Thanks for confirming that you are not at all above doing what you show disdain for in others. ;p

So are you looking forward to interpreting the NIST model when I post it up, or is that too much to expect from a loudmouth that talks a lot of smack? lol

Yeah but the difference in Obama's case, is that those weren't things that the ENTIRE party, from the most centrist to the most leftist, are ALL waiting for action on. Gimme a break, she's barely winning the party base's votes as it is. One wrong move pissing of the Dem base and she would even lose to some pathetic candidate like Trump. So if there is a 4-year do-nothing presidency and she blows off the entire party's top priority, she WILL lose next time, however sorry the next POS candidate is that the Repub's roll out.

No, spineless cowards sit there and throw out some half-assed, zero-thought "solution" like "tear it down", which they think "sounds cool", and then don't do a goddam thing to actually try to make it happen. In fact, the "solution" tends to be something which is really more an excuse for not actually doing anything about the problems. "tear it down" is the classic there. Unless you're actually planning on grabbing your gun and "storming washington" or something?

Wait, you probably *want* to do that, but "Mom wouldn't give me the car keys though, so…". Yeah its ok, we understand….

Yeah anyhow, guys with balls roll up their sleeves and actually try to fix the thing, not just whine about it all day. You might wanna find yours some day and then you can help out with that too. :)

Syria isn't a vital Western interest...frankly I don't care that much if Assad's regime, brutal as it is, stays in power or not (it's probably the lesser evil right now, given that the opposition is dominated by Islamists).
I'm no Putin fanboy and think Russian actions in Ukraine are fairly questionable...but should we risk war with a major nuclear power (the only country that could destroy Europe and the US) because of some issues that definitely aren't central to Western interests? That's utter madness.

Possibly, but I don't see her having much difficulty in the primaries, even if Bernie is healthy enough to try again in 4 years, but that applies to Hilly as well. She's no spring chicken. But if she does win on Tuesday, and is healthy enough to go for a second term, my gut tells me you blokes will once again hold your nose and vote for her, because the alternative will likely be as wretched as the current one is.

It's ignorant to equate "tearing it down" with counterproductive violence. I equate it with doing the sorts of things that the Wobblies did to give us the benefit of things like the 8 hour work day, which largely consisted of having their heads frequently smashed by club-wielding coppers and Pinkertons, but always getting up to keep on fighting. They did much that we should be grateful for, and in a way that was valiant and honorable.

It's also ignorant that you make asinine assumptions based purely on emotion. I've been involved in a fair number of orgs ranging from the Green Party to the Alliance For Democracy, and done a bit of canvassing and lobbying. I certainly could have done more, but what I have done is far more than nothing. So how about you? Have you done anything that's worth mentioning?

Rereposted for truth. ;p

Cowardly? lol

You're fucking pathetic, m8. But sure, I'll be happy to put up. I just assumed that since you're so absolutely certain about this you had decent sources close at hand. I have links on one of my externals but they're old and unlikely to still be good. But I shall cheerfully locate some new ones, ya miserable POS. ;p

I'll also add that I think your response is a good indication that you know a lot less about this than you think you do. If I was in your shoes and knew that I was right, I wouldn't hesitate to beat myself over the head with the truth, regardless of where the burden of proof lay. ;p

And I'm happy to tell you that I've decided to repost everything you and your pals low-rate, but only because I'm a nice guy and want to help you pretend to be a decent human being so you can feel good about yourself. ;p

wow this thread got big fast, oh well I'm still gonna respond to the OP.
Spend a few hours and investigate you tell me? but you haven't been paying attention for the last two years? Well I have been paying attention for the last two years, and for the last ten years for that matter (being in my 20s that basically means since I hit the age of reason) and it's not even you posting conspiracy garbage that pisses me off. No, it's the fact that you think spending two hours on google and reading some idiot's "newspaper" makes you informed, and makes your opinion worth anything. it's the fact that you can't be bothered to actually pay attention to what's happening in the world around you until some sound bite grabs your interest, and then you bandy around irrevocable proof from some guy with no credentials because they sound true. Your opinion is as worthless as the trash you try to pass off as sources, and the willful self aggrandizing ignorance of you and the mass of idiots like you is what's eroding the already tenuous state of American democracy. If you actually want to learn something instead of grabbing on to the first conspiracy theory that swims by, then It's time to pay attention, you think you can do that for more than an hour?

I knew you'd come back.

All you needed was a short break and some sprouts.

Try mainlining wheatgrass juice if you ever find yourself wanting some seriously serious rejuvenation. ;p

As promised, rerereposted for truthiness. ;p

Cowardly? lol

You're fucking pathetic, m8. But sure, I'll be happy to put up. I just assumed that since you're so absolutely certain about this you had decent sources close at hand. I have links on one of my externals but they're old and unlikely to still be good. But I shall cheerfully locate some new ones, ya miserable POS. ;p

I'll also add that I think your response is a good indication that you know a lot less about this than you think you do. If I was in your shoes and knew that I was right, I wouldn't hesitate to beat myself over the head with the truth, regardless of where the burden of proof lay. ;p

If you put video with a building done with controlled demolition side by side with building #7, they look identical, instant freefall and total destruction. Most building materials and furniture are made with fire resistant materials so office building fires tend to be small. Also architects have said before building #7 they've never seen a building come down due to a fire.

You know back on 9/11 it was brought up multiple times to check for explosives and they wouldn't do it. How strange...

What you describe is far from being an exclusively Right-wing phenomenon. The Right-wing pissants think their kool-aid tastes better, and the Left-wing pissants think theirs tastes better, but the bottom line is you're all a bunch of ignorant, kool-aid drinking pissants. But go right ahead and keep drinking up while you diligently maintain your frothy rage, because, goddamn it all, you're kool-aid really does taste better! lol

NIST checked extensively, and none were found. Not finding any doesn't mean they didn't look, it means your idiotic screed about it is based in fantasy.

Controlled demolitions don't look the same as the building 7 fall, except that buildings tend to fall downward. Your inability to see the differences is your own failure, not proof of anything nefarious. And some architects did say that; some even who worked on the NIST analysis, which showed there was no foul play. Actual architects, not army dropouts who wouldn't know a blueprint from a Call of Duty map.

You know who looks like Michael J Fox? Scott Wolf, who amazingly does not have Parkinson's. It's almost as though looking alike on the surface isn't enough to establish anything other than a visual similarity.

Well, that's the pot calling the kettle black, considering he didn't say anything about right-wing or left wing.

And word of advice: writing "lol" or ";p" at the end of your posts don't suddenly make everything you wrote before not seem angry and deranged.
Fox? Wolf? I think there's a conspiracy at play here... Probably something involving clones and JFK. You always gotta include JFK.

NIST did *not* check for anything that was in opposition to it's predetermined conclusion. The fact that it tried to pass off a fraudulent model of the WTC 7 collapse as legitimate science is made painfully clear by it's inexcusable failure to acknowledge that it occurred at free-fall, and it was immensely sad and pathetic to watch 2 NIST engineers shit themselves on public television because some poor fool -- bless his soul -- read a simple, straightforward question sent in by a high school physics teacher that they couldn't for the life of them provide a reasonable explanation: namely, why did they neglect to mention something that was patently obvious, given that the WTC 7 collapse wasn't obscured by a giant dust plume.

I'll see if I can find that video because it's really quite shocking to watch those scoundrels be undone by a question that no honest scientist would have had trouble responding to.

Careful, careful, the "freefall" stuff is 2006 truther nonsense. You're quite behind the times. Even in your endlessly repeated low-res and sped up videos, debris is falling significantly faster than the rest of the building. You keep on spinning that yarn, they will brand you as a secret agent hired to spread misinformation! :( :(

You're in quite the fortunate argumentative position here actually (or you would have been, before the abuse). You're questioning a scientific model based on physics. Now, physics are not only an infinitely complex system, we're possibly not even aware of all the variables to boot. No one can 'prove' the model to be accurate, not even I with my enormous brain. So I have no means to beat you over the head with the truth.

Such a theory or model can, however, be disproven. Up to now, you're doing an awfully bad job at that, and unfortunately no links to other conspiracy nutters or youtube videos from 17 year old highschoolers will change that. And in 20 years time, should the rtcvb32s persist in this debate, their argument concerning controlled demolition and WTC collapse still is and will always only be:

And, surprise, no, they actually don't.

The truthers have since even had to make up their own fictional explosives to make their nonsense feasible. Always good for a laugh.





FYI, "it's" with an apostrophe is a contraction of two words and means either "it is" or "it has". The occurrence of the mistake may not be embarrassing on its own, it's however rather embarrassing in its copy pasted repetition.