(s)he who does not know does tell

 

[Ed Edwards]

In this day of high powered computer technology a demolition from the top down isn't impossible if it's done right, I reckon. Either that or it's all a big coincidence that all the structural supports in all three buildings failed the same way "simultaneously".

most demolitions use wires.
The signal moves at near the speed of light
A signal cannot go through a wire that is
being blown up.


BTW, WTC1 and WTC2 fell top down.
WTC7 fell bottom up.
WTC1 and WTC2 were likely not controlled drops.
WTC7 could be (but doesn't have to be)
a controlled drop.

 

[poncho]

Amen, Brother Carpro! :thumbs:

First Axiom of Conspiracy Theory:

(s)he who does know does not tell
(s)he who does not know does tell

C'mon Ed this old cliche was debunked the first time the CIA bragged about using Iranians posing as communists to shoot people and blow up houses in Iran in 1953. Not only did Kermit Roosevelt talk he bragged about it.

I saw them fall,too(as did millions of others, some of whom had to be as expert as your resident nutball) and there is no indication of a "simultaneous" collapse. Even the firemen in your filmclip said it was a top down collapse and my eyes tell me the same thing.

Find another wacko. This one is toast.

Um, like I addressed this a few post up fellers. Quit acting like top down demolitions are impossible in this day and age. Rare Indeed! Impossible? Puh leeze!

 

[UnchartedSpirit]

I just missed the ultimate con in San Diego. How did it go? Well, maybe I'll be able to see it next year...or later....