Debate (not debase) a Truther

BillyRayValentine said:
And let's remember that this isn't just a tally of people keeping a secret. It's a tally of knowing participants in mass murder plus some number of unwitting pawns who were duped into playing a role in mass murder, and who surely must have figured this out after the fact. So it's basically a list of mass murderers and those who unknowingly abetted mass murder and are unwilling to come forward and blow the lid off.

When I think about the bad guys putting together this list, i.e. the "9/11 team," I can't help but burst out laughing. The belief that it would be possible to assemble a team of thousands of mass murderers, in complete secrecy, no less, is baffling in its stupidity.
Click to expand...

What's baffling in its stupidity is anyone assuming that the plot was constructed in this way. I already circumvented your point with a little known tactic callled compartmentalization.

You've been duh-bunked. Come again.

JREF, what a dissapointment...
 
ImANiceGuy said:
What's baffling in its stupidity is anyone assuming that the plot was constructed in this way. I already circumvented your point with a little known tactic callled compartmentalization.

You've been duh-bunked. Come again.

JREF, what a dissapointment...
Click to expand...

Thousands of people were involved with 9/11 on day one. Many of these people would need unique scripts in their hands the day before. These scripts would tell people to to commit federal crimes (lying, faking evidence, etc) without explaining the big picture.

Nobody complained before or after.

An estimated 70,000 people were involved in total. Many of them would need custom scripts. Any of them could see that what they saw differed with what was reported in the news that day and ask why. These news stories became the archives that became the standards story for the events of 9/11. The archives still exist for anyone that wants to read them.

None of those 70,000 saw any discrepancies.
 
ImANiceGuy said:
What's baffling in its stupidity is anyone assuming that the plot was constructed in this way. I already circumvented your point with a little known tactic callled compartmentalization.

You've been duh-bunked. Come again.

JREF, what a dissapointment...
Click to expand...

and yet you have not accomplished anything you said you would, its been almost nine years, nine, where is all this info you said you would be posting as soon as you had time? well darn son get to moving post it already, I am tired of reading about your french, whether it is inept or not is not up to me, I will leave it to the people who have already corrected you in that arena, this is your thread, what exactly did you want to debate??????? what a failure..deposit in circular file with all of the other twoof garbage.
 
ImANiceGuy said:
You've been duh-bunked.
Click to expand...
You just can't imagine how clever that is. I slap my knee and double over in laughter each time I read that. Doesn't matter if it's you or the other CTists, it never fails to amuse. I think if you repeat it some more, I may just abandon logic and reason, discard the evidence and gouge out 2/3 of my brain with a dull spatula so I can be as clever as you guys.
 
DavidJames said:
You just can't imagine how clever that is. I slap my knee and double over in laughter each time I read that. Doesn't matter if it's you or the other CTists, it never fails to amuse. I think if you repeat it some more, I may just abandon logic and reason, discard the evidence and gouge out 2/3 of my brain with a dull spatula so I can be as clever as you guys.
Click to expand...

kind of reminds you of Dorothy and her red shoes, doesn't it. Except there is no returning to Kansas for the truthers, no matter how much they repeat their canards.

TAM:)
 
ImANiceGuy said:
I'm welcoming any questions, and will pose a few of my own. I hope we can all remain civil.
Click to expand...

ImANiceGuy said:
What's baffling in its stupidity is anyone assuming that the plot was constructed in this way. I already circumvented your point with a little known tactic callled compartmentalization.

You've been duh-bunked. Come again.

JREF, what a dissapointment...
Click to expand...

Nice job remaining civil there, IANG.

Dave
 
ImANiceGuy said:
What's baffling in its stupidity is anyone assuming that the plot was constructed in this way. I already circumvented your point with a little known tactic callled compartmentalization.

You've been duh-bunked. Come again.

JREF, what a dissapointment...
Click to expand...

Well then, perhaps you can be the first truther ever to actually give your personal idea of exactly how the plot was carried out. 70,000+ people were involved with the events of that day, nearly all of whom would have had to willingly hide/alter evidence, lie to reporters and the American people, and participate in the murder of nearly 3000 people with nary a qualm. And then keep their silence for nearly 9 years, without ONE SINGLE member coming forward to blow the conspiracy wide open. Surely you can see the ludicrousness of that idea.
 
Sabrina said:
Well then, perhaps you can be the first truther ever to actually give your personal idea of exactly how the plot was carried out. 70,000+ people were involved with the events of that day, nearly all of whom would have had to willingly hide/alter evidence, lie to reporters and the American people, and participate in the murder of nearly 3000 people with nary a qualm. And then keep their silence for nearly 9 years, without ONE SINGLE member coming forward to blow the conspiracy wide open. Surely you can see the ludicrousness of that idea.
Click to expand...

Man, if a person could perceive ludicrousness, he wouldn't be a truther. Insensitivity to what makes things ludicrous is part of what makes them truthers to begin with.
 
ImANiceGuy said:
What's baffling in its stupidity is anyone assuming that the plot was constructed in this way. I already circumvented your point with a little known tactic callled compartmentalization.

You've been duh-bunked. Come again.

JREF, what a dissapointment...
Click to expand...

Anyone here speak moron? I'm gonna need a moron-to-english translation of the above, please.

Thanks in advance.
 
Last edited:
Sabrina said:
Well then, perhaps you can be the first truther ever to actually give your personal idea of exactly how the plot was carried out. 70,000+ people were involved with the events of that day, nearly all of whom would have had to willingly hide/alter evidence, lie to reporters and the American people, and participate in the murder of nearly 3000 people with nary a qualm. And then keep their silence for nearly 9 years, without ONE SINGLE member coming forward to blow the conspiracy wide open. Surely you can see the ludicrousness of that idea.
Click to expand...

They all compartmentalized. That's what allowed IANG to "circumvent" my point. That and a staggering intellect.
 
BillyRayValentine said:
Anyone here speak moron? I'm gonna need a moron-to-english translation of the above, please.

Thanks in advance.
Click to expand...

Translation:

When you have shown me wrong and explained why I am wrong, I just throw back an allegation that is a mirror image of your conclusion. Thinking 'take that, debunk-ah' is the first step in dealing with the cognitive dissonance your argument induced in me. The second step is making myself believe I have a very clever way of countering your argument. In addition to resolving the cognitive dissonance, this helps me to maintain and reinforce my self-image of being intellectually superior to you.
The cognitive dissonance is now fully resolved, my ego reinforced and I therefore claim victory.

You see.. Moron is not a too difficult language. The important part is getting to know what make those that speak Moron tick. What make the native speakers tick is easy to learn; their clockwork is very simple. You will get the hang of it very quickly. Then you will be able to decipher Moron yourself.
 
BillyRayValentine said:
Anyone here speak moron? I'm gonna need a moron-to-english translation of the above, please.

Thanks in advance.
Click to expand...

Actually, it's pretty simple. Whatever a 9/11 denier utters, whether it be a 3,000 word rant or a single letter, always translates to the exact same thing:

"Nu-uh!!"
 
Thank you all for your insightful comments. Especially Dave who was kind enough to remind me that I asked for civility hypocritically.

I'll take all your insults as concessions...
 
ImANiceGuy said:
What's baffling in its stupidity is anyone assuming that the plot was constructed in this way. I already circumvented your point with a little known tactic callled compartmentalization.

You've been duh-bunked. Come again.

JREF, what a dissapointment...
Click to expand...
Once more, with feeling...

Any supposed "inside job" with respect to the events of 9/11 isn't just unlikely, or maybe a real long shot, but could happen, hey, you never know. The reality is that such a thing, as suggested, is 100% impossible.

It doesn't get any more not possible than 100%, so why go on? What's your agenda? I'm curious.
 
ImANiceGuy said:
What's baffling in its stupidity is anyone assuming that the plot was constructed in this way. I already circumvented your point with a little known tactic callled compartmentalization.

You've been duh-bunked. Come again.

JREF, what a dissapointment...
Click to expand...
See, here's the thing: all you have to do to shut up the big, bad ol' JREF skeptics is present proof of what you are suggesting. Evidence. Considering any "inside job" on the scale of 9/11 would leave countless amounts, both large and small, of physical evidence, paper trails, eyewitnesses, participants, and on and on...why, the mind reels.

Questions are not evidence. Things looking funny and seeming suspicious to you does not constitute evidence. You know what evidence is. That you cannot provide it should suggest something to you.
 
Regnad Kcin said:
Once more, with feeling...

Any supposed "inside job" with respect to the events of 9/11 isn't just unlikely, or maybe a real long shot, but could happen, hey, you never know. The reality is that such a thing, as suggested, is 100% impossible.

It doesn't get any more not possible than 100%, so why go on? What's your agenda? I'm curious.
Click to expand...


Regnad Kcin said:
See, here's the thing: all you have to do to shut up the big, bad ol' JREF skeptics is present proof of what you are suggesting. Evidence. Considering any "inside job" on the scale of 9/11 would leave countless amounts, both large and small, of physical evidence, paper trails, eyewitnesses, participants, and on and on...why, the mind reels.

Questions are not evidence. Things looking funny and seeming suspicious to you does not constitute evidence. You know what evidence is. That you cannot provide it should suggest something to you.
Click to expand...

Your advanced knowledge of probability theory is staggering. What else in this world is 100% "not possible"?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom