 |
|
| |
|
|
|  Bill Clinton Stands Up to 9/11 Conspiracy BuffsPosted on Oct 26, 2007
Fresh on the heels of last week’s “Real Time” confrontation between Bill Maher and 9/11 conspiracy enthusiasts, former President Bill Clinton found himself in a similar situation, albeit with more effective security. Clinton showed little patience for the protesters: “An inside job? How dare you? How dare you?” Watch it: 
Previous item: Cheney Power-Naps as Calif. Burns Elsewhere: . CommentsAre you a Truthdig member yet? Login now, or register with Truthdig. |
Now Is No Time for Phony Thrift
Email
Print
Share
del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Fark
Furl
Ma.gnolia
Mixx
MySpace
NewsVine
NewsTrust
Reddit
SphereIt
StumbleUpon
TwitThis
YahooBuzz
Jump to Comments
By Inherit The Wind, November 1, 2007 at 3:03 am #
Paracelsus on 10/31 at 9:21 pm
(78 comments total)
So attack the messenger, aye. I did not say anything ant-semitic, and there was nothing anti-semitic in that particular post. There are other sources as well. Please be a gentleman. Do not tar my whole argument from that source. There is a Jewish man, who filmed the collapse, and his research shows that it was a controlled demolition.
I’m talking about your source, not you. I’m saying your SOURCE is anti-semitic AND a paranoid nut-case. I don’t know how I can POSSIBLY make that clearer.
And Michael Rivero is well-documented as such.
Yes, I THROW OUT “evidence” in totality from such sources. It’s like pawing threw a dumpster looking for edible food to try to find valid information in all the horseshit that characters like Rivero dump onto the ‘net. You are going to get salmonella poisoning before you get a good meal.
The claim of an “ad hominem” attack isn’t valid here.
Report thisBy Paracelsus, October 31, 2007 at 9:21 pm #
So attack the messenger, aye. I did not say anything ant-semitic, and there was nothing anti-semitic in that particular post. There are other sources as well. Please be a gentleman. Do not tar my whole argument from that source. There is a Jewish man, who filmed the collapse, and his research shows that it was a controlled demolition.
Report thisBy Inherit The Wind, October 31, 2007 at 6:48 pm #
Paracelsus on 10/31 at 2:06 pm
(76 comments total)
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/wtc2_cutter.html
*******************
THAT is your “proof”????? Give me a fucking BREAK!
Michael Rivero (the clown behind that web site) has been “outed” as an anti-semitic lunatic who deliberately fakes evidence to fit his paranoid conspiracy fantasies.
NOBODY with a brain or any intellectual ability takes his bullshit seriously at all.
Naturally, he’s one of Robert-Abu’s favorite sources of the manure he shovels out in such vast quantities.
What Really Happened is that Michael Rivero hates Jew with an insane passion and will use ANY excuse to blame them for any evil in the world.
Report thisBy Paracelsus, October 31, 2007 at 2:21 pm #
Shapes of clouds are not quantifiable or reliable, but recoded sounds of demolition charges are. You can set up a sound board, and run the sounds through an oscilloscope, and see the similarities of the wave patterns. Each sample of wave patterns can be averaged and then set within confidence intervals for resembling the mean wave pattern. A standard normal curve can be used to set confidence intervals for the time between explosion sounds as well as the general shape of each sound event. From that it is possible to say for example I am 95% sure that sound pattern is not a random explosion from fire or anything else.
Report thisYou cannot do that with images from clouds because the computer marked graphics of the clouds will not produce enough similar events to produce a reliable mean variable for point similarity of the images.
By Paracelsus, October 31, 2007 at 2:06 pm #
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/wtc2_cutter.html
Above is the link arguing the 9-11 building collapses were controlled demolitions.
Someone had posted that burning house will have sounds of explosions as its burning. The problem with that idea is the explosive reports of a house have a randomness to them that the 9-11 demolitions do not have.
The 9-11 explosions went off in a synchronized and organized pattern. When events happen in non random manner then it points out there must be an explanatory causation to those events. The 9-11 explosions are too non-random to not have a cause of some sort.
As to Noam Chomsky saying there many phenomena that seem to form patterns with non explanatory variables in them. To me that is sloppy science and Noam Chomsky is not only a failed linguist, but also a careless philosopher if I may be so kind as to call him a philosopher. No experimenter worth his salt would be satisfied with unexplained variations in the results. If we had scientists of his ilk no one would have tried to prove up the special theory of relativity. He would have just said, “Oh well. Can’t explain it. Who’s Einstein anyway.”
Report thisBy Inherit The Wind, October 31, 2007 at 10:04 am #
Paracelsus on 10/30 at 11:22 pm
(71 comments total)
#110425 by Inherit The Wind
Frankly I have had enough crap from Bill Clinton. How dare him! Now I expect even mountains to collapse when an airplane hits it. I have listened to so many videos of those towers collapsing. It is so obvious, Boom, boom, boom, boom, boom, boom, boom, boom, boom, boom! What do I do? Tell my ears that they are shameless and unpatriotic? Those are explosives going off. What else could it be?!?!
Gee….I don’t know—burn a house to the ground and there will be explosions. Just because YOU don’t know “what else” they could be isn’t proof of anything. As large heavy structures within a building exceed their failure point, they fail with a loud “BOOM!”
It’s not my problem if you observe what you want to observe and see what you want to see. People see shapes and figures in clouds—doesn’t mean God put those shapes and figures there.
Report thisBy voice of truth, October 31, 2007 at 8:35 am #
Forgive my earlier post on the Noam Chomsky thread. This one is, in reality, the funniest thread I have ever read. Thanks to the moonbats for giving me a little smile today!
Report thisBy niloroth, October 31, 2007 at 8:06 am #
Paracelsus
please link to any video with the sound of explosives going off while the buildings fall.
Just one please.
Report thisBy Inherit The WInd, October 31, 2007 at 6:39 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Paracelsus on 10/30 at 11:41 pm
(71 comments total)
@ #110090 by John Borowski
The Goon Squader, if you did your research, professes that both political parties are controlled by the same elites.
yeah, yeah, yeah…“not a dime’s worth of difference”..yadda, yadda, yadda.
There’s 2 trillion dollars worth of difference (at least) and the loss of 650,000 Iraqi lives, just for starters.
Report thisBy Paracelsus, October 30, 2007 at 11:41 pm #
@ #110090 by John Borowski
The Goon Squader, if you did your research, professes that both political parties are controlled by the same elites. The reason the Dems are hounded so heavily by the truth movement is because they know that all the Repug candidates are a bunch of dead horses, and that this is just an orderly change of power from Bushes to Clintons.
Report thisBy Paracelsus, October 30, 2007 at 11:22 pm #
#110425 by Inherit The Wind
Frankly I have had enough crap from Bill Clinton. How dare him! Now I expect even mountains to collapse when an airplane hits it. I have listened to so many videos of those towers collapsing. It is so obvious, “Boom, boom, boom, boom, boom, boom, boom, boom, boom, boom!” What do I do? Tell my ears that they are shameless and unpatriotic? Those are explosives going off. What else could it be?!?!
Report thisBy rschop, October 30, 2007 at 5:08 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
The attacks on 9/11 were due to a conspiracy, in fact a criminal conspiracy at the CIA, but not the conspiracy as previously suggested. The 9/11 Commission report says that the CIA knew about Mihdhar and Hazmi for 21 months prior to 9/11 and deliberately did not give this information to the FBI criminal investigation teams. The CIA not only hid this information from the FBI on 10 separate occasions that are now well documented, but hid from the FBI Cole investigators the fact Mihdhar and Hazmi had been at the Kuala Lumpur al Qaeda planning meeting on January 5-8, 2000 with Khallad bin Attash, mastermind of the Cole bombing, planning the Cole bombing, on 5-6 occasions, making this clearly a criminal conspiracy! The 9/11 Commission said they could never understand why the CIA did this or why the CIA never connected these two terrorists to the huge attack the CIA had been warned about from April 2001.
Report thisBut information located in the government’s own files says the CIA had in fact connected these two terrorists to the warnings of a huge attack inside of the US. In fact email between CIA managers on July 23, 2001, says that the CIA was aware that Mihdhar, and by implication Hazmi, were going to take part in this huge attack.
On August 22, 2001 when the CIA finds out that both of these terrorists are inside of the US, they know these terrorists are in the US for no other reason that to prepare to be part of this attack that will kill thousands of Americans and they still continue to hide this information from the FBI criminal investigators knowing this will make it impossible for the FBI to prevent this attack, the attacks that took place on 9/11.
All of this information can be found in the governments own documents and is described in a new book “Prior Knowledge of 9/11” at http://www.eventson911.com.
By rschop, October 30, 2007 at 4:35 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
The attacks on 9/11 were a conspiracy, in fact a criminal conspiracy at the CIA, but not the conspiracy as previously suggested. The 9/11 Commission report says that the CIA knew about Mihdhar and Hazmi for 21 months prior to 9/11 and deliberately did not give this information to the FBI criminal investigation teams. The CIA not only hid this information from the FBI on 10 separate occasions that are now well documented, but hid from the FBI Cole investigators the fact Mihdhar and Hazmi had been at the Kuala Lumpur al Qaeda planning meeting on January 5-8, 2000 with Khallad bin Attash, mastermind of the Cole bombing, planning the Cole bombing, on 5-6 occasions, making this clearly a criminal conspiracy! The 9/11 Commission said they could never understand why the CIA did this or why the CIA never connected these two terrorists to the huge attack the CIA had been warned about from April 2001.
Report thisBut information located in the government’s own files says the CIA had in fact connected these two terrorists to the warnings of a huge attack inside of the US. In fact email between CIA managers on July 23, 2001, says that the CIA was aware that Mihdhar, and by implication Hazmi, were going to take part in this huge attack.
On August 22, 2001 when the CIA finds out that both of these terrorists are inside of the US, they know these terrorists are in the US for no other reason that to prepare to be part of this attack that will kill thousands of Americans and they still continue to hide this information from the FBI criminal investigators knowing this will make it impossible for the FBI to prevent this attack, the attacks that took place on 9/11.
All of this information can be found in the governments own documents and is described in a new book “Prior Knowledge of 9/11” at http://www.eventson911.com.
By loveinatub, October 30, 2007 at 1:11 pm #
I have to agree. Bill sounded awfully sanctimonious with his response of “how dare you.” Like who says freedom of thought and speech isn’t allowed anymore? The Bush administration has been so hostile and contemptous of free speech and thought in this country it’s no wonder some people still think 911 was an inside job. Even if it’s not true, for Clinton to respond in the manner in which he did, showed great contempt for our democracy.
Report thisBy John Borowski, October 30, 2007 at 9:45 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Boiler room folks I think you should come up for some air because the fumes from the boiler are probably getting to you. If the mythical devil set off a bomb underneath your boiler room and a little while later an airplane crashed into your roof, I think you would know which is which.
Report thisBy John Borowski, October 30, 2007 at 3:09 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Sheila, I don’t like to waste my time, but I will answer your interrogative . The twelve fifties are the god bless patriotic Americans (Aka Conservative right wingers) that are the folks overflowing with righteousness that work the boiler rooms for twelve dollars and fifty cents. They are interim people on duty until the British can control the Internet like they do all other forms of media. I pray that an airplane doesn’t hit the roof of your home, but if it does, you will know it even though you didn’t see the plane hit. There are myriad ways to know the exact time of the plane hit, some of them accurate to the nano-second.
Report thisBy Inherit The Wind, October 30, 2007 at 2:45 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Go, Bill Go!
Enough crap from the tin-foil-hat types who will give the Presidency and nation back to fascism in their quest for some kind of “purity”
Nader in 2000 was their perfect rep: “Not a dime’s worth of difference”. Well, we have seen that there was 2 TRILLION dollars and 650,000 lost lives worth of difference, not to mention the gutting of the Constitution.
THAT is the difference…We are still SO close to the edge and all that’s keeping us back are the jelly-fish Demo-weenies in Congress. One more push and “The Last Best Hope” will fail.
Meanwhile they fight over the arrangement of the deck chairs on the Titanic.
So keep on being the Dem with the backbone, Bill. We need it!
Report thisBy Inherit The Wind, October 30, 2007 at 2:28 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Sheila Casey on 10/29 at 7:01 pm
(12 comments total)
re. #110326 by Inherit The Wind on 10/29 at 4:29 pm
He was INSIDE the building and heard 3 tremendous explosions—how did he know they were just before the plane hit, since he couldnt SEE the plane hit?
The exact times of the impacts have been well publicized. Perhaps he was wearing a watch.
And perhaps he wasn’t. And perhaps his watch was slow. And perhaps Lee Harvey Oswald had help from extra-terrestrials—and perhaps he didn’t. You cannot assume facts exist because you want them to exist.
Besides, where is it recorded how long “just before” is? Was it 10 minutes? 2 minutes? 1 second? 1/10 second? If the watch he PERHAPS was wearing was a minute slow, he would have thought the explosions he supposedly heard were 1 minute before the plane hit, when it actually was the plane hitting.
It’s garbage science because people would rather believe that the most evil but also the most incompetent president ever managed to pull this off, or they’d rather believe what the Moslem extremists claimed, that “The Jews” did it.
They simply cannot accept the evil simple elegance of these 19 men. Can’t hijack a plane with a box-cutter? Why not? Up until 9/11, THE RULE was you acquiesce to hi-jackers. They held a box-cutter to a flight attendant’s eye-ball and the captain AS REQUIRED, capitulated because hi-jackers UNTIL THEN wanted to force the plane to go somewhere else.
Hell, they could have broken a glass in 1st Class and used THAT instead of a box-cutter just as effectively. A Black Belt could have done it without any weapon at all.
Only Tom Clancy had fantasized about using an air liner as an unexpected attack weapon—read “Debt of Honor”.
And the creeps in the White House jumped on it like fleas on a dog. George W. Bush could have gone down in history as our greatest president since FDR had he taken the simple obvious steps—but he chose to use it as an opportunity to create a fascist state and start a war nobody wanted or needed. Now he’ll go down as the WORST president ever.
Report thisBy Sagesnow, October 30, 2007 at 12:34 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Who’s Bill’s Daddy?
Report thishttp://farm3.static.flickr.com/2117/1781098382_6af8671 437_m.jpg
What’s Clinton’s stake in the New World Order?
Why was all the WTC evidence destroyed before a real investigation could take place? Why are 9/11 skeptics questions ignored? Why isn’t there a national public forum to answer these architects and engineers questions:http://www.ae911truth.org/?
Why doesn’t Truthdig take the lead and lead open minded investigations into this pivotal disaster in US history?
By niloroth, October 29, 2007 at 7:36 pm #
Yay, Sheila Casey has showed up in this thread.
All you truthers, bow down, for none of you are as truthy as sheila. For though you believe things, sheila believes them even more than you. She even believes things that you (or anyone else in the truth movement) don’t even believe. But don’t question her on her beliefs, because she won’t respond to your inquiries, except to maybe say “i stand by my facts.”
Yes, thats right, you are wrong truthers, and sheila is right. I will prove it:
1) you believe that Marvin Bush sat on the board of Stratesec, well, sheila will do you one better, she believes he OWNED Stratesec! Yes, facts be damned, he owned it.
2) you believe that Steven E. Jones retired from BYU, well, she believes that he was FIRED! Yes, forget the whole paid leave pending hearings held by the university, He was fired.
3) you have given up on the whole power shutdown prior to the attack story. Mostly because it couldn’t be supported by more than 1 person? Well sheila still believes it it 100% accurate.
Yes, thats right folks, give up now, cause not only does she believe the things you truthers believe, but she also believes things that no one else does, things that are made up and have no basis in reality at all. And in the end, doesn’t that just make her the biggest truther out there?
Report thisBy Sheila Casey, October 29, 2007 at 7:01 pm #
re. #110326 by Inherit The Wind on 10/29 at 4:29 pm
“He was INSIDE the building and heard 3 tremendous explosions—how did he know they were just before the plane hit, since he couldnt SEE the plane hit?”
The exact times of the impacts have been well publicized. Perhaps he was wearing a watch.
Report thisBy Inherit The Wind, October 29, 2007 at 4:29 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
The janitor Rodriquez (Surprisingly, a highly intelligent individual) tells the American people that he heard 3 tremendous explosions just before the robotic jet plane hit Tower 1 just below his basement which is the second of six.
I LOVE this! No conspiracy troll questions ANYTHING, no matter how ridiculous. It reminds me of the story: “He dreamed he was falling and when he hit the ground he had a heart attack and died.”
What’s wrong with this story?
He was INSIDE the building and heard 3 tremendous explosions—how did he know they were just before the plane hit, since he couldn’t SEE the plane hit?
See what I mean about conspiracy trolls? No close reasoning ability.
Report thisBy weather, October 29, 2007 at 2:21 pm #
And its worth asking again and again - why was it w/in just days after 9/11 would Rudy fly to Israel when he had so much on his plate here?
3 weeks into 2002 and Rudy gets Guiliani Partners! Not even Ed Koch could have been so struck rich.
Report thisBy niloroth, October 29, 2007 at 11:27 am #
here, since so many of you seem to be fully unable to process anything that is not on you tube, spwnd 4 minutes watching this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fx9QyLDMPmA
then check out the rest of the videos he has done.
http://www.youtube.com/profile_videos?user=RKOwens4&p=r
Report thisBy Sheila Casey, October 29, 2007 at 11:26 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
re:
#110090 by John Borowski on 10/28 at 9:10 am
what are twelve fifties?
Report thisBy d.alon, October 29, 2007 at 11:26 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
How anyone can, after all that has happened in the seven years of this administration, still believe that 9/11 was strictly a terrorist attack perpetrated by a handful of Saudis, as the government officials who get caught lying to you every day say it was, is beyond me. Bill, nevertheless, is certainly not the poster-boy for honestly and morality!
Report thisBy John Borowski, October 29, 2007 at 10:42 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
The comment is abridged to comply w/# of words. THE CURSED WTC PEOPLES’ BODIES REST IN A GARBAGE DUMP IN STATEN ISLAND,NY. Only the FBI is allowed in the dump. No nosy reporters or Conspiracy Nuts until further notice. Most of the evidence that pointed to the destruction of the WTC by Thermate and not the robotic jet planes is safely in their hands. To bring a building down, you MUST break the back of the building in the basement.The janitor Rodriquez (Surprisingly, a highly intelligent individual) tells the American people that he heard 3 tremendous explosions just before the robotic jet plane hit Tower 1 just below his basement which is the second of six. (Confirmed by the seismic recording in Columbia University of NY) The fingerprints of Thermate are a chevron shape melted cut in the steel beams. The cuts of vaporized steel are clearly visible in the pictures of the destroyed WTC. The freight elevators are the only ones that are exposed to the backbone of the towers and if there is a Thermate explosion and some unlucky worker happens to be in the freight elevator he will experience a bad day. This is exactly what happened. Rodriquez (Unlike our hero with the baseball cap, is a true hero that saved many lives that would have died in the World Trade Center if not for his heroics) relates that an immigrant worker came out of the freight elevator with his skin on his arms and face hanging off him. Silverstein (The buyer of the World Trade Center months before it was brought down) knew that the north tower was badly damaged in 1993 by the truck bomb. Knew that the occupancy was a headache from day 1 of its existence. Knew that he would have to remove the asbestos from the steel beams before 2007. Knew companies that remove asbestos wouldn’t touch this because no insurance company would insure them. Knew that the horrendous cost of maintenance sucked out any profit harvested from the buildings. Knew that the owners of the World Trade Center (The NY and NJ Port Authority were denied the solution to all their problems by bringing down the World Trade Center by using explosives. (Any other way to remove the buildings would not be economically feasible). Knew that these beautiful buildings were a white elephant that was unprofitable from the very beginning. Knew that if he ran to the insurance companies months before 9/11 to insure the building for 7 billion he would make out like a bandit if anything happened to the buildings. Knew that there was a legitimate fear that an earthquake or a hurricane up from Florida could bring down Tower1. When they bring down an old structure pregnant with asbestos and dust clouds cover the area where people live-what does that tell you? Uncounted victims are dying from the dust clouds caused by this method of destruction at the WTC.
Report thisBy Douglas Chalmers, October 29, 2007 at 8:12 am #
#110249 by Non Credo on 10/29 at 8:06 am: “...The only reasonable objections to the “inside job” theory are practical - that is, how could they have managed to pull it off, how could they have hoped to cover it up, etc….”
An “inside job” - but with “outside help” - from a small country in the M.East, uhh!
Report thisBy niloroth, October 29, 2007 at 8:02 am #
Man, you truthers have been busy.
Okay, i am tired of continually rewriting the same damn things in all these threads. You folks start going off about controlled demolitions, free fall speeds, squibs, etc etc. But whenever i point out an inaccuracy you all get really quiet on that point and move on to something else. So here if your chance. You all say that the truth is out there, that you have done the research, and that you have the evidence. Okay, show it to me. I ask you for 3 easy things.
1) Squibs. Show me the squibs that the truthers believe were used to help bring the towers down. But, don’t use either http://www.flatplanet.net/truth911/wtc-small.jpg
or http://www.headsup911.com/mind/new_world_order/zzsquib s1qx.jpg
since after all, if the squibs were used to bring the whole towers down, they would have to be more than 2 places right? I mean, 2 squibs couldn’t do all the damage. Even better if you can find me video.
2) you truthers claim freefall speed. Show it to me. I want to see even one of the towers collapse in 9 to 9.5 seconds. Come on, you must have seen it, show it to me.
3) Pulverized materials. Where is your proof that everything was pulverized? Again, prove it to me.
Okay, get to it, should only take you a few minutes right? I am eagerly awaiting your replies.
Report thisBy Douglas Chalmers, October 29, 2007 at 6:34 am #
109954 by Non Credo on 10/27 at 10:20 am: “... But Clinton’s sanctimonious “I dare you” is insulting and misplaced….. This pious “I dare you” implies that we’re all supposed to know of some MORAL limit to the criminality of the Bush administration…...
There is zero evidence for such a limit, and plenty of proof that the Bush-Cheney administration is deeply malignant and malevolent. Furthermore, the pattern so far has been that we continually find new depths to this malignancy: every month, every week, every day, we find out that Bush is worse than we’d dared to think theretofore…... How dare Clinton try to shame those who rightly fear and loathe the evil that is Bush…?”
BILL has just taken a big spade and dug out all of the credibility under HILLARY’s campaign!
The one thing that lawyers, judges and politicians have in common is that they all back each other up in the end. That way, they keep their immunity from prosecution intact.
Can Hillary buck this trend? She will have to now if she wants to win because validating her “new deal” is the only way forward for her. Dissociating herself from her husband, or at least his views, is something she is now stuck with!
Report thisBy GB, October 29, 2007 at 6:08 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Let’s also not forget Democratic Senators Leahy and Daschle who voted against the Iraq war both received what was found to be US Military grade anthrax and still no news on this investigation. If anyone doesn’t think there are those in our government who wouldn’t kill or intimidate to get what they want started are naive. The Project for a New American Century whos signers included Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Bolten, and a host of other neocons stated that barring another event like Pearl Harbor they feel it necessary to invade Iraq, Iran, and Syria. Let’s face it. There is definately something fishy going on here.
Report thisBy Akira_Maritias, October 29, 2007 at 4:27 am #
“Akira, I dont HAVE a conspiracy theory...”
Yeah, you do. Gussy it up however you want to, but you think that someone used the real 9/11 story as a cover up. That’s a conspiracy theory.
So…you want to prove that 9/11 didn’t go down like they said, but you’ll be DAMNED if you’ll show the proof that makes you suspicious. No, you would rather leave that out and hope the stuff that -didn’t- work for you will be enough for me. Thanks.
“So, lets get that straight kid.”
Don’t call me kid. Just ‘cause I was courteous enough to let you know my age, doesn’t mean that you have superiority over me. I know 9 year olds that can hold a damn good discussion, because they ask hard hitting questions.
“There are multiple conspiracy theories…”
I’m not passionately defending the events of 9/11. I’m saying that I saw it, and my common sense is saying that that’s what happened. The fact that you are calling it the official conspiracy theory only -proves- that you are a pompous asshole. That would be like conspiracy theorists for Area 51 saying that Area 51 was the ‘official conspiracy theory’. You’ve got the opinion that is ridiculous, you are the conspiracy theory. It doesn’t work the other way around. You don’t help your argument at all when you insinuate that I, and everyone that I know, are so stupid as to fall for a conspiracy theory.
“So, keep that in mind, because obviously, if I dont have a conspiracy theory of my own that Im willing to put forth on the forum, theres nothing for YOU to judge as reasonable or not.”
Yeah, there is something to judge. You are supporting the conspiracy theorists. I could go anywhere else online concerning this and it would be called a conspiracy theory. Just because you call the sky the ground doesn’t mean that you are right and clear. You’re being an idiot right here; just make some points instead of trying to dodge. I’m saying ‘prove it’, and you’re saying ‘I don’t have to because I’m not the conspiracy theory, so ha!’. This is the -exact- same thing that faithies do when they argue with me: they throw everything at me and say that it is the atheists’ job to prove them wrong, instead of it being the faithies’ job to prove it right.
“And its not a personal concern of mine, whether you remaine in the alice-in-wonderland world of fantasy.”
Last time I checked, alice-in-wonderland was fun. This is not a fun fantasy. And again, your assumption is ludicrous; ‘I’m right, you’re wrong, prove me otherwise, moron!’. How is this fair? That’s right, it isn’t. Your acting as though I am inferior and wrong, then yelling at me when I remain inferior and wrong. I tell you right now, you aren’t winning any favor with me on the ‘reasonable’ section of my brain. Since you haven’t done much besides make this personal, I haven’t seen a reason to believe you. I’ve said this a few times already, but you wanna ‘stay the course’, I guess.
“And no, I dont remember being ousted as a troll on this site or any other. Are you sure thats what you meant? Ousted? Maybe you meant something else. You sound confused. (often)”
I’m always confused, but at least I’m not an asshole. You were caught red handed talking behind someone’s back in a trollish manner, however.
Again, I have the guts to admit when I’m wrong, however. You have the guts to spit in my face and laugh hysterically about how right you are. See a difference there?
“I AM a little worried about your classmates though. Talk about creepy. This culinary thing means you have access to knives. Very scary.”
Another personal jab! Honestly, Cyrena, can you go a post without it? Nope, I guess not. After all, heaven forbid you manage to make a point without acting like I’m stupid/incompetent!
Report thisBy cyrena, October 28, 2007 at 8:18 pm #
#110150 by Akira_Maritias
Of course, now that you feel that you cant persuade me to find you reasonable on your conspiracy theory.
Akira, I dont HAVE a conspiracy theory. I DO have some pretty confirmed suspicions on how and why the events of 9/11 occurred, but Ive yet to share that with you, or anyone else on this public forum. So, lets get that straight kid. There are multiple conspiracy theories regarding 9/11. MY primary focus has been on the Official Conspiracy Theory. The one that YOU so passionately defend, beyond all logical reason, even though youve admitted to never even reading the Official Conspiracy Theory.
So, keep that in mind, because obviously, if I dont have a conspiracy theory of my own that Im willing to put forth on the forum, theres nothing for YOU to judge as reasonable or not. And its not a personal concern of mine, whether you remaine in the alice-in-wonderland world of fantasy.
So, just so that youre able to distinguish the difference, (which even you should have been able to figure out, if youd actually read my posts) the only thing Im doing is QUESTIONING THE OFFICIAL CONSPIRACTY THREORY, (the administrations explanation of what occurred on 9/11/2001.) And, like so many others, I question it, because I know that what theyve assembled in the official conspiracy theory, and put forth to the American public, is a collection of lies. So for now, I dont have a full and documented analysis of what actually DID happen, and I cant say when I may ever be able to provide that. Its possible, as more and more information comes to light, and more documentation can be made available. Still, my only contribution so far, has been to make it abundantly clear that what the Thugs CLAIM to have happened - simply DID NOT!
Still, Im overwhelmingly aware of the fact that PROVING that the WTC Towers (all 3 of them) as well as those 2 passenger aircraft- were pulverized instantaneously via a controlled and pre-planned demolition will be difficult, because all of the concrete evidence was pulverized, and then immediately disposed of. So, theres nothing left (as there would be in any other disaster of this type) to use science to prove what actually happened. WE CAN however, use science to DISPROVE the official lies. And, we can even use science to come real close to what actually DID take place as well. But for now at least, thats still in the works.
Meantime, there is absolutely nothing that prevents you or anyone else, from continuing to believe in the impossible. If you honestly think that pigs can fly, then its certainly not my intention to dissuade you. If you still believe that Santa Claus canvasses the globe every year within a 24 hour period of time, and manages to make it down every chimney on the globe, I cant do anything about that either. And, I wouldnt care to try. If I were legally and morally responsible for your well being, (and the well being of those around you), than I most certainly WOULD make it a point to seek some help for you, (or at least have you situated so that you couldnt harm anyone else) but I dont even know you. So you see, it really doesnt MATTER whether you think Im reasonable or not.
In short, this web site isnt about YOU, (or me) and comments on this blog are not about you-. My comments are directed at anyone who has access, and cares to take something from them, in the form of information that they can consider or disregard. I have that same opportunity. I can read, consider, and dismiss anything I want, or utilize as valuable information if it appears to be so.
And no, I dont remember being ousted as a troll on this site or any other. Are you sure thats what you meant? Ousted? Maybe you meant something else. You sound confused. (often)
I AM a little worried about your classmates though. Talk about creepy. This culinary thing means you have access to knives. Very scary.
Report thisBy Akira_Maritias, October 28, 2007 at 6:30 pm #
To antispin:
“WriterOnTheStorm and Akira both pose as atheists”
Woah, woah, woah. Hang on right there. I’ve been an atheist all of my life (and I’ve spent almost a year on An Atheist Manifesto arguing with faithies), so don’t even PRETEND to know what my faith (or lack thereof) is.
Moving on.
“and claim that to not believe that fire demolished these three buildings (WTC 1,2&7;) is equivalent to believing in things you dont understand: ie the superstition of religion.”
...I really do hate it when people put words in my mouth. I didn’t say that, the other chap did. I said that I don’t believe in the conspiracy theory much how I don’t believe in God; I don’t see enough proof for either. Please read and differentiate between people before you act like an asshole. Thank you.
“Nice ruse, but theres a logical disconnect: in fact, it is the official story of fire demolishing these buildings so that they collapse at the speed of free fall that is without evidence or science. And to cite the Popular Mechanics guys is pathetic.”
But…I didn’t…-panic attack- WHY THE HELL WAS I INCLUDED IN THIS MESSAGE WHEN NOTHING IN IT HAS TO DO WITH ME?!
“Theres a reason its called popular: its not real and its not science.”
Like the ‘popular vote’, and the ‘popular theory of evolution’, and the ‘popular theory of poppler yumminess’...popularity does not mean false, last time that I checked…
“There is the magicians hand misdirecting us to look at the planes impacts; truly terrible spectacles, but the thing to focus on is the actual collapse, which is a non-sequitor.”
Yes, the last time that I checked, a plane full of civilians slamming into a building full of civilians is horrifying, thank you for letting my mind relive that sensation.
“Buildings dont collapse that way because of fire.”
No; but a fucking PLANE hitting a building, followed by the jet fuel EXPLODING sure does weaken the steel structure to collapse.
“And the third building wasnt even hit by a plane.”
No; but it was a VERY weak building to begin with that was already pretty much on the way to being a scrap heap.
“If you take the time to pay attention to the evidence, it is, sadly, irrefutable: controlled demolition in all three cases.”
I just refuted it. I didn’t need big words, and I didn’t even need to do much thinking. That was as irrefutable as proof for God…oh dear, I made a funny.
Moving on.
Report thisBy John Hanks, October 28, 2007 at 6:23 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Pearl Harbor was investigated time and time again by people trying to prove that FDR allowed the Japanese in. Anyone who has read “At Dawn We Slept”, knows how unlikely this is.
Supposedly FDR had one clear warning of the impending attack (debunked). Bush had over 50 warnings for 911, and still we have had no more than one forced investigation by people who ignored the smoking gun, because they had an interest in oil.
911 will be investigated and argued about through the rest of human history, and still a reliable investigation seems impossible today. Cover up? You bet. The only thing in question is the extent and the reasons.
I now think that the Clintons have an interest in the coverup as well. After all, Hillary is financed by the same people who brought us Bush.
Report thisBy antispin, October 28, 2007 at 6:11 pm #
I sense psyops, and I feel like Odysseus: how to hand these guys their eyeball on a stick?
WriterOnTheStorm and Akira both pose as atheists and claim that to not believe that fire demolished these three buildings (WTC 1,2&7;) is equivalent to believing in things you don’t understand: ie the superstition of religion. Nice ruse, but there’s a logical disconnect: in fact, it is the official story of fire demolishing these buildings so that they collapse at the speed of free fall that is without evidence or science. And to cite the Popular Mechanics guys is pathetic. There’s a reason it’s called “popular”: it’s not real and it’s not science. There is the magicians hand misdirecting us to look at the planes’ impacts; truly terrible spectacles, but the thing to focus on is the actual collapse, which is a non-sequitor. Buildings don’t collapse that way because of fire. And the third building wasn’t even hit by a plane. If you take the time to pay attention to the evidence, it is, sadly, irrefutable: controlled demolition in all three cases.
Report thisBy Inherit The Wind, October 28, 2007 at 5:55 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
#110138 by Non Credo on 10/28 at 3:14 pm
(410 comments total)
Inherit the wind writes:
As usual, Non-Credible cant separate fact from fiction. Clinton said How DARE you? not I dare you!
The difference is profound, but I dont expect him to get it.
————————& #8212;
ITW: nothing I wrote implies or in any way depends for its sense on Clintons having said I dare you!, rather than How DARE you?
As a matter of fact, ITW, if Clinton had said I dare you!, then what I wrote would not make any sense.
Your post surpassed even your usual level of nonsensicality.
*********************
Liar. Here’s the proof. You need to figure out how to keep your lies straight. Don’t believe me: Anyone can check your post #109954.
#109954 by Non Credo on 10/27 at 10:20 am
(410 comments total)
Its one thing for Clinton to express skepticism. Its even OK for him to say that the theory is, in practical terms, ridiculously far-fetched. But Clintons sanctimonious I dare you is insulting and misplaced.
This pious I dare you implies that were all supposed to know of some MORAL limit to the criminality of the Bush administration.
There is zero evidence for such a limit, and plenty of proof that the Bush-Cheney administration is deeply malignant and malevolent. Furthermore, the pattern so far has been that we continually find new depths to this malignancy: every month, every week, every day, we find out that Bush is worse than wed dared to think theretofore.
How dare Clinton try to shame those who rightly fear and loathe the evil that is Bush?
Don’t worry, Not-Credible: What you post rarely makes sense anyway.
Report thisBy Akira_Maritias, October 28, 2007 at 5:43 pm #
http://www.truthdig.com/eartotheground/item/2007102 6_fema_apologizes_for_make_believe_press_conference/
That right there? That aids your idea that the government is evil. I know that the government is evil, I have no way of lying to myself about that.
It’s honestly quite disgusting what they think they can get away with. Truly, truly disgusting.
I don’t know about all of you, but FEMA pisses me off.
That is all; please return to your regularly scheduled conspiracy theories.
Report thisBy Paolo, October 28, 2007 at 5:37 pm #
“Writeronthestorm” writes:
“I long ago gave up arguing with the truthseekers. After alienating a few friends and surviving one particularly ruinous thanksgiving dinner, I finally reached the conclusion that logic wasnt the impetus for their theories, that theirs was essentially an emotional reaction to a tragic event.”
This has not been my experience. I have found many people who just find a lot of fishy stuff in the “official” 9-11 story and are looking for logical answers that have not been forthcoming.
This may come as quite a shock, but the US government has been known to lie. An interesting example of this was the obviously faked bin Laden video that has him allegedly confessing to planning the attacks. The only problem was that the “bin Laden” on the grainy video was obviously not bin Laden.
You mean, the US government LIED? Oh, my heart!
As a 9-11 questioner, I still hold that, just maybe, buildings 1 and 2 really did collapse at free-fall speed, not toppling, but going straight down, expelling shorn steel beams hundreds of feet, and reducing virtually all concrete to pulverized dust. All as a result of two jetliner impacts. I still say that maybe it’s possible—but I have yet to see a good explanation.
And then there’s Building 7, which collapsed about 8 hours after the impacts, neither of which hit Building 7 itself. There were some minor fires supposedly caused by a diesel fuel tank rupture. Again, maybe this somehow caused the symmetrical imploding of the building, with the outer structure being neatly pulled towards the core of building, then collapsing downward straight into the building’s footprint. Maybe there is a perfectly innocent, logical explanation of how this unprecedented event occurred. But I have yet to see it.
But I agree many 9-11 “truthers” get carried away and fall for obviously silly theories. This does not, however, prove that all theories are to be dismissed out of hand.
Report thisBy Akira_Maritias, October 28, 2007 at 5:11 pm #
“Youre coming unglued Akira. Go back to cleaning your fishbowl. Please tell me you dont do that at the same time that youre practicing your culinary skills.”
Fishbowl cleaning happens on Saturday mornings…no sense in cleaning it too much. Of course, now that you feel that you can’t persuade me to find you reasonable on your conspiracy theory, you’ve reduced this discussion to personal attacks on hygiene and intelligence. Gee, Cyrena, you must have surely noticed that the insults are a little one sided here. Dare I say that you have become a troll? Oh wait, weren’t you ousted as a troll on another article?
“I never did say that, though my posts to you were not indicative of me losing my temper.”
I will apologize; I got mixed up and mistook you for someone else. Unlike most people here, I admit my errors. I guess that makes me -worlds- dumber than you, doesn’t it?
Oh, I see; I wonder what you’ll sound like when you lose your temper, if this is calm and rational insult hurling. Insinuating that I’m too stupid for college and too inept to know that cleaning a fishbowl ought not happen in a kitchen? Golly, my mistake! These are clearly relevant to the discussion!
“Ive so far not needed to resort to calling you an asshole, or cussing at you, or any of the rest of that. Seems like youre the one whos pretty much lost it.”
I’m a sailor, what can I say? Then again, if you knew a damn thing about the kitchen (which you obviously do not), then you would know that most kitchens are filled with swearing of all sorts. It’s not considered rude. But, I forget; most grown people out in the world cry when they hear naughty language. I didn’t realize that a 17 year old girl was capable of using worse language than a 54 year old, but I guess I’m mistaken. Warning, this child has been rated TRA: Too Rude for Adults.
“So, back to the original deal”
Thank you. Although you have already shown yourself to be an discourteous jerk, I’ll go ahead and continue to read and respond, even though you have already made assumptions about my intelligence that sway on the lines of psychotic.
“It is not, I repeat NOT unreasonable for any person, to question the Official Conspiracy”
I never said that it was unreasonable.
!HOWEVER!
It -becomes- unreasonable when you do what you are doing, I.E, going to other people and saying ‘question it!’, and when they don’t find it to be a conspiracy, which is what you -start- by saying, you immediately say ‘well, you’re just the dumbest thing I’ve ever seen!’ and proceed to bully them while acting as though you are superior. -Then- it is a problem. I could care less if you hold an opinion, but once your opinion is being hammered into my skull over and over again with the grace of a pitbull tearing a baby’s arms off, it is not right. I am entitled to my own opinion, after all, and just because I can’t find the proof that you have (just as I can’t find the proof for God that literally millions have) doesn’t make me wrong. It makes you a bully.
“So, dont make us out to be the crazies-”
You are a crazy. I gave you a photo that has some engine parts that were found at the Pentagon. Wanna elaborate? Or will you just sit here and gloat while calling me stupid?
“Akira, Im glad you decided against Johns Hopkins.”
Another witty remark by an equally witty writer! Why, Akira, I am so glad that you decided not to go to a great college, because you are clearly a shit chucking ape.
Essentially. Don’t pretty up your insults just because you don’t wanna sound rude. You sound ruder when you try to make it proper, because it lets my mind ‘fill in the gaps’.
Report thisBy cyrena, October 28, 2007 at 4:33 pm #
110104 by Akira_Maritias
You’re coming unglued Akira. Go back to cleaning your fishbowl. Please tell me you don’t do that at the same time that you’re practicing your culinary skills.
Unless you purchased the schematics for a Boeing and then proceeded to hunt for EVERY photo, which means purchasing magazines, books, movies, as well as searching ALL of the internet,.
Didnt need to do this Akira. These schematics are a part of my brain bag. (ask your dad what that is). All of these schematics come with the pilot package not just Boeing, but any aircraft any licensed professional is certified to operate.
So yep, I need to know it all. And no, the FAA would NOT be impressed with any knowledge that I might gain from magazines or movies. I actually had to KNOW stuff for those 25+ years that I worked in the industry. And, Im intimately familiar with the design/operation of the Boeing 757. (I do Airbus and DC series as well).
Now, when did I ever say that I dont lose my temper? Curious. I never did say that, though my posts to you were not indicative of me losing my temper. I save that for things that are really a rationale for losing my temper. So, while I never said that I didnt lose my temper, Ive so far not needed to resort to calling you an asshole, or cussing at you, or any of the rest of that. Seems like youre the one whos pretty much lost it.
So, back to the original deal, and Ill include writeronthestorm in this part( #110134)
It is not, I repeat NOT unreasonable for any person, to question the Official Conspiracy, when the official conspiracy indicates things are clearly at odds with the realities of physics/aerodynamics, among other things. Additionally, no one need be a member of any cult to pose those reasonable questions. Yes, I agree that there are people who have gone off the deep-end in their quest for the truth to these events. However, your example of proving the existence of God, and the government proving that AA flt 77 actually crashed into the Pentagon, is way off.
Again, for the record, this isnt about Arabs being able to pull this off or not. And, while nobody can prove or disprove the existence of God, thats not what were talking about in respect to the 757 that allegedly hit the Pentagon.
In THAT case, the Official Conspiracy SHOULD be able to prove that a Boeing 757 passenger jetliner crashed into the Pentagon. It has NOT proven that, and anyone who has been present or even viewed (via film) the aftermath of ANY air disaster in the past ½ century, would find SOME indication that an aircraft actually did crash at any given location. AGAIN, this is the first time in the history of US aviation, when that has NOT happened. WHY do we not have ANYTHING of the sort, from the airplane that allegedly crashed into the Pentagon, or for that matter, the UA flight 93, that allegedly crashed in PA?
Ive said before, this is NOT complicated. Yes, it IS something far more likely to be noted by those in the field, as opposed to a casual observer. But it is NOT unreasonable for anyone to expect, in the year 2001, that there would be some film footage, and reports, and photos of that airplane and ALL of the related emergency response, if in fact it had crashed there.
So, dont make us out to be the crazies just because weve asked some very basic and legitimate questions. And, they ARE basic questions. An NTSB report WOULD have had photos of this incident. So, where are they? The NTSB is bona fide US agency, as is the FAA, operating under the Department of Transportation. So, why is this the first time in recorded history that they have failed to investigate (for the record, and in triplicate) the circumstances of those 4 aircraft, and why have they provided NO information? (books, magazines and movies dont cut it, were talking fact and reality here, not screen plays or comic book stuff).
Akira, Im glad you decided against Johns Hopkins.
Report thisBy antispin, October 28, 2007 at 3:49 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
ok, I sense psyops, and I feel like Odysseus: how to hand these guys their eyeball on a stick?
WriterOnTheStorm and Akira both pose as atheists and claim to not believe that fire demolished these three buildings (WTC 1,2&7;) is equivalent to believing in things you don’t understand: ie the superstition of religion. Nice ruse, but there’s a logical disconnect: in fact, it is the ofiicial story of fire demolishing these buildings so that they collapse at the speed of free fall that is without evidence or science. And to site the Popular Mechanics guys is pathetic. There’s a reason it’s called “popular”: it’s not real and it’s not science. There is the magicians hand misdirecting us to look at the planes’ impacts; truly terrible spectacles, but the thing to focus on is the actual collapse, which is a non-sequitor. Buildings don’t collapse that way because of fire. And the third building wasn’t even hit by a plane. If you take the time to pay attention to the evidence, it is, sadly, irrefutable: controlled demolition in all three cases.
Report thisBy WriterOnTheStorm, October 28, 2007 at 2:59 pm #
I long ago gave up arguing with the truthseekers. After alienating a few friends and surviving one particularly ruinous thanksgiving dinner, I finally reached the conclusion that logic wasn’t the impetus for their theories, that theirs was essentially an emotional reaction to a tragic event.
Recently however, it seems that the 9/11 conspiracy crusade has settled firmly into cult status, complete with brainwashing techniques, narcissistic delusions of persecution, and meme-like defense mechanisms. Apparently, if you doubt the conspiracy, you are either a terminal rube, or a shameless Bush apologists, two things decidedly out of fashion these days.
Observing this phenomenon may shed some light on the mechanisms through which so many were seduced by early Christianity. For every disciple thrown to the lions, there were ten potential converts telling themselves that if those folks were willing to die for their beliefs, then they must be true. Pretzel logic, of course, as the early Christians weren’t being oppressed because they were right, they were more likely being oppressed because the movement was considered spurious by the Jews and a festering political annoyance to the Romans.
Explaining why these conspiracies are drawing flocks of faithful followers is a little more complex that this might suggest of course. For some it is the ultimate expression of Bushbashing, although this eventually backfires, because it gives a great deal more credit to those White House squatters than they merit. For others, it is Islamophobia that drives them, they simply can’t accept that those “desert monkeys” were smart enough to pull it off.
And of course, we can’t overlook the possibility that many simply aren’t intellectually rigorous enough consider the numerous refutations of their belief system. It is mostly this type that can be compared to religious zealots. They even employ the same logic fallacies :
9/11 conspiracy theorist : “prove there was no conspiracy, if you’re so smart.”
Christian equivalent : “can you prove god doesn’t exist?”
or
9/11 conspiracy theorist : “The people pulling the real strings are mad men with their own agenda”
Christian equivalent : “god works in mysterious ways” etc etc.
When it comes to 9/11 “truth” orthodoxy, I am an unapologetic heretic. However, I will apologize for the condescending tone inherent in this comment. It isn’t my intention to fishbowl a certain group for my own entertainment. Rather, my purpose is instructional. Can they tolerate that?
Report thisBy JK, October 28, 2007 at 2:33 pm #
Mr. Billis (109884 + 110083),
You are quite right there are many architects and engineers that have gone on the record that the collapses of all three buildings were controlled demolition. (There is an entire organization of them, http://www.ae911truth.org.
You mention the thoroughly discredited and debunked Popular mechanics (PM) articles. Among many articles debunking PM, Here are two: (http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/pm) and (http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/august2006/10080 6popularmechanics.htm)
I highly recommend Dr. David Ray Griffin’s book “Debunking the Debunkers”. For a small taste of Dr. Griffin on this, here is a link to video of him: (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4538883983032 92237&hl=en)
I watched an interview with the PM author (who was obviously no scientist or even a professional). When asked how the hijackers were identified, he responded that their identities had been proven by DNA. When asked where the DNA came from to compare samples with he was speechless. The article was obviously commissioned and was full of already debunked material.
Please lose the tone and the attitude and take a serious look at the evidence that proves conclusively that the preposterous official conspiracy theory is impossible and that all of the conspiracy buffs that buy the official story are both wrong (and lazy).
Report thisBy antispin, October 28, 2007 at 2:27 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
I am sorry to say that it is obvious that the three buildings didn’t collapse because of fires; they collapsed through controlled demolition. That the USG thinks they can fool us into thinking otherwise is a testimony to their arrogant power and the public’s ignorance and indifference…or, as in Chomsky’s case, profound cynicism (he says, “yeah, if they did it, it’s not nearly the worst thing they’ve done…” - or words to that effect.) “But how could so many incompetents get away with something like that?” is the usual objection from intelligent people. My answer is that it didn’t take that many people and that the ruling class has a huge incentive to go along/get along.
The logician in me is, of course, horrified. In logic we learn that anything can logically follow a false assumption. For the USG and the military/industrial complex, this has meant that, truly, anything that furthers their power-hungry objectives goes. That is also obvious. But then, we all have to live with this cognitive dissonance re the truth vs. the fictional facts portrayed in the MSM. For me, this is very painful. I’ve found it exceedingly wearing on my psche and wish I could just ignore it, but I can’t.
Report thisBy Akira_Maritias, October 28, 2007 at 10:52 am #
To Cyrena:
“I included in the SAME response, MULTIPLE COMMENTSfrom you. Im very sorry that you couldnt figure this out. I didnt note each and every comment (number) from you, because it included several. So, dont get your panties in a wad over it.”
Aw…I thought you don’t lose your temper? It’s not that hard to say ‘To: name’ whenever you have to respond to more than one person, and it certainly isn’t that hard to separate them. Guess common courtesy is something to get angry about.
“Most of the posters here seem perfectly aware…If you ever get to attend college, (though it doesnt sound like youre actually college material) this commission report will be assigned reading.”
Haha…insulting me again? I’m stopping you right now, because I graduated early from high school and I’m sitting in a dorm room. Granted, it’s for culinary school, but I bet that you put psychology classes above learning a trade. I could have gone to Johns Hopkins if I wanted to…but I didn’t want to.
“In the meantime, the thing I asked you to come up with, were photos of what should have been an airplane at the Pentagon, after the alleged Boeing 757 allegedly crashed into it. I thought you might (since youve gone so carefully through everything) have come up with that. You did not, and the reason you did not, is because that 757 did not strike the Pentagon.”
http://membres.lycos.fr/applemacintosh/Pentagon/out sidedebris.jpg
If you wanna bitch and moan, please make sure that you don’t gloat before I start showing you stuff. You sound like a pompous asshole when you do that. I know right now that it’s not good enough for you. I’ll look for more when you start bitching about that not being from a Boeing (or something as ridiculous as saying that they strapped those to a missile).
“Ive examined any and every photo that might be available.”
Bullshit. Unless you purchased the schematics for a Boeing and then proceeded to hunt for EVERY photo, which means purchasing magazines, books, movies, as well as searching ALL of the internet, as well as asking everyone who was near the incident if they took any pictures, you have not seen every photo.
“Keep looking, or stick the fork in your ear. Either way, your results are going to be the same.”
Your probably wondering why I stopped quoting and replying. I already have. You’re positive that you’re right, and you’re positive that I’m stupid. Those several paragraphs basically hopped around saying ‘oh yeah, I’m right, you’re not, planes hit WTC, but no plane hit Pentagon, don’t ask me where those people went, but I’m right, you’re not, blah blah blah I’m a genius, you’re an idiot’.
Essentially.
Report thisBy cyrena, October 28, 2007 at 10:28 am #
Reply to#110063 by Akira_Maritias
Akira, please note the top line with your name in it. That is the format (or one very similar) that the majority of posters use, when they are replying or commenting on other comments. (as opposed to just commenting on the article in general).
I used this in my reply to niloroth, and you. For niloroth, I used his one comment and included that number. I included in the SAME response, MULTIPLE COMMENTSfrom you. Im very sorry that you couldnt figure this out. I didnt note each and every comment (number) from you, because it included several. So, dont get your panties in a wad over it.
Most of the posters here seem perfectly aware, by now, that the official conspiracy (the 9-11 commission report that you havent read) was a cover-up for what actually occurred on 9-11. You dont know that, because you havent read it. If you ever get to attend college, (though it doesnt sound like youre actually college material) this commission report will be assigned reading. (probably for a history course, though it could fall under other areas as well).
In the meantime, the thing I asked you to come up with, were photos of what should have been an airplane at the Pentagon, after the alleged Boeing 757 allegedly crashed into it. I thought you might (since youve gone so carefully through everything) have come up with that. You did not, and the reason you did not, is because that 757 did not strike the Pentagon.
Now Paolo may have misunderstood me as well. I did NOT say that there were NO AIRPLANES at the WTC. Obviously, there were. Not only that, but there was the very typical RESPONSE from the local emergency crew there in Manhattan. So, we know that those two airplanes struck those towers. We also know that those Towers were destroyed by demolition, and so the aircraft involved at that site were destroyed in the same manner. There is no evidence to be gleaned from those aircraft, because all of the debris (all mixed together from the demolition) was immediately hauled off.
What I asked you to find was something that would indicate that an aircraft had actually struck the Pentagon, and I knew that you couldnt do it, because THAT MUCH Ive attempted to do myself. Ive examined any and every photo that might be available. There are NO SIGNS that a passenger aircraft was ever in the area.
Should I explain this for the 6th time? I cant. Theres no need for you to do all of the work for me, because Ive already done it. But, I wanted you to get the hint, that none of what youre coming up with addresses the issue, which is that there is no sign of a standard emergency response to the incident at the Pentagon, and since youre still so very young, you may never have seen what a normal response to an air disaster looks like. But, theres no excuse, because all you have to do is check for the past say 20 or 30 years worth of air disasters/plane crashes, and you will see what normally happens, and how emergency crews (and news crews) respond. Not only that, there will ALWAYS be debris left over from any airplane crash. Its really not complicated.
This was somehow all very mysteriously missing from the incident at the Pentagon. There was ZERO debris, and next to ZERO response. Ive found photos of a Pentagon with a hole in it, and there are photos showing one fire truck pumping water. I also saw a photo that included TWO emergency workers. Yes, TWO.
Where were t