The 100% Impossible 9/11 Inside Job

There's also no evidence to support an independent, outside job either.
Click to expand...


Sure there is. All you need to do is actually tell us what evidence YOU would accept, and we'll be happy to provide it, kiddo.

But we all know the answer to that, don't we?

None.

There is nothing we can say that will satisify you, because you're not here to learn or any of that silly stuff. You're here to prove how retarded a person can be and still operate a keyboard.
 
NoahFence said:
Sure there is. All you need to do is actually tell us what evidence YOU would accept, and we'll be happy to provide it, kiddo.
Click to expand...

Nope, there's obviously not, as none of you have been forthcoming with it. It seems to me that you guys are aware that your "evidence" is compromised, otherwise you wouldn't be so shy about presenting it.
 
NoahFence said:
That's because, junior, you haven't told us what you'd accept yet.
Click to expand...


He's basically saying that there's no evidence because he accepts none. Repeatedly asking him what evidence he would accept is pointless because the implicit answer is an unqualified "none".
 
SpringHallConvert said:
Nope, there's obviously not, as none of you have been forthcoming with it. It seems to me that you guys are aware that your "evidence" is compromised, otherwise you wouldn't be so shy about presenting it.
Click to expand...

In case you haven't noticed, the reason why we haven't played along is you won't accept anything we have to offer, so why even bother? It isn't worth the bandwidth I used to type this.

In short, your one trick is played out. You'll need to do better.
 
SpringHallConvert said:
Nope, there's obviously not, as none of you have been forthcoming with it. It seems to me that you guys are aware that your "evidence" is compromised, otherwise you wouldn't be so shy about presenting it.
Click to expand...

Now that you've racked up such an impressive string of personal victories, perhaps you'd like to answer my question about how the non 9/11 related areas of your life are going?
 
So what is true independent to you SpringHallConvert someone who has a track history of excellent journalism who actually does something and actually looks into it without the help of government, or is it only that someone who only believes what you believe based on conjecture and the *i have the government documents*.

If its only someone who believes what you believe how do you believe he/she/it is not lying, since you said yourself they can all be working to gain, control, or manipulate the evidence provided. you look to a speculation as proof when there isn't evidence that's like saying your a murderer without the conclusive evidence to be provided.


Tell me what kind of evidence appeals to you?
 
Last edited:
Northwoods, apparently, despite most of the primary sources on that being directly and provably from the government, and being declassified since 1997, and publishlished by the NSA in 2001.

He has a source that the government itself released, relating directly to government activities, and no problem. Meanwhile, every source of evidence on Al Qaeda or OBL or 9/11 is tainted.
 
000063 said:
Northwoods, apparently, despite most of the primary sources on that being directly and provably from the government, and being declassified since 1997, and publishlished by the NSA in 2001.

He has a source that the government itself released, relating directly to government activities, and no problem. Meanwhile, every source of evidence on Al Qaeda or OBL or 9/11 is tainted.
Click to expand...

Naturally. Details of the Northwoods plan came out over 30 years after the fact. Every notable person involved was either long dead or completely out of government. By that time, there was hardly anything left to protect, other than the reputation of the U.S. government.

This isn't the case with 9/11. That event is still highly relevant in a geopolitical, historical, and other related current events context. The government still has to a lot to protect, including former members of the government involved in carrying out the 9/11 crime.

Therefore, your meager protest is rejected.
 
000063 said:
Northwoods, apparently, despite most of the primary sources on that being directly and provably from the government, and being declassified since 1997, and publishlished by the NSA in 2001.

He has a source that the government itself released, relating directly to government activities, and no problem. Meanwhile, every source of evidence on Al Qaeda or OBL or 9/11 is tainted.
Click to expand...

He has no clue his logic failed. The only theory he has it the Jews did it. Offering zero evidence, he is using nonsense to support delusions he can't define.

Northwoods, evidence supplied by the evil government, proves the evil government failed safe, and decided not to do stupid stuff. He debunks himself, and he likes to spread lies, when he is not posting claptrap about nothing. 911 truth, using the same evidence used to prove Bigfoot is running around.
 
SpringHallConvert said:
Naturally. Details of the Northwoods plan came out over 30 years after the fact. Every notable person involved was either long dead or completely out of government. By that time, there was hardly anything left to protect, other than the reputation of the U.S. government.

This isn't the case with 9/11. That event is still highly relevant in a geopolitical, historical, and other related current events context. The government still has to a lot to protect, including former members of the government involved in carrying out the 9/11 crime.
Click to expand...

Why does the government, which according to you doesn't care about protecting its own reputation, care about protecting former members of the government?

(I don't really expect a reasonable answer; I'm just dying to see what you come up with.)
 
SpringHallConvert said:
Naturally. Details of the Northwoods plan came out over 30 years after the fact. Every notable person involved was either long dead or completely out of government. By that time, there was hardly anything left to protect, other than the reputation of the U.S. government.

.
Click to expand...

Why do you believe the "Northwood plan" was ever really conceived?

The source is the Government and they always lie, right?

Your "Northwood" claim is rejected due to it's source?

Try again.
 
DGM said:
Why do you believe the "Northwood plan" was ever really conceived?

The source is the Government and they always lie, right?

Your "Northwood" claim is rejected due to it's source?

Try again.
Click to expand...

I think I see where he's going with this.

The government only lies when it has a reason to lie.

So how do you tell when they're lying? Presumably, if they had a reason to lie, they'd lie about it.

The solution is simple: The government is evil, and only does bad things.

Therefore, if the government says they did a bad thing, then they are telling the truth. If they say they didn't do a bad thing, they are lying.

By this logic, we can assume that the government lies by ommission all the time. For instance, since they have not said they are selling powdered orphans as an aphrodesiac in third-world countries, then you can be assured they are doing just that. They're just that evil.
 
aggle-rithm said:
For instance, since they have not said they are selling powdered orphans as an aphrodesiac in third-world countries, then you can be assured they are doing just that. They're just that evil.
Click to expand...
Oh, my FSM! Really? Orphans? Powdered? :eek:

You're right, they have not said they did that! That confirms it! Evil, evil guvmint. :mad:

Thanks for the excellent explanation of the quality of SHC's arguments.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom