Subrosa said:
And I was attempting (apparently unsuccessfully) to show you that the only fact demonstrated in this thread so far has been that there is speculation on both sides.

This is the single greatest thing that I've ever read from your general direction. This is entirely my point. Well, not really, as I think my position is better than theirs (and yes, I get it, it's still speculation, but goddamnit, it's my speculation), but the fact is that EVERYTHING has been speculation so far.

actually, that was kind of my original point, remember?

MrCrisp said:
you're bitching about the commission's theory and then you're getting up in arms about somebody questioning yours?

MrCrisp said:
i'm just wondering why you're being an obtuse hypocrite.

and now, after pages of arguing, you call your stance speculation? bullshit.

First off, please gather all of your thoughts and then type. It's unbelievably difficult to have to read your posts three times to wait for the inevitable edits. Think, then type. Now on to the meat and potatoes:

Your original "point" was an attack against me, defending hadees position that what I posted was a crazy conspiracy theory. So, no that is not the same thing.

And as a matter of fact, if you're capable of grasping the simple concept of reading, you will see that the only place that I would agree this could be considered speculation is in a court of law and then it would only be speculation until the eyewitnesses validated it as fact, in which case it would finally become fact. So...go away. There's a shiny thing in the corner,; go play with it. It's more on your level.

Anyway, I must sleep. I'll gladly respond to the rest of the inevitable stupidity that will spew forth from you in the morning.

Subrosa

San Francisco, CA

July 2004

DEC 22, 2006 01:07 AM

DieWhiteGirls said:
and yes, I get it, it's still speculation,

My work here is done.

MrCrisp

Charleston, SC

August 2004

DEC 22, 2006 01:08 AM

...wow.

DieWhiteGirls

Madison, WI

July 2005

DEC 22, 2006 01:08 AM

MrCrisp said:
more childish quibbling? how adorable.

You said it, sweetcheeks. You can't possibly be that stupid, can you? I dunno.
Night night honeybuns. I'll be dreaming of you.

MrCrisp

Charleston, SC

August 2004

DEC 22, 2006 01:15 AM

thank god for the ignore feature.

lunchbox

Richmond, MA

March 2005

DEC 22, 2006 01:18 AM

DieWhiteGirls said:
Is my line of thinking wrong?

From what I've read I would have to say yes. You seem to make the assumption that writing a paper on the subject makes you an expert. While I don't doubt you worked vey hard and are well informed on the subject of Arturo Griffith and the WTC elevators, the difference between research for a paper and truly investigating the intricacies of what happened in the Towers is pretty substantial.

Unless you are only arguing that Griffith survived the attack, Subrosa and MrCrisp have done a pretty good job of invalidating everything you've put forth.

And as far as "Lucky" Griffith surviving? I'm going to chalk that up to some sort of freakin' miracle. You know, like when a soccer mom pulls a burning car off of thier kid or a dolphin saves a drowning puppy or some crap like that. Of course, this last part is pure speculation on my part.

hadees

Austin, TX

December 2003

DEC 22, 2006 09:01 AM

And this is why I wanted DieWhiteGirls to post this dicussion in another topic because talking about what "really happend" on 9/11 is tantamount to thread cyanide.