The 9/11 Conspiracy Facts

mjd1982 said:
I have bought 1 book on 911 Truth, and that was about 1 mth ago to support the London movement. So tell me how I am being exploited?
Click to expand...

By handing over money for lies.

Someone is making a profit off you, by taking advantage of your gullibility and lying to you to get your money. How is that not exploitation?

And yes, you are right. Many people in TM are selling stuff. That is correct. Now, tell me how this means that the TM is driven by financial gain. This will be your 4th(?) attempt?
Click to expand...

Umm 2nd attempt I believe.

Because it is the people who are making the financial gains that are driving the Truth Movement. It isn't the deluded schmucks who buy the lies that are driving the "movement", it's the Alex Joneses, David Ray Griffins and Dylan Averys who are in it for the money. They set the agenda, they drive the movement (such as it is) and they make the profits .

This really shouldn't be too difficult for you to work out mjd.
 
mjd1982 said:
Learn to distinguish between design and execution
Click to expand...

All right, genius. Here's a question.

How would the situation differ between case a) PNAC executed 9/11 and b) PNAC didn't execute 9/11?

These two cases are exactly the same - military spending on technology has not increased to their liking. Thus your claim is utterly unfalsifiable, which is pretty typical of your conspiratorial thinking. (cf. "The proof of a cover up is that it's been covered up").
 
Last edited by a moderator:
mjd1982 said:
As I said to the other dude, learn the difference between "quickly" and "quicker" (vite/ plus rapide)
Click to expand...

You have no idea what you're talking about. It hasn't happened yet, so you don't even know if it'll be "quicker" (plus rapide) anyway.

The transformation will take a long time. You cannot militarise space in a day. Do you understand this?
Click to expand...

So how do you know if it'll be "quicker" (plus rapide) ? How do you know it won't be "slower" (plus lent) ?

With the aid of a new PH, and the creation of a wartime environment, extra urgency will be put on military policy, and thus extra impetus will be provided to such transformations. Thus they will happen quicker.
Click to expand...

Only in your fantasy world, because in reality none of this is actually happening.

Learn to distinguish between design and execution
Click to expand...

If you're only designing, then any discussion about the execution is irrelevant.
 
mjd1982 said:
No, some of your "ilk" flailed at explaining 1 point in #750, failing to show how such testimony does not suffice as evidence. There were 3 other points.

This should have been very simple to understand.
Click to expand...
Again, yes it's simple to understand and again, you are 100% wrong. You have yet to prove that his testimony has any credibility, therefore it does not qualify as evidence. Your refusal to acknowledge this does not make it wrong, but does make your contention that we failed dishonest. You have yet to prove that the not acting on the 40 threats and warnings in a way that appeases you is an unusual occurrence just like you have failed to show the that the PNAC's new PH is propitious to any policy. You failure to acknowledge this goes hand in hand with your failure to acknowledge that there is no cover up by FT about the WTC power down and your failure to acknowledge the "TM's" extremely dishonest move to convolute Scott's story into something completely different.

BTW, in your case, ignore and duck are the same thing since when any one of us ignore your posts, you accuse us of not having the courage to respond. Then again, even when we do respond, you wait until the response is many pages back and you then accuse us of failing to respond in any way. Then, when we show you that we did indeed respond, you modify your statement with your mythical "sensible" clause even though your meaning of sensible is an ever changing definition that we are supposed to somehow know from one post to another. Your continued tactics of moving goalposts, lying, bending space and time and acknowledgment that you may be wrong is extremely dishonest. Yet we are supposed to take your word at face value. Well, someday you may grow up to realize that the world does not work that way.
 
mjd1982 said:
Oh, excuse me. So the driving force behind the movement is money. What is your proof/basis for saying this?
Click to expand...

mjd1982 said:
So people sell DVDs and aprons. Tell me how this proves that the driving force behind the movement is selling such.
Click to expand...

How much of that money has been spent on a new investigation?

Dylan Avery says that over 50,000 copies of LC have been sold. SOURCE
50,000 DVDs at $17.95 apice, that's $897,500.
(This is not including sales of the soundtrack, sweatshirts, t-shirts or other merchandise, any money from advertising from their radio shows, or advertisements on their website, or any funding provided by Alex Jones et all for LCFC, or from the Virgin Airlines debacle)
 
mjd1982 said:
Oh, so inference is admissible to debate when you want it, is that right?

Aside from that hypocrisy, all you have done is show that figures in the movement are selling stuff. You have to make the connection betweem this, and your assertion that the TM is "driven by financial gain". You wont.
Click to expand...

The connection there is far more clear than your conclusions regarding the PNAC document.

mjd1982 said:
Understand the difference between ignoring and ducking, this will resolve your confusion.
Click to expand...

Okay, you've platypussed several of my posts.
1241706L.jpg


mjd1982 said:
Please dont be facile. The implication in Scotts charge is clear, otherwise we wouldnt be debating it. (snip).
Click to expand...

Wrong, wrong, wrong.

I've explained it to you so many times on the SLC forum.

If the implication were so clear-cut there would be no need for debate.

The reason there's debate on the issue is due to the ambiguity. Has that not sunk in yet, njd1982?

mjd1982 said:
2. Borat is a creation of Cohen- if he is racist, then Cohen would have to be too
Click to expand...

Using that logic, Thomas Harris, author of BLACK SUNDAY, RED DRAGON, SILENCE OF THE LAMBS, etc., is a canniballistic serial-killer.

[nsfw]
Stephanie Seymour:

1241704L.jpg


All-in.[/nsfw]
 
Brainache said:
By handing over money for lies.

Someone is making a profit off you, by taking advantage of your gullibility and lying to you to get your money. How is that not exploitation?



Umm 2nd attempt I believe.

Because it is the people who are making the financial gains that are driving the Truth Movement. It isn't the deluded schmucks who buy the lies that are driving the "movement", it's the Alex Joneses, David Ray Griffins and Dylan Averys who are in it for the money. They set the agenda, they drive the movement (such as it is) and they make the profits .

This really shouldn't be too difficult for you to work out mjd.
Click to expand...
Sorry, whose agenda am I following?

You have yet to
a) Show that Avery, Jones et al are getting rich of the TM
b) Show that this illustrates that the driving force behind the TM is this financial gain.

This is pretty poor logic. I could equally say that Chomsky does what he does for financial gain, not to spread his thoughts.

Of course, you will say that all these people are lying, and NC isnt.Well, 2 problems there
1- Its what we are debating
2- You will have to prove that they are consciously lying. I think David Icke's reptilian spiel is insane, but I'm sure he believes it. So you will have to show, 3rd attempt, that this is all the case.

You can give up any time yuo want
 
volatile said:
All right, genius. Here's a question.

How would the situation differ between case a) PNAC executed 9/11 and b) PNAC didn't execute 9/11?

These two cases are exactly the same - military spending on technology has not increased to their liking. Thus your claim is utterly unfalsifiable, which is pretty typical of your conspiratorial thinking. (cf. "The proof of a cover up is that it's been covered up").
Click to expand...
So you havent understood.

Let me give you an example of the difference, one which no one in your movement has come upon to understand, betweem design and execution.

PNAC have their plan to have a new PH, start the never ending WOT, and get a load of money for these military radicalisations. That is the design. They get the new PH. They get a load of money. They embark upon one element of the WOT, namely the occupation and control of Iraq and its oil fields. They overthrow Saddam, and then they start to do stupid things, like firing the entire Iraqi army, Abu Ghraib, and more. This creates resentment, a quagmire, and a war that ends up taking all the resources from the US, and stopping development of the other programs. This is the execution.

Further they cannot withdraw, since they would lose direct control of what they invaded for, even if this might free up more funds for other things.

Hence the difference betweem design and execution. Make sure you tell all your friends.
 
Belz... said:
You have no idea what you're talking about. It hasn't happened yet, so you don't even know if it'll be "quicker" (plus rapide) anyway.



So how do you know if it'll be "quicker" (plus rapide) ? How do you know it won't be "slower" (plus lent) ?



Only in your fantasy world, because in reality none of this is actually happening.



If you're only designing, then any discussion about the execution is irrelevant.
Click to expand...
Lente- la transformation
 
lapman said:
Again, yes it's simple to understand and again, you are 100% wrong. You have yet to prove that his testimony has any credibility, therefore it does not qualify as evidence.
Click to expand...

good. So you believe that the testimony of the middleman in discussions between the US and the Taliban about killing OBL, is worthless in a debate about discussions between the US and the Taliban about killing OBL.

Back in the real world, this is called key testimony. You may dispute it, but it is key testimony, and would be central to any case about Bush's "failures" to stop 911

lapman said:
You have yet to prove that the not acting on the 40 threats and warnings in a way that appeases you is an unusual occurrence
Click to expand...

He was warned once in every 4 days that OBL was plotting to attack the US. All 40 times he did nothing. If you are happy with that sort of behaviour from your president, then you too are a negligent member of the electorate.

lapman said:
just like you have failed to show the that the PNAC's new PH is propitious to any policy.
Click to expand...

Lol, you ignoring it doesnt mean that it hasnt been shown. Btw, though you may well be closing your eyes, this is being show on this page

lapman said:
You failure to acknowledge this goes hand in hand with your failure to acknowledge that there is no cover up by FT about the WTC power down and your failure to acknowledge the "TM's" extremely dishonest move to convolute Scott's story into something completely different.
Click to expand...

WTF???

Where has his story been convoluted? You were trying to say that the TM werent even aware of his story, that it was just me! ROFL Get off them pills mate!

The 1st part, well, I have asked people to explain why he hasnt been sacked for implicating his employers in a 911 cover up. No one has. Surprise surprise!

lapman said:
BTW, in your case, ignore and duck are the same thing since when any one of us ignore your posts, you accuse us of not having the courage to respond. Then again, even when we do respond, you wait until the response is many pages back and you then accuse us of failing to respond in any way. Then, when we show you that we did indeed respond, you modify your statement with your mythical "sensible" clause even though your meaning of sensible is an ever changing definition that we are supposed to somehow know from one post to another. Your continued tactics of moving goalposts, lying, bending space and time and acknowledgment that you may be wrong is extremely dishonest. Yet we are supposed to take your word at face value. Well, someday you may grow up to realize that the world does not work that way.
Click to expand...

I dont mind when someone doesnt respond to me. But when I go on and on and on at people to respond, and no one does, that is ducking.
 
nicepants said:
How much of that money has been spent on a new investigation?

Dylan Avery says that over 50,000 copies of LC have been sold. SOURCE
50,000 DVDs at $17.95 apice, that's $897,500.
(This is not including sales of the soundtrack, sweatshirts, t-shirts or other merchandise, any money from advertising from their radio shows, or advertisements on their website, or any funding provided by Alex Jones et all for LCFC, or from the Virgin Airlines debacle)
Click to expand...
There has been no investigation, what is there to pay for? There can only be a new investigation with congressional approval as I have said
 
mjd1982 said:
I dont mind when someone doesnt respond to me. But when I go on and on and on at people to respond, and no one does, that is ducking.
Click to expand...

Now see, you did exactly what he told you you were doing. You accuse others of not responding to your posts when they have, and when it's pointed out to you, you simply say "well, it's not sensible".

Then after a few pages goes by, you start again with the 'no one responds to me' spiel.

What's funny is that in response to a post that you even quoted that called you on it, you STILL DID IT.
 
mjd1982 said:
Sorry, whose agenda am I following?

You have yet to
a) Show that Avery, Jones et al are getting rich of the TM
b) Show that this illustrates that the driving force behind the TM is this financial gain.

This is pretty poor logic. I could equally say that Chomsky does what he does for financial gain, not to spread his thoughts.
Click to expand...

I have no problem with letting the wealthy keep most of their wealth myself, but Chomsky is a man who claims to be opposed to this and yet goes to great lengths to place himself in the company of those he claims to despise: we aren't talking of a liberal sitting back and enjoying tax cuts handed down by the Bush administration here, but an advocate of extreme left-wing equalitarianism who went out of his way to find tax specialists to help him take advantage of every dodge and loophole possible, indulging in the very shenanigans he himself has condemned as "greedy" and "immoral", and if that doesn't meet the textbook definition of hypocrisy, nothing does. One should either be willing to live according to the principles one preaches to others, or one should stop preaching them altogether.
Noam Chomsky is a Hypocrite
Click to expand...

Belz... said:
Lent- le changement.

Si tu veux m'en apprendre sur ma langue maternelle, tu ferais mieux de t'atteler.
Click to expand...

possédé
 
twinstead said:
Now see, you did exactly what he told you you were doing. You accuse others of not responding to your posts when they have, and when it's pointed out to you, you simply say "well, it's not sensible".

Then after a few pages goes by, you start again with the 'no one responds to me' spiel.

What's funny is that in response to a post that you even quoted that called you on it, you STILL DID IT.
Click to expand...

Reminds me of a conversation with someone:

Me: That's very annoying. Why do you keep doing [something] ?
Person: Well, YOU do it too!
Me: See ? That's your standard defense to everything, you always say that.
Person: Well, so do YOU!

:rolleyes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom