It's not a conspiracy


Recommended Posts

PreKe    147
I'm not interested in speculation, that is you, which is why you still believe the official conspiracy theory. I don't like to publicly advocate any "alternative" theories, I have my own opinions I like to keep to myself, but that's not the point. The point is you believe the official conspiracy theory, therefore the burden of proof is you, as the believer of the conspiracy theory.

Why are you making assumptions about what I "believe"? Stop trying to dodge my questions, and answer them. If you don't think the collapses were due to planes, explain what caused them. You obviously think it was a controlled demolition, in which case you must explain the things that don't fit with a controlled demolition.

You are the one who believes in conspiracy theories. The official version is not a "conspiracy theory".

And finally, no, you can't just reject the official explanation without coming up with valid arguments to support your assertions.

s1k3sT made this statement: "Like a controlled demolition couldn't have caused that pivot?"

So he is arguing for a controlled demolition. He tried to claim that he didn't, but that was a lie, as everyone can see.

So he must answer these questions or retract his statements:

Why didn't it look or sound like a controlled demolition? Where were the rhythmical explosions? Why did the building collapse from the top down rather than bottom up?

And how could the plane fly into a building rigged with explosives without setting them all off prematurely?

And how could the people working in the building actually work there when all walls had to be drilled full of holes and have explosives stuffed into them? Not only would it be extremely dangerous to work there, but it would be impossible to stuff dynamite everywhere without anyone noticing.

So come on now, tell us how all this is supposed to have magically happened.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Phenom II    104

Why are you making assumptions about what I "believe"? Stop trying to dodge my questions, and answer them. If you don't think the collapses were due to planes, explain what caused them. You obviously think it was a controlled demolition, in which case you must explain the things that don't fit with a controlled demolition.

You are the one who believes in conspiracy theories. The official version is not a "conspiracy theory".

And finally, no, you can't just reject the official explanation without coming up with valid arguments to support your assertions.

s1k3sT made this statement: "Like a controlled demolition couldn't have caused that pivot?"

So he is arguing for a controlled demolition. He tried to claim that he didn't, but that was a lie, as everyone can see.

So he must answer these questions or retract his statements:

Why didn't it look or sound like a controlled demolition? Where were the rhythmical explosions? Why did the building collapse from the top down rather than bottom up?

And how could the plane fly into a building rigged with explosives without setting them all off prematurely?

And how could the people working in the building actually work there when all walls had to be drilled full of holes and have explosives stuffed into them? Not only would it be extremely dangerous to work there, but it would be impossible to stuff dynamite everywhere without anyone noticing.

So come on now, tell us how all this is supposed to have magically happened.

Goblins

Link to post
Share on other sites
PreKe    147

Phenom II: Those questions apply to you, too.

But one has to realize that conspiracy theorists cannot adequately explain their position because it's based on wishful thinking and inventing stories. That is why you and the other guy are now dodging these extremely revealing questions.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Phenom II    104

Not doging, I had a good go at answering all previous questions, but have decided not to join in this hounding any longer as it is not a debate, but a witch hunt, and it gave me 2 headaches and I only have 1 head

Link to post
Share on other sites
PreKe    147

If you are not going to participate in the discussion, why are you still posting? You are only disrupting the discussion with your hit and run tactics.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Phenom II    104

Fair enough, although its not really fair having one person getting hammered by the rest, without even a chance to explain their thoughts and views without being told how wrong and stupid they are.

A discussion is views of both parties being listened to by both parties, and talked about in a constructive manner, not 5 people bullying one into a corner and laughing at them.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
PreKe    147

No one is bullying anyone. If he had simply answered people's questions, and stopped dodging and weaving, we could have moved on ages ago.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
s1k3sT    31

No one is bullying anyone. If he had simply answered people's questions, and stopped dodging and weaving, we could have moved on ages ago.

Please...

No one was "dodging and weaving" except all you truth deniers. It's funny because even if you can prove how the building came down it still doesn't prove your theory on who did it. Personally, I still believe it was a controlled demolition, but I would much rather focus on who did it because I see that as far more important. I almost wonder if "the powers that be" wanted two competing theories about how the buildings came down so they could destroy the evidence and have the two theorists arguing with each other over how the buildings came down (distraction), so the people that ran the operation were able to quietly sneak off into the shadows.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Phenom II    104
thohnonotagain1.gif
Link to post
Share on other sites
s1k3sT    31

Yes, we all know Bush is a moron. Next.

It's more than just Bush:

In May 2002, national security adviser Condoleezza Rice said: "I don't think anyone could have predicted that these people would take an airplane and slam it into the World Trade Center"; then-White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer echoed Rice's remarks: "Never did we imagine what would take place on September 11 where people use those airplanes as missiles and weapons."
CNN noted on March 24 that Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld told the Commission: "I knew of no intelligence during the six-plus months leading up to September 11 to indicate terrorists would hijack commercial airlines, use them as missiles to fly into the Pentagon or the World Trade Center towers."

At least three other people lied as well, because as my link pointed out there were multiple warnings leading up to 9/11. Try em all for treason!

Link to post
Share on other sites
PreKe    147
No one was "dodging and weaving" except all you truth deniers.

Translation: "You evil fact proponents. Facts are evil!"

It's funny because even if you can prove how the building came down it still doesn't prove your theory on who did it.

You are the one with the burden of proof. Simple observations show that controlled demolition is not a viable explanation.

Personally, I still believe it was a controlled demolition

And yet all facts contradict your beliefs.

Link to post
Share on other sites
hdood    145

Please...

No one was "dodging and weaving" except all you truth deniers. It's funny because even if you can prove how the building came down it still doesn't prove your theory on who did it. Personally, I still believe it was a controlled demolition, but I would much rather focus on who did it because I see that as far more important.

Yeah, who cares that you can't come up with any coherent counter-argument to my description of how the collapse happened (funny how that doesn't meet the definition of "dodging and weaving.") It's not important, let's just move onto something else! That's the classic conspiracy theorist strategy. What's the point in anyone debunking your claims or explaining what actually happened when you're not actually interested in the truth? You aren't interested in facts, and you aren't interested in other people's opinion. You just want to post yours in a hit-and-run fashion.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
Treemonkeys    5

Why is it that when we admit we don't believe the official conspiracy theory of 9/11 we are labeled "conspiracy theorists"?! WTF?! I always thought society leaned more towards Brave New World, but there is obviously some 1984 type doublethink as well.

Does anyone have any explanation how this happens?! We don't even have to offer a theory, just admit we don't believe the official conspiracy theory and we are labeled a "conspiracy theorist" like it's an insult...

IMHO anyone that isn't a "conspiracy theorist" isn't thinking clearly, they drank too much koolaide, no offense intended, please let me explain. If you theorize that bank robbers conspired to rob a bank you are a conspiracy theorist. Does anyone doubt that bank robbers conspire to rob banks?

I know someone is probably going to say the official story isn't a conspiracy theory, so I will get that out of the way right now. The "official" theory is that Muslims conspired to hijack planes and crash them into buildings like the wtc and pentagon.

It seems to me that human thought at a society level is still controlled with playground like tactics, simply make a derogatory label and use it to make fun of people who disagree with you. Conspiracy theorist, tin foil hat wearer, birther, truther, etc. When this happens the majority of people will be too timid to even consider risking setting themselves apart from the crowd to be mocked.

It is really just absurd to think that arabs on the other side of the world could plan 9/11 in secret but it would be impossible for people in our government to do the same exact thing in secret because "the would government would have to be in on it".

After all our government has entire organizations that are based on secrecy, CIA, NSA, ect. Many people think that a sense of nationalism would keep people in our government from ever doing something like 9/11, but killing someone you have never met isn't going to be much different from a moral standpoint regardless of what country they are from. Then again many people also think our government actually avoids killing innocent people, they don't.

Please...

No one was "dodging and weaving" except all you truth deniers. It's funny because even if you can prove how the building came down it still doesn't prove your theory on who did it. Personally, I still believe it was a controlled demolition, but I would much rather focus on who did it because I see that as far more important. I almost wonder if "the powers that be" wanted two competing theories about how the buildings came down so they could destroy the evidence and have the two theorists arguing with each other over how the buildings came down (distraction), so the people that ran the operation were able to quietly sneak off into the shadows.

Of course they did, it used to be called COINTELPRO.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO

Yes, we all know Bush is a moron. Next.

Yeah a moron who ran the country and made billions of dollars doing it....there is a whole lot more to being a moron than just acting like one on TV.

You keep thinking that he's a moron as he enjoys his retirement of ridiculous wealth and security. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
iamawesomewicked    80

Yeah a moron who ran the country and made billions of dollars doing it....there is a whole lot more to being a moron than just acting like one on TV.

You keep thinking that he's a moron as he enjoys his retirement of ridiculous wealth and security. :)

You can be rich and a moron at the same time. I mean, look at Paris Hilton for example.

Link to post
Share on other sites
PreKe    147
When this happens the majority of people will be too timid to even consider risking setting themselves apart from the crowd to be mocked.

I find this to be a highly amusing statement, considering that no one behaves more like sheep than conspiracy theorists. They all fall in line.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Treemonkeys    5

You can be rich and a moron at the same time. I mean, look at Paris Hilton for example.

There is a big different between enjoying inherited wealth when you are young and retiring with wealth and security when you are old.

I find this to be a highly amusing statement, considering that no one behaves more like sheep than conspiracy theorists. They all fall in line.

Really? What line is that?

Link to post
Share on other sites
PreKe    147
Really? What line is that?

Conspiracy theorists mindlessly parrot each other, and create an echo chamber of nonsense that just gets crazier and crazier. They don't accept any input from other people, while claims from their own ranks, no matter how idiotic, are automatically taken as gospel.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Treemonkeys    5

Conspiracy theorists mindlessly parrot each other, and create an echo chamber of nonsense that just gets crazier and crazier. They don't accept any input from other people, while claims from their own ranks, no matter how idiotic, are automatically taken as gospel.

That's not true for me or any other "conspiracy theorists" that I know personally, there are plenty of theories out there that are wrong. Assuming that thinking 9/11 was an inside job makes me a conspiracy theorist, I certainly know how I think better than you do.

So am I a conspiracy theorist or not? lol I don't even have my own ranks, not sure what that is.

I don't agree with this:

http://www.911hoax.com/top_lists_911.asp

or this:

http://letsrollforums.com/driver-shot-jfk-clearly-t18216.html?amp;

or this:

http://www.goodnewsaboutgod.com/studies/political/jews/jews_run_world.htm

or this:

http://www.illuminati-news.com/moriah.htm

or this:

http://www.libertylobby.org/articles/2000/20000806jesuits.html

The fact is many conspiracy theories completely go against each other, so it is obvious that you cannot believe them all. I could cherry pick theories I don't agree with all day. Put two conspiracy theorists in a room and they will disagree with each other. If we made a thread where only people who think 9/11 was an inside job could post in it, chances are we would all just argue with each other.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.