16-10-2012, 09:37 PM
Jeffrey Orling Wrote:Charles,
Let's not act so condescending and dismissive. I use the term MIHOP meaning intentionally placed devices with all three towers to destroy them.
Then you strip the term of all deep political meaning -- and for reasons that defy logic.
Utter nonsense.
Jeffrey Orling Wrote:Could your sponsor friends and their mechanics/operative have known that hitting two towers would knock 3 towers down? I seriously doubt it.
Irrelevant to the MIHOP/LIHOP issue.
Jeffrey Orling Wrote:Why would they CD 7 and not 1 & 2? Who would believe that? answer no one. Two plane slam into the towers and what do you know WTC 7 collapses...
Circular reasoning.
Sophistry -- argument based on a false premise.
Utterly ignorant of the importance of the creation and maintenance of broad-based cognitive dissonance to the maintenance of a cover-up of a major deep political crime.
Jeffrey Orling Wrote:Charles I may not be the sharpest knife in the drawer... but I wasn't born yesterday either.
In a sense understanding (my MIHOP) view wtc 7 is key. If it's not a CD then it looks like the entire destruction was not CD and was a result of the plane damage and this may or may not have been intended.. complete destruction of the complex. My guess is that it wasn't and it went out of control so to speak. But they got the same results ultimately and simply had to cover their asses a bit more with deeper lies.
You don't like this theory? Tough nuggies. It's a free country! :dancingman: lighten up dude!
Alas, Jeffrey, America is not a "free country" in the sense you would convey.
But I do appreciate your "[t]ough nuggies" sentiment insofar as it stands as an exemplar of the intellectual level of your deep politics-related analyses.
As for your theory: It is fatally under-informed, tediously presented, and otherwise worthless accept as a reminder of just how lame a deep political thinker you truly are.