Go Back   Freethought Forum > The Public Baths > News, Politics & Law

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #26  
Old 09-15-2006, 07:19 AM
Dingfod's Avatar
Dingfod Dingfod is offline
Gone Guy
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: In a Hole
Gender: Male
Posts: XLMMDCLIII
Blog Entries: 21
Images: 92
Default Re: A Polite Discussion of 9/11 Theories

Oddly enough, just a few months before 9/11/2001, I had read the book Why Buildings Fall Down: How Structures Fail. I will have to admit to being surprised that the buildings collapsed at all, but when I saw the first tower fell it immediately dawned on me why and why they fell as they did. The heat of the fire, although far short of the heat required to melt the steel in the floor support beams, was sufficient to weaken them.

In the book they go into a great deal about how in any structure that has fallen, from suspension bridges to the roof at the Kemper Arena, the failure can be tracked to the failure of one single element, whether it be a poorly maintained, thus rusted, bolt, or one single weak component and insufficient redundancy. Under normal loads, structures can stand the failure of a single or even a few structural components, but when they are stressed by fire, by heavy loads, etc. the failure becomes progressive, but usually in such a way that appears to be nearly a simultaneous collapse.

The way the WTC towers were constructed (inland wave and I work in a building built exactly the same way) with a steel shell and a conventional concrete and steel elevator/utility core with open floors, the floor beams are dependent on the shell and the core to remain intact. The planes did not strike just one floor on each building, they hit at least two, resulting much damage to the shell as well as the core support beams. The fire weakened the floor beams, causing them to sag, putting too much lateral strain on the the remaining shell and core support structure.

When the first floor collapsed, the weight above it was sufficient to collapse the next floor down and so forth all the way down. The reason the structure above the collapsing floors stayed basically intact on the way down was the structure above the collapsing floors was sufficient to support the weight of the floors above it. Gravity took it straight down.

Seldom does a building fall to one side, especially buildings built like the towers are. However, the WTC towers did not fall directly down, the fell sufficiently off center to damage a number of other buildings in the vicinity, including WTC-7. The fire didn't bring down WTC-7, the damage to from debris from WTC-1 and 2 did.

As for why the building in Spain did not fall down when it was on fire for so long, it wasn't a jet fuel fire for one thing, and for another it wasn't built the same way, it was a standard beam and girder construction building, much like the Empire State Building, which was hit by a WWII bomber with nearly full tanks of gasoline. It burned for quite a while but did not fall down? Why? It was overbuilt, with lots and lots of redundant beams, rivets and thickness of beams. Why did the WTC towers collapse when the Empire State Building did not? Ultimately because modern engineering methods which allowed buildings to be built with a minimum of redundancy to save construction costs.

A line from Doc Holliday in the movie Tombstone seems apt: "It would appear that the strain was more than he could bear."
__________________
Sleep - the most beautiful experience in life - except drink.--W.C. Fields
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 09-15-2006, 07:25 AM
The Jesus Lawyer's Avatar
The Jesus Lawyer The Jesus Lawyer is offline
Ana Haneek Omak We Abook
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Same place as before.
Posts: MMCXVIII
Default Re: A Polite Discussion of 9/11 Theories

now see...i was just watching something on tv either today or yesterday that said tc7 was brought down from fire started from falling debris...i honestly can't remember which show it was i heard that on, but it honestly stuck in my head as being odd. the show wasn't conspiracy based at all and the information was presented as being normal, which is why i found it odd. they also showed video of tc7 collapsing in the same pancake fashion...

michael :)
__________________
i see 11:11 - www.11-11.tv
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 09-15-2006, 07:28 AM
Dingfod's Avatar
Dingfod Dingfod is offline
Gone Guy
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: In a Hole
Gender: Male
Posts: XLMMDCLIII
Blog Entries: 21
Images: 92
Default Re: A Polite Discussion of 9/11 Theories

Of course, they might have built the whole thing with explosive bolts holding the beams together to allow for easy demolition in the future, and a short in the wiring caused by the fire set them off.
__________________
Sleep - the most beautiful experience in life - except drink.--W.C. Fields
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 09-15-2006, 07:29 AM
The Jesus Lawyer's Avatar
The Jesus Lawyer The Jesus Lawyer is offline
Ana Haneek Omak We Abook
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Same place as before.
Posts: MMCXVIII
Default Re: A Polite Discussion of 9/11 Theories

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dingfod
Of course, they might have built the whole thing with explosive bolts holding the beams together to allow for easy demolition in the future, and a short in the wiring caused by the fire set them off.
ah, those damn explosive bolts...when will they learn? :D
__________________
i see 11:11 - www.11-11.tv
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 09-15-2006, 02:44 PM
California Tanker's Avatar
California Tanker California Tanker is offline
Compensating for something...
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: San Jose, California
Posts: VCMXXXVIII
Default Re: A Polite Discussion of 9/11 Theories

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Jesus Lawyer
i can understand the floors above the impact point collapsing and spilling over, but you would think that there would be enough strength in the bottom floors to continue holding the weight of the top since that is what they had been doing since it was constructed.
One word: Inertia. I did some rough calculations once on another board to see just how much more force is applied after a one-floor-fall vice static, and the figure was pretty high. After all, you've got several thousand tons of concrete coming down at 3 meters a second or thereabouts.

NTM
__________________
A man only needs two tools in life. WD-40 and duct tape. If it moves and it shouldn't, use the duct tape. If it doesn't move and it should, use WD-40.
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 05-09-2015, 06:03 PM
Aemilus's Avatar
Aemilus Aemilus is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: XXXI
Default Re: A Polite Discussion of 9/11 Theories

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dingfod View Post
Oddly enough, just a few months before 9/11/2001, I had read the book Why Buildings Fall Down: How Structures Fail. I will have to admit to being surprised that the buildings collapsed at all, but when I saw the first tower fell it immediately dawned on me why and why they fell as they did. The heat of the fire, although far short of the heat required to melt the steel in the floor support beams, was sufficient to weaken them.

In the book they go into a great deal about how in any structure that has fallen, from suspension bridges to the roof at the Kemper Arena, the failure can be tracked to the failure of one single element, whether it be a poorly maintained, thus rusted, bolt, or one single weak component and insufficient redundancy. Under normal loads, structures can stand the failure of a single or even a few structural components, but when they are stressed by fire, by heavy loads, etc. the failure becomes progressive, but usually in such a way that appears to be nearly a simultaneous collapse.

The way the WTC towers were constructed (inland wave and I work in a building built exactly the same way) with a steel shell and a conventional concrete and steel elevator/utility core with open floors, the floor beams are dependent on the shell and the core to remain intact. The planes did not strike just one floor on each building, they hit at least two, resulting much damage to the shell as well as the core support beams. The fire weakened the floor beams, causing them to sag, putting too much lateral strain on the the remaining shell and core support structure.

When the first floor collapsed, the weight above it was sufficient to collapse the next floor down and so forth all the way down. The reason the structure above the collapsing floors stayed basically intact on the way down was the structure above the collapsing floors was sufficient to support the weight of the floors above it. Gravity took it straight down.

Seldom does a building fall to one side, especially buildings built like the towers are. However, the WTC towers did not fall directly down, the fell sufficiently off center to damage a number of other buildings in the vicinity, including WTC-7. The fire didn't bring down WTC-7, the damage to from debris from WTC-1 and 2 did.

As for why the building in Spain did not fall down when it was on fire for so long, it wasn't a jet fuel fire for one thing, and for another it wasn't built the same way, it was a standard beam and girder construction building, much like the Empire State Building, which was hit by a WWII bomber with nearly full tanks of gasoline. It burned for quite a while but did not fall down? Why? It was overbuilt, with lots and lots of redundant beams, rivets and thickness of beams. Why did the WTC towers collapse when the Empire State Building did not? Ultimately because modern engineering methods which allowed buildings to be built with a minimum of redundancy to save construction costs.

A line from Doc Holliday in the movie Tombstone seems apt: "It would appear that the strain was more than he could bear."
Hi Dingfod, just curious.... Do you still feel the same way now as you did back then?
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 05-09-2015, 06:33 PM
SR71's Avatar
SR71 SR71 is online now
Stoic Derelict
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: The Dustbin of History
Gender: Male
Posts: VCCCLIII
Images: 2
Default Re: A Polite Discussion of 9/11 Theories

__________________
Chained out, like a sitting duck just waiting for the fall _Cage the Elephant
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
Anastasia Beaverhausen (05-12-2015), Angakuk (05-12-2015), Dingfod (05-10-2015), Janet (05-12-2015), LadyShea (05-12-2015), Nullifidian (05-10-2015), Stephen Maturin (05-11-2015), Stormlight (05-11-2015), Ymir's blood (05-11-2015)
  #33  
Old 05-09-2015, 09:48 PM
Aemilus's Avatar
Aemilus Aemilus is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: XXXI
Default Re: A Polite Discussion of 9/11 Theories

Hah!
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 05-10-2015, 04:28 PM
Dingfod's Avatar
Dingfod Dingfod is offline
Gone Guy
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: In a Hole
Gender: Male
Posts: XLMMDCLIII
Blog Entries: 21
Images: 92
Default Re: A Polite Discussion of 9/11 Theories

I have not seen anything that would change my opinion.
__________________
Sleep - the most beautiful experience in life - except drink.--W.C. Fields
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 05-10-2015, 10:41 PM
SR71's Avatar
SR71 SR71 is online now
Stoic Derelict
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: The Dustbin of History
Gender: Male
Posts: VCCCLIII
Images: 2
Default Re: A Polite Discussion of 9/11 Theories

I think this is one of very few forums where I could get away with such a carelessly flippant remark and not suffer at all as far as public censure goes. I apologize if anyone was offended. No offense was intended.
__________________
Chained out, like a sitting duck just waiting for the fall _Cage the Elephant
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 05-11-2015, 06:39 AM
Stormlight's Avatar
Stormlight Stormlight is offline
Not a relevant party
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Luxembourg
Gender: Male
Posts: XLMDLVIII
Images: 92
Default Re: A Polite Discussion of 9/11 Theories

Quote:
Originally Posted by SR71 View Post
I think this is one of very few forums where I could get away with such a carelessly flippant remark and not suffer at all as far as public censure goes. I apologize if anyone was offended. No offense was intended.
I am terribly offended and I demand restitutions, sir! This is an outrage!
__________________
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
beyelzu (05-12-2015), BrotherMan (05-11-2015), chunksmediocrites (05-13-2015), Clutch Munny (05-11-2015), Dingfod (05-11-2015), Janet (05-12-2015), JoeP (05-11-2015), LadyShea (05-12-2015), Nullifidian (05-12-2015), Sock Puppet (05-11-2015), SR71 (05-11-2015), Stephen Maturin (05-11-2015), Ymir's blood (05-11-2015), Zehava (05-13-2015)
  #37  
Old 05-11-2015, 07:36 AM
BrotherMan's Avatar
BrotherMan BrotherMan is offline
A Very Gentle Bort
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Bortlandia
Gender: Male
Posts: XVDXXXV
Blog Entries: 5
Images: 63
Default Re: A Polite Discussion of 9/11 Theories

:bipolar: :infinity: :crazy:
__________________
\V/_
I COVLD TEACh YOV BVT I MVST LEVY A FEE
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
Janet (05-12-2015), Nullifidian (05-12-2015), Stormlight (05-11-2015), Ymir's blood (05-11-2015)
  #38  
Old 05-11-2015, 09:54 AM
erimir's Avatar
erimir erimir is offline
Projecting my phallogos with long, hard diction
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Dee Cee
Gender: Male
Posts: XMMDCCXLII
Images: 11
Default Re: A Polite Discussion of 9/11 Theories

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aemilus View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dingfod View Post
Oddly enough, just a few months before 9/11/2001, I had read the book Why Buildings Fall Down: How Structures Fail. I will have to admit to being surprised that the buildings collapsed at all, but when I saw the first tower fell it immediately dawned on me why and why they fell as they did. The heat of the fire, although far short of the heat required to melt the steel in the floor support beams, was sufficient to weaken them.

In the book they go into a great deal about how in any structure that has fallen, from suspension bridges to the roof at the Kemper Arena, the failure can be tracked to the failure of one single element, whether it be a poorly maintained, thus rusted, bolt, or one single weak component and insufficient redundancy. Under normal loads, structures can stand the failure of a single or even a few structural components, but when they are stressed by fire, by heavy loads, etc. the failure becomes progressive, but usually in such a way that appears to be nearly a simultaneous collapse.

The way the WTC towers were constructed (inland wave and I work in a building built exactly the same way) with a steel shell and a conventional concrete and steel elevator/utility core with open floors, the floor beams are dependent on the shell and the core to remain intact. The planes did not strike just one floor on each building, they hit at least two, resulting much damage to the shell as well as the core support beams. The fire weakened the floor beams, causing them to sag, putting too much lateral strain on the the remaining shell and core support structure.

When the first floor collapsed, the weight above it was sufficient to collapse the next floor down and so forth all the way down. The reason the structure above the collapsing floors stayed basically intact on the way down was the structure above the collapsing floors was sufficient to support the weight of the floors above it. Gravity took it straight down.

Seldom does a building fall to one side, especially buildings built like the towers are. However, the WTC towers did not fall directly down, the fell sufficiently off center to damage a number of other buildings in the vicinity, including WTC-7. The fire didn't bring down WTC-7, the damage to from debris from WTC-1 and 2 did.

As for why the building in Spain did not fall down when it was on fire for so long, it wasn't a jet fuel fire for one thing, and for another it wasn't built the same way, it was a standard beam and girder construction building, much like the Empire State Building, which was hit by a WWII bomber with nearly full tanks of gasoline. It burned for quite a while but did not fall down? Why? It was overbuilt, with lots and lots of redundant beams, rivets and thickness of beams. Why did the WTC towers collapse when the Empire State Building did not? Ultimately because modern engineering methods which allowed buildings to be built with a minimum of redundancy to save construction costs.

A line from Doc Holliday in the movie Tombstone seems apt: "It would appear that the strain was more than he could bear."
Hi Dingfod, just curious.... Do you still feel the same way now as you did back then?
So, I'm guessing we're all curious, but... Why do you ask?
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
Nullifidian (05-12-2015), Stephen Maturin (05-11-2015)
  #39  
Old 05-11-2015, 03:35 PM
ChuckF's Avatar
ChuckF ChuckF is offline
liar in wolf's clothing
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Frequently about
Posts: XVMMMDCCLXXXV
Images: 2
Default Re: A Polite Discussion of 9/11 Theories

Quote:
Originally Posted by SR71 View Post
I think this is one of very few forums where I could get away with such a carelessly flippant remark and not suffer at all as far as public censure goes.
We keep that kind of thing in the private forums.
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
BrotherMan (05-11-2015), Clutch Munny (05-11-2015), Dingfod (05-11-2015), Janet (05-12-2015), Nullifidian (05-12-2015), Pan Narrans (05-12-2015), SR71 (05-11-2015), Stormlight (05-12-2015), wei yau (05-11-2015)
  #40  
Old 05-11-2015, 05:36 PM
Stephen Maturin's Avatar
Stephen Maturin Stephen Maturin is offline
Refreshingly Stupid
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Juggalonia
Posts: VMMCCII
Default Re: A Polite Discussion of 9/11 Theories

Quote:
Originally Posted by erimir View Post
So, I'm guessing we're all curious, but... Why do you ask?
It may have something to do with the fact that Dingfod's post contained no missile pod references at all.
__________________
"We can have democracy in this country, or we can have great wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can't have both." ~ Louis D. Brandeis

"Psychos don't explode when sunlight hits them, I don't give a fuck how crazy they are." ~ S. Gecko

"What the fuck is a German muffin?" ~ R. Swanson
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
Dingfod (05-11-2015), Janet (05-12-2015), Nullifidian (05-12-2015), Stormlight (05-12-2015)
  #41  
Old 05-11-2015, 05:40 PM
Dingfod's Avatar
Dingfod Dingfod is offline
Gone Guy
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: In a Hole
Gender: Male
Posts: XLMMDCLIII
Blog Entries: 21
Images: 92
Default Re: A Polite Discussion of 9/11 Theories

Or hat-shaped UFOs.
__________________
Sleep - the most beautiful experience in life - except drink.--W.C. Fields
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
Nullifidian (05-12-2015), Stormlight (05-12-2015)
  #42  
Old 05-12-2015, 02:08 AM
Aemilus's Avatar
Aemilus Aemilus is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: XXXI
Default Re: A Polite Discussion of 9/11 Theories

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dingfod View Post
I have not seen anything that would change my opinion.
So you haven't seen anything that would change your opinion. What about WTC7 and gravitational acceleration.... You don't see any problem there with the Law of Conservation of Energy?

What about the rest of you.... Do you all pretty much support the official explanation?

Last edited by Aemilus; 05-12-2015 at 05:44 AM.
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
ChuckF (05-12-2015)
  #43  
Old 05-12-2015, 02:56 AM
ChuckF's Avatar
ChuckF ChuckF is offline
liar in wolf's clothing
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Frequently about
Posts: XVMMMDCCLXXXV
Images: 2
Default Re: A Polite Discussion of 9/11 Theories

:cornucopia:
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
Ari (05-12-2015), BrotherMan (05-12-2015), Crumb (05-12-2015), Dingfod (05-12-2015), erimir (05-12-2015), JoeP (05-12-2015), Nullifidian (05-12-2015), Pan Narrans (05-12-2015), Sock Puppet (05-12-2015), Stephen Maturin (05-12-2015), Stormlight (05-12-2015), Ymir's blood (05-12-2015), Zehava (05-13-2015)
  #44  
Old 05-12-2015, 10:06 AM
JoeP's Avatar
JoeP JoeP is offline
[thanks] whisperer
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: England/Miisaland
Gender: Male
Posts: XXMVCCXXXII
Images: 18
Default Re: A Polite Discussion of 9/11 Theories

:popcornucopia:
__________________

:roadrun:
Free thought! Please take one!

:unitedkingdom:   :southafrica:   :unitedkingdom::finland:       :eur:       :m&ms::m&ms::twix::twix: (rotated 180°):m&ms::m&ms:
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
Dingfod (05-12-2015), maddog (05-12-2015), Nullifidian (05-13-2015), Pan Narrans (05-12-2015), Stormlight (05-12-2015), Ymir's blood (05-12-2015)
  #45  
Old 05-12-2015, 10:53 AM
Ari's Avatar
Ari Ari is offline
I read some of your foolish scree, then just skimmed the rest.
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Bay Area
Gender: Male
Posts: MXCDLXXXV
Blog Entries: 8
Default Re: A Polite Discussion of 9/11 Theories

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aemilus View Post
You don't see any problem there with the Law of Conservation of Energy?
:chin: :nope:
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
Crumb (05-12-2015), Nullifidian (05-13-2015)
  #46  
Old 05-12-2015, 12:53 PM
Dingfod's Avatar
Dingfod Dingfod is offline
Gone Guy
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: In a Hole
Gender: Male
Posts: XLMMDCLIII
Blog Entries: 21
Images: 92
Default Re: A Polite Discussion of 9/11 Theories

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aemilus View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dingfod View Post
I have not seen anything that would change my opinion.
So you haven't seen anything that would change your opinion. What about WTC7 and gravitational acceleration.... You don't see any problem there with the Law of Conservation of Energy?

What about the rest of you.... Do you all pretty much support the official explanation?
Gravitational acceleration? Every collapse video I've seen shows the buildings accelerating as they collapsed. That the rate of acceleration may have been less than freefall is most likely due to a bunch of shit in the way, like all the lower floors and the amount of time (fractions of seconds) that it took to collapse each progressively.

WTC7 was in fact damaged severely by the fall of WTC1 and WTC2, and further weakened by unfought fire. No eyewitness reported hearing anything approaching explosions prior to that 40 story building collapse.

However, I'm not going to rehash what has been hashed and hacked and folded, bent, spindled and mutilated over and over again already. I have not seen anything to change my mind about the cause of the building collapse of any of the WTC buildings.
__________________
Sleep - the most beautiful experience in life - except drink.--W.C. Fields

Last edited by Dingfod; 05-12-2015 at 07:25 PM.
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
Ari (05-12-2015), But (05-12-2015), Crumb (05-12-2015), Janet (05-12-2015), Nullifidian (05-13-2015), Stephen Maturin (05-13-2015), Stormlight (05-12-2015), The Lone Ranger (05-12-2015), Watser? (05-12-2015), Ymir's blood (05-12-2015), Zehava (05-13-2015)
  #47  
Old 05-12-2015, 03:57 PM
beyelzu's Avatar
beyelzu beyelzu is offline
simple country microbiologist hyperchicken
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: georgia
Posts: XMMMLXXXVI
Blog Entries: 1
Images: 8
Default Re: A Polite Discussion of 9/11 Theories

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stormlight View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by SR71 View Post
I think this is one of very few forums where I could get away with such a carelessly flippant remark and not suffer at all as far as public censure goes. I apologize if anyone was offended. No offense was intended.
I am terribly offended and I demand restitutions, sir! This is an outrage!
Sr71 is being a bore which I think means this situation is a national disaster for you.

You deserve that apoligy.
__________________
:blowkiss: :beloved: :blowkiss: :beloved: :blowkiss: :steve: :blowkiss: :beloved: :blowkiss: :beloved: :blowkiss:
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
Stormlight (05-13-2015), Zehava (05-13-2015)
  #48  
Old 05-12-2015, 06:41 PM
Angakuk's Avatar
Angakuk Angakuk is offline
NeoTillichian Hierophant & Partisan Hack
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Iowa
Gender: Male
Posts: MXCCCLXXXIII
Default Re: A Polite Discussion of 9/11 Theories

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dingfod View Post
However, I'm not going to rehash what has been hashed and hacked and folded, bent, spindled and mutilated over and over again already. I do have not seen anything to change my mind about the cause of the building collapse of any of the WTC buildings.
That is because you haven't been looking hard enough or in the right places.
:headinsand:

Try looking here.
:butt:
__________________
Old Pain In The Ass says: I am on a mission from God to comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable; to bring faith to the doubtful and doubt to the faithful. :shakebible:
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
BrotherMan (05-12-2015), Dingfod (05-15-2015), Nullifidian (05-13-2015), Stephen Maturin (05-13-2015), Stormlight (05-13-2015), Ymir's blood (05-12-2015)
  #49  
Old 05-12-2015, 10:15 PM
Ymir's blood's Avatar
Ymir's blood Ymir's blood is offline
Coffin Creep
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: The nightmare realm
Posts: XXMXCCCLXXXIV
Images: 67
Default Re: A Polite Discussion of 9/11 Theories

I found monkeys! :arsemonkeys:
__________________
Much of MADNESS, and more of SIN, and HORROR the soul of the plot.
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
Angakuk (05-13-2015), BrotherMan (05-12-2015), Crumb (05-13-2015), Dingfod (05-15-2015), Janet (05-12-2015), JoeP (05-12-2015), Kael (05-13-2015), LadyShea (05-13-2015), lisarea (05-12-2015), Nullifidian (05-13-2015), Pan Narrans (05-13-2015), Sock Puppet (05-13-2015), SR71 (05-16-2015), Stephen Maturin (05-13-2015), Stormlight (05-13-2015), Watser? (05-12-2015)
  #50  
Old 05-13-2015, 04:15 AM
SR71's Avatar
SR71 SR71 is online now
Stoic Derelict
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: The Dustbin of History
Gender: Male
Posts: VCCCLIII
Images: 2
Default Re: A Polite Discussion of 9/11 Theories

Quote:
Originally Posted by beyelzu View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stormlight View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by SR71 View Post
I think this is one of very few forums where I could get away with such a carelessly flippant remark and not suffer at all as far as public censure goes. I apologize if anyone was offended. No offense was intended.
I am terribly offended and I demand restitutions, sir! This is an outrage!
Sr71 is being a bore which I think means this situation is a national disaster for you.

You deserve that apoligy.
Full and adequate remedies, reliefs and reparations shall be forthcoming to all injured parties.

These shall be disbursed in the form of photographs of flippantly careless rough tree seks.
__________________
Chained out, like a sitting duck just waiting for the fall _Cage the Elephant
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
BrotherMan (05-13-2015), lisarea (05-13-2015), Nullifidian (05-13-2015), Pan Narrans (05-13-2015), Sock Puppet (05-14-2015), Stormlight (05-13-2015)
Reply

  Freethought Forum > The Public Baths > News, Politics & Law


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

 

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:50 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Page generated in 2.16389 seconds with 13 queries