now u are getting into my nerves. i've said that obl's motive is very weak in contrast to the govt's motive, never i said the motive is weak in itself. i asked u if that was enough to justify those massive attacks. u twisted my quotes and said i stated obl motive was weak in itself. it is perfectly clear i never said those things. i repeat this for your challenged mind can understand: obl motive is much weaker than govt's motive. fucking unbelievable. yes u are deranged and dangerous.
omfg, why do u think i asked u if it the attacks were carried out just because hatred? because i dont think it is a good enough reason if compared to the govt motive. of course it is a weak argument that obl attacked just because of hatred but only if u compare it to other suspects and their motives. that's what i meant: re-read my first and second post about it. why would i challenged u to find a reason and then ask u if it was because of hatred? because i dismiss that as a motive in the 911 attacks. if it was another attack where another stronger motive didnt appear i prolly would accept it.
In trading, you have to know when to stop fighting the markets. When you've made a bad call, get out and try again. You're averaging a losing position over and over again. You stepped over the line. We've all done it. Just keep silent now and try again tomorrow. Just try again tomorrow, man. Seriously.
You might have 'meant' that, but it's not what you said, as I proved with my quotes. We go by what you say, not by what you later tell us you 'meant'. Damn inconvenient, isn't it? The archives? ZTroll runs into the same problem all the time. As I said, just take my advice and stop for the day. Try again tomorrow. (As an aside, I think that regardless of what you now claim you 'meant', the fact that you questioned the idea that Islamic extremists and OBL would have 'any shred of a motive' to attack the US says more about this thread than anything we have seen so far, in the sense that it reveals the quality of thinking of those who buy into these absurd conspiracy theories).
Comprehension problems abound in you, son.... What does it matter WHO runs the site, the site is just a compiler of resources. The people giving the opinion are identified, in every case,THAT'S what matters. I guess you don't get that. If you're too dogmatic in your beliefs to read an opposing position, then that's YOUR problem. LMAO... What a 2 faced liar you are. You use smoke as evidence, then said it's an irrelant fact. LMAO.... How many more of your opinions are based on irrelevant facts? So what evidence DO you use to indicate low temps? I'm sure I'll be able to destroy them also, one by one. ANd when I do, where will you be? Ok, relevant evidence - why were the towers bending inwards just prior - a few minutes - to their collapse? Heat made the trusses bend and sag. Any other claim is ridiculous. I'll try to find a photo from a helo pilot that shows the tower exterior walls sucked in. Love to see your response to that . ROFLMMFAO....
let's see what the pilots have to say: http://pilotsfor911truth.org/ <embed style="width:500px; height:407px;" id="VideoPlayback" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://video.google.com/googleplayer.swf?docId=-8672066571196607580&hl=en" flashvars=""> </embed>
Bit, believe it or not, not everything in this world is a product of the drive for financial gain. You obviously have no inkling as to the degree of religious fanaticism of OBL and his cohorts. If suicide bombings aren't proof enough, then I don't know what is. Read his decrees sometime. Please.
that's not really true that all the opinions comes from experts in those site. aside that if u recall i asked u to prove RELEVANT evidence is made up. and that's exactly because of this reason: do u recall i said not everything jones says can be trusted? well, that should be enough to give u a hint. the evidence may have been manipulated but certainly is not made up. infact to follow on your post: uncombusted hydrocarbons cause black starved smoke, like plastic, nylon ect. and anyways the evidence of black fire may be questionable but not to the extent of dismissing that fires where not hot enough as conclusively proven by other compelling evidence. [...]