By Proof | August 26, 2007
No, seriously! This moonbat is at large! Wandering around, bumping into things, drooling on his keyboard and possibly crapping his nappies!
I am not a conspiracy theorist. Spare me the ravers. Spare me the plots. But like everyone else, I would like to know the full story of 9/11, not least because it was the trigger for the whole lunatic, meretricious “war on terror” which has led us to disaster in Iraq and I am talking about scientific issues. If it is true, for example, that kerosene burns at 820C under optimum conditions, how come the steel beams of the twin towers – whose melting point is supposed to be about 1,480C – would snap through at the same time? (They collapsed in 8.1 and 10 seconds.) What about the third tower – the so-called World Trade Centre Building 7 (or the Salmon Brothers Building) – which collapsed in 6.6 seconds in its own footprint at 5.20pm on 11 September? Why did it so neatly fall to the ground when no aircraft had hit it? The American National Institute of Standards and Technology was instructed to analyse the cause of the destruction of all three buildings. They have not yet reported on WTC 7. Two prominent American professors of mechanical engineering – very definitely not in the “raver” bracket – are now legally challenging the terms of reference of this final report on the grounds that it could be “fraudulent or deceptive”.Afghanistan and in much of the Middle East.Lunatic?? Islamic terrorists kill three thousand of our citizens in an unproved attack on us for who we are, and Robert Fisk thinks that it’s “lunatic” to defend ourselves or strike back against those who attacked us and would gladly attack us again. Two guesses who the “lunatic” is in this scenario!
Meretricious? Sounds like Robert Fisk! If he didn’t already have a word named after him (“to Fisk”) this one would do!
“Fisking": A point-by-point refutation of a blog entry or (especially) news story. A really stylish fisking is witty, logical, sarcastic and ruthlessly factual…Named after Robert Fisk, a British journalist who was a frequent (and deserving) early target of such treatment.For those of you who haven’t kept up on your obscure and pretentious words,
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) - Cite This Source
mer·e·tri·cious /ˌmɛrɪˈtrɪʃəs/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[mer-i-trish-uhs] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–adjective
1. alluring by a show of flashy or vulgar attractions; tawdry.
2. based on pretense, deception, or insincerity.
3. pertaining to or characteristic of a prostitute.
He says, I am not a conspiracy theorist, then regurgitates the same old conspiratorial crap the rest of the moonbats do:
I am increasingly troubled at the inconsistencies in the official narrative of 9/11. It’s not just the obvious non sequiturs: where are the aircraft parts (engines, etc) from the attack on the Pentagon? Why have the officials involved in the United 93 flight (which crashed in Pennsylvania) been muzzled? Why did flight 93’s debris spread over miles when it was supposed to have crashed in one piece in a field? Again, I’m not talking about the crazed “research” of David Icke’s Alice in Wonderland and the World Trade Center Disaster – which should send any sane man back to reading the telephone directory.Robert Fisk: Even I question the ‘truth’ about 9/11
Yeah, “Fisk”! Put the “truth” in quotes! You wouldn’t know it if it bit you on the bum!
Posts
