If man can not control himself when he see nice and seductive woman than he has a big problem..And also what somebody consider daring? Islamic people even rape veiled woman..
and donkeys. and goats. |
|
|
|
Guns should be banned forever. It should be implemented asap
Who would you trust with a gun to protect you and your family forever? Your government? The police? The military? Police can't protect you. When seconds count the police are only minutes away. They will get there just in time to fill out the crime scene report. Unfortunately, I'm hearing more frequently "an hour." |
|
|
|
.....
If you don't know where the official story resides yet, why are you even in this thread?
Eighth grade physics, math and chemistry again? Why are you continually trying to use a bottle-rocket to go to the moon? Just because a few of the principles hold true in, both, bottle rockets and moon shots... or are you really trying to do this?
.....
Unfortunately for you... Delta V = ISP * g * ln(Ms/Mf) ... governs both bottle rockets and moon shots. Wow! I had totally thought you wouldn't say something like this. Notice that I said, "Just because a few of the principles hold true in, both, bottle rockets and moon shots..." If you ever build a bottle rocket to scale large enough so that it could reach the moon, let me know. I wanna watch the blast-off... from a distance, with binoculars, of course. Large enough? More idiotic anti scientific, anti-physics gibberish. Plug ISP = 50 into the equation, set Ms and Mf, and you will see the performance of a black powder rocket. If you can't see what math or physics even does, then you are incompetent to even talk about 911. Oh wait, I forgot. It's the Evil Joes, isn't it? In your mind. Ho, ho, ho. You want to get away from 9/11, so I talk about bottle rockets. Then you distract from bottle rockets with a bunch of gibberish..... Argument from ridicule, ad hominem. The last refuge of losers. Please product some actual arguments for the twin towers atrocity that cannot be refuted by 8th grade chemistry, math and physics. Otherwise, your 911 Truther arguments are basically, ridiculous. So go watch those dumb ass movies on Youtube, and watch your asinine conspiracy linkys and come back with some argument that CAN'T be refuted with 8th grade stuff. Your problem, not mine. |
|
|
|
Hillary Clinton Admits U.S. Created Al Qaeda, ISIS  Why isn't the Mainstream Media (MSM) in America reporting the fact that Hillary Clinton admitted in public that the U.S. government created Al Qaeda, ISIS, Al Nusra, etc.? Why does the MSM refuse to tell the American people that the United States has not ever actually fought ISIS but instead has surreptitiously and very actively supported ISIS and the other radical Muslim terrorists in the Middle East? Why has the media refused to reveal the fact that ever since Russia started to fight a true offensive war against ISIS the terrorist organization has been reduced to almost half? ....  Thank you for sharing this. Same thing in Libya & Iran -- assassination & regime change, only to have them turn on us. What is not clearly stated is the objectives of Hillary and Obama here, versus the national interests of the American people. Hillary is in debt to Saudi interests, and has an Iranian girlfriend. Obama has an Iranian chief of staff. We should be on the side with Russia against ISIS and others, and Trump sees this quite clearly. |
|
|
|
Soylet Green pills. Hmmm..... |
|
|
|
No no no! Some surgical enhancements are definitely in order, though! |
|
|
|
Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders Contemplate a Debatehttp://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/27/us/politics/donald-trump-bernie-sanders-debate.htmlHillary Clinton has declined an invitation to debate Senator Bernie Sanders before the California primary election next month, but he may have found a willing replacement: Donald J. Trump.
The idea of a debate between the two men came up on Wednesday when Mr. Trump was appearing on “Jimmy Kimmel Live” and Mr. Kimmel said that Mr. Sanders had passed along an invitation to Mr. Trump, the presumptive Republican nominee. Mr. Trump, who opted out of a debate in Iowa in January and decided that he would no longer participate in primary debates after the Republican field narrowed to three candidates, said he would be open to debating Mr. Sanders if the proceeds were donated to charity, although there were conflicting reports about how serious he was.
“If I debated him we would have such high ratings and I think we should take that money and give it to some worthy charity,” Mr. Trump said. “If we paid a nice sum toward a charity, I would love to do that.”
... I also heard something about TYT hosting a debate, but Hillary dropped out, so they invited Trump instead Donald Trump Officially Invited To The Young Turks Debatehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wXuBJvzeC1Q I view TYT with disgust as lying propagandists but am genuinely curious how Trump would handle them and how he would act toward them. Well, he's not exactly your typical right winger Republican.... |
|
|
|
In 1988, Al Gore and Dr. James Hansen made the initial presentation to a Senate committee which launched the Global Warming As We Know It Today. It was in the middle of summer, and it was swelteringly hot in the Senate chambers. This was covered by reporters for major newspapers that immediately went out and started promoting the alarmist theology. What isn't well known is that Gore and Hansen the night before, broke the AC system to that room so that it would be unbearably hot. |
|
|
|
.....
If you don't know where the official story resides yet, why are you even in this thread?
Eighth grade physics, math and chemistry again? Why are you continually trying to use a bottle-rocket to go to the moon? Just because a few of the principles hold true in, both, bottle rockets and moon shots... or are you really trying to do this?
.....
Unfortunately for you... Delta V = ISP * g * ln(Ms/Mf) ... governs both bottle rockets and moon shots. Wow! I had totally thought you wouldn't say something like this. Notice that I said, "Just because a few of the principles hold true in, both, bottle rockets and moon shots..." If you ever build a bottle rocket to scale large enough so that it could reach the moon, let me know. I wanna watch the blast-off... from a distance, with binoculars, of course. Large enough? More idiotic anti scientific, anti-physics gibberish. Plug ISP = 50 into the equation, set Ms and Mf, and you will see the performance of a black powder rocket. If you can't see what math or physics even does, then you are incompetent to even talk about 911. Oh wait, I forgot. It's the Evil Joes, isn't it? In your mind. |
|
|
|
I don't think so but she's is.
I don't know, maybe she's isn't? |
|
|
|
.....
If you don't know where the official story resides yet, why are you even in this thread?
Eighth grade physics, math and chemistry again? Why are you continually trying to use a bottle-rocket to go to the moon? Just because a few of the principles hold true in, both, bottle rockets and moon shots... or are you really trying to do this?
.....
Unfortunately for you... Delta V = ISP * g * ln(Ms/Mf) ... governs both bottle rockets and moon shots. Wow! I had totally thought you wouldn't say something like this. Notice that I said, "Just because a few of the principles hold true in, both, bottle rockets and moon shots..." If you ever build a bottle rocket to scale large enough so that it could reach the moon, let me know. I wanna watch the blast-off... from a distance, with binoculars, of course.
Yes, what I am doing is showing how many, IF NOT ALL of the 911 Truther arguments "Based on laws of physics" can be disproven with 8th grade physics, math, etc.
That's it, buddy.
That's how bad and how idiotic the "science" behind your "beliefs" is. It's bat shit crazy. Since we're staying on the 8th grade let's look at your ideas about keeping the lid on a conspiracy. The typical middle school in the USA has about 750 students - and that's 7th, 8th, and 9th grade. Probably for your Grand Conspiracy Theory, included the Evil Joes and the US Government, you'd have 2250 people or so involved (including all the Ninjas to place explosives at night).
That's 3 US Middle Schools full of people. And according to your bat shit crazy views, that ocean of baboons is going to keep quiet about their secret for 15 years?
That's crazy talk, buddy.
There's no way you can keep those people from talking.
The basic problem you have is that regardless of how bad you think the "OFFICIAL STORY" is, the stories you come up with are FAR WORSE. You're just a guy that watched one or two badly researched propaganda movies and you're doing nothing but repeating crap from them. That's it. You aren't a crusader for truth, but the opposite. A naive agent of disinformation and mis information for Muslim and Islamic terrorists.
The problem with you is, all you can do is SAY that you are showing how the official story is truth. Other than to SAY that you are rebutting, you haven't rebutted anything. That's okay, though. All your talk simply helps to show that 9/11 was an inside job. Liar. It's the easiest thing in the world to "rebut" an argument presented in an absolute sense, such as Techshare does. Or which you do. EXPLOSIVES WERE NEEDED!!!!! No, the potential energy of the fall alone was equal to over 100 TONS of explosive. Rebutted. You are now officially the Bagdad Bob Badeker. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CXl1GkWWGmAhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yfAeMtcURg0 |
|
|
|
So, at least 31% are fucked in the head or downright stupid to think there is anything honest about Hillary to begin w/. These fucking progressive scum just are in a different world but at least the Bernie types can see what's up. Welcome to America. But most likely the 31% could be just old timers who arent informed of the information what we read and find so its not they are dumb. Pretty much media washed up to their senses and this is how most are - on whatever the media tells them. Old gray haired libtards that see the hillary of twenty years ago, not the one standing and talking today. |
|
|
|
I just saw the most epic Trump Protestor video I have ever seen and I just had to share it with you people here.
....
Transcript:
The only reason that they started shooting tear gas at us was because an old man was pushed by a police officer. I asked, let him pass! Let him walk that way...he had a cane! No, he hit him in the face for no apparent reason! When Donald Trump showed up look at how heavy and hate he brought here! I stand for people! Uhh ...our... armed services! Our men and women in uniform we're apposed to stand united, but he brings division! He brings hatred. We are apposed to stand united aren't we? Aren't we all American's? Are...arv... our liberty is apposed to be uphold! Our Constitution is apposed to be held and the strongest upset... my bad....huhu. The reason ah, yeah, start fires...fires were started. Earlier, but when that man was attacked by a police officer that incited vylence. Obviously they brought it when they attacked that innocent man. Now, WTF is that appost ta be about?! Mah bad... scuse my language. But you know aaa....ehhh... look it...we are apposed to protect foreign and domestic, but they'r domestic here! They're bringing domestic terrorism to us! We're all Americans, we have the...free stand where we please! We're not cheap! We're not slaves! Oh...my bad... and you know we apposed to stand! Look at what theyr tryna do, they'r tryna force us on our KNEES! American was founded on revolution! We're founded on immigrants. George Washington, we should take example. Abraham Lincoln, Patton, they fought for this country didn't they? Didn't they do any good? We must stand! We stand united!
A for effort, F- for execution.
Say what? |
|
|
|
.....
If you don't know where the official story resides yet, why are you even in this thread?
Eighth grade physics, math and chemistry again? Why are you continually trying to use a bottle-rocket to go to the moon? Just because a few of the principles hold true in, both, bottle rockets and moon shots... or are you really trying to do this?
.....
Unfortunately for you... Delta V = ISP * g * ln(Ms/Mf) ... governs both bottle rockets and moon shots. Yes, what I am doing is showing how many, IF NOT ALL of the 911 Truther arguments "Based on laws of physics" can be disproven with 8th grade physics, math, etc. That's it, buddy. That's how bad and how idiotic the "science" behind your "beliefs" is. It's bat shit crazy. Since we're staying on the 8th grade let's look at your ideas about keeping the lid on a conspiracy. The typical middle school in the USA has about 750 students - and that's 7th, 8th, and 9th grade. Probably for your Grand Conspiracy Theory, included the Evil Joes and the US Government, you'd have 2250 people or so involved (including all the Ninjas to place explosives at night). That's 3 US Middle Schools full of people. And according to your bat shit crazy views, that ocean of baboons is going to keep quiet about their secret for 15 years? That's crazy talk, buddy. There's no way you can keep those people from talking. The basic problem you have is that regardless of how bad you think the "OFFICIAL STORY" is, the stories you come up with are FAR WORSE. You're just a guy that watched one or two badly researched propaganda movies and you're doing nothing but repeating crap from them. That's it. You aren't a crusader for truth, but the opposite. A naive agent of disinformation and mis information for Muslim and Islamic terrorists. |
|
|
|
....
It doesn't matter if TECSHARE is qualified or competent to discuss the failure of the Twin Towers or not. Why doesn't it matter? Because neither you or anyone else has produced enough information for anyone to come to a correct conclusion about exactly the way the Towers came down. However, like there are science theories that are more valid than other science theories, the official 9/11 story is way less valid than many other stories.
You'd have to start your little propaganda spiel by explaining exactly what it might be that you are calling the "official story." Then you can go to explaining why Badecker's beliefs are more valid than anyone else's, even though you don't even know 8th grade physics, math or chemistry. Oh, one more thing. It certainly is ridiculously easy to show that the dynamic load of the towers falling is a sufficient cause of the collapse without invoking explosives or magical "nano powders." I've done that. It's also ridiculously easy to show that many other core beliefs of you and your Trufer friends are complete bullshit and do not withstand even a cursory examination. You're just a guy that watched one or two badly researched propaganda movies and you're doing nothing but repeating crap from them. That's it. You aren't a crusader for truth, but the opposite. A naive agent of disinformation and mis information for Muslim and Islamic terrorists. |
|
|
|
Actually, you asked if I considered a hurricane a static load. Your words-
As far as your point about 2000% over engineering being a static load, please tell me, what do you call wind shear? Is the fact that the building was designed to stay standing in a hurricane a static load?
Then you've got a couple little problems with your claim about "let's use the official report." Here are your words -
I never even debated the .8 seconds. You can have it, not that it helps your argument other than providing another distraction. Lets use the official report which states 10 seconds which IS STILL FREE FALL SPEED. Your talk about the "margin of error" again is just more word salad to attempt to sound like you have an argument.
No, it's your problem to show what your margin of error is in the quoted "10 seconds."
What I see is a huge dust cloud covering up precise measurements and a seismic record that goes on and on and on. So you want 0.8 seconds, fine. Then you've got "Something close to free fall," don't you? Because "Something between 10 and 10.8 seconds" is not "exactly free fall."
Anyway, do you even have a clue as to what the time for "free fall" of this structure would have been? Because I sure don't. Let's look at another "official report."
The technical information on the building collapse is in the NIST reports. The NIST FAQ (Frequently Asked Questions) site has the pertinent information.
The seismic spikes for the collapse of the WTC Towers are the result of debris from the collapsing towers impacting the ground. The spikes began approximately 10 seconds after the times for the start of each building’s collapse and continued for approximately 15 seconds.
So what the heck is your "10 seconds" claiming? That's when the entire mass of the WTC hit the ground? When the first piece of junk hit the ground? When the last piece hit the ground?
That is interesting, because these are your exact words, stated before the above quote I might add. Is a hurricane a static load? Have you ever been in a hurricane? Even been separated by one pane of glass from a full blown hurricane? I have. I was stuck for four miserable days in a hotel with no power in Kowloon. Yes, I would call it a static load in the horizontal direction, unless some dynamic oscillations set up in the building structure. The load presented was remarkably constant over the duration.
Want to argue that one? Go ahead.
Funny, you can't even seem to keep your own lies straight. I already repeatedly stated I am using the number of 10 seconds from The 9/11 Commission Report. Is the official report too "conspiratorial" for you now? The number of 9.2 seconds is from independent video analysis. The .8 seconds is not "a margin of error", because it is the difference between the independent analysis and the official 9/11 report..... Not that you bothered to read it, but I already sourced the final NIST report which admitted free fall speeds in building 7. As far as towers 1 and 2, NIST HAS NO OFFICIAL EXPLANATION of how the towers fell, only a collection of assumptions. Assumptions based on "dry labed" models that have widely been disputed for lack of accuracy completely dismissing things like the core support structure in their models. Additionally your quote from the NIST F.A.Q. says nothing about free fall speeds, it says what their interpretation of the seismic record is. Nice attempt at misdirection. You are the one supporting the official narrative, not me. I only used numbers out of The 9/11 Commission Report so that it would not simply be used by you as another source of distraction from the violation of the laws of physics that had to have happened even based on these numbers for the official narrative to be true. Since you are so insistent that the seismic records corroborate the official narrative, lets take a look at them shall we? The First Building's fall:  The following are excerpts from a report by Dr. André Rousseau. He is a Doctor of Geophysics and Geology...... So I guess you concede that the 2000% is a static load. Then you have to concede that the simple test case I showed with 120x weight is more than 20x.... Now let's talk about your seismic charts. Can you kindly show me where the famous ten seconds begins and ends? Thanks. Dr. Rousseau is obviously bat shit crazy. We've already established the TNT equivalent of one building's fall to be equal to more than 100 TONS OF TNT. What more is needed? Nothing more. I'm just not seeing how you get a precise number from the seismic charts. They show exactly what I would expect to see, waveforms from a big pile of rubble forming. Please show us how you read this chart to get your precise "free fall" speeds. I'm not buying this garbage one bit. So far you've showed you -
don't know or comprehend static vs dynamic load
were not aware that the dynamic load dwarfs the building's strength and made it inescapable they would fall
didn't have a clue that force to propel and object sideways was just the initial push, not "exponentially larger as you go further"
have no clue as to how to even measure "free fall velocity"
didn't have a clue that the potential energy of any object at 1000 feet was 500 times what would be required to move that object 600 feet sideways
Believe that the lid can be kept on a conspiracy with thousands of people involvedI don't think you are qualified or competent to discuss the mechanisms of failure of the Twin Towers. Basically there is not one assertion you have made that checks out. Not one. |
|
|
|
Guns should be banned forever. It should be implemented asap
But that would take people with guns to do the banning. |
|
|
|
Islam hates people because People hate Islam -- simple as that.
Islam hate people? lol what you mean that Islam hates people? Islam does not teach hatred! It's because Islamists say that terrorists go to a reward in the afterlife, while the rest of us claim either 1) there is no afterlife, and so life is precious on Earth, or 2) terrorists will be punished in the afterlife.
you do not learn about Islam, so that you do not know, that there is life after death Hereafter. life on earth is temporary, so very precious to you always do good and diligent in worship. However, Islamic leaders NEVER claim that terrorists will be punished in the afterlife; on the contrary, they say that terrorists have earned their eternal rewards in paradise.
terrorists clearly would be punished in the hereafter, for the purpose they are wrong, killing innocent people. terrorists will never get happiness in the hereafter or in heaven. all the statements you really do not based in fact, I will not argue, because you do not know Islam. so there is no end if I argue with you. May I suggest? Why don't you go to youtube and show evidence of an Islamic scholar saying terrorists will be punished in the hereafter. |
|
|
|
LOL.... I'm going to tell you what I see in this picture. 100% correct carry. Magazine is out, gun is pointed DOWN or UP, trigger finger is OUTSIDE the trigger guard. 'Nuff said. |
|
|
|
.....
However criticisng a religion and telling them to fuck off and stop persecuting gays or women or deliberately trying to usurp governments to install religious ones? Yes, I will fucking say that, because it's true. Actually no, I can't even call stuff like that a religion because of the apostasy issue, it really is more like a cult.....
"Holding someone against their will..." "Coercion of behavior under threat of death..." One need say no more. What troubles me is the manner in which pro-Islamic commentators gloss over, ignore, or purposefully suppress these issues, forcing the likes of me or you to point them out. Then they go silent. There's an astonishing amount of lying going on by pro Islamic commentators. Takiyya uncovered, once again. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
