Loose Change

[Apex Rogers]

Let me get this straight, geggy; one minute you say that the steel was so hot it melted and the next you say there was no way it could've melted, all the time ignoring that steel didn't need to melt in order for the towers to fall.l The more you distort the arguments and change your tune, the less credible you appear (not that you've presented a single thing that would lend you any credibility in the first place...)

 

[delphi_ote]

Then you must already know that hitler spied on opposition party and the dissents in whom he labelled as terroists. The "terrorists" tried to warn the citizens of germany that reichstag fire were possibly started by the nazis yet they were ridiculed.

I didn't know "terrorist" was a German word. You teach me something new every day, geggy!

 

[CptColumbo]

BTW I just watched "Loose Change" (I went to the Library). It was not a very good piece of investigative journalism. In the interviews the questions were leading, with the interviewer often finishing the sentences of the person being interviewed. Irrelevant facts were over-inflated. Suspicious actions by the gov't are easily explainable, by most anyone with a GED. The Movie clearly set out to prove it's agenda by cherry picking facts, and ignoring any that worked against their hypothosis. It was as painful to watch as reading an Anne Coultier book.

Gravy did a good job with his rebuttal, and answered any questions I had (that didn't have obvious answers).

 

[geggy]

Ok, regardless of the truth or falsehood of your statement, how does this prove that there was a conspiracy?

That bombs were planted in the basement of both wtcs to weaken the steel when it sets off and creates pool of molten steel after the collasping, thus the government covered it up.

Hence, cover up is a conspriacy.

 

[CptColumbo]

I didn't know "terrorist" was a German word. You teach me something new every day, geggy!

I thought it was this:
Remember in Superman II:

White:The terrorists say they have a hydrogen bomb, and will set it off if their demands aren't met.
Kent:That's terrible Mr. White.
White:That's why their called TERRORISTS Kent.

or words to that effect.

 

[geggy]

"If you are not with us, then you are with them {terrorists}" -george bush, 9/12/01

 

[CptColumbo]

That bombs were planted in the basement of both wtcs to weaken the steel when it sets off and creates pool of molten steel after the collasping, thus the government covered it up.

Hence, cover up is a conspriacy.

Now it's weakened steel and explosives in the basement. I thought it was molten steel pouring out and explosives higher up.

Covered what up?

To cover up that they planted explosives higher up which caused the WTC to collapse like a controlled demolition? and then remote controlled planes to crash into the WTC? Get your conspiracy straight, then come back.

 

[CptColumbo]

"If you are not with us, then you are with them {terrorists}" -george bush, 9/12/01

He was speaking to the other countries that were harboring terrorists.

Once again, changing the topic.

 

[senorpogo]

That bombs were planted in the basement of both wtcs to weaken the steel when it sets off and creates pool of molten steel after the collasping, thus the government covered it up.

Hence, cover up is a conspriacy.
Last edited by geggy : Today at 07:22 PM.

Did you edit this because it wasn't confusing enough?

 

[Pardalis]

Then you must already know that hitler spied on opposition party and the dissents in whom he labelled as terroists. The "terrorists" tried to warn the citizens of germany that reichstag fire were possibly started by the nazis yet they were ridiculed.

Man, you're all over the place. Comparisons with Hitler and the nazis is the easiest exist. YOU ARE SINKING VERY LOW.

WORD OF ADVICE: I wouldn't sympathise with terrorists over the internet if I were you...

 

[Pardalis]

That bombs were planted in the basement of both wtcs to weaken the steel when it sets off and creates pool of molten steel after the collasping, thus the government covered it up.

Hence, cover up is a conspriacy.

Here's a nice fallacy for aggle-rithm.

A Collection of Fallacies:

When it's raining, the birds don't sing.
The birds aren't singing.
Therefore, it's raining.

When a person dies, they become very quiet.
Bob is very quiet.
Therefore, Bob is dead.

If done properly, poisoned food tastes like normal food.
My dinner tastes normal.
Therefore, my dinner has been poisoned.

When a building is demolished, the roof of the building falls downwards.
WTC7's roof fell downwards.
Therefore, WTC7 was demolished.

If a person is very intelligent, they are able to post messages in a forum.
geggy posts messages in a forum.
Therefore, geggy is very intelligent.

 

[delphi_ote]

That bombs were planted in the basement of both wtcs to weaken the steel when it sets off and creates pool of molten steel after the collasping, thus the government covered it up.

Hence, cover up is a conspriacy.

Not to cut you off before you even get started, but it has already been pointed out to you over and over that explosives won't melt steel. At this point, I can only assume you are either illiterate or deliberately perpetuating a lie.

 

[Pardalis]

Not to cut you off before you even get started, but it has already been pointed out to you over and over that explosives won't melt steel. At this point, I can only assume you are either illiterate or deliberately perpetuating a lie.

Let's bet this is what geggy is going to answer you with:

from Americanfreepress

"A “sharp spike of short duration” is how seismologist Thorne Lay of University of California at Santa Cruz told AFP an underground nuclear explosion appears on a seismograph."

 

[geggy]

Man, you're all over the place. Comparisons with Hitler and the nazis is the easiest exist. YOU ARE SINKING VERY LOW.

WORD OF ADVICE: I wouldn't sympathise with terrorists over the internet if I were you...

You missed the point. Hitler labelled the opposition party and dissents as terrorists just as george bush have been labelling the opposition party and the dissents as terrorists (or saddamists in his own words).

 

[delphi_ote]

You missed the point. Hitler labelled the opposition party and dissents as terrorists just as george bush have been labelling the opposition party and the dissents as terrorists (or saddamists in his own words).

Adolf Hitler was also male and so is George W. Bush! OMFG!

 

[Ramooone]

That bombs were planted in the basement of both wtcs to weaken the steel when it sets off and creates pool of molten steel after the collasping, thus the government covered it up.

Hence, cover up is a conspriacy.

Thank you geggy, that really explains how the buildings fell from the top down!

Geggy you're the only person whom i actually believe can throw a rock at the ground and miss.

 

[Euromutt]

Amerika was responsible of installing Saddam as a puppet in government of Iraq to obey america orders.

Rummy and Saddam meets...

[qimg]http://www.marxist.com/images/saddam_rumsfeld.jpg[/qimg]

Because of amerika's treachery, saddam decided to turn his back away to america's orders that lead to the toppling of saddam before ameica could install another puppet in the iraqi government.

Oh dear, that canard again. And by "again," I mean, "again in this very thread." Here's something I posted on page 10, in response to Alek's assertion that Saddam had been "a CIA asset for some 40 years":

Uh, no. After the 1968 coup, the Ba'athist regime fostered relations with the Soviet Union, culminating in the Iraqi-Soviet Friendship Treaty of April 1972. Subsequently, the Soviet Union and other Warsaw Pact member states sold the Iraqis all the weapons they wanted, from small arms through AFVs to fighter-bombers. In addition, the Ba'athists purchased training in surveillance and interrogation techniques for their security/intelligence services--the Estikhbarat (military intelligence), the Amn (state intelligence) and Mukhabarat (Ba'ath party intelligence)--from the Sovs and the East Germans in the 1970s. Many of those sales were on credit, too; by the time the Ba'athist government was toppled in 2003, it still owed billions of dollars to Russia.

Now, if PBS, UPI or some pajamahadin can "uncover" that Saddam was "a CIA asset" during that time, it's a reasonable assumption that the KGB could have done so as well. Does it seem plausible that the Sovs would provide billions in weaponry, on credit, and details of their own counter-intelligence methods, to a government whose vice-president, later president, was a CIA asset? The notion is laughable. Or it would be, if so many credulous idiots didn't buy into the idea.

In addition, it deserves pointing out that the US cut off diplomatic relations with the Ba'athist regime early on (log before Saddam ousted Abu Bakr and assumed the presidecy himself), and those relations remained severed until 1983. Pointing to that photograph of Rumsfeld meeting Saddam and claiming it shows that the US incited Iraq to go to war against Iran isn't even a post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy, it's a praeter hoc ergo propter hoc ("before this, therefore because of this") fallacy. The fact is that the US rekindled relations with Iraq only after Iran had declared that it would not be satisfied with restoration of the status quo ante, but that it intended to keep on fighting until the Ba'athist regime was deposed and replaced with a new government which was more friendly towards Iran.

It's also a matter of public record, if you can be bothered to look for it, what support the US actually gave Iraq during the war with Iran. The US sold (not, sold) Iraq military equipment, but none of it was weapons systems; rather, it was stuff like battlefield ambulances, unarmed helicopters and the like. The DIA provided intelligence on Iranian force dispositions, and in later stages even provided battle plans designed to take advantage of that intelligence. But that's about it; American policy was quite clearly intended to provide Iraq with the means to hold off Iran without actually providing it with anything that could be used against any other country in the region.

And note that, even after the 1983 meeting between Rumsfeld and Saddam, the Soviets continued to sell military hardware to Iraq, culminating in the sale in 1989-1990 of massive amounts of hardware which had become surplus to Soviet requirements following the withdrawal of Soviet forces from eastern Europe. Evidently, the Sovs found that photograph significantly less compelling evidence than conspiracy theorists do now. I'm constantly amazed by the tendency on the part of many anti-Iraq war/anti-Bush types to seize upon dribs and drabs of material from the 1980s and brandish them as if nobody had been previously aware of these things, and as if there were no other explanation for them but some post-9/11 conspiracy theory. Those of us who actually followed the news back in the 1980s (yes, we had news reporting before the internet!) have a hard time knowing how to respond, simply because the ignorance displayed is so breath-taking.

 

[Pardalis]

Thank you geggy, that really explains how the buildings fell from the top down!

Of course now geggy is going to explain to you that NUCLEAR explosions weakened the steel columns therefore the towers could collapse.

How am I doing geggy, am I a good conspiracist?

Geggy you're the only person whom i actually believe can throw a rock at the ground and miss.

LMAO!!!

 

[Regnad Kcin]

Our little friend is online as I write this, so let me try for the third time:

geggy, what do you do for a living?

And as a bonus, what was your major in college?

 

[bob_kark]

That bombs were planted in the basement of both wtcs to weaken the steel when it sets off and creates pool of molten steel after the collasping, thus the government covered it up.

Hence, cover up is a conspriacy.

Ok, lets take this one step at a time. What explosive leaves steel in a liquid state for several days?