"BornN2BS" <nirrad01@gmail.com> wrote:

Bryan Olson wrote:

BornN2BS wrote:

houlepn@attglobal.net wrote:

BornN2BS wrote:

Why do you think that the WTC fires *must* have been
much cooler that typical residential fires are?

This was misquoted as I never posted such a statement and
is another lame attempt to discredit me. For future
reference I don't use the * symbol as a modifier, or to
place emphasis on a word in a given sentence. I do find it
most interesting that you chose this misquoted material to
question whether or not I am a human. 

I see no quotation of you there. You seem to know English,
so what are you talking about?  Do you need a lesson in how
quotations are marked?


--
--Bryan

BornN2BS wrote:

Why do you think that the WTC fires *must* have been much
cooler that typical residential fires are?

I  was not responding to you Bryan. The above was used in a
context which implied that I made the statement. The poster
went on to falsely lambaste me using the misquotation as a
foundation from which to launch another in a series of
personal attacks. Such "mistakes" are commonplace on usenet
these days when the subject of 9/11 is involved. I applaud
your efforts to defend the original story by whatever means 
necessary. The status quo is, for the moment, being maintained
on meaningless platforms such as usenet. Even when the
perpetrators of 9/11 are eventually tried and convicted, I
don't expect the overall tone of threads such as this one will
change one iota. Yours is a shining example of the network of
misinformation that exists on the internet with the sole
purpose of clouding the facts surrounding 9/11 with whatever
"BS of the day" you are advertising to garnish the heaping
helping of propaganda being served. I think I'll pass. 

That was an excellent spoof of the terminally-ignorant raving of 
a seriously fucked-up gull.  

If you were serious, future spoofers could use it as a "go by."