Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 5 6 
Send Topic Print
Ask a muslim (Read 7298 times)
Yadda
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 20901
A cat with a view
Re: Ask a muslim
Reply #60 - Sep 4th, 2018 at 5:57pm
 
Baronvonrort wrote on Aug 19th, 2018 at 6:29pm:

If  I see or talk to a single muslim woman I ask-

Is your husband out with one of his other wives?



Baronvonrort,

LOL

That brought a smile to my face.



.



polite_gandalf wrote on Sep 3rd, 2018 at 12:40pm:

Of course. As is your right to behave like an absolute arsehole. No one can take that away from you Baron  Smiley



gandalf,

Once again, you demonstrate the total inability of the moslem [man or woman] to laugh at himself.
....if that laughter is initiated by a person who is not a moslem.




gandalf,

Your derogatory response,      totally ignores the fact that many moslem men     DO have    multiple wives.

Q.
Why is making some fun about that circumstance, on a public forum, offensive ?



A.
Because it was a non-moslem          who made an amusing joke, a quip, directed at many moslem men's proclivity, to acquire multiple wives.


Back to top
 

"....And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead."
Luke 16:31
 
IP Logged
 
UnSubRocky
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Legend

Posts: 21675
Rockhampton, Q
Gender: male
Re: Ask a muslim
Reply #61 - Sep 5th, 2018 at 1:17am
 
Gnads wrote on Sep 3rd, 2018 at 7:44am:
I think you wouldn't have a clue. The explosions that were heard as the videos show (if you had cared to watch them Roll Eyes) were heard at ground level no where near where the supposed planes hit the building.

That's what is required to bring a building down in it's own footprint.

No planes hit building No.7 & it had a few minimal fires.

The video shows a lecture presented to architects & engineers as well as statements by physicists that fully explains that the official story is bogus.


More like you would not have a clue. There has been video after video of the collapse of the buildings. All of which show no sign of a demolition job (other than the ones that both planes caused). The planes both were near full of their fuel for their across the country flights, at the point of impact with the towers. The fuel on board both planes did not just completely combust into flames. It would have taken minutes to completely use up the amount of ignitable fuel that was splashed across the floors of the buildings. Added to the fuel being inflamed, so too were the desks and papers and all kinds of flammable sources that would have prolonged the fires. As such, the fires would have compromised the integrity of the structure to a point where the weight of the upper floors would have collapsed and then set about further collapsing of the lower floors.

I sat in a friend's loungeroom that September 11 night, thinking "I reckon that second building will fall. But that first one should remain standing". Alas, both towers fell. Later, we heard about how building WTC7 collapsed. And whilst I find it strange that the building, being not too close to WTC1 & 2, the claim was that fires had spread underground to WTC7 and set off sufficient damage to collapse the building. I did figure that perhaps the building fell from a controlled demolition. But the explanation of fire damage was credible enough not to warrant further (now redundant) investigation.

I do wonder how you think that the WTCs were brought down into their own footprint. That has to be the messiest alleged "controlled demolition" I have ever seen. People must have been literally running for their lives for a quarter mile down the street before they could have felt safe from the collapse. I would surmise that many of those who just got out of the building would have had to run a good 200 metres away and/or then taken cover to have had reasonable chance of surviving the debris falling. Plenty of evidence of cars nearby having been hit by debris.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Grappler Truth Teller Feller
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 79574
Proud pre-1850's NO Voter
Gender: male
Re: Ask a muslim
Reply #62 - Sep 5th, 2018 at 6:10am
 
Beats the classic Turkish block of flats collapse during an earthquake...

Word For Today:-

folliage (n) - the forest that makes it impossible to see for the trees.....

Source - New Grappler Dictionary, 2018 edition.
Back to top
 

“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.”
― John Adams
 
IP Logged
 
Ajax
Gold Member
*****
Offline


CO2 has never controlled
temperature on Earth

Posts: 10952
Australia
Gender: male
Re: Ask a muslim
Reply #63 - Sep 5th, 2018 at 5:54pm
 
UnSubRocky wrote on Sep 5th, 2018 at 1:17am:
Gnads wrote on Sep 3rd, 2018 at 7:44am:
I think you wouldn't have a clue. The explosions that were heard as the videos show (if you had cared to watch them Roll Eyes) were heard at ground level no where near where the supposed planes hit the building.

That's what is required to bring a building down in it's own footprint.

No planes hit building No.7 & it had a few minimal fires.

The video shows a lecture presented to architects & engineers as well as statements by physicists that fully explains that the official story is bogus.


More like you would not have a clue. There has been video after video of the collapse of the buildings. All of which show no sign of a demolition job (other than the ones that both planes caused). The planes both were near full of their fuel for their across the country flights, at the point of impact with the towers. The fuel on board both planes did not just completely combust into flames. It would have taken minutes to completely use up the amount of ignitable fuel that was splashed across the floors of the buildings. Added to the fuel being inflamed, so too were the desks and papers and all kinds of flammable sources that would have prolonged the fires. As such, the fires would have compromised the integrity of the structure to a point where the weight of the upper floors would have collapsed and then set about further collapsing of the lower floors.

I sat in a friend's loungeroom that September 11 night, thinking "I reckon that second building will fall. But that first one should remain standing". Alas, both towers fell. Later, we heard about how building WTC7 collapsed. And whilst I find it strange that the building, being not too close to WTC1 & 2, the claim was that fires had spread underground to WTC7 and set off sufficient damage to collapse the building. I did figure that perhaps the building fell from a controlled demolition. But the explanation of fire damage was credible enough not to warrant further (now redundant) investigation.

I do wonder how you think that the WTCs were brought down into their own footprint. That has to be the messiest alleged "controlled demolition" I have ever seen. People must have been literally running for their lives for a quarter mile down the street before they could have felt safe from the collapse. I would surmise that many of those who just got out of the building would have had to run a good 200 metres away and/or then taken cover to have had reasonable chance of surviving the debris falling. Plenty of evidence of cars nearby having been hit by debris.


Your analyses is flawed, watch the video below.

The top section gets demolished before it reaches the good untouched sections below, so this mass on top is total BULLSHIT..!!!...the other tower was the same.

Watch from 1:20 minute mark.




Back to top
 

1. There has never been a more serious assault on our standard of living than Anthropogenic Global Warming..Ajax
2. "One hour of freedom is worth more than 40 years of slavery &  prison" Regas Feraeos
 
IP Logged
 
Ajax
Gold Member
*****
Offline


CO2 has never controlled
temperature on Earth

Posts: 10952
Australia
Gender: male
Re: Ask a muslim
Reply #64 - Sep 5th, 2018 at 6:18pm
 
South tower looks like its going to topple over BUT of course it doesn't because the top section get demolished before the sections beneath are demolished.

Steel doesn't give way like that.

Back to top
 

1. There has never been a more serious assault on our standard of living than Anthropogenic Global Warming..Ajax
2. "One hour of freedom is worth more than 40 years of slavery &  prison" Regas Feraeos
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47066
At my desk.
Re: Ask a muslim
Reply #65 - Sep 5th, 2018 at 9:56pm
 
Do you have a nutty conspiracy theory Ajax, or just the search function on youtube?
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Ajax
Gold Member
*****
Offline


CO2 has never controlled
temperature on Earth

Posts: 10952
Australia
Gender: male
Re: Ask a muslim
Reply #66 - Sep 8th, 2018 at 9:31am
 
freediver wrote on Sep 5th, 2018 at 9:56pm:
Do you have a nutty conspiracy theory Ajax, or just the search function on youtube?


Can only comment on what we have seen and know FD.

......
Back to top
« Last Edit: Sep 8th, 2018 at 12:09pm by Ajax »  

1. There has never been a more serious assault on our standard of living than Anthropogenic Global Warming..Ajax
2. "One hour of freedom is worth more than 40 years of slavery &  prison" Regas Feraeos
 
IP Logged
 
Baronvonrort
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 17388
Gender: male
Re: Ask a muslim
Reply #67 - Sep 8th, 2018 at 10:21am
 
Ajax wrote on Sep 8th, 2018 at 9:31am:
freediver wrote on Sep 5th, 2018 at 9:56pm:
Do you have a nutty conspiracy theory Ajax, or just the search function on youtube?


Can only comment on what we have seen and know FD.

https://preview.ibb.co/dmqLaU/ST_WTC2.jpg



I like this pic of the WTC with sun shining right through it, it gives an idea of how it was built.

https://viewing.nyc/incredible-vintage-photograph-shows-sun-shining-through-worl...


http://www.debunking911.com/
Back to top
 

Leftists and the Ayatollahs have a lot in common when it comes to criticism of Islam, they don't tolerate it.
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47066
At my desk.
Re: Ask a muslim
Reply #68 - Sep 8th, 2018 at 10:44am
 
Ajax wrote on Sep 8th, 2018 at 9:31am:
freediver wrote on Sep 5th, 2018 at 9:56pm:
Do you have a nutty conspiracy theory Ajax, or just the search function on youtube?


Can only comment on what we have seen and know FD.

https://preview.ibb.co/dmqLaU/ST_WTC2.jpg


You can also think about it Ajax. Do you have a nutty conspiracy theory, or just the search function on youtube?
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Gnads
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 27649
Gender: male
Re: Ask a muslim
Reply #69 - Sep 8th, 2018 at 11:10am
 
UnSubRocky wrote on Sep 5th, 2018 at 1:17am:
Gnads wrote on Sep 3rd, 2018 at 7:44am:
I think you wouldn't have a clue. The explosions that were heard as the videos show (if you had cared to watch them Roll Eyes) were heard at ground level no where near where the supposed planes hit the building.

That's what is required to bring a building down in it's own footprint.

No planes hit building No.7 & it had a few minimal fires.

The video shows a lecture presented to architects & engineers as well as statements by physicists that fully explains that the official story is bogus.


More like you would not have a clue. There has been video after video of the collapse of the buildings. All of which show no sign of a demolition job (other than the ones that both planes caused). The planes both were near full of their fuel for their across the country flights, at the point of impact with the towers. The fuel on board both planes did not just completely combust into flames. It would have taken minutes to completely use up the amount of ignitable fuel that was splashed across the floors of the buildings. Added to the fuel being inflamed, so too were the desks and papers and all kinds of flammable sources that would have prolonged the fires. As such, the fires would have compromised the integrity of the structure to a point where the weight of the upper floors would have collapsed and then set about further collapsing of the lower floors.

I sat in a friend's loungeroom that September 11 night, thinking "I reckon that second building will fall. But that first one should remain standing". Alas, both towers fell. Later, we heard about how building WTC7 collapsed. And whilst I find it strange that the building, being not too close to WTC1 & 2, the claim was that fires had spread underground to WTC7 and set off sufficient damage to collapse the building. I did figure that perhaps the building fell from a controlled demolition. But the explanation of fire damage was credible enough not to warrant further (now redundant) investigation.

I do wonder how you think that the WTCs were brought down into their own footprint. That has to be the messiest alleged "controlled demolition" I have ever seen. People must have been literally running for their lives for a quarter mile down the street before they could have felt safe from the collapse. I would surmise that many of those who just got out of the building would have had to run a good 200 metres away and/or then taken cover to have had reasonable chance of surviving the debris falling. Plenty of evidence of cars nearby having been hit by debris.


Then you have seen naff all controlled demolition .... and you never watched those videos.

Random organic collapse is what should have happened to those buildings ..... & it didn't.

Collapse by fire doesn't cause powderised concrete dust.

They all collapsed in their own footprints no ifs or buts.

Furthermore you fail to explain the multiple photos of skyscrapers that were completely gutted by fire going back decades that never collapsed.

Nor the fact that the Empire State building was struck by a fully fuel laden B52 bomber in 1945 with several floors burning and it did not collapse.

The WTC buildings were decades younger & no doubt built to even tougher standards  yet they collapse along with a building that wasn't struck & had minimal comparative damage & also in it's own footprint.

Baaaaa baaaaa baaaa ... you sheep.
Back to top
 

"When you are dead, you do not know you are dead. It's only painful and difficult for others. The same applies when you are stupid." ~ Ricky Gervais
 
IP Logged
 
Ajax
Gold Member
*****
Offline


CO2 has never controlled
temperature on Earth

Posts: 10952
Australia
Gender: male
Re: Ask a muslim
Reply #70 - Sep 8th, 2018 at 11:28am
 
Baronvonrort wrote on Sep 8th, 2018 at 10:21am:
Ajax wrote on Sep 8th, 2018 at 9:31am:
freediver wrote on Sep 5th, 2018 at 9:56pm:
Do you have a nutty conspiracy theory Ajax, or just the search function on youtube?


Can only comment on what we have seen and know FD.

https://preview.ibb.co/dmqLaU/ST_WTC2.jpg



I like this pic of the WTC with sun shining right through it, it gives an idea of how it was built.

https://viewing.nyc/incredible-vintage-photograph-shows-sun-shining-through-worl...


http://www.debunking911.com/


The towers were built to withstand a hit from a boeing 707 flying at 600mph fully ladened  with fuel...... Kiss

A comparison of the design vs what hit the towers.

BTW 707 had two engines on each wing, 767 only had one engine on each wing

...

WTC construction.

...
Back to top
« Last Edit: Sep 9th, 2018 at 9:27am by Ajax »  

1. There has never been a more serious assault on our standard of living than Anthropogenic Global Warming..Ajax
2. "One hour of freedom is worth more than 40 years of slavery &  prison" Regas Feraeos
 
IP Logged
 
Ajax
Gold Member
*****
Offline


CO2 has never controlled
temperature on Earth

Posts: 10952
Australia
Gender: male
Re: Ask a muslim
Reply #71 - Sep 8th, 2018 at 11:34am
 
Back to top
 

1. There has never been a more serious assault on our standard of living than Anthropogenic Global Warming..Ajax
2. "One hour of freedom is worth more than 40 years of slavery &  prison" Regas Feraeos
 
IP Logged
 
UnSubRocky
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Legend

Posts: 21675
Rockhampton, Q
Gender: male
Re: Ask a muslim
Reply #72 - Sep 10th, 2018 at 1:30am
 
Gnads wrote on Sep 8th, 2018 at 11:10am:
Then you have seen naff all controlled demolition .... and you never watched those videos.

Random organic collapse is what should have happened to those buildings ..... & it didn't.

Collapse by fire doesn't cause powderised concrete dust.

They all collapsed in their own footprints no ifs or buts.

Furthermore you fail to explain the multiple photos of skyscrapers that were completely gutted by fire going back decades that never collapsed.

Nor the fact that the Empire State building was struck by a fully fuel laden B52 bomber in 1945 with several floors burning and it did not collapse.

The WTC buildings were decades younger & no doubt built to even tougher standards  yet they collapse along with a building that wasn't struck & had minimal comparative damage & also in it's own footprint.

Baaaaa baaaaa baaaa ... you sheep.


Are you not being a hypocrite by claiming that I am naive, when you obviously slept through the live footage of the tower attacks. Keep in mind that you are comparing a barely fueled bomber to a nearly fully fueled passenger airliner. You are also comparing the Empire State building to the World Trade Centres.

I am no engineer. However, I do have enough knowledge of physics to know that the impact of a smaller, less flammable plane on to a differently designed building would mean that the building could withstand 40 minutes of fires without collapsing. And though that is a considerable amount of time to be on fire, the ESB could withstand that kind of treatment without the weight of floors above buckling the structure. The Grenfell towers also burned for a long time too. I don't think the building fell, either.

A skyscraper, such as the WTC, that was built with concrete slabs on top of concrete slabs on each floor. Do you actually think that is going to be able to withstand the skeletal weakness of iron keeping the building shaped to reinforce the way it was, buckling under the stress of the weight? The fires weakened the integrity of the steel to a point that the weight and the crumbling of the concrete did enough to pancake the floors around the crash site. Domino effecting the collapse one floor after the other.

Checkmate!
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47066
At my desk.
Re: Ask a muslim
Reply #73 - Sep 10th, 2018 at 12:20pm
 
Ajax if you are incapable of understanding any of this yourself, how do you decide which are the crackpot theories and which are legit?
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Stig
Senior Member
****
Offline


>_<

Posts: 399
Gender: male
Re: Ask a muslim
Reply #74 - Sep 10th, 2018 at 1:24pm
 
Gnads wrote on Sep 8th, 2018 at 11:10am:
[quote author=WorldSacred link=1534590110/61#61 date=1536074266][quote author=Gnads link=1534590110/31#31 date=1535924667]

Nor the fact that the Empire State building was struck by a fully fuel laden B52 bomber in 1945 with several floors burning and it did not collapse.

The WTC buildings were decades younger & no doubt built to even tougher standards  yet they collapse along with a building that wasn't struck & had minimal comparative damage & also in it's own footprint.

Baaaaa baaaaa baaaa ... you sheep.


A time travelling bomber too, since the first flight of the B-52 was in 1952
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 5 6 
Send Topic Print