Quote:
|
Originally Posted by notabook
Look fuck for brains, I'm not the one who can't obviously follow a thread. The *ENTIRE* time I've been talking other then those little interjects has been about Building #7 and not the WTC. I even admitted throughout the thread that the WTC was probably taken down by the combination of fire + structural damage. Then you come here and start saying ridiculous shit that has nothing to do with Building #7 directly to me. "lol they were hit by PLANES rofl". When I try to explain to your dumbass that I'm not talking about the WTC (and if you?d been following the thread it would have been obvious to anyone with an inkling of intelligence) but instead Building #7, you come back again with your idiotic statements saying something like "lol, don't get all uppity LOL" to which I respond 'At least I can tell buildings apart.'. For some unapparent reason you keep trying to interject useless tidbits of blather into this conversation yet for some reason you can't get it through your thick skull that I talking about BUILDING #7. Not the WTC....
So to summarize for you buddy since you and a couple others here have a bit of a problem with reading comprehension:
The World Trade Center was hit by two jets. Building #7 was not hit by a jet. The World Trade Center most likely fell due to the structural damage from the jets in combination with the high intense fires caused by jet fuel. Building #7, however, suffered no more or no less damage that the other building closer to the World Trade Center sustained, and as such it should have not fell because of fire w/combination of limited structural damage. Because of this, Building #7 is a highly debated issue and remains a hot topic for conspiracists and non- conspiracists alike.
*Note: Building #7 is NOT the fucking World Trade Center you god damn moron.
|
2 key points stand out here
1) Notabook's paranoid WTC fantasies are not just about jingoism but also about jujuism,
and
2) Notabook has no fixed ethical principles.
So let's begin, quite properly, with a brief look at the historical development of the problem, of its attempted solutions, and of the eternal argument about it. Whenever he is blamed for conspiring to undermine everyone's capacity to see, or change, the world as a whole, he blames his representatives. Doing so reinforces their passivity and obedience and increases their guilt, shame, terror, and conformity, thereby making them far more willing to help Notabook work hand-in-glove with insincere losers. Easy as it may seem to change the world for the better, it is far more difficult to lead the way to the future, not to the past. And now, to end with a clever bit of doggerel: United we stand. Divided we fall. Notabook's peevish methods of interpretation will destroy us all.
