addressalign-toparrow-leftarrow-rightbackbellblockcalendarcameraccwchatcheckchevron-downchevron-leftchevron-rightchevron-small-downchevron-small-leftchevron-small-rightchevron-small-upchevron-upcircle-with-checkcircle-with-crosscircle-with-pluscrosseditemptyheartexportfacebookfolderfullheartglobegmailgoogleimageimagesinstagramlinklocation-pinmagnifying-glassmailminusmoremuplabelShape 3 + Rectangle 1outlookpersonplusprice-ribbonImported LayersImported LayersImported Layersshieldstartickettrashtriangle-downtriangle-uptwitteruseryahoo

Re: [humanism-174] regarding TC3

From: Tim C.
Sent on: Monday, April 8, 2013 10:45 PM
Ditto, Glen.  And especially when those innuendos are shown again and again to be absurd and why. 
Just watching  a 9/11 doc (probably made by Bush/Cheney/Martian minions!).  The video is convincing. Only a complete idiot or conspiracy nut would think that there was anything remotely controlled about anything that occurred in NYC that morning. 
On the good side, in spite of the treasonous behavior of the Bush/Cheney administration in diverting attention from our real enemies to removing Hussein from power, some ten years later, UBL got his justice--a SEAL bullet in the forehead (of course, the nuts will now claim that he i alive and living with JFK and Elvis in Winona, Minnesota).
Screw Islamic sensibilities and that idiotic "cross".  They shoulda brought back UBL's head and put it on a pole in front of the new WTC! 
Tim Campbell
In a message dated 4/8/2013 8:52:42 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, [address removed] writes:
Mark O wrote:

"If he [Tim] accepts the report conditionally, then I would think, at the
very least this implies an openness to discuss the matter.  But his
statements are more in line with someone who accept the N.I.S.T.
reports unconditionally."  

Since I also conditionally accept the report, let me clarify what I for one mean by that, and why the alleged inconsistency Mark complains about does not exist. I accept the report conclusions because they appear reasonable and consistent with the evidence regarding the impacts, fires, materials involved, witnesses, etc.  The condition under which I would question the conclusions or want to discuss them further would be the presentation of convincing (or at least plausible) _counter evidence_ --not just speculations, innuendos, and suspicions from someone who admits that his views are not evidence based. 


Please Note: If you hit "REPLY", your message will be sent to everyone on this mailing list ([address removed])
This message was sent by Glen ([address removed]) from The Cleveland Freethinkers.
To learn more about Glen, visit his/her member profile:
Set my mailing list to email me

As they are sent

In one daily email

Don't send me mailing list messages
Meetup, POB 4668 #37895 NY NY USA 10163 | [address removed]

Our Sponsors

Sign up

Meetup members, Log in

By clicking "Sign up" or "Sign up using Facebook", you confirm that you accept our Terms of Service & Privacy Policy