My Confined Space

Paint my House!

Dana Delaney was totally hot in this movie. Makes me want to get some butter.

Comment by bawb — May 16, 2008 @ 7:08 pm

My eyes!! THey BuRn!!

Comment by bright green — May 16, 2008 @ 7:08 pm

I don’t understand how you can be that fat and still have no titties…I have to be half her weight, and even I have bigger titties then her. I hate me

Comment by jamestown — May 16, 2008 @ 7:17 pm

I’d hit it.

Comment by mastermunan — May 16, 2008 @ 7:24 pm

Worst book-to-movie adaptation EVAR.

Comment by SouthernOracle — May 16, 2008 @ 7:45 pm

There is a special circle in hell for you natedog….

Comment by bigjames26 — May 16, 2008 @ 7:52 pm

i’m going to have nightmares….

Comment by storminator — May 16, 2008 @ 8:49 pm

I’d do her, no questions asked

Comment by Bonking_Sheep — May 16, 2008 @ 9:30 pm

SHE IS THE EXCEPTION TO RULE 34 DO NOT WANT

Comment by Snow — May 17, 2008 @ 4:36 am

This, sirrah, is amazing.

Comment by Gilly — May 2, 2008 @ 4:39 am

amazing, eh absofuckinglutely.
I wanna know the source.

Comment by dieAntagonista — May 2, 2008 @ 4:56 am

AMERICA! FUCK YEAH!

Comment by Ando — May 2, 2008 @ 5:05 am

Wow thats the most hilarious thing I have ever seen.

Comment by Namelis1 — May 2, 2008 @ 6:15 am

That’s just good comedy. If only it weren’t do damned accurate.

Comment by st_judas — May 2, 2008 @ 7:00 am

fucking A.

but they forgot to mention that the price of hockey went to it’s highest price ever…

Comment by natedog — May 2, 2008 @ 7:57 am

@dieAntagonista
It’s from Married to the Sea: http://www.marriedtothesea.com/mtts-archives/mttsarchive-apr08.php

Comment by Serraph — May 2, 2008 @ 8:14 am

This is actually pretty damn funny, if I say so myself.

Comment by Sticky — May 2, 2008 @ 10:50 am

Blame Canada.

Comment by Korinthian — May 2, 2008 @ 2:01 pm

@ st_judas
What are you talking about? Accurate? I can’t possibly find any comparable event, you must be crazy.

Comment by Sarcastastic — May 2, 2008 @ 2:20 pm

Oh I get what you did there. It’s like a comparison.

I wish it weren’t so broad and stupid. It’s funny if you’ve got .01% of the info the way most Americans do.

If Iraq were full of Canadians and Canada were a dictatorship who had just invaded…I dunno…wealthy Greenland? Then maybe this would work. If we were publicly stating we had the death of the UAE on our minds and rallied our people around that cause…then maybe this would make some sense. If our domestic population of English and French were shooting the shit out of each other and burrowing the country into a perennial state of civil unrest…then mayyyybe.

But it fails. It fails hard and then it fails some more.

What’s not funny is someone thought they were clever when they drew that little mess. And they probably protest, tell people to watch crappy conspiracy movies, and collect social assistance while still living with their parents. All the while wondering why foreign investors have pulled away from putting money into the US and blaming their own president for all their problems.

Comment by mAgnUS BUTTfoorson — May 2, 2008 @ 2:29 pm

Looks like mAgnUS BUTTfoorson bought every word the media spoon-fed him. It’s people like him that make good soldiers, christians, or something else that doesn’t require thinking about things in a critical manner.

Comment by Korinthian — May 2, 2008 @ 2:50 pm

Hi pot, I’m kettle. And I believe it is you who are black.

People like you make good welfare cases.

Comment by mAgnUS BUTTfoorson — May 2, 2008 @ 3:40 pm

Oh btw: since you’re obviously new…I’m Canadian.

So…ya. You lose.

Comment by mAgnUS BUTTfoorson — May 2, 2008 @ 3:42 pm

I *am* new, I had no idea this place had a rule saying that opposing canadians resulted in automatic juvenile proclamations of victory. Who cares if you are canadian, and who would bother to remember it?

Comment by Korinthian — May 2, 2008 @ 4:05 pm

this might not be the most accurate scenario, but close enough.

there are plenty of religious fanatics that might crusade.
too bad america wasnt invaded during the Civil War. yeah, thats right, america has the capability of killing its citizens.

oh, and the pot-kettle comment… went nowhere

Comment by uberubermensch — May 2, 2008 @ 6:46 pm

Why so uptight? If you actually checked their website you can see they make some of the best comics on the web. Its humor for laughing at.

Comment by Serraph — May 2, 2008 @ 7:50 pm

Well no duh Americans, just like any other people, have the *potential* to kill each other.

And America being invaded during the Civil War would still be nothing like what’s going on in Iraq.

Comment by FlyingMantisShrimp — May 2, 2008 @ 9:05 pm

This is absolutely ridiculous.

U.A.E. doesn’t have the firepower

Comment by mechaxl — May 2, 2008 @ 11:27 pm

@mAgnUS

Even you get owned once in a while.

Comment by AlecDalek — May 3, 2008 @ 7:18 am

I’ll readily admit if I get told and am wrong but this fucking idiot just plain missed the point.

You didn’t “oppose” me. You made some inane bullshit faggot statement that was clearly an attack on a certain segment I am not a part of. You also cited media influence for my perspective when everyone (even some retards like you) knows the media if heavily biased towards the uninformed hippie point of view you are presenting.

Think about that in a critical manner you half wit queer little prick.

I’m sorry was that too juvenile for you? Well apparently you’re not only new here but to the internet as well. This is going to be rough on you but…you’re probably going to get a lot more of this kind of reaction if you are in the habit of shooting your mouth off like an asshole.

I tried being polite in my response and you for whatever reason interpreted it as a green light to be even more of a loser.

This picture is stupid. Its not ‘not funny’ because its insulting. Its not funny because it is the kind of thing someone with zero knowledge of global politics would chortle at just because they think they’re supposed to. Then if you call them out on it they give you a reaction like I got from pisshead over there.

Why don’t you give a good explanation of how what I said was wrong? Take the dick out of your mouth first please.

Comment by mAgnUS BUTTfoorson — May 3, 2008 @ 7:19 pm

troll?
seems to be more insults in there than logic…fail.

Comment by uberubermensch — May 3, 2008 @ 7:51 pm

its demonstrating that if the table were turned and they attacked the a) the wrong group and b) for the actions of few (as americans did) it would not be funny.

über troll action right there.

also, magnusbuttforwhatever, tl;dr.

Comment by Pants — May 3, 2008 @ 8:01 pm

too bad you didn’t read what I wrote because I pointed out the massive flaws in your thinking and this fucking crappy cartoon.

Poor Pants. Poor poor Pants.

short enough?

Comment by mAgnUS BUTTfoorson — May 3, 2008 @ 11:58 pm

wow mAgnUS BUTTfoorson, let loose a little. laugh at the cartoon. it is funny cuz it could happen if roles were reversed. but you dont get that. how the hell are you in canada and not see this.

and what you write is trivial. you dont say much for the amount you write. “if you have nothing good to say, dont say anything at all”

Comment by uberubermensch — May 4, 2008 @ 5:30 am

Holy shit you fucking retard…

I KNOW THAT’S WHAT IT’S SUPPOSED TO BE ABOUT BUT THE REASON IT’S FUCKING STUPID IS BECAUSE IT DOESN’T TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE MASSIVE VARIABLES I MENTIONED BEFORE AND IT OPERATING PURELY ON GEOGRAPHY.

AS I SAID THIS IS THE KIND OF THING UNINFORMED FUKWITS GIGGLE AT BECAUSE THEY THINK THEY’RE SUPPOSED TO CAUSE THEY SO SMERT ETC. THESE SAME PEOPLE WOULD BE THE ONES GUILTY OF MEDIA BRAINWASHING.

GET IT?

“If Iraq were full of Canadians and Canada were a dictatorship who had just invaded…I dunno…wealthy Greenland? Then maybe this would work. If we were publicly stating we had the death of the UAE on our minds and rallied our people around that cause…then maybe this would make some sense. If our domestic population of English and French were shooting the shit out of each other and burrowing the country into a perennial state of civil unrest…then mayyyybe.”

Understand?

No?

That’s because you’re a fucking moron.

My God. You’re just about the biggest dumbshit I’ve ever come across. Go turn on the Daily Show and laugh along like you have any idea about whats going on in the world you limp dick little sheep.

‘tee hee…itth wike eewak wer gog boosh sented miwitawy and waw ith a bad ting. me tho thmert.’

You’re a fucking idiot. The worst part is you’re typical.

Comment by mAgnUS BUTTfoorson — May 4, 2008 @ 10:48 am

Hey wait a sec… dood! I love the daily show…! Does that make me typical? Dagnabbit!!!

Comment by Phyreblade — May 4, 2008 @ 1:43 pm

so you disagree with the cartoon and are trying to force that down everyones throats.

the thing is the united states will always be the dominating power, and kinda a bully nation. but the middle east in general will never be conquered. hence a war over there is futile. just like a war in canada would go nowhere. there prolly wouldnt be many casualties in a canadian war, and the US would crush them… nobody wants to war with america, but send a message.

war is futile. and funny. and when you out a new twist on it, then its really funny.

for the second time. insults only backfire on you. And caps lock doesnt make you look cool either.

Comment by uberubermensch — May 4, 2008 @ 2:23 pm

It’s like I’m standing in front of you pointing at “the point” and you’re shaking your head and saying “no….that’s not right at all”.

You can’t argue with facts. Hell you can’t argue at all. You’re a fucking moron.

You have demonstrated an outright absence of knowledge of anything related to this. You reiterate a point that was combated in the first post I made.

You know what doesn’t make you look cool? Being a fucking retard who with every post lets me know that no matter how big of a retard I knew you to be before you will prove me wrong and are in fact much more retarded.

btw: China laughs at the US frequently. I like America but that’s just another way you’re wrong and are a fucking idiot.

I mean the middle east will never be conquered? You’re not there to conquer anything asshole! It’s not colonization! You’re supposed to be liberating people from a dictatorship! Hence this cartoon making no sense and the only correlation being a geographic flip. Which is idiotic. Which is why its not funny.

What are you 14? You did just wake up from a coma?

What’s wrong with you or is it just plain old fashioned stupidity?

Comment by mAgnUS BUTTfoorson — May 4, 2008 @ 4:49 pm

oh and would you please now take the next faggot step in the hierarchy of faggotry and retreat to a puppet master stance where you profess to have fained this utter stupidity in some kind of pathetic, nerd flailing attempt at controlling something in your life.

Thanks.

Comment by mAgnUS BUTTfoorson — May 4, 2008 @ 4:52 pm

hmmm, very descriptive.
if you arent insecure, then dont flame.

Comment by uberubermensch — May 4, 2008 @ 6:21 pm

“if you aren’t insecure…

…then don’t “flame”"

Ok people there it is. He is a retard.

Sorry I wasted any time on you at all “uberubermensch” or on the first idiot who missed every point like they were going to hurt.

Here’s the answer to the cartoon:
it’s hilarious!**

**if you’re a complete fucking moron who doesn’t know a God damned thing about the world or anything this cartoon is relating to. You really need to be one of those gangly, snide little pricks who says things like ‘Bush sucks’ because your sorry little ass saw someone else say it on TV and you really want to sound grown up and smart.

Comment by mAgnUS BUTTfoorson — May 5, 2008 @ 9:05 am

- Serraph, thanks a lot.

Comment by dieAntagonista — May 5, 2008 @ 5:00 pm

Its a young Steve Buscemi!

Comment by aproximation — May 1, 2008 @ 10:53 pm

with a spotty beard!

Comment by tiki god — May 1, 2008 @ 11:09 pm

now’s the time on Sprockets when we dance…

Comment by natedog — May 2, 2008 @ 8:18 am

tiki> lol… Say hello to Mr. Pink. Nice page btw. -9/11 Truth Norway

Comment by gamlerik — May 3, 2008 @ 4:26 pm

um, wallpaper tag?

Comment by pedantic — April 12, 2008 @ 5:16 pm

This is stupid, mines don’t kill you.

They just blew off your legs.

Comment by Hepathos — April 12, 2008 @ 6:37 pm

Funny picture, but just to perfectly clear: that is not George W Bush.
http://www.mbfala.com/Jackson/Jackson.html

Comment by reboot — April 3, 2008 @ 5:28 pm

*Fuck, Wheres The On Button*

Comment by mex_hustler — April 3, 2008 @ 6:40 pm

What does this picture show you about national security… you can take a picture of the president and he doesn’t even notice…..

Comment by Mindless101 — April 3, 2008 @ 10:30 pm

Oh man, remember the chick on even stevens? What happened to her?

Comment by Bakudai — March 20, 2008 @ 2:37 pm

I second Bakudai’s motion.

Comment by Rage 0 — March 20, 2008 @ 2:43 pm

Third world nations of the world, take note. The US economy is based primarily on building more and more bombs. After a while they pile up and they need to move their merchandise. Do the math.

Comment by AlecDalek — March 20, 2008 @ 2:46 pm

@Alekdalek
You need to add: “So do not give them a ready excuse to move the merchandise to your corner of the world.”

Comment by vygramul — March 21, 2008 @ 3:31 pm

what the fuck are you trying to say? remember USA is big but not enough to hide when real terrorist or people tired of that democratic stuff that have been given to them start to buy those precious bombs guns and any killing machine. so USA remember having a lot of bombs but not fingers to press the button its not gona help you. I said that because am from a foregine country not for another reason and I felt like insulted.

Comment by acid_monkey1 — March 27, 2008 @ 5:55 pm

Damn those guys were incredible. I’m from the other side of the pond, and I’m awed by what I heard.

Comment by numb7rs — February 24, 2008 @ 2:48 pm

LOL at first, on the top ladder, I thought it said TEH TRUCK but then sadly realized it was simply TEN TRUCK.

Comment by purple banana — February 24, 2008 @ 3:28 pm

I know this is true. How? Because I was THERE. Yup, thats right. In the middle. It’s true, all of it.

Comment by LordPartyTime — February 11, 2008 @ 1:23 pm

Don’t forget Tower 7

Comment by natedog — February 11, 2008 @ 3:50 pm

The World Trade Center was constructed from 1966-1973. The first man on the moon was July 20, 1969. The last man to walk on the moon was on December 11, 1971.
Conclusion: the WTC was the location of the hidden studio that faked the moon landing and was destroyed because the conspiracy theorists were getting to close to the truth. Iraq is just a cover story, a conspiracy to hide the conspiracy. Gentlemen: we are through the looking glass…

Comment by reboot — February 11, 2008 @ 4:09 pm

We actually live in a computer generated reality… our real bodies are being used by robots as slaves…

Comment by Alfalfasprouts — February 11, 2008 @ 5:16 pm

natedog,

Various news media agencies reported that Tower 7 was going to collapse before it actually did.

Take off your tin foil hat and stop acting like an idiot.

Comment by diabeetus — February 11, 2008 @ 5:28 pm

THAT JUST MEANS THEY WERE IN ON THE CONSPIRACY!!!

Comment by schulzbrianr — February 11, 2008 @ 5:30 pm

I have a conspiracy in my pants. I have a feeling I’ll be releasing it to the public soon enough.
It’s not quite a jumbo jet. But it is pretty close to a tower.

Comment by Nimoy — February 11, 2008 @ 5:32 pm

10. ????
11. Profit!

Comment by TokenWGuy — February 11, 2008 @ 8:35 pm

Hmm.. Comic got it wrong. They really did crash the fully loaded people into the building. Saddam would NEVER sell Bush the oil, he was pissed they were stealing it out of Kuwait…….and forgot to mention…..

FACT: War is the single largest contributor to the American economy.

Comment by benny — February 11, 2008 @ 10:32 pm

@reboot

you win.

Comment by tiki god — February 12, 2008 @ 9:37 am

@ Diabetus:

um, hello? those repeaters, er, reporters, did not say it was going to fall, they said it HAD ALREADY fallen. the BBC footage was a half hour early.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mxFRigYD3s

Larry Silverstien (the leaseholder of the WTC Complex, who made $6billion off 9/11) was interviewed in 2002 saying he gave to OK to bring the tower down.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7WYdAJQV100

The 47 Story STEEL framed tower fell in 6 seconds into a neat little pile just 7 hours after the other 2 towers collapsed. Here is a clip showing it falling in case anyone has not actually seen this tower fall:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LD06SAf0p9A

Go watch this 2 second video close up of WTC7 falling and then tell yourself it wasn’t explosives:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2EadoxWXpgY

So add it up. 2+2=4

at the very least, people that question the official bullshit spoonfed story are not crazy.

Comment by natedog — February 12, 2008 @ 10:21 am

you have a two sec clip where the leaseholder of the building said “pull it”. If you look at some of the other clips that are on your own link, you’ll see that “pull it” probably means use cables to control the fall.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1uxlrcQL5Dk&feature=related
I have a 56-page report from NIST showing it was a structural collapse from damage. So unless you are a qualified structural engineer who can find flaws in that report, STFU.

Comment by reboot — February 12, 2008 @ 10:46 am

Do you know what my problem is with the lose change explosion thing? All the examples they show of controlled demolitions are of buildings that are wider than they are tall or smaller apartment buildings, which WTCs clearly are not either. Find me some control videos of actual tall skyscrapers in a demolition and I’ll put some faith in that shit.

Comment by Caio — February 12, 2008 @ 10:49 am

@Caio:
i never said anything about Loose Change

@ Reboot:
the 2 second clip is not about Larry Silverstien. it is a close up of WTC7. the Silverstien clip is 24 seconds long.

and your explanation for ‘pull it’ is retarded. where are these cables that you speak of being used on Tower7? that video you linked to is about Tower6, after it had fallen, and was only 8 stories of rubble.

Cables were NOT used on Tower7. and certianly NOT by the Fire Department like Silverstien says in the interview.

also, i read the 56 page NIST report you linked to, and found it retarded. if you go read the thing, pay attention to pages L-19 to L-35, where they show the photos of the damage to WTC7. pay attention to figure L-22a, L-22b, and L-23c.
you want me to believe this damage caused the tower to collapse along the path of most resistance, as opposed to falling sideways as it most certainly would have done had it fallen due to the damage we can see in the photos?
i guess that’s where the cables came in handy?

Go look at Figure L-32. WTC5 & WTC6 were closer to the Twin Towers, and they were fucking gutted by the fall of those 2 buildings. yet i dare say it took longer than 6 or 7 seconds to bring down WTC6.

the rubble of WTC6 was 1/6 the size of the mostly intact WTC7.

Comment by natedog — February 12, 2008 @ 11:23 am

Oh, I wasn’t reading your posts, I’m just speaking generally here. I *really* want to see a skyscraper demolished. It would be awesome, and without the feeling of guilt associated with enjoying the death of thousands of people.

Comment by Caio — February 12, 2008 @ 12:13 pm

@natedog:

“and your explanation for ‘pull it’ is retarded. where are these cables that you speak of being used on Tower7? ”

That’s the point. ‘Pull it’ is not an industry term for explosive demolition of a building:

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&ct=res&cd=1&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.implosionworld.com%2FArticle-WTC%2520STUDY%25208-06%2520w%2520clarif%2520as%2520of%25209-8-06%2520.pdf&ei=CNSxR5LhOqSAigHSx5zLDg&usg=AFQjCNFFfgFVm_7mMB-mGLS4OM6lRft0_A&sig2=5DPRTKzUlgqjf2Zy5X9ZCw

As a result, Silverstien was referring to some other “it”. Like, and I’m just spitballing here, the firefighting effort.

Comment by vygramul — February 12, 2008 @ 12:15 pm

Good effort natedog, but it’s really not worth it. Spend your energy elsewhere and give up on convincing people on internet forums who have already closed their minds.

Comment by 7footJesus — February 12, 2008 @ 1:25 pm

If you don’t accept the clear PROOF given here:

http://www.timecube.com/

…your mind is clearly closed. What was that logical maxim? Of all competing theories, the burden of proof rests on those I disagree with?

Comment by Caio — February 12, 2008 @ 1:55 pm

Silverstein Quote: “I remember getting a call from the, er, fire department commander, telling me that they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire, and I said, “We’ve had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it.” And they made that decision to pull and we watched the building collapse.”

“Pull it” can not refer to the firefighting team. according to the FEMA report, page 5-23 of Chapter 5, the “manual firefighting efforts were stopped fairly early in the day”

the next page goes on to mention that “The average debris field radius was approximately 70 feet.” Think about that for a second. it was a 47 story skyscraper.

as to post 16, vygramul: his explanation for ‘pull it’ was a video clip of Building 6, which used cables to pull down the wall of a tower that had already collapsed. i pointed out that since WTC7 had not collapsed or had cables used on it, that his explanation was, in fact, retarded.

Comment by natedog — February 12, 2008 @ 2:13 pm

link to FEMA report:

http://www.fema.gov/pdf/library/fema403_ch5.pdf

Comment by natedog — February 12, 2008 @ 2:15 pm

And yet you haven’t provided a better explanation. The clip I linked clearly shows several people using the phrase “pull it” it terms of pulling it down with cables. The most likely explanation for the Silverstein quote is the that Silverstein is a glorified landlord who doesn’t know wtf he is talking about. Or maybe he meant “pull it down with cables”, but the building collapsed on its own before they could do that. Simple explanations are the most likely to be true.
Why bother linking to FEMA if they were in on the conspiracy anyway? Why bother trusting 8-10% of the US population since that’s about how many people would have to have direct knowledge of the plan in order to pull it off?
Let’s just examine the news reporters had prior knowledge claim: That would mean that nearly everyone in the CNN and BCC studios would be in on the conspiracy. Do you have any idea how people that would be? Have you seen the credits for those shows? And none of those people have come forward? Yeah, total BS.
This is Special Olympics territory, so I’m just going to leave it at that and let you be retarded by yourself for a while.

Comment by reboot — February 12, 2008 @ 2:48 pm

@natedog:

What we are trying to explain to you is that “pull it” has a very narrow definition in the demolition industry, and that definition does not include explosive demolition.

If I may draw an analogy, it’s like Diabetus posting a picture of a penguin and saying, “See, THIS is a penguin,” and you saying, “look, I didn’t see any of those at the Safari I went to in Namibia, so your explanation is retarded.”

Protec says it’s not a term for explosive demolition. The PBS documentary ONLY uses it in the context of pulling a building down with cables. What we’re left with is Silverstien using a phrase that is inappropriate for the purported demolition of building 7, and therefore that can hardly be construed as proof that building 7 was a demolition.

My whole problem with the 9/11 conspiracy theories is that, in the end, the inescapable fact is that the conspiracy described is so vast as to be laughable. “Truthers” will point out that the conspiracy beforehand need only be small. But even if true, the conspiracy in the aftermath would have to be huge:

– You have to have firefighters complaining en masse they weren’t allowed to save building 7 (and ordered to keep quiet about it)

– You would have to have every seismograph operator and analyst within 30 miles on NYC be in on it. The entire staff of the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory would have to refuse to answer questions as to why the seismograph analysis, which truthers claim “CLEARLY” shows the charges used in WTC 1 & 2 going off, doesn’t mention it.

– You would have to have the firms intent on “rushing” the steel out of NYC remain silent.

– You would have to silence NTSB and FAA investigators who would have to subscribe to the airplanes used (especially the one at the Pentagon).

– FAA radar operators who watched flight 93 go off their scopes in PA and two unidentified fast-movers would have to be silenced.

– If the Pentagon was hit by a missile, you’d have to have the armaments men keep silent about missing cruise missiles, not to mention launch operators, the launch technicians, down to the driver of the TEL or maybe an entire base. (Missiles are freaking loud.)

– Everyone who participated in setting the demolitions would have to be silenced or kept quiet, along with the building security and maintenance personnel, some of whom would HAVE to know (either be told to stand down or to facilitate).

– The insurance company itself would have to be prevented from expressing doubt about the building’s fate. What’s THEIR incentive for keeping quiet?

– The airlines would have to be involved: ground crews, schedulers, maintenance guys, all saying that the flights EXISTED.

The list goes on.

Comment by vygramul — February 12, 2008 @ 3:05 pm

And to add to what Vygramul had to say — yeah, there are some questions around the margins about why particular things happened the way they did. That’s for a number of reasons:
1) It was literally an unprecedented event. (Strangely, we didn’t have a lot of data on what happens when a 110-story skyscraper gets hit by airplanes and falls to the ground.) Any model — which is at best an approximation of reality anyway — is therefore likely to have minor inaccuracies.

2) Emotions were running high that day, and some of the best witnesses regarding the details didn’t survive to be interviewed.

3) Data collection was not set up beforehand, and was not a high priority during the event. So you’re left with what you just happen to have.

Anyone of us who has had to reconstruct and analyze real world events (which, incidentally, includes Vygramul and I) do not find the frayed edges of this explanation at all surprising. But the conspiracy nuts point to the handful of data points that are curious, add another handful that they willfully misinterpret, and then argue that the vast majority of the data is the result of a conspiracy. Why? Well, it seems to me there are three possible explanations:
1) The conspiracy nuts are ignorant. They do not have a firm grasp of either the facts or how to connect the dots;
2) They suffer from delusions or other psychological problems, and really should be seeking treatment as soon as possible; or
3) They are themselves part of a conspiracy to discredit those who don’t believe there is a conspiracy.

Hmmm, the more I think about it, the more I think the third possibility is probably it. After all, why else would they continue to insist on this theory of theirs, when all common sense and evidence indicates otherwise? I’m sure if they asked them, they would deny it, which is about as good an indicator of being part of the conspiracy as we can find. (After all, if they weren’t part of a conspiracy, then they couldn’t deny it’s existence, because they wouldn’t know about it, so a denial of its existence is as good as admitting membership!)

Comment by chrisweuve — February 12, 2008 @ 7:27 pm

You guys are a bunch of fucking idiots.

I remember that day on 9/11 when the news reported that tower 7 was going to collapse minutes before it actually did. Maybe MSNBC was part of the conspiracy as well?

The footage is on youtube, search for it, that is if you can trudge through all that Loose Change bullshit jewtube-tards keep bumping up.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=troofer

Comment by diabeetus — February 13, 2008 @ 1:56 pm

@chrisweuve:
“all common sense and evidence indicates otherwise”
i call bullshit. “all” the evidence does NOT indicate otherwise.

271 9/11 Smoking Guns pulled from the Mainstream Media:
http://killtown.911review.org/911smokingguns.html

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

As to not having “a lot of data on what happens when a 110-story skyscraper gets hit by airplanes” I suggest you look at the Empire State Building.

Empire State Building: 1,250 feet/102 stories tall, built in 1931

1 WTC: 1368 feet/110 stories tall, built in 1972
2 WTC: 1362 feet/110 stories tall, built in 1973

The difference is about 100 feet and 8 stories, well within the realm of comparability.

At 9:49 a.m. on Saturday, July 28, 1945, a ten-ton, B-25 bomber smashed into the north side of the Empire State Building. The plane hit 2 floors and burned for 40 minutes. Many floors were open for business 2 days later.

Obviously, the Empire State Building did not fall, and today is once again the tallest building in NYC.

Compare to the WTC:
American Airlines Flight 11, a Boeing 767-200 wide-body aircraft, crashed into the northern side of the North Tower (WTC1) at 8:46 a.m., hitting 5 floors (94-98th) It burned for 102 minutes.

United Airlines Flight 175, a Boeing 767-200, crashed into he South Tower (WTC2) at 9:02 a.m., hitting 8 stories (78-85th). It burned for 56 minutes.

Now, i realize that much bigger planes hit the WTC than hit the ESB, as well as fewer floors were hit and the WTC burned for a longer time.

However, the stats are comparable.

ESB = 2 floors hit, burned for 40 mins
WTC1 = 5 floors hit, burned for 102 mins
WTC2 = 8 floors hit, burned for 56 mins

The WTC complex had the benefit of 4 DECADES of technological advancement and a Fire Suppression System, which the ESB did not have.

Comment by natedog — February 13, 2008 @ 2:48 pm

@natedog
the only problem being that in those 4 decades of technological advancement, they decided that a thin exo skeletal structure would be better then a internal support structure. Ultimately it was the design of the building that brought down the towers, combined with the obvious heat from the fires.

Comment by tiki god — February 13, 2008 @ 3:04 pm

tiki is right, the Twin Towers were framed tube structures. Very, very different from the Empire State Building.

Comment by reboot — February 13, 2008 @ 3:09 pm

lol @ framed tube structures. sounds like you’re describing macaroni art.

Comment by tiki god — February 13, 2008 @ 3:20 pm

Tiki, is that what happened to WTC7? a ‘thin’ exo-skeleton?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wtc#Design_innovations

“The core supported the weight of the entire building and the outer shell containing 240 vertical steel columns called around the outside of the building, which were bound to each other using ordinary steel trusses. In addition, 10,000 dampers were included in the structure.”

http://infowars.net/articles/march2007/280307blueprints.htm

“Within each trade tower there were 47 steel columns at the core and 240 perimeter steel beams. 287 steel-columns in total. According to the official story, random spread out fires on different floors caused all these columns to totally collapse at the same time and at a free fall speed, with no resistance from undamaged parts of the structure.

“Where is the delay that must be expected due to conservation of momentum – one of the foundational Laws of Physics? That is, as upper-falling floors strike lower floors – and intact steel support columns – the fall must be significantly impeded by the impacted mass. If the central support columns remained standing, then the effective resistive mass would be less, but this is not the case – somehow the enormous support columns failed/disintegrated along with the falling floor pans.”

and what about the 9/11 families that think the official story is bullshit?

http://www.911pressfortruth.com/

without them fighting BushCo., LTD. we wouldn’t have even had a 9/11 Commision

Comment by natedog — February 13, 2008 @ 3:25 pm

“all common sense and evidence indicates otherwise”, MY ASS

Comment by natedog — February 13, 2008 @ 3:26 pm

Conservation of Momentum FTW

Comment by natedog — February 13, 2008 @ 3:30 pm

“and what about the 9/11 families that think the official story is bullshit?”
I’m sure they’re all trained in building construction, and demolition, and aren’t being puppeteered by nutjobs like you exploiting their emotions for TV sensationalism.

Comment by schulzbrianr — February 13, 2008 @ 3:35 pm

Also:
“Professor Steven Jones points out that the total annihilation of the building, core columns and all, defies the laws of physics unless it was artificially exploded”
So, Professor Steven Jones says that artificial explosions CAN defy the laws of phsyics?

Comment by schulzbrianr — February 13, 2008 @ 3:37 pm

i call bullshit. “all” the evidence does NOT indicate otherwise.
All the EVIDENCE does, what nutjobs and psychos cull together to support their ridiculous claims isn’t evidence, it’s a lack of evidence that they think suggests some massive conspiracy. So which is it, is President Bush a bumbling simpleton who can’t even give a speech without clusterfucking the English Language, or is he a brilliant military mastermind?

Comment by schulzbrianr — February 13, 2008 @ 3:40 pm

schulz, learn to read and comprehend someone’s posts before commenting, please.

#32: you counldnt even name one of the family members, let alone know what their respective careers or areas of expertise are.

#33: the annihilation defies the laws of physics UNLESS it was artificially exploded.

#34: I have put forth several evidences that the official story is bullshit. just because you ignore them does not mean they aren’t real. i mean, really. Conservation of Momentum?
Tower 7 and its average debris field radius? News reports that jumped the gun? The Leaseholder who made BILLIONS? The obvious demolition wave?
Comparison to ESB?
the Fema Report?
The NIST report?
The 9/11 families?
271 smoking guns?

oh, wait, i am misinterpreting it all. You’re right, NONE of it even remotely suggests that 9/11 was anything other than what the news media and our trustworthy gub’mint tell us it was.

Not to mention the concrete that was pulverized form the very onset…
Not to mention the LIVING hijackers…
http://www.welfarestate.com/911/
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/1559151.stm
http://911research.wtc7.net/cache/disinfo/deceptions/telegraph_stolenids.html
Not to mention 9/11 STEEL that they sold off, melted down, and threw away within 2 weeks of 9/11.
We have laws in this country concerning any disasters that happen, i.e. plane crashes, fires, bridge collapses, space shuttle crashes, etc…
Protocol demands the debris must be saved and analyzed so we can improve our building codes and fire codes and recreate what happened for official reports.
When the space shuttle exploded and all the pieces fell down to earth, they collected all of it. If someone was to take a piece of evidence, they were arrested and criminally charged with a crime.
When planes crash in the ocean, the government goes out and drudges every piece up so they can put the plane back together and recreate what happened.
However, none of this was done with the WORLD TRADE CENTER.

oh wait, nevermind. you called me names and said i was crazy, so i obviously am.

so let’s act like we are chasing OSAMA BIN LADEN through afghanistan (where the Taliban is still in charge), but really we are going to invade Iraq…

it’s bullshit.

Comment by natedog — February 13, 2008 @ 4:16 pm

#32: you counldnt even name one of the family members, let alone know what their respective careers or areas of expertise are.
No, I couldn’t, except for Cindy Sheehan. Which is more than I want/need to know.
#33: the annihilation defies the laws of physics UNLESS it was artificially exploded.
Yeah, no shit. Good catch.
#34: Rule 34?

Comment by schulzbrianr — February 13, 2008 @ 4:27 pm