What is Wrong With These People!? - The U.S. Politics Discussion Thread

[Zoidberg747]

So I guess using a demolition term such as "pull it" isnt relevant then? And clearly hearing an explosion a few seconds before its collapse doesnt matter either? What about BBC reporting the building collapsed 10 minutes prior as they report with the building in clear site.

If they didnt want it to cause collateral damage, why did they leave the Empire State Building after a B-52 bomber slammed into it?

The whole point of this conspiracy thing is you are using very trivial things to go against hundreds of eye witnesses accounts. You use some obscure taxi driver to try and prove your point when hundreds of people just like him said the plane hit the towers.

 

[Lt. Boxy Angelman]

Rev's point of view

I want you to be right, man. I really, really do. You've got trustworthy brains.
I want there to be nothing wrong with it, and all the inconsistencies to just be imagination.
But there's way too much that just doesn't sit right with me, the Pentagon being the biggest red flag.

Conspiracy theories or not, there's too many missing pieces.

 

[rev0lver]

So I guess using a demolition term such as "pull it" isnt relevant then? And clearly hearing an explosion a few seconds before its collapse doesnt matter either? What about BBC reporting the building collapsed 10 minutes prior as they report with the building in clear site.

If they didnt want it to cause collateral damage, why did they leave the Empire State Building after a B-52 bomber slammed into it?

They pulled it with cables so it would fall in a certain area. It has nothing to do with explosives. They didn't want to use explosives because it was considered too risky in the situation.

The BBC report was an error because the media was told that the building is expected to collapse. I don't see a major issue with that. It's like calling it a "conspiracy" when a guy gets shot 20 times and is reported dead 10 minutes before he actually dies.

What are you talking about the Empire State Building crash btw? There wasn't a problem in that because they were able to put out the fire and there was no significant structural damage. It was a B-25, not a B-52 btw.

 

[rev0lver]

I want you to be right, man. I really, really do. You've got trustworthy brains.
I want there to be nothing wrong with it, and all the inconsistencies to just be imagination.
But there's way too much that just doesn't sit right with me, the Pentagon being the biggest red flag.

Conspiracy theories or not, there's too many missing pieces.

The #1 problem for me, which is why I converted from truther to non-truther, is that there seem to be more inconsistencies in the conspiracy than there are in the actual story.

 

[SonicKaballs]

The whole point of this conspiracy thing is you are using very trivial things to go against hundreds of eye witnesses accounts. You use some obscure taxi driver to try and prove your point when hundreds of people just like him said the plane hit the towers.

Im not denying a plane hit the towers. The Pentagon is what I'm talking about. Watch the WHOLE Pentagon documentary I posted. Thats more what I'm focuses on although I still do believe in the WTC Conspiracies as well. I havent seen more than 10 eyewitnesses say they saw the plane fly in low and hit the Pentagon.

 

[Lt. Boxy Angelman]

The #1 problem for me, which is why I converted from truther to non-truther, is that there seem to be more inconsistencies in the conspiracy than there are in the actual story.

No doubt there. It's like the genuine WTF facts and factoids get lost in thousands of other hypothetical bits and pieces, so truth gets mixed with fiction, fiction blurs terrifying fact, and terrifying facts gets blurred so badly, they end up distorted into dozens of other bits of fiction.

 

[nwo]

Here's some more very powerful video.

He says "You don't understand, there may be more, anyone of these fucking buildings could blow up, this ain't done yet."

Firemen Explosion Testimony

Here's another good one, it just doesn't look right to me, those were steel structure buildings.

Oh damn it, I gotta throw this one in too.

No doubt there. It's like the genuine WTF facts and factoids get lost in thousands of other hypothetical bits and pieces, so truth gets mixed with fiction, fiction blurs terrifying fact, and terrifying facts gets blurred so badly, they end up distorted into dozens of other bits of fiction.

Yeah, that's done on purpose so a bunch of weak minded people get lost in a bunch of real "conspiracy theories." I like to just watch raw video footage and testimony usually.

 

[Abra Kapocus]

If you guys have about two hours to kill, this thorough debunking of Loose Change may help to fill in some of your gaps.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3214024953129565561#

 

[Lt. Boxy Angelman]

If you guys have about two hours to kill, this thorough debunking of Loose Change may help to fill in some of your gaps.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3214024953129565561#

I'm gonna have to show my mom this. That movie legit made her cry.

 

[rev0lver]

I'm watching a little bit of that vid, lol pretty nice. I love when it talks about the Pentagon.... if it were a missile it would have had to zig zag and hit multiple light poles, skim across a generator, then crash into the pentagon with the eyewitnesses being none the wiser!

 

[nwo]

No one responded to the Firemen testimony video. I figured. On scene testimony is hard to twist/spin.

Another informative video PROVING the buildings couldn't fall like they did from office fires.

9/11 Experiments: Newton vs. NIST

 

[Abra Kapocus]

nwo: Won't take you seriously until you respond to "Screw Loose Change." Most of your claims have already been debunked like eight years ago.

 

[nwo]

nwo: Won't take you seriously until you respond to "Screw Loose Change." Most of your claims have already been debunked like eight years ago.

I'm suppose to respond to a film called "Screw Loose Change?" Sounds like a "respectable" documentary. The thing is, I did a YouTube search for it and I came up with nothing. I don't believe it's even on YouTube, maybe you could correct me?

The link you posted was from google videos, which doesn't allow user comments, doesn't display view counts, has no user rating system. I have to admit, this is a huge turn off for me, I like fair platforms. My guess is that it was put on google videos for a damn good reason.

Maybe you could bring some facts to the table here? So we could debate them.

I'm still waiting for someone to explain the WTC7 penthouse collapse, and the explosion heard right before, then 5 seconds later the entire building drops out of the sky at free fall speed.

 

[Abra Kapocus]

That was already covered. You just refused to listen.

I gave you a link to "Screw Loose Change" in an earlier post. Scroll up. It's a debunking of "Loose Change" that was independently made. You don't seem to have a problem citing unverified claims yourself, so I guess you just like spouting off the ones that conform to the narrative in your head, almost as if you want it to be true. Which explains why you won't listen to anyone's dissenting viewpoints, nor the explanation that was put forth about WTC7.

Bring some facts to the table? Take your own advice, duder. And stop wasting everyone's time. This is insipid, asinine, and all kinds of retarded. Not everything the government tells you is an outright lie, just most of it. Take off the tinfoil hat. If you can't do that, then get the fuck out.

 

[nwo]

That was already covered. You just refused to listen.

I gave you a link to "Screw Loose Change" in an earlier post. Scroll up. It's a debunking of "Loose Change" that was independently made. You don't seem to have a problem citing unverified claims yourself, so I guess you just like spouting off the ones that conform to the narrative in your head, almost as if you want it to be true. Which explains why you won't listen to anyone's dissenting viewpoints, nor the explanation that was put forth about WTC7.

Bring some facts to the table? Take your own advice, duder. And stop wasting everyone's time. This is insipid, asinine, and all kinds of retarded. Not everything the government tells you is an outright lie, just most of it. Take off the tinfoil hat. If you can't do that, then get the fuck out.

Wow, nice way to duck and dodge dude.

Now you and I are done too.

 

[Abra Kapocus]

nwo: Well, aren't you just an entitled, self-righteous little twat.

You've presented nothing that hasn't already been handily refuted, and yet when someone does actually address your points you dismiss it as bullshit because they're "one of them" (speaking of ducking and dodging). At that point, it's plain to see that it's not worth arguing with you. I know a brick wall when I see one.

Drink more kool-aid, brah

 

[SonicKaballs]

About 10 eyewitnesses? Wow, that's almost as much as the dozens (probably 100+) eyewitnesses who saw a plane, many actually seeing the impact. Or are you going to tell me everyone who was outside that morning (minus 10 people) were paid disinfo agents?

The mental gymnastics you have to use there are insane. Like the cab driver (Lloyd i think his name is?). A cab driver who seems to have trouble recalling what happened apparently tosses out all the other eyewitness accounts out the window.

Let me paint a picture here:
Let's say you're investigating a murder. You have 5 witnesses. Four say the suspect had brown hair, but one says he had black hair. Do you say "he must have had black hair and these people are covering up for him"? What kind of sense does that make? Do you think this is logical at all?

It's unbelievable that a plane can crash into a government building in a huge city and some people think it was something else because a few people went "it might've been such-and-such".

Also, that picture is of the Flight 93 crash site. I don't understand your point there.

He didnt have trouble re-calling anything. When he knew he was being video tapped he denied the location of cab and where the pictures were taken, despite the fact that the evidence was clear and the pictures he was shown told the whole story. When the creator secretly recorded him as they were driving, Lloyd blatantly admitted to the whole thing being set up.

 

[SonicKaballs]

I'm watching a little bit of that vid, lol pretty nice. I love when it talks about the Pentagon.... if it were a missile it would have had to zig zag and hit multiple light poles, skim across a generator, then crash into the pentagon with the eyewitnesses being none the wiser!

Please read both of these pages. Dont skim, read.
http://letsrollforums.com/if-wasnt-c-130-t11549.html
http://letsrollforums.com/entry-point-pentagon-consistent-t10528.html?p=98368

They pulled it with cables so it would fall in a certain area. It has nothing to do with explosives. They didn't want to use explosives because it was considered too risky in the situation.

The BBC report was an error because the media was told that the building is expected to collapse. I don't see a major issue with that. It's like calling it a "conspiracy" when a guy gets shot 20 times and is reported dead 10 minutes before he actually dies.

What are you talking about the Empire State Building crash btw? There wasn't a problem in that because they were able to put out the fire and there was no significant structural damage. It was a B-25, not a B-52 btw.

But the problem is there were a couple office fires, not the whole building engulfed in flames.

 

[rev0lver]

But the problem is there were a couple office fires, not the whole building engulfed in flames.

A couple of office fires? Who told you that lol, because it's not true at all. I know the truthers like to pull deceptive pics out.

As for those forum posts, I read them. The first one, it still makes no sense at all. Not only does that still not account for the poles and the generator that was moved, but it's still based on the incredibly strange idea that the people in the area would look the other way when the whole thing was going down. It makes ZERO logical sense.

As for the hole, I would suggest watching the anti-Loose Change video. The people in that forum are misunderstanding how the plane was believed to have crashed into the building and how the debris got where. And again, still completely
defies the logic I have been talking about.

He didnt have trouble re-calling anything. When he knew he was being video tapped he denied the location of cab and where the pictures were taken, despite the fact that the evidence was clear and the pictures he was shown told the whole story. When the creator secretly recorded him as they were driving, Lloyd blatantly admitted to the whole thing being set up.

Yeah, wouldn't that be cool? To pretend that things were set up? Of course he would deny it when he knows hes being recorded because then people would expose him as a fraud. I could tell you I once knocked out Jon Jones at a bar, but not on camera because I would get exposed.

 

[nwo]

Here's a video of a planted eye witness, who seems highly scripted and fake, almost like an infomercial. Notice his "Harley Davidson" t-shirt, he was known as "The Harley guy" for a long time until it came out that his name was Mark Walsh, a freelance reporter for Fox news.

Here's a great comment from someone...

"And then Mark Walsh volunteers the REASON for the collapse WITHOUT being asked, "mostly due to structural failure because the fire was just too intense". But no high-rise had ever collapsed in history due to fire until three did that day.
Freelancer Mark Walsh planted an image on live TV into people's minds of what caused the unprecedented collapses that day at a time when everyone was wondering what happened."

There's actually a longer version of this same interview now, where the guy even uses the term "ground zero." This was like an hour or two after the attack, I find this kinda scary.

 

[aj1701]

No one responded to the Firemen testimony video. I figured. On scene testimony is hard to twist/spin.

Another informative video PROVING the buildings couldn't fall like they did from office fires.

9/11 Experiments: Newton vs. NIST

Eyewitness testimony is known to be unreliable: http://agora.stanford.edu/sjls/Issue One/fisher&tversky.htm

 

[aj1701]

You keep saying "they," but there is only one person talking in that video.

We are done talking about it.

Maybe if you explain he will shut up.

I don't need to explain it, others have, but since people need explainations shoved in their face instead of doing a simple Google: http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/birthers/birthcertificate.asp

"They" would be the guy in the video and all the other morons doing the same thing and saying its a fake, not knowing how scanners work.

FYI, not what happened here, but its possible to fake an entire website.

If you have Windows, try this.

• Start -> Programs -> Notepad (right click and Run As Administrator if on Vista or higher)
• In NotePad, open the file c:\windows\system32\drivers\etc\hosts (no extension)
• Add this line to the bottom of the file.
• 74.125.228.8 www.whitehouse.gov
• Save the hosts file.
• Close any open browser windows, then reopen one.
• Goto www.whitehouse.gov

Everything on the web can be downloaded locally, and you can run a local web server. Using the above trick, anyone can then modify the site and say "hey look what this site did today" in some YT video.

 

[aj1701]

But no high-rise had ever collapsed in history due to fire until three did that day.

No highrise had jet fuel, which burns exteremly hot, weakening the steel supports. Steel doesn't need to melt to become weak from heat.

 

[nwo]

No highrise had jet fuel, which burns exteremly hot, weakening the steel supports. Steel doesn't need to melt to become weak from heat.

I don't need to explain it, others have, but since people need explainations shoved in their face instead of doing a simple Google: http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/birthers/birthcertificate.asp

"They" would be the guy in the video and all the other morons doing the same thing and saying its a fake, not knowing how scanners work.

FYI, not what happened here, but its possible to fake an entire website.

If you have Windows, try this.

• Start -> Programs -> Notepad (right click and Run As Administrator if on Vista or higher)
• In NotePad, open the file c:\windows\system32\drivers\etc\hosts (no extension)
• Add this line to the bottom of the file.
• 74.125.228.8 www.whitehouse.gov
• Save the hosts file.
• Close any open browser windows, then reopen one.
• Goto www.whitehouse.gov

Everything on the web can be downloaded locally, and you can run a local web server. Using the above trick, anyone can then modify the site and say "hey look what this site did today" in some YT video.

I'll trust Adobe Illustrator over notepad bro.

It took you a week to come up with this? I already told you I was done with you.

Eyewitness testimony is known to be unreliable: http://agora.stanford.edu/sjls/Issue One/fisher&tversky.htm

and I think I'll trust what these Firefighters said over you as well.

Quote: "You don't understand, there may be more, anyone of these fucking buildings could blow up, this ain't done yet."

Firemen Explosion Testimony

 

[DanCock]

the Scott walker Wisconsin recall is today. This is huge stuff. We'll find out if money does win after all.

Being out spent 25-1 it will be a miracle if Democratic challenger Tom Barrett wins.

Are we sheep or can we think for ourselves???


Sent from my iPad 2 using Tapatalk