In news:2_Ipg.149$Ym2.39@trndny05,
Justin Case <NoFuckin'Way@UgottaBkidding.net> typed:

"Amanda Angelika" <manic_mandy@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:xOGpg.11231$v4.10349@newsfe3-win.ntli.net...

In news:Xns97F34EB95CBAthathillbillyyahooco@130.133.1.4,
John Griffin <thathillbilly@yahooie.com> typed:

"Amanda Angelika" <manic_mandy@hotmail.com> wrote:

In news:fmcba25ckk27d498jhqb60mv4a3412me3u@4ax.com,
Bookman <thebookman@kc.rr.comNULL> typed:

On Fri, 30 Jun 2006 18:58:34 GMT, "Amanda Angelika"
<manic_mandy@hotmail.com> wrote:

In news:aZdpg.285$wP7.215@fe06.lga,
H. Bosch <hbosch@charter.net> typed:

Amanda you should give it up.  You get more ridiculous
with every post.  You think you know things but you
don't know squat.

Then you are obviosly delusional.

No, he was quite correct; you far overvalue your limited
expertise, and make a habit of rejecting superior analysis
and outright factual information for the sole reason that it
interferes with your belief system.

As I have said before I don't have a belief system. You are
trying to debunk something that doesn't exist. Which simply
indicates a blind acceptance of official dogma and no facility
for independent thought and a fear of intellectual analysis.
Which is sad in a way, but thankfully not my problem.

It is spectacularly obvious that it is in fact your problem.

You're recycling the shallowest versions of long-since
discredited nonsense.  You make vague references to scientific
and engineering concepts, erroneously believing that they support
you, while others give you specific results derived from
familiarity with those principles.  For just one little example,
you were blown away by the very idea of an airplane carrying 100
thousand pounds of fuel. You actually thought it would take an
oceangoing ship to carry that much, which wouldn't even be a good
puddle in its bunkers. That was a definitive display of ignorance
and it puts all the rest of your yapping into perspective.

Idiot
--
Amanda

Instead of sinking down to the level of name calling, which is one of
the debunkers favorite tactics,
which derails any thread into a course of mindless drivel, lets
examine the facts.

That is true. But when people simply make out one is stupid for seeing
problems in the official story you come to realise they aren't really
interested in examining anything in an unbiased fashion, they are simply
interesting in debunking rather than serious discussion. Of course any idiot
can do that, and at the end of the day it's all rather pointless. If people
want to believe in the official story why should I care? Maybe it's a
simpler and happier existence for them to believe everything their
Government tell them with complete trust and innocent naivety. I wasn't
going to come back and discuss it any more people can believe what they feel
happy with, what ever turns them on basically.

Interesting post BTW I shall read it properly when I get a chance. There are
may very highly intelligent people that see flaws in the official account of
9/11. I think in the beginning it was such a shocking event that it was easy
to take the official version on board without question. But when you analyse
what happened over time the official story becomes less credible, even
simple commonsense tells you that buildings don't normally fall like that.
it was shocking in it incredibility and remains so to this day.
-- 
Amanda