wow…just wow.
OK, I’m gonna watch it, against my better judgement. This better not be another fucking Truther video!
its not really pushing any conspiracy theories, just tearing about the official government story and explaining why that particular story is impossible.
Evidently, someone regarded my latest personal attack on Truthers as a “personal attack” on Truthers, and deleted my last post – imagine that! No problem; allow me to rephrase…
I do not see how anyone out there can believe this nonsense that is put out about the 9/11 attacks. Questioning the official story is one thing, but fabricating evidence in order to refute what you think is someone else’s fabricated evidence is not helping the situation. Yes, I know that some peoples’ hatred of George Bush and Dick Cheney knows no bounds. George Bush is guilty of a lot of participation in a lot of government conspiracies, but 9/11 is not among them. Furthermore, he got away with them all and is going to retire to his ranch in Texas, and will be rich, fat and happy for the rest of his days. Yes, it sucks, but you all have to accept it and move on. The constant attacking and name calling and failed attempts at confrontation ten years later just make Truthers seem even crazier.
Yes, “imagine that” indeed.
Please demonstrate what “fabricated evidence” was presented in this thread.
FleetCenturion, perhaps if you could make your point as well as the British man in the video someone would listen to you and perhaps take you seriously. Right now though, it just sounds like unorganized babbling.
For this particular thread (though not in others on this forum), I will say there was only a video posted with crackpot theories, instead people actively arguing those crackpot theories. For that, I thank you all!
The video, however, and all the others like it repeat the same tired and frankly, insane notions. In particular the often-repeated, “Those murder weapons… resembling passenger planes… took off, but from where?”
This is, I presume, implying that we really have no idea what they were or where they came from, that those supposed airplanes never really existed, and that the government-- since they’re so smart-- was able to make cruise missiles look like airplanes and crash them into the WTC and Pentagon. All the while, erasing all evidence of the planes that are suddenly missing, and the people supposedly on board who are suddenly dead. I guess George Bush was so devious that he manages to pay off hundreds of people every year to pretend to be the grieving family members at the 9/11 memorials. Damn him! He’s just so clever!
The long and short of Truther logic is thus: “Government is evil. 9/11 was evil. The resulting loss of civil liberties is evil. Therefore, the government must have caused 9/11 because they want 's oil, and so Dick Cheney can drink Muslim children’s blood! It’s so simple. Wake up !”
Those who push this kind of garbage have an agenda all their own, and those who believe it are (without getting too personal) sad and pathetic souls looking for someone-- anyone-- to blame.
"that those supposed airplanes never really existed, and that the government-- since they’re so smart-- was able to make cruise missiles look like airplanes "
Wow…you’re the crackpot. Nowhere in this video is it saying there were no planes that hit the towers.
Here is some nice and serious video about building 7, I think some of you must watch it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uFJa9WUy5QI&feature=feedu it
Especially from 2:05
Still not convinced? Watch this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=saHs6J0OXVI
The video is re-hashing talking points from Loose Change, questioning where the wreckage was, as if there never was a plane at all.
As I refuse to watch either again, let’s review their talking points here:
Close. 9/11 was a superlatively convenient event for the US government in the waning decade of the Cold War after the collapse of its arch-nemesis, the USSR, whose existence had sustained a 25+% GDP Evil Giant Squid Military Industrial Complex for five or so decades. It’s like the lottery commissioner’s wife just randomly winning the mega-jackpot… it is mathematically possible that it “just happened” as they claim but it’s still suspicious as hell. So, since 9/11 is automatically suspicious as hell, we might just want to poke around and see if we can find inconsistencies in the government’s story that are consistent with deception, which they have foisted on the public so many times in the past (e.g. the faked Zapruder film).
Oh, shit, what’s this? Building 7 collapsed on the very same day when it had not been hit by an airplane or severely damaged by falling debris with all its core columns intact? It had suffered severe office fires but these had been nearly put out two hours before the building’s collapse supposedly due to “thermal expansion”. The unevenly distributed office fires caused an event so improbable that evenly distributed office fires would not have been a sufficient explanation: sudden, symmetrical collapse of the entire building into its own footprint at free-fall speed (for the first several seconds, slowing ever-so-slightly near the bottom).
Say what? NORAD/FAA failed to intercept the civilian airliners for well over an hour (from first signs that Flight 11 had been hijacked until Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon)? Not only did the lottery commissioner’s wife just win the mega-jackpot but the winning numbers happened to be her birthdate!
But you’re right, the sheeple should just go back to bed:
Clayton -
“sudden, symmetrical collapse of the entire building into its own footprint at free-fall speed (for the first several seconds, slowing ever-so-slightly near the bottom).”
you are repeating your mantra again which has been DEBUNKED (it wasn’t symetrical in any way) in your own eyes in the first video I posted above. It never ceases to amaze me seeing the true believer’s behaviour. After you give step by step explanation they once again repeat their delusions from the beginning as if nothing happened. Same with creationists. Did you watch the video at all?
Oh well. At least you have some good ideas on anarchy.
Thank you for babbling on with your crackpot theories about crackpot theories, but if you don’t mind, you said “Questioning the official story is one thing, but fabricating evidence in order to refute what you think is someone else’s fabricated evidence is not helping the situation.”
Please demonstrate what “fabricated evidence” was presented.
To further the analogy, I normally have no problem even with the hard-core creationists. I respect their opinions, no matter how silly I might think they are. Faith is believing in stuff that can’t be proven. It’s when they start insisting they can prove that Adam and Eve rode dinosaurs to church, and shout it from the mountain tops, that they get on my nerves. It’s as if you’re supposed to disbelieve what you see with your own eyes, and adopt an implausible theory based on someone else’s religious-- or political-- agenda
That video debunks nothing. The building came down at free-fall speed (even NIST was forced to admit this), into its own footprint, hours after the fires had burned out, in just as symmetrical a fashion as any other controlled demolition. His example of the highway overpass collapse doesn’t fly; that came down in MINUTES, while the fire was still raging. The fire was far more intense, literally engulfing the entire structure that collapsed. And his assertion that WTC7 was the only high-rise building in history to burn uncontrolled for 7 hours is patently false (see here for several more).
Your painting people skeptical of the Official Conspiracy Theory (OCT) as being as bad as creationists applies with far greater accuracy to those still clinging to the official narrative.
What is that “thing” called? In other words, how are “conspiracy theorists” or “truthers” different from anyone who simply doesn’t swallow the “official story” hook, line, and sinker? Are you saying that you consistently believe the “official story” each and every time, without fail? If so, based on what precedent? Who is the real “true believer” here?
“The video is re-hashing talking points from Loose Change, questioning where the wreckage was”
the video in no way, shape, or form says there were no planes that hit the towers. In fact it says the opposite. It says the obvious, that planes hit the towers. are you having trouble understanding the video?