Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Unlock unbeatable offers today. Shop here: https://amzn.to/4cEkqYs 🎁
not presenting one is a bogus dodge..Refusing to discuss any hole in his awkward little theory, or even acknowledge they exist.
I never presented one, you fucking simpleton. Congrats on being the ASSumer.
it's obvious you didn't .Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master.
George Washington -
Love the Quote!
and as for the topic at hand
did anybody actually take Science101 and earn a passing grade?
REALLY?
not presenting one is a bogus dodge..Refusing to discuss any hole in his awkward little theory, or even acknowledge they exist.
I never presented one, you fucking simpleton. Congrats on being the ASSumer.
the inference is so strong it's as if you were shouting it .
besides, when you first showed your photo, you had theorized that damaged beam could not have been damaged by any convectional means. you insisted that it had to have been an exotic force AKA space beam or dustification ray..
right jumping on a typo is the very definition of desperate...not presenting one is a bogus dodge..Refusing to discuss any hole in his awkward little theory, or even acknowledge they exist.
I never presented one, you fucking simpleton. Congrats on being the ASSumer.
the inference is so strong it's as if you were shouting it .
besides, when you first showed your photo, you had theorized that damaged beam could not have been damaged by any convectional means. you insisted that it had to have been an exotic force AKA space beam or dustification ray..
Convectional?
You're brain dead, kid.
right jumping on a typo is the very definition of desperate...not presenting one is a bogus dodge..Refusing to discuss any hole in his awkward little theory, or even acknowledge they exist.
I never presented one, you fucking simpleton. Congrats on being the ASSumer.
the inference is so strong it's as if you were shouting it .
besides, when you first showed your photo, you had theorized that damaged beam could not have been damaged by any convectional means. you insisted that it had to have been an exotic force AKA space beam or dustification ray..
Convectional?
You're brain dead, kid.
kid? then you must be one too as we are about the same age.
bullshit! you've proved only what was already well known and it was not me being full of shit, it's you and your nut sack cohorts.right jumping on a typo is the very definition of desperate...not presenting one is a bogus dodge..Refusing to discuss any hole in his awkward little theory, or even acknowledge they exist.
I never presented one, you fucking simpleton. Congrats on being the ASSumer.
the inference is so strong it's as if you were shouting it .
besides, when you first showed your photo, you had theorized that damaged beam could not have been damaged by any convectional means. you insisted that it had to have been an exotic force AKA space beam or dustification ray..
Convectional?
You're brain dead, kid.
kid? then you must be one too as we are about the same age.
Desperate? I dont have anything to prove to you. I already showed you to be full of shit in here. The only thing I'm desperate for is a bit of intelligent discourse from you. Probably like the women in your life desperate for an orgasm.
bullshit! you've proved only what was already well known and it was not me being full of shit, it you and your nut sack cohorts.right jumping on a typo is the very definition of desperate...not presenting one is a bogus dodge..I never presented one, you fucking simpleton. Congrats on being the ASSumer.
the inference is so strong it's as if you were shouting it .
besides, when you first showed your photo, you had theorized that damaged beam could not have been damaged by any convectional means. you insisted that it had to have been an exotic force AKA space beam or dustification ray..
Convectional?
You're brain dead, kid.
kid? then you must be one too as we are about the same age.
Desperate? I dont have anything to prove to you. I already showed you to be full of shit in here. The only thing I'm desperate for is a bit of intelligent discourse from you. Probably like the women in your life desperate for an orgasm.
the only thing that's fact in your post is how hilariously wrong you are on every assumption you've made!
as to women the only time you made them orgasm was after you paid them....
what about them? banker trust had fire /heat damage just like all the other structures in the wtc complex.bullshit! you've proved only what was already well known and it was not me being full of shit, it you and your nut sack cohorts.right jumping on a typo is the very definition of desperate...not presenting one is a bogus dodge..
the inference is so strong it's as if you were shouting it .
besides, when you first showed your photo, you had theorized that damaged beam could not have been damaged by any convectional means. you insisted that it had to have been an exotic force AKA space beam or dustification ray..
Convectional?
You're brain dead, kid.
kid? then you must be one too as we are about the same age.
Desperate? I dont have anything to prove to you. I already showed you to be full of shit in here. The only thing I'm desperate for is a bit of intelligent discourse from you. Probably like the women in your life desperate for an orgasm.
the only thing that's fact in your post is how hilariously wrong you are on every assumption you've made!
as to women the only time you made them orgasm was after you paid them....
So, about those fires in the Banker's Trust building, Daws.....
what about them? banker trust had fire /heat damage just like all the other structures in the wtc complex.bullshit! you've proved only what was already well known and it was not me being full of shit, it you and your nut sack cohorts.right jumping on a typo is the very definition of desperate...Convectional?
You're brain dead, kid.
kid? then you must be one too as we are about the same age.
Desperate? I dont have anything to prove to you. I already showed you to be full of shit in here. The only thing I'm desperate for is a bit of intelligent discourse from you. Probably like the women in your life desperate for an orgasm.
the only thing that's fact in your post is how hilariously wrong you are on every assumption you've made!
as to women the only time you made them orgasm was after you paid them....
So, about those fires in the Banker's Trust building, Daws.....
since I'm neither there is nothing to be embarrassed about or to relent.what about them? banker trust had fire /heat damage just like all the other structures in the wtc complex.bullshit! you've proved only what was already well known and it was not me being full of shit, it you and your nut sack cohorts.right jumping on a typo is the very definition of desperate...
kid? then you must be one too as we are about the same age.
Desperate? I dont have anything to prove to you. I already showed you to be full of shit in here. The only thing I'm desperate for is a bit of intelligent discourse from you. Probably like the women in your life desperate for an orgasm.
the only thing that's fact in your post is how hilariously wrong you are on every assumption you've made!
as to women the only time you made them orgasm was after you paid them....
So, about those fires in the Banker's Trust building, Daws.....
No, it did not. you're making shit up you can not prove. Furthermore, you're unwilling to relent that you're fucking wrong. Which makes you not only ignorant of the subject, but bullheaded. Lastly you should be embarrassed for putting it on display for all to see.
since I'm neither there is nothing to be embarrassed about or to relent.what about them? banker trust had fire /heat damage just like all the other structures in the wtc complex.bullshit! you've proved only what was already well known and it was not me being full of shit, it you and your nut sack cohorts.Desperate? I dont have anything to prove to you. I already showed you to be full of shit in here. The only thing I'm desperate for is a bit of intelligent discourse from you. Probably like the women in your life desperate for an orgasm.
the only thing that's fact in your post is how hilariously wrong you are on every assumption you've made!
as to women the only time you made them orgasm was after you paid them....
So, about those fires in the Banker's Trust building, Daws.....
No, it did not. you're making shit up you can not prove. Furthermore, you're unwilling to relent that you're fucking wrong. Which makes you not only ignorant of the subject, but bullheaded. Lastly you should be embarrassed for putting it on display for all to see.
all ready have! besides, I have to prove nothing to you.since I'm neither there is nothing to be embarrassed about or to relent.what about them? banker trust had fire /heat damage just like all the other structures in the wtc complex.bullshit! you've proved only what was already well known and it was not me being full of shit, it you and your nut sack cohorts.
the only thing that's fact in your post is how hilariously wrong you are on every assumption you've made!
as to women the only time you made them orgasm was after you paid them....
So, about those fires in the Banker's Trust building, Daws.....
No, it did not. you're making shit up you can not prove. Furthermore, you're unwilling to relent that you're fucking wrong. Which makes you not only ignorant of the subject, but bullheaded. Lastly you should be embarrassed for putting it on display for all to see.
Then prove it and quit typing like you did. Because you havent. You're lying and digging a whole because you're THAT bullheaded.
There were no fires in Banker's Trust. It was hit by falling debris. End of story.
Or PROVE IT.
"what happened on 9/11/2001?"
It marked the beginning of one of the more moronic conspiracy theories.
Dozens of them actually and the authors ridicule each other's versions while adjusting their own foil hats. In fact, the "Truther" field is so littered with ludicrous 9/11 scenarios that some even contend that mis and disinformationalists are at work trying to discredit their particular lunacy and their movement in general. Hilarious.
My personal favorite? Judy Wood and her 'directed energy weapons from space' conspiracy. I'm not making this up. Phasers. That's literally her explanation.
She has diagrams and charts and everything. Like most truther conspiracies, its laughably bullshit. But she believes.
You can't fix stupid.
Refusing to discuss any hole in his awkward little theory, or even acknowledge they exist.
I never presented one, you fucking simpleton. Congrats on being the ASSumer.
No, but you were presented with several. And ran exactly like I said you would for one very simple reason:
People like you don't want the truth. They want their story. And if anyone asks them any question that doesn't ape their story, notes any hole ...no matter how enormous...in their reasoning, your ilk straight up ignore them.
No one actually interested in truth ever would.
OK, Corky. Keep swing that whiffle ball bat around.
all ready have! besides, I have to prove nothing to you.since I'm neither there is nothing to be embarrassed about or to relent.what about them? banker trust had fire /heat damage just like all the other structures in the wtc complex.So, about those fires in the Banker's Trust building, Daws.....
No, it did not. you're making shit up you can not prove. Furthermore, you're unwilling to relent that you're fucking wrong. Which makes you not only ignorant of the subject, but bullheaded. Lastly you should be embarrassed for putting it on display for all to see.
Then prove it and quit typing like you did. Because you havent. You're lying and digging a whole because you're THAT bullheaded.
There were no fires in Banker's Trust. It was hit by falling debris. End of story.
Or PROVE IT.
The fact is you and Daws haven't proven shit in here to me. Nothing. Nathan. Nadda. Zero.Refusing to discuss any hole in his awkward little theory, or even acknowledge they exist.
I never presented one, you fucking simpleton. Congrats on being the ASSumer.
No, but you were presented with several. And ran exactly like I said you would for one very simple reason:
People like you don't want the truth. They want their story. And if anyone asks them any question that doesn't ape their story, notes any hole ...no matter how enormous...in their reasoning, your ilk straight up ignore them.
No one actually interested in truth ever would.
OK, Corky. Keep swing that whiffle ball bat around.
Translation: I really don't care about the truth so I'll just make some snarky comment about whiffle ball and everyone will think I'm cool.
The fact is you and Daws haven't proven shit in here to me. Nothing. Nathan. Nadda. Zero.Refusing to discuss any hole in his awkward little theory, or even acknowledge they exist.
I never presented one, you fucking simpleton. Congrats on being the ASSumer.
No, but you were presented with several. And ran exactly like I said you would for one very simple reason:
People like you don't want the truth. They want their story. And if anyone asks them any question that doesn't ape their story, notes any hole ...no matter how enormous...in their reasoning, your ilk straight up ignore them.
No one actually interested in truth ever would.
OK, Corky. Keep swing that whiffle ball bat around.
Translation: I really don't care about the truth so I'll just make some snarky comment about whiffle ball and everyone will think I'm cool.
There were no fires in that building. And in this thread, besides what I already said i was wrong over ( the NIST report vs. the Commission) that's the only point I've made in here. And you can't come up with an explanation regarding how steel gets mangled in that manner without sufficient heat/energy.
That's all! You're still losing!
The fact is you and Daws haven't proven shit in here to me. Nothing. Nathan. Nadda. Zero.I never presented one, you fucking simpleton. Congrats on being the ASSumer.
No, but you were presented with several. And ran exactly like I said you would for one very simple reason:
People like you don't want the truth. They want their story. And if anyone asks them any question that doesn't ape their story, notes any hole ...no matter how enormous...in their reasoning, your ilk straight up ignore them.
No one actually interested in truth ever would.
OK, Corky. Keep swing that whiffle ball bat around.
Translation: I really don't care about the truth so I'll just make some snarky comment about whiffle ball and everyone will think I'm cool.
There were no fires in that building. And in this thread, besides what I already said i was wrong over ( the NIST report vs. the Commission) that's the only point I've made in here. And you can't come up with an explanation regarding how steel gets mangled in that manner without sufficient heat/energy.
That's all! You're still losing!
I've nothing to lose, Princess. I just enjoy getting you "Truther" types all riled up.
bullshit ! everyone of your posts in the last few days are tantrums...The fact is you and Daws haven't proven shit in here to me. Nothing. Nathan. Nadda. Zero.No, but you were presented with several. And ran exactly like I said you would for one very simple reason:
People like you don't want the truth. They want their story. And if anyone asks them any question that doesn't ape their story, notes any hole ...no matter how enormous...in their reasoning, your ilk straight up ignore them.
No one actually interested in truth ever would.
OK, Corky. Keep swing that whiffle ball bat around.
Translation: I really don't care about the truth so I'll just make some snarky comment about whiffle ball and everyone will think I'm cool.
There were no fires in that building. And in this thread, besides what I already said i was wrong over ( the NIST report vs. the Commission) that's the only point I've made in here. And you can't come up with an explanation regarding how steel gets mangled in that manner without sufficient heat/energy.
That's all! You're still losing!
I've nothing to lose, Princess. I just enjoy getting you "Truther" types all riled up.
I'm not riled up at all. What I am is exposing you as the moron that you are. Its entertaining to do every few years. You're the first morons in the door to criticize anyone who should speak outside the 9/11 official narrative and you're the first one to look like a fucking retard when you try.
bullshit ! everyone of your posts in the last few days are tantrums...The fact is you and Daws haven't proven shit in here to me. Nothing. Nathan. Nadda. Zero.
OK, Corky. Keep swing that whiffle ball bat around.
Translation: I really don't care about the truth so I'll just make some snarky comment about whiffle ball and everyone will think I'm cool.
There were no fires in that building. And in this thread, besides what I already said i was wrong over ( the NIST report vs. the Commission) that's the only point I've made in here. And you can't come up with an explanation regarding how steel gets mangled in that manner without sufficient heat/energy.
That's all! You're still losing!
I've nothing to lose, Princess. I just enjoy getting you "Truther" types all riled up.
I'm not riled up at all. What I am is exposing you as the moron that you are. Its entertaining to do every few years. You're the first morons in the door to criticize anyone who should speak outside the 9/11 official narrative and you're the first one to look like a fucking retard when you try.
