You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #85: You provided no links to your pictures there. [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-20-08 04:47 PM
Response to Reply #60
85. You provided no links to your pictures there.
I'm not questioning their authenticity. I just would like more details on those crashes.

Including this particular piece of information -- how much fuel did those wings have loaded into them?

Flight 175 was loaded full of fuel for an intercontinental flight -- something the terrorists were counting on.

And correct me if I'm wrong, but does this mean, seatnineb, that you are a no-planer?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
  -CGI Plane Insert? spooked911  Dec-13-08 07:34 AM   #0 
  - This reminds me of a recently coined 9/11 maxim  LARED   Dec-13-08 08:22 AM   #1 
  - QFT n/t  Realityhack   Dec-24-08 07:54 AM   #211 
  - You are seriously suggesting that the second tower was not hit by a plane? seriously???  Realityhack   Dec-13-08 02:37 PM   #2 
  - Yeah....U got a problem with that.  seatnineb   Dec-18-08 12:08 PM   #23 
  - Well then...  Ohio Joe   Dec-13-08 02:57 PM   #3 
  - Gotta love U anonymouse internet eye-witnesses..so authentic n/t  seatnineb   Dec-18-08 12:03 PM   #22 
     - Interesting  Ohio Joe   Dec-19-08 12:15 PM   #40 
        - If you get a typical reply it will go something like this  LARED   Dec-19-08 12:22 PM   #41 
        - Probably  Ohio Joe   Dec-19-08 12:52 PM   #42 
        - Answers on that vary  jberryhill   Dec-19-08 01:26 PM   #44 
        - Indeed:  seatnineb   Dec-19-08 01:49 PM   #47 
        - Where was your mother in relation to the WTC? n/t  seatnineb   Dec-19-08 01:34 PM   #46 
           - You have already made clear your belief I am a liar  Ohio Joe   Dec-19-08 02:02 PM   #48 
              - If I am so debunkable......why not just tell me where was your mother on 9/11?  seatnineb   Dec-19-08 04:15 PM   #50 
              - It's not that you're debunkable but that you are disagreeable.  boloboffin   Dec-19-08 04:34 PM   #51 
              - Well...  Ohio Joe   Dec-19-08 04:57 PM   #52 
                 - U put me in a catch 22 situation....I will get banned if I call U a liar  seatnineb   Dec-20-08 09:54 AM   #55 
                    - Are you aware that  LARED   Dec-20-08 11:04 AM   #56 
                    - And are you aware that witnesses saw planes like this  seatnineb   Dec-20-08 12:45 PM   #62 
                       - Interestingly you have no problem  LARED   Dec-20-08 01:33 PM   #67 
                          - Ok..lets look at those who saw the plane hit...  seatnineb   Dec-20-08 02:03 PM   #69 
                             - I don't have to concentrate on anonymous witnesses  LARED   Dec-20-08 02:58 PM   #78 
                                - See post 24  seatnineb   Dec-20-08 04:39 PM   #83 
                    - Are you even reading my posts?  Ohio Joe   Dec-20-08 01:27 PM   #66 
                       - We can go round in circles n/t  seatnineb   Dec-20-08 02:06 PM   #70 
                          - Then you are not going to answer my questions?  Ohio Joe   Dec-20-08 02:13 PM   #71 
                             - I don't what to get banned. thank you n/t  seatnineb   Dec-20-08 02:27 PM   #74 
                                - From my post #40  Ohio Joe   Dec-20-08 02:53 PM   #77 
                                   - Ok..  seatnineb   Dec-20-08 04:46 PM   #84 
                                      - ok, I'll try to post this again  Ohio Joe   Dec-23-08 06:41 AM   #165 
                                         - Thanks for responding.  seatnineb   Dec-23-08 07:36 AM   #171 
              - What's even more insidious  vincent_vega_lives   Dec-23-08 08:45 AM   #172 
  - The whole video is a fake. n/t  balantz   Dec-13-08 07:46 PM   #4 
  - Maybe the plane was not faked, but was vaporized  LARED   Dec-14-08 01:26 PM   #5 
  - Not the DEW.  boloboffin   Dec-14-08 01:43 PM   #6 
  - Perhaps this is similiar to the Lasaga Cell  LARED   Dec-14-08 02:14 PM   #7 
  - Yes, who would have noticed bulk shipments of table salt to the Twin Towers...  boloboffin   Dec-14-08 02:50 PM   #8 
     - fake Planes/ meteors hitting the wtc were part of the american cultural psyche  seatnineb   Dec-18-08 12:21 PM   #25 
        - "the american cultural psyche"  vincent_vega_lives   Dec-23-08 08:54 AM   #174 
           - If the islamists hated the USA so much...  seatnineb   Dec-23-08 10:59 AM   #180 
              - KISS  vincent_vega_lives   Dec-23-08 11:16 AM   #183 
                 - You contradict yourself...  seatnineb   Dec-23-08 11:22 AM   #184 
                    - Pot-kettle-black  vincent_vega_lives   Dec-23-08 11:34 AM   #188 
                       - You are speaking gobledegook  seatnineb   Dec-23-08 12:26 PM   #193 
                          - To you perhaps  vincent_vega_lives   Dec-23-08 01:37 PM   #197 
                             - CIA and the mujahadeen were intertwined to the tune of Billions of $  seatnineb   Dec-23-08 04:29 PM   #200 
                                - That page is gone.  vincent_vega_lives   Dec-24-08 06:52 AM   #206 
                                   - Yeah...I know that story backwards  seatnineb   Dec-24-08 07:10 AM   #207 
                                      - The Japanese (n/t)  vincent_vega_lives   Dec-24-08 07:27 AM   #209 
                                         - True..But the japanese did not use UAV packed with explosives! n/t  seatnineb   Dec-24-08 07:42 AM   #210 
                                            - No they used a MAV packed with explosives.  vincent_vega_lives   Dec-24-08 12:07 PM   #221 
                                               - Ok...thanks for info. n/t  seatnineb   Dec-24-08 01:07 PM   #223 
  - Even more insidous  vincent_vega_lives   Dec-23-08 08:49 AM   #173 
  - Now that was thoughtful...  jberryhill   Dec-14-08 04:28 PM   #9 
  - Just to remind people how much **** you have peddled down the years  seatnineb   Dec-18-08 12:15 PM   #24 
     - Wow you dug that up again  LARED   Dec-20-08 08:43 PM   #87 
        - Yep...it is...(a big deal)...  catnhatnh   Dec-21-08 01:35 AM   #92 
        - Did you ever consider that in the 20 intervening months  LARED   Dec-21-08 06:40 AM   #100 
        - And what did you check...  catnhatnh   Dec-21-08 10:23 AM   #107 
        - Wow, that's some bad math.  AZCat   Dec-21-08 10:32 AM   #109 
        - Let's discuss LARED's math...  catnhatnh   Dec-21-08 10:49 AM   #110 
           - You're assuming numbers meant the same thing...  AZCat   Dec-21-08 10:56 AM   #111 
              - Actually YOU are assuming that you can challenge...  catnhatnh   Dec-21-08 11:04 AM   #112 
                 - Yeah, nobody cares about your "find".  AZCat   Dec-21-08 11:15 AM   #114 
                 - Your fact checking seems every bit as accurate as LARED's...  catnhatnh   Dec-21-08 11:25 AM   #117 
                 - I don't know what you're talking about.  AZCat   Dec-21-08 11:28 AM   #118 
                    - Let me talk slowly here....  catnhatnh   Dec-21-08 11:39 AM   #119 
                       - Failed to be candid?  AZCat   Dec-21-08 11:43 AM   #120 
                       - No, actually he did not...  catnhatnh   Dec-21-08 11:50 AM   #121 
                       - Hmmm. Not how I read it.  AZCat   Dec-21-08 12:07 PM   #123 
                          - So if LARED said his eyewitnesses...  catnhatnh   Dec-21-08 12:17 PM   #125 
                             - Four is pretty close to two.  AZCat   Dec-21-08 12:18 PM   #126 
                             - And appearently....  catnhatnh   Dec-21-08 12:25 PM   #127 
                                - Twelve? Twenty-four?  AZCat   Dec-21-08 12:25 PM   #128 
                                - Yet in his first account...  catnhatnh   Dec-21-08 12:32 PM   #129 
                                - You can count to over one million using your fingers and toes...  AZCat   Dec-21-08 12:37 PM   #130 
                             - Dude, please keep in mind you are a no planer/ fake plane  LARED   Dec-21-08 01:36 PM   #135 
                       - Thanks nt  LARED   Dec-21-08 01:37 PM   #136 
                       - The witnesses did not disappear. I was not there and was  LARED   Dec-21-08 01:16 PM   #133 
                       - The pressure is too much, I've cracked under the bright lights  LARED   Dec-21-08 01:23 PM   #134 
                 - It ok, they have so little actual evidence the trival takes on  LARED   Dec-21-08 01:12 PM   #132 
                 - Actually, I care  Bjarne Riis   Dec-23-08 10:48 AM   #178 
                 - Huh oh you booked marked it.  LARED   Dec-21-08 01:10 PM   #131 
        - What a fail  anigbrowl   Dec-22-08 03:11 PM   #163 
        - DU posters like U have a habit of changing your testimony  seatnineb   Dec-21-08 06:21 AM   #98 
           - Let me repeat myself and add  LARED   Dec-21-08 06:37 AM   #99 
              - You forgot to add that witnesses lie....9/11 is a classic example n/t  seatnineb   Dec-21-08 06:48 AM   #101 
                 - So do CT'ers ...... 9/11 is a classic example  LARED   Dec-21-08 07:49 AM   #102 
                    - Simple question...did your friends see the plane approach  seatnineb   Dec-21-08 08:46 AM   #105 
                       - No, they were on roof top of a building on  LARED   Dec-21-08 12:04 PM   #122 
                          - Oh my god!  AZCat   Dec-21-08 12:13 PM   #124 
                             - I found something even better  LARED   Dec-22-08 06:19 PM   #164 
  - It's caused by the slow motion  anigbrowl   Dec-16-08 04:40 PM   #10 
  - Once again, ignorance of video tech. Sort of 'stonishing!  JackRiddler   Dec-16-08 04:49 PM   #11 
  - Yup  jberryhill   Dec-16-08 05:00 PM   #12 
  - Wait until there's more footage from this camera  anigbrowl   Dec-16-08 05:10 PM   #13 
  - Rational reason for missing plane parts  dlaliberte   Dec-16-08 10:13 PM   #14 
     - How does this information affect your belief in pods? nt  LARED   Dec-17-08 05:45 AM   #15 
     - No-plane fakery reaffirms the evidence for pods on real planes  dlaliberte   Dec-20-08 04:18 PM   #80 
        - I'm suggesting there is no pod  LARED   Dec-20-08 08:46 PM   #88 
           - So you are a no-pod theorist - got any evidence?  dlaliberte   Dec-20-08 11:17 PM   #91 
              - You want evidence for no - pods???  LARED   Dec-21-08 07:56 AM   #104 
     - The plane parts are not really "missing"  William Seger   Dec-18-08 10:45 AM   #20 
        - Faking planes is possible.  seatnineb   Dec-18-08 12:00 PM   #21 
           - possible, but not necessary and not sufficient  dlaliberte   Dec-18-08 02:59 PM   #28 
           - Thats fair enough....just keep an open mind and its cool n/t  seatnineb   Dec-18-08 04:27 PM   #31 
           - What type of plane do they show? nt  hack89   Dec-20-08 12:10 PM   #59 
              - Excuse me, but your pod is showing  dlaliberte   Dec-20-08 01:56 PM   #68 
                 - Thanks for the trip through memory lane  hack89   Dec-20-08 02:24 PM   #73 
                    - The truth remains true forever  dlaliberte   Dec-20-08 02:36 PM   #75 
                       - Spend some time in the archives  hack89   Dec-20-08 02:39 PM   #76 
                          - Spend some time updating your script  dlaliberte   Dec-20-08 03:55 PM   #79 
                             - You're a little too late  hack89   Dec-20-08 10:11 PM   #89 
                                - 20 January? Too late? What are you predicting?  dlaliberte   Dec-20-08 10:45 PM   #90 
                                   - Without hatred for Bush  hack89   Dec-21-08 05:24 AM   #95 
                                      - Luc Courchesne, who made this video, is a low-level conspirator.  spooked911   Dec-26-08 12:52 PM   #229 
           - LMAO! Ya think?  William Seger   Dec-18-08 03:46 PM   #29 
              - shit fuck No-planers like Fred want U 2 think they don't know what  seatnineb   Dec-18-08 04:24 PM   #30 
                 - (That's what you think)  William Seger   Dec-18-08 08:09 PM   #32 
                    - Funny thing is U take him seriously...he wants U 2 debunk him..  seatnineb   Dec-19-08 01:38 AM   #34 
  - For a while now, I've thought it's not a matter of "planes/no planes," but rather  lulu in NC   Dec-17-08 10:41 AM   #16 
  - Show me plane wreckage that didn't match commercial jets.  scrinmaster   Dec-17-08 11:09 PM   #17 
     - I misspoke--the engine parts found were not consistent with a 767, but  lulu in NC   Dec-18-08 04:14 AM   #18 
        - "One doesn't need to be a jet engine expert ..."  Make7   Dec-18-08 05:19 AM   #19 
           - True-- but why can't we have an expert in these engines  spooked911   Dec-19-08 05:46 AM   #38 
           - How many have you contacted?  jberryhill   Dec-19-08 01:29 PM   #45 
           - I contacted a few people at a company I found that services these engines.  spooked911   Dec-20-08 04:32 PM   #82 
           - Because then all you would say is that the conspirators knew enough to plant the right parts.  boloboffin   Dec-19-08 02:37 PM   #49 
              - you're right  spooked911   Dec-20-08 04:30 PM   #81 
                 - let me clarify-- I *am* open to new evidence  spooked911   Dec-20-08 06:28 PM   #86 
           - Got any data...  catnhatnh   Dec-21-08 01:55 AM   #94 
  - Do you expect it to bounce off the side of the building?...nt  SidDithers   Dec-18-08 12:38 PM   #26 
  - No....just enter the building more realistically  seatnineb   Dec-18-08 12:55 PM   #27 
     - How do you know what it looked like after it entered the building?  William Seger   Dec-18-08 08:15 PM   #33 
        - I would have expected some oscillation of the wings:  seatnineb   Dec-19-08 01:42 AM   #35 
           - Oscillation? How much oscillation would you expect in 1/10th of a second  William Seger   Dec-19-08 02:57 AM   #36 
              - Typical....you hide behind the speed factor and ignore the physics.  seatnineb   Dec-19-08 03:38 AM   #37 
                 - The plane went straight into the building  William Seger   Dec-19-08 09:41 AM   #39 
                    - So how could the wings enter the building within 3 frames of video  seatnineb   Dec-19-08 01:19 PM   #43 
                       - That looks like the Controlled Impact Demonstration.  AZCat   Dec-19-08 05:39 PM   #53 
                          - i take your point.....but wings are fragile  seatnineb   Dec-20-08 09:44 AM   #54 
                             - Well, "fragile" is a relative term.  AZCat   Dec-20-08 11:07 AM   #57 
                             - They can be shorn through and sheered off  seatnineb   Dec-20-08 12:39 PM   #61 
                                - That's the problem.  AZCat   Dec-20-08 12:48 PM   #63 
                                   - The wings are already partially in the wall:  seatnineb   Dec-20-08 01:14 PM   #64 
                                      - I'm not really sure where the fuel tanks are in the wings.  AZCat   Dec-20-08 01:25 PM   #65 
                                         - This gif shows the entrance..  seatnineb   Dec-20-08 02:22 PM   #72 
                             - Also, wings hold up those massive engines when the plane is on the ground  boloboffin   Dec-20-08 11:47 AM   #58 
                                - But wings can be perforated:  seatnineb   Dec-20-08 12:32 PM   #60 
                                   - You provided no links to your pictures there.  boloboffin   Dec-20-08 04:47 PM   #85 
                                   - More fuel means more chance of it igniting....  seatnineb   Dec-21-08 06:15 AM   #97 
                                      - More fuel meant more support for the structure of the wing  boloboffin   Dec-21-08 10:30 AM   #108 
                                         - I don't think so.  seatnineb   Dec-21-08 11:12 AM   #113 
                                            - It doesn't matter if the spark is there if the fuel isn't exposed yet.  AZCat   Dec-21-08 11:16 AM   #115 
                                            - But the tanks are exposed....the wings are being cut by the steel!  seatnineb   Dec-21-08 03:31 PM   #139 
                                               - You still haven't provided links to information about those other crashes  boloboffin   Dec-21-08 03:34 PM   #141 
                                               - So you are not going to ignore me then! LOL!  seatnineb   Dec-21-08 03:46 PM   #145 
                                               - I didn't say I was going to put you on Ignore.  boloboffin   Dec-21-08 04:56 PM   #154 
                                               - But will NEVER ignore you.It's my duty. n/t  seatnineb   Dec-23-08 07:23 AM   #169 
                                               - No, no, you've got it all wrong.  AZCat   Dec-21-08 03:46 PM   #144 
                                               - LOL! I never said it ignited in the tanks!  seatnineb   Dec-21-08 03:51 PM   #146 
                                               - The one you showed earlier was before the wings made contact.  AZCat   Dec-21-08 03:56 PM   #147 
                                               - A plausible explanation that maybe the view of the ignition is blocked  seatnineb   Dec-21-08 04:04 PM   #149 
                                               - You mean we SAW a burst of light (whatever it was) when the cockpit hit.  AZCat   Dec-21-08 04:08 PM   #150 
                                               - I respect your hypothesis and I believe it is the only explanation  seatnineb   Dec-21-08 04:22 PM   #151 
                                               - That's cool.  AZCat   Dec-21-08 04:24 PM   #152 
                                               - Well iam certain that Flight 175's did not ignite when they should have done  seatnineb   Dec-23-08 07:26 AM   #170 
                                               - It takes more than the fuel tanks to be ruptured for an explosion  vincent_vega_lives   Dec-23-08 09:13 AM   #175 
                                               - The circumstances were already conducive for an explosion:  seatnineb   Dec-23-08 10:53 AM   #179 
                                               - Not quite that simple  vincent_vega_lives   Dec-23-08 11:28 AM   #187 
                                               - Ok....a reasonable hypothesis.....but  seatnineb   Dec-23-08 12:00 PM   #190 
                                            - Your opinion about it doesn't matter here. A liquid provides support for the container it's in.  boloboffin   Dec-21-08 11:19 AM   #116 
                                               - In other words....you have no rebutal...ignorance is bliss huh? n/t  seatnineb   Dec-21-08 03:33 PM   #140 
                                                  - Sorry, ball's in your court  boloboffin   Dec-21-08 03:35 PM   #142 
                                                  - You wanna spam....its all you got left...and it ain't enough to save you.  seatnineb   Dec-21-08 03:56 PM   #148 
                                                  - "Yet on 9/11...ruptured fuel tanks do not explode"  boloboffin   Dec-21-08 04:58 PM   #155 
                                                  - I am not talking about the plane once it is completely inside the building  seatnineb   Dec-21-08 05:09 PM   #157 
                                                  - ...  boloboffin   Dec-21-08 05:37 PM   #158 
                                                  - Every other plane crash features an instaneouse explosion  seatnineb   Dec-21-08 06:33 PM   #159 
                                                  - Almost immediately  boloboffin   Dec-21-08 06:59 PM   #160 
                                                  - No that's your problem  seatnineb   Dec-23-08 07:04 AM   #166 
                                                  - You still didn't provide links to other information about your second plane.  boloboffin   Dec-23-08 11:02 AM   #181 
                                                  - I provided links to the videos...and I am sure U can count n/t  seatnineb   Dec-23-08 11:24 AM   #185 
                                   - Those aircraft were probably traveling much slower than the airliners that hit the WTC and Pentagon.  scrinmaster   Dec-21-08 01:37 AM   #93 
                                      - Steel will always sheer through the wings..no matter what the speed.  seatnineb   Dec-21-08 06:07 AM   #96 
                                         - LOL -  LARED   Dec-21-08 07:53 AM   #103 
                                            - The only thing which is Dumb is the shit that U believe in....  seatnineb   Dec-21-08 08:47 AM   #106 
                                               - According to your logic it is impossible for water to cut steel  LARED   Dec-21-08 01:46 PM   #137 
                                                  - Pathetic analogy...  seatnineb   Dec-21-08 03:40 PM   #143 
                                                     - You're right it was a lousy analogy  LARED   Dec-21-08 04:39 PM   #153 
                                                     - How bout hitting a steel post with an an aluminium pipe LOL!  seatnineb   Dec-21-08 05:04 PM   #156 
                                                     - No nt  LARED   Dec-21-08 07:53 PM   #161 
                                                     - Then tell that to purdue.  seatnineb   Dec-23-08 07:16 AM   #167 
                                                     - A largely horizontal impact at lower speed works differently...  Realityhack   Dec-24-08 08:03 AM   #212 
                                                     - Make a proper comparison:  seatnineb   Dec-24-08 08:38 AM   #213 
                                                     - You persist in repeating that logical fallacy  William Seger   Dec-22-08 11:25 AM   #162 
                                                     - The fallacy is yours  seatnineb   Dec-23-08 07:20 AM   #168 
                                                     - You've got to be kidding  William Seger   Dec-23-08 10:00 AM   #176 
                                                     - Wrong  seatnineb   Dec-23-08 10:47 AM   #177 
                                                     - You have some nerve asking for links when you refuse to provide them yourself. n/t  boloboffin   Dec-23-08 11:03 AM   #182 
                                                     - Yawn...is this the best that DU's 9/11 debukah's have to offer.  seatnineb   Dec-23-08 11:26 AM   #186 
                                                     - No links for you until you produce the links you've been asked for previously  boloboffin   Dec-23-08 12:13 PM   #191 
                                                     - Bolo...stop describing yourself. n/t  seatnineb   Dec-23-08 12:29 PM   #194 
                                                     - More evasions from seat. n/t  boloboffin   Dec-23-08 12:39 PM   #195 
                                                     - Just saying it does not make it true Bolo.  seatnineb   Dec-23-08 12:50 PM   #196 
                                                     - No, but the facts bear me out.  boloboffin   Dec-23-08 02:00 PM   #198 
                                                     - Keep waiting..whilst I bludgeon U with more doses of real plane crashes  seatnineb   Dec-23-08 04:36 PM   #201 
                                                     - "fine particulates". ROFL!!!  vincent_vega_lives   Dec-23-08 11:45 AM   #189 
                                                     - No wonder you believe in the plane videos...U can't see  seatnineb   Dec-23-08 12:16 PM   #192 
                                                     - Jeeeez  William Seger   Dec-24-08 09:24 AM   #214 
                                                     - I am not denying that there was plane debris...  seatnineb   Dec-24-08 10:05 AM   #219 
                                                     - And BTW  William Seger   Dec-24-08 09:45 AM   #216 
                                                     - Dont be shy Seagar...show people a larger picture.  seatnineb   Dec-24-08 09:52 AM   #218 
                                                     - You need ot look up the "rule of holes"  William Seger   Dec-24-08 11:12 AM   #220 
                                                     - I'm more than glad to show people what U don't want them to see.  seatnineb   Dec-24-08 12:57 PM   #222 
  - This video looks fake to me  Vroomfondel   Dec-21-08 01:57 PM   #138 
  - Time for this hideously malformed thread to die  anigbrowl   Dec-23-08 03:41 PM   #199 
     - Probably cos your group have had an ass-kicking n/t  seatnineb   Dec-23-08 04:42 PM   #202 
        - I don't think endlessly repeating BS counts as kicking ass.  anigbrowl   Dec-23-08 04:47 PM   #203 
           - Thats why your side has not kicked any!  seatnineb   Dec-23-08 05:07 PM   #204 
              - Wow. I bet you came up with that all by yourself too  anigbrowl   Dec-23-08 07:38 PM   #205 
                 - But this witness did not see the plane that you claim exists.  seatnineb   Dec-24-08 07:15 AM   #208 
                    - Wow. "He would have seen this plane..."  William Seger   Dec-24-08 09:31 AM   #215 
                       - He was looking up..i emailed and asked him..I suggest you do the same  seatnineb   Dec-24-08 09:49 AM   #217 
                          - Okay....if you e-mailed him.....  SDuderstadt   Dec-24-08 01:12 PM   #224 
                             - I have posted his email address-can U read?  seatnineb   Dec-24-08 01:39 PM   #225 
                                - Sorry...I overlooked the e-mail address, but....  SDuderstadt   Dec-24-08 01:55 PM   #226 
                                   - You did...that was quick ! LOL! n/t  seatnineb   Dec-24-08 02:04 PM   #227 
  - Uh, guys? Things SHEAR off airplanes upon impact, not SHEER.  Redstone   Dec-24-08 02:50 PM   #228 
 

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC