• Manchester United Message Board

  • Clive Clive Sep 20, 2009 07:37 Flag

    Foolish people like Yorkie B.

    Yorkie B has been having a go at me for a long time, since someone put up a thread talking about 9/11 issues.
    Well yorkie b was telling us we don't know what we are talking about and demanding us to prove what we were saying was true, even after I explianed that the whole issue was not about saying what happened ( as we can't get to the evidence, much of it was destoyed withing days of 9/11), it was about saying the offical version is not true because the evidence that is available to everyone shows it is impossible in so many areas.
    So people like yorkie b are doing what Bush did, Bush did not have any evidence to back up the offical version so when people question that he can only say 'your supporting the terrorists', if he had any evidence he would have said - and so would yorkie b- you are wrong because we can prove this and that happened, but because they can't they just hoped that having every TV and radio staion, as well as all the mewspapers giving out their version would be enough to persuade enough people, people that have been programmed by the education system - you now the one, where the more you can repeat what you have been told the better marks you will get - will accept it with no problems at all, like they accept the history they are taught, and every country has a different version of history.

    If you disagree it's down to you to prove your point, it's not down to the person you disagree with.
    And if you don't understand the issue then don't comment on it, you don't have to comment on every thread.
    On the 11th of Sep at 2:15pm Yorkie B claimed 'I've seen both sides of the story, read engineers reports, seen the videos and read the books, far more than I bet you have', and then he keeps asking me to provide evidence, evidence that he claims he has already seen, so why does he not know where the evidence is? Because he lied. If I say I know your name and then keep asking you to say your name and get annoyed when you don't did I really know your name or was I lying?

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • Your not wrong Clive. This Yapping Yorkie ( Butch) is a RENOWNED NASTY little pillock.

      It has been MOST amusing watching you, like MANY others SWAT him!

    • I'm glad you posted this clive, because it deals with a single point ....


      "'I've seen both sides of the story, read engineers reports, seen the videos and read the books, far more than I bet you have', and then he keeps asking me to provide evidence, evidence that he claims he has already seen, so why does he not know where the evidence is? "


      Why do I not know where the evidence is?

      Are you really that thick?


      You make a number of outrageous claims, I ask you where the evidence is for YOUR claims, and your answer is, why should you provide evidence for YOUR claims,when I've already seen evidence for mine.

      I'll ask again clive .... WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE FOR YOUR CLAIMS?

      I know where the evidence for mine is, and it's obviously DIFFERENT evidence, in a DIFFERENT place to yours, because we have DIFFERENT claims.


      Is that CLEAR enough for you clive?


      So, back to the "free-fall' assertion you made .... according to you, you watched a video of the towers falling, timed how long they took to fall, measured that against the figures for a free-fall, and decided they must have been brought down by pre-installed explosions.

      That's YOUR assertion, not mine, so I am entitled to ask for evidence, after all, you didn't just watch a video and work it all out in your head did you?

      So here's a few questions about the method you used to work out the fall ...



      1. Are you sure the predicted rate of fall figures you consulted were for the WTC, and what was the predicted fall time?

      2. Did you measure the fall from the floor the plane hit or from the top?

      3. As the two towers were hit on different floors, did you do two calculations?

      4. What were the calculated rates of fall you came up with, and what were the rates you would have expected?

      5. What difference to the rate of fall did you allow for the weight of the top floors falling first?



      There clive, that should be easy enough for you to answer, because otherwise it's going to look like you're talking out of your arse, and we wouldn't want that.

      .

      • 1 Reply to A Yahoo! User
      • Again Yorkie, you have not worked it out.
        If someone makes a claim about an issue it is up to those who don't agree to provide evidence to back up their point.
        You said you have already seen all the evidence, 'I've seen both sides of the story, read engineers reports, seen the videos and read the books', but have obviously decided to ingnore the points that do not support your view.

        IF YOU KNOW, as you claim, I AM WRONG, PROVE IT.

    • yorkie b@stard, Butch and his idiotic pal Legende, navy seal chris are RETARDED. both of them are a joke on these boards. you should just ignore them.