The 9/11 Conspiracies: Debunking What You've Been Told

Submitted by: boredhuman 1 month ago in News & Politics


I will begin with the official story, move on to expert government-paid scientists, which result in public sources filled with misinformation, and we'll end by giving some examples of how the lies play out here on IAB. To find the truth, you need only think for yourself.

There plenty of Liars who are paid off by the government to spread misinformation. This includes people on many levels:

The Official Lie

A few dozen government-paid architects who wrote the greatest works of fiction on 9/11:
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) was paid by the government to "investigate" WTC disaster and to write a Fantastic Story.

Now, you may think it all looks reasonable/convincing... But once you use your head a little, their fantastic explanation topples like a ... building undergoing controlled demolition.
FEMA Report (following links include comments to show just what a joke it is): Introduction; WTC 1&2; WTC 7.

The Expert Liars
Scientists spreading Lies and confusion, calling it "debunking myths."
Public figures, like Noam Chomsky who use logical fallacies to spread lies.
The Truth is: 2900 architects and engineers risk their careers by questioning the official story. Some are forced to alter their profile to create deniability to protect their identity. Imagine how many architects would speak out if there wasn't a professional risk? So, the official story told by a dozen Government-paid Liars lives on.
(a bit off topic: Similarly, there IS a scientific consensus on Global Warming: over 9,000 PhD in relevant scientific field agree there is no AWP.)

The Public Sources tell Public Lies:
Wikipedia is the modern encyclopedia, and most people expect to find facts. DON'T BE FOOLED: it can be edited by anyone, including the government. The government will rarely edit entries directly - instead they spread misinformation to experts, who then will edit the public sources. Beware that sometimes what looks like Truth, is actually government created Straw-man Lies designed to discredit Truth.
Truth turns into "conspiracy." Sheep call themselves "rational." Lies become "fact."

The Truth:
Now that you're able to spot the Lies, you may be ready to learn the Truth. It's going to be hard: there will be plenty of sheeple ridiculing you and questioning your logic while committing fallacies such as ad hominems. Some will tell you they HAVE watched the Truth, but then will mindlessly quote the "expert" Liars or Public Lies. Don't blame the sheeple though - they don't know how to think for themselves and don't know any better!

The Fake Victims:
There's no point to mourn the fake/paid-off victims in the WTC and the flights. The TRUTH is the only victim here. The government doesn't need to kill the Truth or people who spread it -- the masses of sheeple silence the Truth for them.

Seek TRUTH!!!
To start looking for Truth and seeing sheeple in action you don't need to look any further than IAB:
European Engineers and 9/11 - and @whosaidwhat sheeple.
Demolition of Truth - and @Cajun247 sheeple

Use your head. Don't let fools play with your emotions as 9/11 approaches. 
There are 299 comments:
Male 337
I'd like to sincerely apologize to anyone who was offended by this idiotic post - I fell victim to Poe's law. It was meant as sarcastic, over-the-top parody of conspiracy theories (CTs), and the links should have given it away. 

The text: 
In the post I was telling the story that everyone is wrong and you can't trust anyone but yourself and this post. I peppered in terms like "truth" and "sheeple" which are popular when the goal is to force ideas onto people. And I kept saying "think for yourself" when really you were supposed to blindly trust the CT. 

Links that counter the text: 

The official story: 
There is a mountain of research by experts who analyzed what happened. All that information is publicly available. To appreciate how bad the CTs are, you also need to see what they comment on: The CTs won't directly dispute statements made in official report but will ask for more information. If you have doubts or would like to learn more, read the 100s of pages that were written in official reports, preferably with someone who has good understanding of physics and engineering... 

Experts: 
First 2 links were just direct debunking of 9/11 CT. 
The ae911truth.org 2900 architects section was an attempt to show how untrustworthy those signatures are. The links to real Mark Allen and the contrasting post on AE911 were here to show that it's easy to get fake signatures on the site. ae911truth.org would benefit from getting fake signatures, so there would be no reason for them to take great care to check their validity. Try signing up yourself as an architect or adding some random professor to the site... Global Warming petition has the same issues. Even if all these signers were genuine, it wouldn't get you closer to the truth than the experts who were specifically tasked to write the reports. 

Public sources / Truth: 
Again, if you're not going to believe wikipedia or any written public sources, you might as well call yourself crazy (which is the same as saying "the whole world is crazy"). 

Victims: 
This section was tough to write. In an attempt to make it go over the top to hint at parody, I ended up just offending people. Please accept my deepest apologies and condolences if you know people who died in the attack. The links show the names of known victims and comments about them. These were real people - I doubt the 9/11 CTs attempted to contact the victims' families and friends. 

IAB past discussions: 
I linked past discussions to show that this conspiracy shit will happen all the time. whosaidwhat and Cajun247 utterly counter the CT crap. 


I was hoping that people would get a chuckle out of this nonsense, especially once they take a look at the links. A few people have called it out to be sarcasm but most were just offended. 
0
Reply
Male 4,880
boredhuman ~facepaw~ I had NO idea this was satire. None. IAB has been so rife with conspiracy theories this past year that this probably wasn't the right venue for this. At the very least, a more obvious wink was needed than what you provided.

But focusing on the big picture here, let me say I'm relieved you aren't a conspiracy theorist. We've got enough of those on this site already.
0
Reply
Male 337
squrlz4ever I was hoping to take the impact off the inevitable monkwarrior post about 9/11. It back-fired a bit, as it wasn't clear that it was a satire. I'll need to be more careful next time. Still, it was a very worthwhile learning experience for me. :D

I really think having posts by conspiracy theorists like monkwarrior, or hopelessly biased conservatives like 5cats, are important and improve IAB. Even if we disagree with them, many people still think like they do. Their posts offer an opportunity for rational IAB members to counter the nonsense. 
0
Reply
Male 4,880
boredhuman I'll bet it was a learning experience! I think you nailed it with your reference to Poe's Law, something I hadn't heard of before but fits this situation perfectly.

I'm a bit torn on the publishing of conspiracy theories or outlandish political theories. One the one paw, I think they should be published occasionally so that they can be countered by others, as you describe and per the "marketplace of ideas" metaphor.

On the other paw, I think their publication needs to be limited because otherwise the energy of the more grounded critics is absolutely exhausted by continually having to counter them. Why should the majority be placed in the position of having to dedicate 90% of their time to rebutting unhinged opinions? Why should a small majority with extremist views be allowed to determine the topics for discussion?

It isn't as bad here at IAB as I've just described, but already I'd say conspiracy theories and extremist views on here get more than their fair share of attention.
0
Reply
Male 337
squrlz4ever I'm tempted to post guides on IAB: 
- Critical thinking
- Scientific Method
- Evaluating resources 
etc. 

In this digital age, where it's easy to find all kinds of information that reinforce any views (including crazy ones), it's important to know how to properly evaluate information. 
0
Reply
Male 4,880
boredhuman I'd welcome any posts along those lines. Potholer54, a YouTuber with some excellent content, has a stellar video on the scientific method that I'd love to see go up.
0
Reply
Male 5,364
boredhuman i knew right off the bat you weren't serious from the key words that exposed you in your post.  But your admission to mocking the facts really just shows your fear of them.
0
Reply
Male 4,999
monkwarrior Actually what bored human showed is that the more ridiculous he made his post the more real it sounded, and that is because Truther arguments like yours are ridiculous.
0
Reply
Male 5,364
markust123 so he and perhaps you may have thought so.  But those who do understand the need for a re-investigation, or those who are simply looking to understand it will easily see the 'fanaticism' of his post.  Still, some of his links valuable to help someone understand.

Deniers of the truth, and those afraid of what the evidence actually reveals really have no other recourse but mockery, fallacies, and as boredhuman exemplified, complete dishonesty by pretending to be for a cause, but only to mock it.
0
Reply
Male 337
monkwarrior Hmm interesting. I was wondering what your reaction to this post would be... Would you support it or counter it? You ended up largely ignoring it.

"Deniers of the truth..." - nice statement... sounds just like my post.

"...afraid of what the evidence actually reveals really have no other recourse..." "But your admission to mocking the facts really just shows your fear of them." -- very interesting perspective. 
0
Reply
Male 5,364
boredhuman As i said, i ignored it because it was obvious to me it was one of two things, neither good:  someone mocking, or a fanatic who didn't do enough research.  I did respond to posts of others though.  It is clear though, you fear the facts presented against the official report to go the distance to make such a post to mock it.  Your reaction is a normal one by those who live by western media delusions, where the media feeds tells them what the truth is, and to mock anything (even facts) that nullify that 'truth'.  But ultimately, it's still ridiculous because you mocked it but provided information others will be able to look at and learn from, so thanks for that.  I'm sort of glad it backfired for you and you had to write your reveal.  But it didn't fool me in the slightest.


0
Reply
Male 337
monkwarrior It's curious that "someone mocking" and "a fanatic" can be confused so easily, isn't it? That's Poe's law in a nutshell. 

Apparently you know what I fear and how I think better than I do! What would be the point of trying to correct you? 

I've argued with you once - trying to find your level of knowledge about the moon missions from the official sources... and you showed none. I have to assume it's the same here: you just keep watching conspiracy videos and never bother to learn the official story. 

Keep seeking YOUR truth, monk! 
0
Reply
Male 5,364
boredhuman as mentioned, neither were good options, but i didn't raise anything about it because you had some links that people will view and learn something about.  So thanks again for that.
0
Reply
Male 4,999
boredhuman I am very happy to hear this was sarcasm. Sorry I snapped at you.
0
Reply
Male 1,798
God, some people are such uneducated idiots. My basic firefighter training tells me just how FEASIBLE the events on 9/11 were, and how STUPID all the conspiracy theories about it being an "inside job" really are. Grow up, people.
-1
Reply
Male 39,880
No one has ever walked on the moon. The Earth is flat. The world trade center never collapsed and the holocaust never happened.

That's my story and I'm sticking to it. Don't confuse the issue with facts.

|
0
Reply
Male 8,526
Gerry1of1 And the most important mystery of all? Is the Great A'Tuin a boy or a girl?

What if the Great A'Tuin 'identified' as a globe?
0
Reply
Male 4,999
Popular Mechanics debunked the 9/11 Truther arguments years ago with their book: Debunking 9/11 Myths: Why Conspiracy Theories Can't Stand Up to the Facts

Here's the Popular Mechanics article. The seismic data recorded during the towers collapses clearly shows there were no explosions at the beginning of the collapse.



Funny how the Truther's usually only show the condensed recording that gives the illusion of an explosion spike.
2
Reply
Male 5,364
markust123 I've submitted a 3-part series to fancylad that shows how those 'debunkers' you talk of, and whose information you rely on, really have nothing to stand on.  keep an eye out for it!
0
Reply
Male 3,375
markust123 but they were paid off by the illuminati and.. uhh various other sources.. uh and SATAN. uhm and. the science isnt settled! uhh and. HASHTAGS. uhh crap you're a TROLL!!! LOLXXXZ
1
Reply
Male 4,880
markust123 Thanks, Markust. Great links.
0
Reply
Male 2,145
Also, if the world was round the buildings would have fallen sideways......
1
Reply
Male 40,728
handimanner Yes, because the Earth is allegedly spinning so fast, they'd fall just like in cartoons: that's physics! Proof the Earth is flat :nods:
-1
Reply
Male 8,526
5cats Obviously the Earth is spinning so fast, so the terrorist should have crashed the plane at the base so the buildings would have flown into outer space from centrifugal force.
0
Reply
Male 39,880
It takes only one word to derail the conspiracies ....... ' Why? '
1
Reply
Male 20,899
Gerry1of1 Follow the money?
1
Reply
Male 5,364
fancylad that's exactly what needs to be done if you ask me
0
Reply
Male 39,880
fancylad okay Deep Throat
-1
Reply
Male 38
The internet; where pretending to be a neo-nazi and going "ha! You didn't click the links" makes you clever and unique!
1
Reply
Female 1,605
I actually have an open mind about conspiracy theories, but I can't think of a single one that definitively convinced me that it was anything other than what it appeared to be. People who know big secrets will find a way to reveal them (a la Deep Throat) in the hopes of one day being THE ONE who blew the lid off something. Human nature. 

The one conspiracy theory that bothers me most is Sandy Hook. People need to stop with that shit. I'm sure it's because I'm a teacher, and I can imagine the heartache. If I had family or friends in 9/11, I'd probably feel the same way others who have commented do.  
1
Reply
Male 40,728
littlemissqt I love a good conspiracy theory! It doesn't have to be proven correct, just be logical and interesting.
A LOT of conspiracies get proven to be true, but usually after decades of denial. The Maine, the Lusitania (unless things have changed? The UK to this day denies it) and plenty more.

Someday things like JFK, MLK and RFK may be exposed, or maybe not :/ Probably long after we're gone tho.

Debunking bad conspiracies is fun too! And finding which are actually government-run CoIntelPro fronts is fun, but dangerous!
1
Reply
Female 1,605
5cats I see your point.  There's always the CHANCE one could be proven true...
0
Reply
Female 4,396
I know exactly why they came down... wobbles! :D
0
Reply
Male 15,259
Conspiracy theories are the post 9-11 world's version of 80s ALL chain letters promising untold wealth or death by syphilis. People who pass them on just make fools of themselves.
0
Reply
Male 5,364
Draculya not at all, but 'conspiracy theorist' is a propaganda war term commonly used by people who want to silence people who get to close to finding out the truth of something they did on a grand scale.
0
Reply
Female 1,605
Draculya I like this!
1
Reply
Female 400
I stopped reading at 'sheeple'.
1
Reply
Male 6,077
And the Earth is flat
0
Reply
Male 40,728
broizfam It's turtles all the way down!
-1
Reply
Male 586
This sort of stupid shit gets a post? There's caps in the article, fuck off. If it's bored human or monk, why the fuck bother? They're two stupid shitty kids, what they have to say isn't worth anyone's time.
1
Reply
Male 5,364
thething911 often people will trow a tantrum and mock those who expose things that rattle their world-view.
0
Reply
Male 86
Before the Internet, these people sat in their basements, wearing their tinfoil hats, and tried to explain to people how they were abducted by little green men and butt probed.  Now, they get to spread this BS over a huge audience.
2
Reply
Male 5,364
david-morris Often people will mock what they don't understand, and throw in a bit of arrogance when something comes close to rattling their world-view.  Good job at exemplifying that.
0
Reply
Male 86
monkwarrior , seriously?  Mock what I don't understand?  Arrogance?  Doesn't this exactly describe 99% of the conspiracy people?
0
Reply
Male 5,364
david-morris not at all, but it's understandable you question it, since it describes you.
0
Reply
Male 86
monkwarrior wear that tinfoil hat with pride
0
Reply
Male 5,364
david-morris i don't wear one, but it seems you dress yourself with fallacies, as it looks ridiculous.
0
Reply
Female 1,605
0
Reply
Male 12
I'm another person that comes here often, but rarely comments.
I was 21 when this happened. I live in Canada, and heard about the first plane hitting the WTC on the Howard Stern show on my way to work. I turned on my office television and watched the second plane hit on Live television. Sure it's not a firsthand eyewitnessing, but I have the perspective of a foreigner. 

After looking at the conspiracy sites and videos, all they have proven to me is a fundamental lack of understanding about basic physics, and the ability for humans to keep secrets.
"But Madt, Jet fuelz doesn't melt steel beams, yo! LOLZ!!!1"
 Okay, but fires don't just hit a certain temperature and just chill out there. Heat builds up. The air gets hotter and hotter and hotter. Structural collapse is a thing.
"But Madt! You can see the windows blowing out several floors below the point of collapse!"
 Yes and thousands of cubic feet of air being compressed will do that. As the building is coming down, the air inside the lower floors will be compressed by the air coming down from the floors above and it will find the weakest point and escape. Thus it blows out the windows.
"But Madt, Controlled Demolition..."
Is neither practical, concealable, logical, nor necessary. The conspiracy that several hundreds of people would have to somehow sneak demolition charges into with world's tallest building in the worlds most populous city for the purposes of getting a president in the first year of his first term into a war with Iraq to satisfy some strange idea of revenge for how Saddam beat his Daddy 8 years previously is just bizarre. It's nonsensical. The simpler solution to the problem. One that doesn't involve collusion between multiple hundreds of people, experts in Special Visual Effects, or stretching your imagination to come up with strange physics that don't actually match reality, is that a small group of assholes that don't like America flew 4 planes into three buildings. Some of those buildings then fell over.

I would like it if this site stuck to videos about cats and neat inventions and left the politics out. Articles like this just make people angry, and fuel the crazies need to feel like they're right about something.

3
Reply
Male 5,364
Madt Stick around, there's a 3-part series i submitted that goes through the 'official report' and really exposes its flaws.  Many people who understand the basics of physics are speaking out against its flaws.  Though, i admit, based on your comment, i doubt it will sway you, as you seem to have made your decision and re-inforced it with ridiculousness and mockery.
0
Reply
Female 1,605
Madt THANK YOU!  Absolutely right on.  

BTW, sites post shit like this for page views. The more people who comment, the more people who return to this page to respond.  
2
Reply
Male 145
Madt "But Madt, What will I spend my sleepless nights website rabbit holing on now? Fluoride, Flat Earth, Moon Landing?" 
1
Reply
Male 3,410
Madt Here Here

Heat displacement through the entire building is never considered by their conspiracy's when it comes to the jet fuel and structural beams.

I love this guys video about what happens where you super heat steal.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FzF1KySHmUA
1
Reply
Male 4,880
kalron27 Just a short note from Wikipedia I thought you might find of interest. Please consider this as partial payment on the many black oil sunflower seeds you've thrown my way.

"Hear, hear" is an expression used as a short, repeated form of "Hear him!" It represents a listener's agreement with the point being made by a speaker. ... The phrase "Hear him, hear him!" was used in Parliament from late in the 17th century, and was reduced to "Hear!" or "Hear, hear!" by the late 18th century.
2
Reply
Male 3,410
squrlz4ever incoming black oil sunflower seed reward!



0
Reply
Male 3,415
kalron27 you took away the wrong thing from that video.

The localized heated steel was very easy to bend, but the REST was solid.  Heating a piece of steel to a bending point requires very intense LOCALIZED heat.  2 or 3 floors away from the burning site, the steel beams would have been cool to the touch.

The whole building would have been hotter, this is true, but it would not have been melting steel hot.
0
Reply
Male 3,410
daegog Not at all, you are ignoring the heat displacement aspect. As that fire burned, the steal beams became super heated.  As this heat displaced throughout the structure it became a ticking time bomb with the structural integrity weakening due to increasing heat.  Once it reached the balance of heat and weight the integrity collapsed.  It does not have to be melting to weaken the integrity enough to collapse, as presented in the video.  The steal rod is not melting, as demonstrated by the poster the rod is still a solid structure.  But when he applies the pressure the rod folds like a noodle.  As Madt says below, additional failures further compromised the structural integrity.
0
Reply
Male 12
daegog But when you have several floors worth of mass collapsing on top of a single floor all at once, it will exceed the load bearing capacity of the steel beams in that floor. One collapse instigates the next and the one after that until it hits the ground.

A plastic lawn chair can support the weight of a person sitting on it. But if the same person were to jump on the same chair, the legs snap and the whole works winds up lying in the dirt.
0
Reply
Male 3,410
Madt ^again this. It is a domino effect of a compromised structure.
0
Reply
Male 3,415
Madt Your analogy is skewed.  Because people and lawn chairs are different. Stack a bunch of lawn chairs on top of each other.. say 100.. now dump 40 more on top of them.

Would the bottom 100 stack of lawn chairs simply shatter and the entire stack fall directly down upon itself?

0
Reply
Male 12
daegog I'm sorry, I was trying to dumb it down a bit for you. I assumed you understood analogy, and could see that it wasn't equivalency. The structure of a plastic lawn chair is not the same as a steel building, no. but it was designed to hold a human being up to a certain weight. a stack of lawn chairs as you describe does not equal the weight that the lawn chair was designed to support. so dropping a stack of 40 lawn chairs may not cause the legs on a stack of 100 lawn chairs to buckle, however, if you were to drop a 200 pound human on that stack, it would still likely collapse. 

What I was trying to describe was design limits. and what I described is still accurate and relevant to what I was analogizing. 
0
Reply
Male 6,077
Madt I'm afraid you're just using way too much sense here.
0
Reply
Male 12
broizfam I mean, I'm not a physicist, but I do come from Earth, have a high school education and basic reasoning skills...
0
Reply
Male 3,415
Madt but when ACTUAL scientists and PHDs tell you it could not happen the way it did, you don't believe them, why is that?

How can you know better then they?  Because the government said so?
0
Reply
Male 12
daegog No, because a tiny minority of scientists subscribe to the demolition idea, whereas far more agree that physics, and metallurgy and thermodynamics and chemistry and just plain reality all point to the cause of the collapse being airplanes bigger than existed when the building was designed, loaded with more fuel than would be expected from an accident causing fires that were fueled not by paper and desks but by propellants used to fly said aircraft.

It is not the government's explanation that convinced me. It was the overwhelming evidence. 

I made a point of never believing anything that G.W. Bush or Dick Cheney had to say as neither of them had the education or expertise to advise anyone on such a subject.
0
Reply
Male 12
daegog Because the VAST MAJORITY of scientists with PhD's say that yes. It can happen exactly the way they told us. A small group is bucking consensus, and you're following them. Just like with your climate change analogy. 99% of scientists say yeah, that's a thing, and you're going with the 1% who disagree.

Why do these 2900 Architects disagree? There are boatloads of dollars to be made selling books to people that will buy anything that confirms what they think.
0
Reply
Male 3,415
Madt where is information on the vast majority of scientists you are claiming?  I have tried googling it several ways and could not find it.  Do you have some actual info on this or did you make it up?

This is akin to me saying the vast majority of people think X, but never showing proof of them thinking X.
0
Reply
Male 2,607
daegog 
Climate scientists publish peer reviewed papers in credible journals.

Oftentimes, consensus studies actually examine the findings of those studies, or even what papers are being cited as sources.

How can we confirm the expertise and individual findings of those 2900 signatures? 
0
Reply
Male 12
daegog Here's one article from a reputable source:
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/when-the-twin-towers-fell/

And another:
http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/design/a3524/4278874/

And another:
https://www.nist.gov/el/faqs-nist-wtc-towers-investigation

And one from a university:
http://www.civil.northwestern.edu/people/bazant/PDFs/Papers/476.pdf

The Fake News chimes in here:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/22/nyregion/22wtccnd.html?mcubz=3

Another University:
https://www.uwgb.edu/dutchs/PSEUDOSC/911NutPhysics.HTM

Oh look:
https://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/11-09-07/

I can continue if you like, but I think this proves that either you don't know how to operate the googles, or are susceptible to confirmation bias
0
Reply
Male 3,415
Madt Yes, i can google links of people who think the official report is legit.  This is totally not what i asked for tho, because i do not suspect what i asked for exists.

Would you like me to link some articles from engineers that do not agree with the official report?
0
Reply
Male 5,364
daegog Good question, because you've got them now, no such information exists aside from the 'debunkers'/'official report' thumpers.
0
Reply
Male 6,077
daegog And then, of course, there are things like this:
http://www.smithsonianchannel.com/videos/this-computer-simulation-explains-how-the-twin-towers-fell/37709

But, no. The government killed thousands of Americans by destroying a major economic location in a city of major economic importance to justify going to war with a backward nation. That makes much more sense.

0
Reply
Male 3,415
broizfam ok, that is literally a simulation created by ONE guy.  If you would not listen to 2900 who disagree, why are on would you listen to that one guy?  

Is it the simulation part?  If i found you a simulation that disagreed with his findings, whose simulation would you then believe?
0
Reply
Male 6,077
daegog Depends on who's doing it, I guess. US gov't complicity still makes no sense to me. And I was no fan of that gov't.
0
Reply
Male 7,910
daegog You may as well as also be a Climate Change denier with that logic.  Listen it's okay to entertain and have opposing views, but at some point the evidence on one side is heavily outweighing the other.  Consequences will be had if decisions aren't made.
0
Reply
Male 3,415
normalfreak2   A climate denier sides with the minority of scientists not the majority.

Where is information on this majority of scientists that think 9/11 happened the way its listed in the official report?  I have tried googling for it several different ways but i cannot find it.

If you have a larger group of scientists than the 9/11 skeptics, a link would be greatly appreciated, because if it exists i cannot find it.

It is extremely simple to find information about the majority of scientists who agree with climate change, about 9/11? Not so much.
0
Reply
Male 12
daegog If you're looking for a number, you're ignoring the forest because you've spotted a tree. That 2900 number could have been made up by anyone with a blog and an agenda. Look at the number of studies and papers published.

A petition can have a thousand signatures on it, but that doesn't mean any of them are real.

An election could have had 3 million illegal votes cast, if one person insists it's true?
0
Reply
Male 5,364
Madt You've got nothing.  Daegog has got you.
0
Reply
Male 3,415
Madt So, what you are basically saying is that there is no way to actually know what the majority of engineers and architects say?

Are you saying the engineers who signed the paper are made up individuals?  I feel you are beating around the bush a bit here.

Lets drop all the metaphors for a second, they bring no clarity to the conversation...

1)Do you feel the ae9/11 organization is fictitious?

2)Do you feel their questions have all been answered, including the rebuttals to the rebuttals?

3)Have you ever seen a video were a skyscraper caught fire and dropped straight down upon itself?


0
Reply
Male 3,415
I will start by saying the section about the Fake Victims is bullshit.  I feel certain that a lot of people died, a lot of people even died from health related issues from the dust and particulates released when the buildings fell.  That aside, i would hope some folks would give the rest of the article a realistic look.

abetterworld i hear that a lot, "the planes were not necessary."  Well i disagree, the planes create a great camouflage.  Had all three of those buildings came down in the exact same manner without a plane hitting them, we would not be having this conversation.  Absolutely no one would believe that these random terrorist could rig a building to blow with the exact same precision as a standard demolition crew.  It has never been done before, to my knowledge and would have required too much suspension of disbelief for the american people and the world to swallow that story.  Asymmetric damage could not cause the buildings to fall in a symmetrical manner.

Barry9a: i agree, little would change.  But to that end, why look for anyone's killer?  Nothing changes, a person goes to jail or not, the dead guy is still dead.  I think justice is why many people still search for answers, but that is just a guess.

@ kalron27 markust123 Again, i think boredhuman fucked up his whole post with that bs about fake victims.  People died, this is a certainty.  I do not wish in any way to appear disrespectful of the losses suffered by anyone or their families while talking about 9/11.


To People who are not too pissed boredhuman, did you actually bother to check out any of the links like the Demolition of Truth?  Do you mean to tell me you find all of those people totally with any validity?

I will liken this to Global Warming in that regard, Why would you believe a bunch of scientists that talk about the weather, but not believe a bunch of scientists that talk about the physics of building demolition?

It is reasonable to suggest that the Global Warming scientists have more to lose in terms of scorn and derision going against the vast majority of their brethren and denying climate change.  What do these Engineers that put their names and careers online the line have to gain by pointing out the obvious inconsistencies in the 9/11 report?

Do you think the fire fighters that report hearing a chain of explosions consistent with controlled demolition are all lying too?

I think too many of us (on both sides, THANKS TRUMP) have drawn a line and refuse to look at the other side.

I am pretty set on the side that the official report is bullshit.  Does that mean bush, cheney, rice, and the gang all knew?  I do not know.  If NIST released it's data for people to investigate and our scientists could see how they came to their conclusions, it would go a long way in resolving this entire issue imo.

OK rant over, have a good saturday folks.
0
Reply
Male 5,364
daegog i submitted a 3-part series on 9/11 so be sure to check it out.  It's a bit more in-depth and based on the facts, and compares to the claims by the 'official report', and 'debunkers'.  I'm sure you'll find it interesting, because i did.
0
Reply
Male 145
daegog You miss the point completely.  There would be no need to camouflage anything if just planes crashed into the buildings.  This isn't Hollywood, where complete destruction is preferred when giant robots battle in the city core.  In fact, I could say it would have been more dramatic with 2 high rises with burnt out tops towering Manhattan.
0
Reply
Male 3,415
abetterworld You are correct, i have no idea of what point you are trying to make.  Are you saying that the plane crashes alone are enough to cause the buildings to fall?
0
Reply
Male 3,643
daegog I believe the point abetterworld was trying to make was, you keep talking about the psychological effects that the planes to the table. Had the buildings remained standing, the net effect of the future (our present) would ultimately be the same; we still would have gone to war, Saddam would've been executed, etc. So why bring the buildings down when they were already, essentially, inhabitable?
0
Reply
Male 145
DuckBoy87 Exactly. Much, much less to cover up and way easier to execute under the radar.
  When that first plane hit, the U.S.A. was off to war.
0
Reply
463
I'm not going to get myself tangled into the arguments surrounding the points that have been made in the post but I will share this (as I tend to do when people speak about 9/11 conspiracies)

The Story of the 5 Israeli's arrested on 9/11


The Israeli "Art Students" that had construction passes

The rest of the shady Israeli "art students"

The DEA's report on Israeli activities in the U.S. just prior to 9/11


"By way of deception thou shalt do war"
-3
Reply
Male 40,728
layla_wilson Not even going to touch this anti-Semitic nonsense. Like 'all the Jews called in sick that day" and such...

Oh, and some of the family of the 19 are claiming it was Israeli agents posing as 'Jihad recruiters' who duped their kid(s) into doing such a horrible thing. On and on it goes...
-1
Reply
463
5cats Define Anti-Semetic. I'm accusing a single country of having prior knowledge of the incident (not a race or semetic people in general). All the evidence needed for that is in the last link. 

Why does no one ask the question "could it have been prevented"

because the answer is yes.
0
Reply
Male 40,728
layla_wilson The only Jewish nation in the world, you single it out for microscopic scrutiny. The dozens of Muslim nations? You ignore their commonplace crimes and atrocities. Why? Because you are an anti-Semite and so are those Muslim nations: they are you allies.
Simple really.
Oh you dress it up and call it 'progressive' names, but it's just the same as the 1930's, it's still hatred of all Jews.

How could 9/11 have been stopped? By arresting and deporting thousands of Muslims? Tens of thousands? Just to catch the 20 or so who were plotting? Yeah, good luck with selling that one, especially these days!

There are always thousands of people "being watched" in the USA because there are MILLIONS of illegals there, and millions of legal visitors, and millions of new citizens who may have 'sketchy' connections.
Millions and millions and millions of them, and you expect the FBI or CIA to find 20 hiding among them and, with no crime yet committed, arrest them all?
Delusional.
0
Reply
463
5cats "How could 9/11 have been stopped"

Mossad (Israeli spies) were doing surveillance on the 20 or so that were plotting for months before hand, the majority of the surveillance happened in the USA(without the US government knowing). They even went as far as to "Document the incident" if you want to read into the "5 dancing Israelis" They had their van pulled over on 9/11 and they were interrogated then deported. A woman who was watching in terror saw them Dancing and Exchanging high-fives on top of their van while taking pictures of themselves with the towers on fire in the back ground, It was her phone call to the police that lead to their arrest.

Why would they withhold the information they gathered and let the attacks happen? what did they have to gain from the attacks happening?

And as a side note: Condemning Israel doesn't make me an anti-Semite, I condemn Saudi Arabia, and I'm not Anti-Muslim.

Overall I Condem those I see as having done wrong regardless of race/religion/gender.


0
Reply
Male 712
I visit here regularly but don't say much. But here I feel a need to contribute with a suggestion to everyone. And it's this: Let's all make a promise to each other. Let that promise be that every one of us, at some point today, will put a few minutes aside to think and reflect on something important. Promise to sit down somewhere quiet and ask ourselves, These firm and established beliefs of mine, is there any chance I could be wrong about them? Might I be giving my emotions a little too much free rein when it comes to formulating or maintaining my opinions? Is there just the tiniest possibility that if I take a step back and really look at what I'm doing, I might find that I've been looking through the wrong end of the telescope all this time? See, I think if we all do this, all of us, every day—and we really, genuinely do this, without lying to ourselves or pretending we're doing it when we aren't—we might just start solving a few more problems, and creating a few less.
0
Reply
Male 337
RandomNoun I couldn't agree more. That's why I appreciate posts that conflict with my beliefs. Digging into the 9/11 conspiracy has in the end reinforced my beliefs, but I've given the conspiracy side a very thorough look. 
0
Reply
Male 1,324
I grew up, part time, in the West Village in NYC. We watched this get built and I'm sad to say I never made it to the observation deck. The Empire State building is still my favorite. I happened to be at my corporate headquarters in Ridgefield Park,NJ that day and we could see the tower from the 7th floor cafeteria. We didn't see the first plane hit but were drawn to the fire and flames. When we were all standing going Shit Fuck!!! we saw the second plane come in. So to all the jack wads in the world that say it didn't happen that way I give you a rousing  BULLSHIT FUCK OFF AND DIE. I lost firefighter friends in the aftermath so for me it's personal. That's all I've got to say about this. I call it places in history I'd rather not have been.
5
Reply
Male 145
If I were evil enough to plan the 9/11 attack, I would have skipped the building demolition part.  Why bother?  Look at that picture. That's enough to get the patriot act and the Iraq war in motion.  To plant explosives in the high-rises is an insane amount of work, planning, risk, people, for a moot reason.  It's just completely unnecessary.  Getting planes to crash into buildings; way easier, that's why it was done.
  Do notice that 9/11 truthers go on and on about the collapse. They pick apart every detail ad nauseam and create doubt which is easy to do with suggestive explanations.  They're so focused on their little part that they don't see the elephant in the room: it makes no sense to detonate the buildings for anyone's cause.  But that's not as fun I guess.
1
Reply
Female 1,605
abetterworld I get what you're saying and I agree. I think when the buildings went down, the people responsible were shocked and excited at this accidental turn of events.  
0
Reply
449
At this point, it doesn't matter anyway. It's been nearly a generation since the event, and so much political water has gone under the bridge. And so what if it's found that the gummint did it after all, to a level provable to the establishment? NOTHING WILL CHANGE. We've already seen Trump in so many scandals that would have sunk presidencies from last century. These days scandals are boring. This would be a big scandal, yes, and it might even claim a scalp or two if it were true, but NOTHING WOULD CHANGE.

Okay, so the gummint did it. What would change? Would the constitution change? Would there be more checks and balances? Would anything happen at all, once the initial wave of denunciation passed? Nope. Business as usual. The government wouldn't be restructured. Cool, you've proved that all the current members of the political party you hate are personally responsible for the event in 2001, beyond a shadow of a doubt. You've uncovered the conspiracy, and managed to organise things so that not only they are executed, but their entire staff for the past several decades are all executed as well. All the politicians you hate and their staff are dead, leaving just the ones you like. Now, what changes? FUCKING NOTHING.
0
Reply
Male 5,364
barry9a the truth always matters.  if a re-investigation reveals the government played a hand, the next step is to bring those responsible into court and have them face justice, and then put whatever is needed in place to ensure government can't do this again.
0
Reply
Female 27
I have loved I am bored for many years and rarely comment. Lately though, this is turning into some political bullshit, fallacy site where opinions count as facts. I was coming out of the subway to lots of smoke and people running. Me and a co-worker started following them, unsure of what was going on, but as we ran someone said a plane hit the tower.  I couldn't get a hold of my family in the midwest til 8pm that evening.  One of the engines landed on the roof of my building.  If you think it wasn't terrorists flying planes into the towers, and you seem to be some expert on a computer who just happened to figure it all out... kindly go fuck yourselves. Get out of your head and live life instead of 'finding' the truth that no one ever asked you to look for, because the truth is already right there.  Maybe you're just looking for something more because you don't want to believe that people could have done this based solely on hating Americans, or that somehow, it's way too easy of an excuse. I don't even know what to say anymore, I don't leave here relieved of boredom, I'm just disappointed. 
2
Reply
Male 5,364
evilminded1 i love how those people with low comment counts come in making a claim, but then use the exact same thing they accuse others of to ignore hard facts.
-1
Reply
Male 3,410
evilminded1 Thank you for lurking in on this one.  I commented in a former 9/11 post,  a friend of mine at the time, her father was in NY for a Fire Department convention.  They didn't hear from him for 3 days because he went into protection mode.  I also had a former coworker whose close relative was on Flight 93.  Both of them can confirm that there were real victims not "fake" as this post implies.  I will happily reiterate your comment of "Kindly go Fuck Yourself" to those who think there were "fake" victims.
2
Reply
Male 3,375
evilminded1 people arent getting enough fiber
1
Reply
Male 4,880
evilminded1 Thanks for your comment, Evil. I share your disappointment regarding the fallacies-and-conspiracies content.
2
Reply
Male 3,375
no monkwarrior comments. hmm sock puppets much? right 5cats?
0
Reply
Male 3,375
is this post sarcastic or just trying to stir the shit pot.
0
Reply
Male 337
rumham This post speaks for itself... too bad people refuse to cut through the bullshit.
0
Reply
Male 3,375
boredhuman yet here you are speaking for your post.
0
Reply
Male 2,607
It's just PERSONAL INCREDULITY and FALLACIES that blinds people to the truth, eh? LOLZ!!!!!

*edit

boredhuman
The bit about "fake victims" was a bit much, but you certainly have touched on the ridiculousness of many of these theories and the way in which they are often presented to us.
0
Reply
Male 9,732
Every time this shit gets posted it kind of sickens me. I think it is a direct insult to the memories of those who died. 

It comes from the minds of the same people who think sandy hook was staged because a kid walks around aimlessly or an fbi agent looks like a parent. It comes from the same minds that said Hillary wasn't actually at a speech because of how big a flag was behind her. It comes from ignorance and stupidity and it flourishes because we all love a good conspiracy.

Let me ask you 2 questions if you believe this was a conspiracy, and I mean this in all sincerity.

If you believe the towers were taken down by the government why do the plane thing at all? I mean the towers were already bombed before. Why not just bomb the towers at street level and take the towers down and blame it on terrorists? The plane plan makes no sense.

Also, it would take hundreds of people to plan and execute a demolition. You think that many people are really that evil that they would be willing to knowingly kill thousands of innocents just for money? And you think not a single one of them came forward in the past 16 years?
3
Reply
Male 7,910
holygod Thanks for summing up what I said and making it better
0
Reply
Male 3,415
holygod I cannot speak for anyone else, but as for myself, i do have issues with 9/11 but i do not have issues with sandy hook.

1) Bombs going off and the buildings going down would have the same NET effect (twin towers down) but the psychological effect of seeing that plane fly into the building was an entirely different scale of horror.  The plane plan, as we can call it for expediency, was crucial to getting bush a green light for any and every plan he wanted to enact.  I literally recall watching it on tv and thinking to myself: We are under attack, we have to kill them first.  I didnt know WHO "them" was, i just knew that we had to kill SOMEONE. 

2) i do not know exactly how many people would be needed to execute a demolition, but I would have to envision mulitple smallish groups that only know THEIR particular assignment.  They cannot point fingers because they do not know who to point them at.

 Finding people to commit murder for money PARTICULARLY this kind of murder (where  all you do is install explosives but do not actually pull the trigger, is quite frankly the easiest part of the job in my estimation.

And on top of all the stuff that seems fishy, why would all 3000 of those engineers lie?  What would be in it for them?  They risk much putting their name on that document.  If the results of the 9/11 report are at odds with everything we know about physics in the world, then i'm more inclined to believe physics than that report.

To think that somehow building 7 took enough damage to collapse is one thing, to somehow think it took enough damage to collapse in the freefall manner that it did is incredibly hard on my brain.  And if I am of a mind that building 7 is a "work", then the rest of it isnt a coincidence.
0
Reply
Male 5,364
daegog i agree with you 
0
Reply
Male 4,880
holygod Thank you. You said what needs to be said.
1
Reply
Male 3,643
Though this "article" doesn't really make mention of Flight 93, here's a truth bomb;
Flight 93 crashed near my hometown. I can literally wake up, have breakfast, go visit the crash site, and be back before noon; it's that close to me.
I was in 8th grade on 9/11/2001, so I have very clear memories of that day.

Here's the bomb; while everyone's eyes were fixed on the TV screen as planes flew into the WTC, mine were focused on the windows (southish facing windows), contemplating what was happening. Wanna know what I saw? A plane that was flying lower than usual. A little while later, reports came in that a plane crashed in Shanksville, PA. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know what happened there.



My coworker's father was actually one of the first people to arrive on site. He wasn't a first responder, or anything of that sort. No. He owns a construction company and was doing work in Shanksville. He arrived, then shortly after, the FBI arrived and shooed him and his crew off the site.

But, I know those who want to believe in fairy tales, won't believe my story.
3
Reply
Male 5,364
DuckBoy87 or is it you want to believe your fairy tale is true?  Just because you saw a plane out the window, is not to mean that it is the one that crashed.  You know there were quite a number of planes in the air, right?
-1
Reply
Male 3,643
monkwarrior I checked the flight path of Flight 93. Right over my town. The chances of a normal flight being so close to the ground, so soon to the crash of Flight 93, with a similar flight path, is lower than the chances of god existing.

You told me that first hand experience trumps any "media delusions". I give you first hand experience, and second hand experience, and you choose to wave it off. Hypocrite.
0
Reply
Male 5,364
DuckBoy87 Interesting that you continue to assume that a 'low flying' plane you saw was the one that did a perfectly perpendicular nose-dive into the ground, so that the ground swallowed the whole thing up leaving no trace of debris like most other crashes.  I submitted a 3-part series, that touches on that flight, you ought to watch it.  But what you've said is simply speculation.
-1
Reply
Male 4,999
Fake Victims?!?!? I have had an aunt that died in the Pentagon attack (mom's brother's wife's sister). My uncle is almost 80 and he would punch you in the face if you talked this trash to him. This whole post is an insult to intelligence and an even bigger insult to the innocent people who died in the planes, the towers and in the Pentagon.
3
Reply
Male 9,732
markust123 Not to get off topic, but is a "mom's brother's wife's sister" an aunt? I guess I've never thought about it. My mom's brother is my uncle. His wife is my aunt. Are her brothers and sisters my aunts and uncles? I don't think I've even ever met them.
-1
Reply
Male 4,880
holygod I believe the relationships you're describing would be your aunt-in-law's brothers and sisters. Similarly, the relationship Markust is describing is his aunt-in-law's sister. Commonly, the "in-law" part is dropped, but I've never seen unclehood or aunthood extended to the siblings of aunts-in-law or uncles-in-law.
0
Reply
Male 4,999
holygod I don't know. We called my Grandpa's brother my Uncle. Would she be my second cousin? That always confuses me.

Update: The internet says she's nothing to me. That seems a little harsh.
1
Reply
Male 9,732
markust123 LOL. All it means is your family is super close. The internet can go fuck itself. If she's your aunt then she's your aunt.

I believe your Grandpa's brother IS your great uncle. I'm pretty sure that's a thing.
0
Reply
Male 4,999
holygod That made me laugh too reading, she's nothing to you.
0
Reply
Male 4,880
markust123 I'm with you. The phrase "fake victims"--and the calling out by usernames of IAB'ers who don't buy this nonsense as "sheeple"--is offensive and crass.
1
Reply
Male 337
monkwarrior was supposed to reveal a bombshell in regards to 9/11. Let's get this started! Lots of info to get through indeed...
0
Reply
Male 5,364
boredhuman Two things about that.  The alaska fairbanks report is being put off until october, but there will be a live streamed event on Sept 6.  So i won't be posting the link till the report is out, maybe in october.  But i have a 3 part series i'm going to post to fancylad this weekend.
0
Reply
Male 3,375
boredhuman wow if thats your touchstone for intelligence then wow bro.
0
Reply
Male 1,009
boredhuman Firstly monkwarrior doesn't have anything on anything.

Secondly your link to Chomsky doesn't support you stance.

Thirdly  You don't have to put words in all caps to prove your point.  Language should be enough.

Finally: Name Calling:  Calling people "sheeple" won't get anybody on your side.  I don't think there been one person that has been called a "sheeple" and has thought " wow -- that person right maybe I should convert"
2
Reply
Male 5,364
lockner01 wrong as usual, the 3 part series was submitted to fancylad.
0
Reply
Male 1,009
monkwarrior Just because you found something with Google doesn't mean it's going to be anything of substance.
0
Reply
Male 5,364
lockner01 for you i don't expect it to be of any substance, as you've made your mindset fairly obvious.  in fact i fully expect you to move the goalposts when you find out i do have something, to point out it is of no substance to you.  Your nature is quite obvious as i said.
0
Reply
Male 1,009
monkwarrior For months you've been claiming to have something.  You refused to even answer what it was about.  If you had said it was concerning 9/11 I would have said "ok let's wait and see what it is".  But you couldn't even say that.  So that's given you months to gather something together -- anybody would be able to do that.  I won't move the goal posts but if it's anything like this post from BoredHuman you're waisting your time.
0
Reply
Male 5,364
lockner01 Well your wait depends on fancylad now.  have patience, and like i said, if he doesn't post it, i'll post it to you directly on 9/11.  
0
Reply
Male 1,009
monkwarrior I don't understand when I asked months ago what the content would be you wouldn't just say "9/11"
0
Reply
Male 5,364
lockner01 maybe because it is about 9/11?
0
Reply
Male 1,009
monkwarrior but why wouldn't you just say that months ago?
0
Reply
Male 5,364
lockner01 i did say it was about 9/11
0
Reply
Male 1,009
monkwarrior 

you:  "In fact, the next month and 9 days should provide you with many people denying the facts, using their propaganda war term 'conspiracy theorist', and failing to accept facts due to their indoctrination by the lies of the media.  Stick around, i'll be posting a few posts in the lead up to 9/11 2017, so you'll get a first-hand view of what i'm talking about.  Unless, of course, you're one of the deniers, in which case, good luck!"

Me:  "What's going to happen on 9/11 2017? Could you give me a hint?  
Are you talking about the movie with Charlie Sheen? Becuase that looks pretty awesome.  It looks like his best movie since "Cadence"."

You: "Re-read the 2nd paragraph of the last post i made, specifically the sentence that inspired your question. It holds the hints you missed or chose to ignore."

This went back and forth a number of times and you kept accuing me of being a troll.  If in the original post you had indicated the anniversary of 9/11 2001. I would have asked the first question.  After asking for clarification had you said the anniversary of 9/11 2001.

Never did you indicate, up until just recently, that this post would be about 9/11 2001.  Or did you want me to make an assumption?


0
Reply
Male 5,364
lockner01 Well, as you can already see in the post that i posted, there are already people denying the facts, using their propaganda war term 'conspiracy theorist', and failing to accept facts due to their indoctrination by the lies of the media.  And who was the first to do that?  Well surprise, surprise! none other than lockner01 

Doesn't surprise me in the slightest that you were played like a fiddle, and quite skilfully i might add :D.
0
Reply
Male 1,009
monkwarrior I didn't deny any facts.  I just said I wasn't spending 2 hours watching a conspiracy theorist video.  You didn't tell me your prefered dictionary but here's a definition from Webster:  

"a person who holds a theory that explains an event or situation as the result of a secret plan by usually powerful people or groups"

Now since I'm not going to spend two hours today -- I may try to watch a little tomorrow. I can't definitively say it's a conspiracy video however when you say 

"It’s a timely investigation, as we continue to see growing corruption in high places, as it exposes corruption, and strengthens a case for an overhaul of governance; the duty of citizens. I think if you take the time to watch these 3 episodes and consider what it presents, you will learn quite a bit about what exactly happened on 9/11, and glimpse the problems plaguing governance today."

There's a pretty good chance.  The director massimo mazzucco has also made a number of other videos that a lot of people have labelled as conspiracy theory videos -- so my using the term probably isn't that big of a stretch.
0
Reply
Male 5,364
lockner01 so you didn't deny any facts, you just don't want to give them a chance because of your assumptions and prejudices, makes sense.  I knew you weren't sincere right from the start about your 'questions', and suspicion that you just wanted to troll. Revealed by your first attempt to discredit the presenter of the video with fallacies, you really ought to watch it before speaking. 
0
Reply
Male 1,009
monkwarrior Who said I wasn't willing to give them a chance.  I just don't want to take 5 gruelling hours to sit through the video.

I was stating a fact that I looked up the director and the term conspiracy theorist came up quiet frequently -- that's a fact.  Other videos he's produced have been called by a lot of people conspiracy theory videos -- that's a fact.  I offered you a definition, from a dictionary about what a conspiracy theorist is -- fact.  The paragraph of yours I quoted fits into that definition.  So deductively yes I called it a conspiracy theory video.

You've just admitted that you've falsey accused me something I didn't do. I other words you lied and admitted to it.  in other words:  Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus 
0
Reply
Male 5,364
lockner01 Then you should have thought about reserving your judgments on it until you did, revealing your true colors: first find ways to discredit and deny what you don't like before considering what is said.
0
Reply
Male 1,009
monkwarrior And why are you commenting in this thread about a comment I made in your post?  Are you afraid that other people will back me up?
0
Reply
Male 1,009
monkwarrior The only judgement I made on it was the length.  I offered solid reasoning behind calling it a conspiracy theory video.  I've now actually watched parts of it and some of those fit within the definition I provided.

Please show me where I did this: " first find ways to discredit and deny what you don't like before considering what is said."
0
Reply
Male 5,364
lockner01 so you're back to seeing what you want to see.  Also, you're the one who was replying here.
0
Reply
Male 1,009
monkwarrior You'll have to explain how I'm back to seeing what I want to see.  Without an example you're not really saying anything.

Also I'm replying here because you said:

lockner01 Well, as you can already see in the post that i posted, there are already people denying the facts, using their propaganda war term 'conspiracy theorist', and failing to accept facts due to their indoctrination by the lies of the media.  And who was the first to do that?  Well surprise, surprise! none other than lockner01 

Doesn't surprise me in the slightest that you were played like a fiddle, and quite skilfully i might add :D.

You were replying to me about another post that you linked to in your response.  The only reason I can think of is that you realize other people aren't going to read this thread at this point.  But if you respond to me in the thread you linked to other people would back me up.
0
Reply
Male 5,364
lockner01 actually, you'll have to try some reading comprehension studies.
0
Reply
Male 1,009
monkwarrior Why because you can't defend your remarks.  Thanks for proving my point that you can't handle not having the last word.
0
Reply
Male 5,364
lockner01 I don't need to defend anything, in fact it's more likely you who does, with all the baseless claims you've made over the last month and a bit.
0
Reply
Male 1,009
monkwarrior Please give me one example of a baseless claim.
0
Reply
Male 5,364
lockner01 "boredhuman Firstly monkwarrior doesn't have anything on anything. "
0
Reply
Male 1,009
monkwarrior And at the time you didn't.  I asked you multiple time if you had anything and you couldn't even give an indication about the subject of what you had.  So I based my statment on the information that I had -- thus making it not a baseless claim.
0
Reply
Male 5,364
lockner01 proving my point you ought to watch it before speaking, and erring by making baseless claims.
0
Reply
Male 1,009
monkwarrior again it was based on the information I had at the time.  If you had giving more information it would have solved the issue.
0
Reply
Male 5,364
lockner01 so the blame is all on me even though you were the one who made rash judgments?
0
Reply
Male 1,009
monkwarrior I'm not laying blame on anyone -- I just demonstrated how my claim wasn't baseless.  I asked you for weeks for some little grain of evidence -- even a subject. Yet you wouldn't offer anything. At one point you said you were working on the write up for what you were going to post.  I don't think this is what you would call a rash judgement.

You posted a video from a year ago and wrote a few paragraphs.  Not really ground breaking.
0
Reply
Male 5,364
lockner01 basing things on rash judgements is still baseless.
0
Reply
Male 1,009
monkwarrior I don't see how you can call weeks of asking questions as a rash judgement.  
0
Reply
Male 5,364
lockner01 if you say so.
0
Reply
Male 1,009
monkwarrior isn't your comment rather redundant as I did just say so.  Or are you compulsively having to get the last word again?
0
Reply
Male 5,364
lockner01 not at all, as this thread can be referenced to evidence your trolling in the future.
0
Reply
Male 1,009
monkwarrior How is this trolling according to the definition you provided? " a troll (/ˈtroʊl/, /ˈtrɒl/) is a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting quarrels or upsetting people"  How am I starting a quarrel or upsetting anyone?  I mearly pointed out that you made a very redundant comment.

In fact your constantly calling me a troll and insulting me multiple time would, by your definition, make you the troll.
0
Reply
Male 5,364
lockner01 yes, most trolls would think that, but as i said i'm a troll-eater.
0
Reply
Male 1,009
monkwarrior You provided the definition -- your actions fit within that definition.  You've been called a troll by a lot of people on this site.  You're the only one that has called me a troll.  I'm not sure what you mean by troll-eater. 

And again when asked for evidence you can't provide anything.

You've admitted to making false accusations and lying.  Why would you do this other than to start a quarrel or to upset me?
0
Reply
Male 5,364
lockner01 Nothing you do at this point will be able to hide your trolling.
0
Reply
Male 1,009
monkwarrior Yet you can't provide me with one instance of me trolling -- other than one specific instance where I admitted to doing it right away.
0
Reply
Male 5,364
lockner01 unfortunately this whole thread of your replies to me is quite telling, though i understand you can't see it at this time.  Maybe when you're older.
0
Reply
Male 1,009
monkwarrior Again with the condescending insults.
0
Reply
Male 5,364
lockner01 most trolls would see it that way.
0
Reply
Male 1,009
monkwarrior So you're denying that you've insulted me? A simple yes or no answer. 
0
Reply
Male 5,364
lockner01 i'm saying you have provided a good future reference to your nature as a troll with this comment thread.
0
Reply
Male 1,009
monkwarrior So you can't answer with a yes?  So you're admitting to insulting me on multiple occassions.  And you've admitted to wrongly accusing me of something and lying.

Even though you can't offer any evidence of me being a troll, you constantly call me a troll.  Why?  I don't know.

Making comments like "Maybe when you're older." and "you obviously have poor reading comprehension" to anybody is extremely disrespectful.  Anybody would take that as a insult.  It's interesting that you use these phrases when you get backed into a corner.

I've offered to make peace with you on multiple occasions yet you adamantly refuse.

I'm not sure what your issue is?  Although even if I asked you directly you would just come back with some vaguie response that either begged the question or had nothing to do with it.
0
Reply
Male 5,364
lockner01 As i said, this is making a good future reference, im just seeing how far you want to go.  the more you go the more difficult you make it for your future self.
0
Reply
Male 1,009
monkwarrior How am I making things more difficult for my future self?  Of course you won't answer this either.

You obviously have some serious issues.

I actually feel sorry for you.

Just out of curiosity why haven't you commented on the post you made with the long video?  It's obviously a subject you're passionate about. I thought you would have chimed in by now.
0
Reply
Male 5,364
lockner01 at this rate, im sure you'll find out eventually.  feel as sorry for me as you like, it doesn't bother me in the slightest, but these long threads of yours show you might have some issues. Thanks for letting me know it irks you that i haven't posted on another topic, i can see it's difficult for you to not have anything to latch on to and troll like you did here, even attempting to make your own latches to troll from, that haven't worked.
0
Reply
Male 1,009
monkwarrior I'm not sure how where you got that it irks me that you haven't commented on your post.  I said I was curious that's all.  

I think you might have a persecution complex.  I've been nothinig but civil towards you.  I've offered to make peace. I've aksed you open questions to stem a civil debate.  Yet you take all of these as trolling.  When I ask how am I trolling -- you answer with because you're trolling.

And this is why I feel sorry for you.  Other people on this site have made direct insults to you. Yet when someone tries to reach out to you -- although with different beliefs -- you get defensive.  Your defense mechanism is to go on the offense and start insulting and name calling.  especially using the word troll.
0
Reply
Male 5,364
lockner01 You making it an issue clearly shows you're irked.  Also, i've told you you'll know when you're older.  Your mindset now is not open to learning as you've consistently demonstrated.  You would prefer to assume and make that assumption a fact.  There's nothing i can really do about it if someone chooses to act that way, they damage themselves more than others, as you have clearly shown through your long threads of trolling.  Again, please feel sorry for me as much as you like, and express it in all the ways you can possibly dream up.  It means little to me, though it does expose quite a bit about you when combined with your assumptions as previously noted.
0
Reply
Male 1,009
monkwarrior It's interesting that you're trying to take a superior posistion by placing yourself as the teacher and me as the ignorant student who is not old enough to learn. What qualification do you have to take such a position?  I've asked you what type of monk you are in the past and you've refused to answer -- so I doubt you'll answer this time.

What assumptions have I taken as fact?

I know it's a fact that you can't provide any solid evidence of me trolling.  

Here's why I think you have a persecution complex.

I asked "Just out of curiosity why haven't you commented on the post you made with the long video? "

I had no hidden agenda behind asking you other than I was curious -- that's it.  I didn't make it an issue.

you replied with "You making it an issue clearly shows you're irked."  creating it an issue. Were you doing this to garner some sort of negative response.
0
Reply
Male 5,364
lockner01 it's more interesting to watch you clutch at straws.
0
Reply
Male 1,009
monkwarrior Quoting you isn't clutching at straws.  I would ask you to explain but I know you're incapable of doing so.  You make these false baseless accusations then when asked to back them up you can't.  

Do you really want people to take you seriously or are you just being, what multi people on this website have called you "The ultimate troll"?
0
Reply
Male 5,364
lockner01 like i said, most trolls would consider me such, but i'm just a troll eater.  it irks them too.
0
Reply
Male 1,009
monkwarrior I've asked you what you mean by troll-eater and you haven't answered.  I'm assuming you are a self-proclaimed troll-eater (again whatever that means) as you are a self proclaimed monk.  Just because you call yourself something doesn't make it true.

So the answer to my question is that you don't want people to take you seriously.
0
Reply
Male 5,364
lockner01 you'll find out someday.  
0
Reply
Male 1,009
monkwarrior See it's obtuse comments like that that make it impossible to take you seriously.  Unless you were making a threat.
0
Reply
Male 5,364
lockner01 when you're older, and have better reading comprehension, less assumptive, and have left your trolling ways behind.
0
Reply
Male 1,009
monkwarrior Again with the personal insults.  What's your objective here?  You can't provide me any evidence of my trolling yet you fall back on personal insults.  
0
Reply
Male 5,364
lockner01 as stated, it's going to make a fine reference to refer back to in the future.
0
Reply
Male 1,009
monkwarrior For when you need an example of you being the ultimate troll?
0
Reply
Male 5,364
lockner01 for you, and your ignorance of the fact.
0
Reply
Male 1,009
monkwarrior "The fact"?  What is this fact that I'm ignorant of?  And can you support "The fact" with any evidence?
0
Reply
Male 5,364
lockner01 the fact of your trolling, evidenced by most of your thread correspondences.
0
Reply
Male 1,009
monkwarrior It would be easy enough for you to copy and paste quotes to support your argument but your either too lazy or you can't find anything of substance. 
0
Reply
Male 5,364
lockner01 there's no need with your continual trolling.  you lay yourself bare.
0
Reply
Male 1,009
monkwarrior So most of my responses to you accusing me of trolling have been "I'm not trolling" or "please provide evidence of me trolling".  So you're saying that by me defending myself is a form of trolling.
0
Reply
Male 5,364
lockner01 like i said, when you're older you might understand reading comprehension a bit better.
0
Reply
Male 1,009
monkwarrior again with the condescending insults.  I'm going to take it that you're too lazy to even try to find anything.  Similar to the amount of effort you put into you 9/11 conspiracy theory posts.
0
Reply
Male 5,364
lockner01 more assuming and ignoring your flaws more? it's interesting you think it still works for you - in a hilarious way, that is.
0
Reply
Male 1,009
monkwarrior Assuming and ignoring my flaws? From the evidence of your posts it's obvious that your lazy.  The posts you put up you call new however they've been popping up on my Youtube for nearly a year.  The write-up you did was Sophmore at best.  And you used (BECUASE SCIENCE!!) which makes it a bit of a joke.

This is the first time you've used the word flaws.  Everyone has flaws -- I try not to ingore mine. However I don't see anywhere in this thread where I have ignored my flaws.

Are you claiming to be a flawless person?  You've already admitted to lying and making afalse accusations.  Now you say you find this hilarious.  In other words you're gaining pleasure from trying to bate me -- or in other words troll me.
0
Reply
Male 5,364
lockner01 im simply pointing out your trolling and the ridiculousness of it, along with your assumptions.  Please continue as you please, it's only yourself you're hurting.
0
Reply
Male 337
lockner01 "In other words you're gaining pleasure from trying to bate me -- or in other words troll me."

You got it! 

monkwarrior (link): "i absolutely love it when people criticise and hate on me, it's like people willingly give me their energy to stand above them.. weird, but true.  They expend energy for me to take, and i can use it effectively to become better.  Always baffles me why people do that with their energy, i'd never give it away so foolishly." 


0
Reply
Male 5,364
boredhuman unfortunately lockner01 is the one trying to find something to latch on and troll with, and they're not finding it.
0
Reply
Male 1,009
monkwarrior So are you denying saying those things?  The proof is right in front of you.
0
Reply
Male 5,364
lockner01 I said you are trolling because it's clear you are trolling.
0
Reply
Male 1,009
monkwarrior I'll ask one more time.  How am I trolling?  Just saying it's clear your trolling is just begging the question.  

I've been than respectful towards you, you've insulted me.  I've asked you open questions to start a conversation you've falsey accused me of things.  You've admitted to lying and you've admitted that you love it when people hate on you.  One thing I haven't done but if it's something you love then I believe you're baiting me into making a hateful comment towards you.
0
Reply
Male 5,364
lockner01 this whole thread exposes it, sorry you can't see it.  But like i said, maybe someday when you're older/wiser.
0
Reply
Male 1,009
monkwarrior Again with the condescending insults.  You've already been called a troll by BoredHuman in this conversation.  You haven't had one person back you up.  You're being delusional.
0
Reply
Male 5,364
lockner01 being branded a troll by someone who admitted in this very thread they were trolling doesn't phase me in the slightest.  Nor by a troll referring to the said troll who is desperate to brand me a troll to hide that fact in themselves.  you're hilarious.
0
Reply
Male 1,009
monkwarrior That's not what I said.  You can copy and paste if you want to.  I said that in one small instance I admitted to trolling you about a month ago.  One time and one time only.  Never did I admit to being a troll.  

And this " Nor by a troll referring to the said troll who is desperate to brand me a troll to hide that fact in themselves. "  makes no sense.  How many different people ar you refering to as trolls in this sentence?

I can see you're starting to lose it as other people are coming and calling you out as a troll.

Or are you claiming to be flawless again?  

Or are you going to respond with another condescending insult?
0
Reply
Male 5,364
lockner01 yet you're still showing yourself to be a troll.  keep trying all you like, but your best bet is to cut your losses.
0
Reply
Male 1,009
monkwarrior I don't see how I'm trolling and you refuse to tell me.

Are you not reading what other people are writting here?
0
Reply
Male 5,364
lockner01 you wouldn't.  Like i said maybe when you're older.  And yes i can see many comments, about what i expected from the usual deniers of facts.
0
Reply
Male 1,009
monkwarrior I knew you couldn't last more than a couple of comments before you made a condescending insult.

Why not come back with a solid argument or a piece of evidence?
0
Reply
Male 5,364
lockner01 because it seems you don't like evidence for example, and for example.  Dealing with people like that, and who chose to troll, ends up being a huge waste of time, as you've proven so far today, and ysterday, on this very post.
0
Reply
Male 1,009
monkwarrior Well your linking to the your 2 posts.  If there's a comment you want to rebut why not defend your posts?

Also you said "And yes i can see many comments, about what i expected from the usual deniers of facts."  Are you calling boredhuman a usual denier of facts?
0
Reply
Male 5,364
lockner01 As i said, dealing with people who don't like evidence is just a waste of time.  Also, there have been no good rebuttals at all to date, just the usual mud slinging and grasps at straws in face of a complete denial of what is presented.  Exactly what i was expecting :D
0
Reply
Male 1,009
monkwarrior That's too bad I was looking forward to your responses.
0
Reply
Male 5,364
lockner01 yes, it's too bad there were no good rebuttals, just mockeries, grasps at straws, and other fallacies.  But its really no surprise, that's all deniers of the facts have.
0
Reply
Male 1,009
monkwarrior Actually there were some replies that provided solid links and solid rebuttal evidence. Or are you denying engineering reports?
0
Reply
Male 5,364
lockner01 like i said.. no good rebuttals.  and your 'some' was only one.  markust123 had the best reply, of what was there last time i checked, but it was still not a good rebuttal (it's debunked in part 3).  You'll have to raise your bar, and i know it's difficult for you since you'll have nothing but what i previously mentioned, so you might as well throw the towel in.
0
Reply
Male 1,009
monkwarrior If you stand there declaring youself the winner without saying anything -- and not one person agrees with you -- you've won nothing. In fact by not standing up for your position you've already lost.

I made my points.  I don't buy into conspiracy theories -- and yes these videos fit withing the definition of conspiracy theories as I provided in the first of your posts.  I find them entertaining sometimes but if it takes you 5 hours to explain something that's tto long.

For all the hype you put into this the last month I was expecting a lot more.  In fact I was very disappointed.

What I find interesting is that it's only your two posts that have a huge amount of up votes.  These are posts where not one person has supported your position.  Who are all these people up voting but yet are unwilling to back you up?  It would be pretty easy to make a bunch of fake IAB accounts to up vote your own posts. I think you're probably insecure enough to actually do just that.
0
Reply
Male 5,364
lockner01 oh so it's about 'winning' and 'losing' for you, huh?  Well if so it's not going your way, that's for sure.  As for the posts, maybe more people like the video than you realize, and there is no obligation for anyone to post a comment.  perhaps they saw that there are simply deniers of the truth posting comments full of baloney that is being debunked in the videos, and have chosen to not reply?  As for making fake i-a-b accounts, i would be willing to bet you have made some and use them, but as for me i only have this one.  You're truly grasping at straws in your little echo chamber of a few people, aren't you, 'someone is smiley facing this post - its a conspiracy!'  ha ha ha!  The levels of ridiculousness  deniers of facts go to is hilarious.
0
Reply
Male 1,009
monkwarrior you made it about winning and losing when you said "but what i previously mentioned, so you might as well throw the towel in."

you seem to be a little rattled at this point.
0
Reply
Male 5,364
lockner01 that was referring to your trolling.  you're getting nowhere with it, and since then you've gone nowhere.
0
Reply
Male 1,009
monkwarrior Actually I'm not trolling and I've had some nice conversations with other people.  I wouldn't call that going nowhere.
0
Reply
Male 5,364
lockner01 keep telling yourself that, and go converse with your fellow-trolls back under your bridge..
0
Reply
Male 1,009
monkwarrior So everyone is a troll to you on this website?  When you think the world is against you, you may want to take a look in the mirror for some self-introspection.  
0
Reply
Male 5,364
lockner01 no, just specific trolls, like yourself.  And yes, i'm well aware that trolls think i'm a troll, as they hate it that i'm a troll-eater who can send them into a whine like where you are presently.
0
Reply
Male 1,009
monkwarrior I don't understand how I'm whining?  I've had interactions with most of the regulars on this website. So when you said "go converse with your fellow-trolls"; it could be read that I only converse with trolls.

I was serious about the self-introspection. I'm assuming you know what that means.  I could help you with it -- I could be your guide. What do you say should we start?
0
Reply
Male 5,364
lockner01 Sorry, i'm already light years ahead of you on the topic.  And most of your posts on this thread prove the observation.
0
Reply
Male 1,009
monkwarrior If you feel you're light years ahead on the subject you may not be doing it right -- or you don't know what self-introspection means.  I really think you need a guide.  Why don't we start with a simple question.  How would you describe your childhood?


I should also point out that a light-year is a measure of distance and not time.  Are you saying you're from another galaxy?

A term I don't know the meaning of in Troll-Eater.  I've tried to search it but can't find any results.  If you've made it up -- great, I love it -- but I think you need to at least define it, if you're going to use it.

Anyway back to watching the video you posted.
0
Reply
Male 5,364
lockner01 I'm an empath so i know what it means more than others.  The way you are talking makes me see you can't teach me on the topic, but that i could be your teacher.  Troll-eater has been explained enough to you already for you to get the rough idea.
0
Reply
Male 1,009
monkwarrior you've never once offered any kind of an explaination for the word troll-eater.  Any teacher that created a term  would at least give a definition. I don't want a rough idea I need a solid definition.

A little like this definition:

em·path
ˈempaTH/
noun

  1. (chiefly in science fiction) a person with the paranormal ability to apprehend the mental or emotional state of another individual.

So now you're claiming paranormal ability -- nice.  Can you do that through the internet -- I thought you had to touch someone or at least be in the same room.

back to the video
0
Reply
Male 5,364
lockner01 again, you're seeing what you want to see, but its relating more to empathy, and identifying with the experiences, feelings, thoughts, or attitudes of others.  But you show you can't teach what you thought you could.
0
Reply
Male 1,009
monkwarrior Sorry -- I actually use dictionaries for my definitions.  That's the basis of the English language.  You called yourself an empath -- I'm taking the dictionary definition.

Back to the video.
0
Reply
Male 5,364
lockner01 it's your choice to limit yourself like a troll after i've clarified what i meant, that's how i know you can't teach what you claim.
0
Reply
Male 1,009
monkwarrior I'm not trolling -- i'm using actual evidence.  I can teach you how to use a dictionary if you like.

How many times have you insulted my ability to comprehend the english language? Then when I give you a dictionary definition you go back on it.  That's pretty hypocrytical.

anyway back to the video.
0
Reply
Male 5,364
lockner01 Well it's good to see you're using your dictionary then as per my previous requests, perhaps i can expect you to understand  what i say in the future, though with your trolling nature i wouldn't bet on it.  As for what i said, perhaps if i clarify it a bit, i'm empathic, which is what i previously described.
0
Reply
Male 1,009
monkwarrior Wel you did claim to be an empath. And it was never a question of understand you choice of vocabulary it was your lack of grammer that made things confusing.
0
Reply
Male 5,364
lockner01 it was your unwillingness to learn, and rigidness, choosing to troll, that prevented you from learning something new.
0
Reply
Male 1,009
monkwarrior  Again trying to claim the superior position as teacher -- which you are not.

You should work on your grammer.
0
Reply
Male 5,364
lockner01 i was simply pointing out you're not a teacher.  But that  i could be your teacher on the said topic.  Not that i would want to though, trolls are a waste of time.
0
Reply
Male 1,009
monkwarrior HAHAHA -- actually I am a teacher at a university level and have been for over a decade.

I'm not trolling you -- when you think someone disagrees with you your defense is to call them a troll.

Can we not keep conversations to one thread? Or do you need to have the last word on every thread?
0
Reply
Male 5,364
lockner01 So you claim, but you can't teach self-introspection to me, as i'm already a master of it.  I doubt you'd be effective to your students either, if that's the case, based on your posts here on i-a-b.  Perhaps when you're older you'll learn how to use it properly?
0
Reply
Male 1,009
monkwarrior still two threads -- fine.  The thing is I get paid to teach and I've earned that the years of study and practice -- I have the letters behind my name and someone else gave me the title.

You gave yourself the title monk.  I know real monks, I'm related to a real monk and they are all very proud of what they are.  A real monk would never act the way you do towards another human being.
0
Reply
Male 5,364
lockner01 keep trolling, it does you no good.
0
Reply
Male 1,009
monkwarrior I'm just stating facts.
0
Reply
Male 5,364
lockner01  keep trolling with your assumptions, it does you no good. 
0
Reply
Male 1,009
monkwarrior statings facts is neither making an assumption nor trolling.
0
Reply
Male 1,009
boredhuman Thanks for the link.  monkwarrior admitting that he gains pleasure from trolling people.

The issue is I haven't really criticized him -- maybe mildly at points but never hated on him.
0
Reply
Male 3,643
lockner01 1st, I commend you on your efforts engaging with monkwarrior.
2nd, I actually find it odd that boredhuman is chastising monk, as I thought the two shared a similar mindset. Even if the 2 agree on topics, at least boredhuman is elegant in the art of debate.
0
Reply
Male 337
DuckBoy87 The 9/11 post was meant as a parody, but was taken as genuine views. I posted an apology and explanation. 
The best thing that came from this post was people like you sharing personal stories about the disaster. Thank you.
0
Reply
Male 3,643
boredhuman OH! My apologies then. I did not see your addendum. Very well then, carry on.
0
Reply
Male 1,009
DuckBoy87 Thanks DuckBoy.  I've seen monkwarrior treated poorly on this website.  I thought if I extended him a chance for some civil conversation he might have accepted yet he turned it arround and called me a troll and personally insulted me.  I'm hoping that he might realize what he's doing.  But to be honest I think he's not only delusional but also has a persecution complex.  I'm not a mental health expert -- that's just my opinion.
0
Reply
Male 3,643
lockner01 Likewise, I've extended a hand at friendly banter with him before, as has others. It usually turns out exactly like this... either collectively we're not persistent enough, or something else, I don't know.
0
Reply
Male 4,880
Just uggh. Really disappointing to see this on IAB. I've grown accustomed to Monk. Wasn't expecting this kind of material from this IAB'er. *sigh* Or perhaps I'm missing something and this is all satire?
2
Reply
Male 337
squrlz4ever How much of the official story do you know? Frankly, this post was inspired by Monk and other so-called "conspiracy theorists" (who are really truth seekers). 
You gotta be willing to explore the other side and really dig in. And as anyone can see, once you look at the lies, they crumble. Problem is, few will follow up on the links - all the info is there!
1
Reply
Male 5,364
boredhuman well said, i'm sure you'll like the 3-part series i submitted (if fancylad decides to post it)
0
Reply
Male 4,880
boredhuman Yeah, not going down this rabbit hole with you, thanks. I've already spent over 30 hours this past year debating and discussing things like the shape of the Earth and the Moon landings with Monk. That's about as much time and energy as I'm willing to commit to topics like this.
2
Reply
Male 3,375
squrlz4ever yes sir
0
Reply
Male 1,009
squrlz4ever We normally don't get squrlz on our farm but I saw one today -- I would set up a feeder for it but between the goats the chickens and the crows; I'm not to sure how far I would get.
2
Reply
Male 4,880
lockner01 We learn to respond to calls pretty quickly. If you make a squirrel call and reward your fluffy friend with a few unsalted peanuts in the shell, you'll soon be able to call him and his buddies whenever you want.
0
Reply
Male 3,375
squrlz4ever i swerved to avoid a squirell on the road today and though of you squirlez. god help me
0
Reply
Male 1,324
rumham You know what they call a squrl dead on the road? Nature's little speed bump! HaHa I kill myself!
0
Reply
Male 4,880
rumham Bless you, Rumham. You've earned 500 squirrel karma points.
0
Reply
Male 3,375
squrlz4ever does that get me 3 cents off gas or something?
0
Reply
Male 4,880
rumham 500 SKPs will get you 50% off your Thanksgiving turkey or buy-one-get-one-free for any two products in the dairy aisle (2nd product must be of equal or lesser value).

We also give double squirrel karma points on Wednesdays, provided you can stick your tongue out and breathe through your nose.
0
Reply
Male 3,375
squrlz4ever fu... when does squirrel hunting season start :P 
0
Reply
Male 1,009
squrlz4ever That was a great link
0
Reply
Male 216
Get used to tard's, most people don't want to know the truth.

1
Reply
Male 337
prichards114 Exactly my point! It's easy being a sheeple. 
-2
Reply
Male 1,009
Could someone please explain this statement to me "Public figures, like Noam Chomsky who use logical fallacies to spread lies."? 

What are the logical fallacies Chomsky is using?

Who are the other public figures?

Why do people try to support their arguements by using the term fallacy?  It's like some people here think it's a trump card.
2
Reply
Male 38
lockner01 careful or they'll sic Hegelian dialectics on you
1
Reply
Male 337
lockner01 Watch the video. At least Chomsky admits not to have an opinion on Building 7 - but that's what expert liars do sometimes: they take a step towards you to look reasonable and then start lying. All lies, fallacies, and deception.  
-3
Reply
Male 1,009
boredhuman You need to watch more than 10 seconds of the link you posted.  He stated he wasn't an engineer and he would respect the facts that the experts in that feild would present.


2
Reply
Male 337
lockner01 That's exactly what I was talking about: before demonstrating fallacious thinking, he puts you at ease by giving a hint of truth. Listen at the sheeple applaud him before he starts telling you "uncontroversial facts."
-2
Reply
Male 1,009
boredhuman You have to be have a laugh.  

Do you realize that the word -- or any form of -- "fallacy" is not used in any deductive logical arguement?

We used to have what we called the "fallsum".

Would you be willing to accept the falsum?
2
Reply
Male 337
lockner01 "You have to be have a laugh" You have no idea... I actually feel pretty bad, but it's all in a good cause i hope...
0
Reply
Male 1,009
boredhuman  <<<(())>>>.  As the sun sets so does the moon -- our lives lean towards a bond in botherhood.
0
Reply
Male 3,375
lockner01 derp vortex power go go go
1
Reply
Male 941
lockner01 I believe that they think it makes them sound smart.
1
Reply
Male 7,910
Oh goodie we haven't had a good ole 9/11 conspiracy in a while!
1
Reply
Male 337
normalfreak2 9/11 only happens once a year. 
0
Reply
Male 3,375
boredhuman thats what she said
1
Reply
Male 454
normalfreak2 I came down here to make that same comment!

It's all just a little bit of history repeating
0
Reply
Male 3,415
Well this will take some getting thru, lets get some caffiene and have a shot.

ALTHOUGH, i must admit, of all the current popular conspiracy things (flat earth, fake moon landing, false flag ops, holocaust), this is the only one that ever makes me raise an eyebrow.
0
Reply
Male 5,364
daegog I agree, because it's got too many smoking guns involved.
0
Reply
Male 7,910
daegog Bill Clinton can't even keep a blow job secret, how the fuck does killing 3,000 Americans remain a secret?  Sorry the amount of people needed to be involved and have them all remain quiet is way too hard.  



That's not saying I don't think it possible.  There are parts of this tragedy that do not make sense.  I still have an issue with Building 7 going down.  My refutation to that is  who benefited from the towers going down?  I'm not sure I see anyone or any group getting anything significant  out of it unless you want to lump the "war economy" into this.
0
Reply
449
normalfreak2 To be fair... blowjobs are the kind of thing that a guy will brag about :p
1
Reply
Male 1,009
normalfreak2 I had a theory -- with absolutley nothing to back me up.  In 1993 there was a truck bomb that went off in the World Trade Center.  It could have been a lot worse than it was.  If I was a government insider at the time I would have said "What if it had been a lot worse?"  "What would happen if someone did something to the building that would make it collapse?" " 

So rather than having a building fall down over multiple city blocks there were self-destruct protocols built in. So if lets say hypothetically a jet flew into a building it could brought down in a controlled fashion rather than falling over; killing 10 times the amount of people.

Building 7 could fit into my theory that it was just hooked-up to the same trigger and automatically went down with the rest.  Or the guy who had to hit the red buttons hit one too many.  When I picture it in my mind there's some guy at a board of buttons panicing saying "fuck fuck fuck fuck fuck" -- hits the wrong button "FUUUUUUUUCK".


0
Reply
Male 337
lockner01 "So rather than having a building fall down over multiple city blocks there were self-destruct protocols built in. So if lets say hypothetically a jet flew into a building it could brought down in a controlled fashion rather than falling over; killing 10 times the amount of people." This is covered in the post... check out the 16:00 mark:

Scientists spreading Lies and confusion, calling it "debunking myths." 
0
Reply
Male 1,009
boredhuman

I did start off by saying "I had a theory -- with absolutley nothing to back me up."

You have 23 links in your original post with 2 more in your response.  Do you really think I'm going to click on 25 links trying to figure out what "16:00 mark" you're talking about?