Merged 9/11 CT subforum General Discussion Thread

[JihadJane]

... Just a few from that one thread where I tried to engage you in debate about your claims regarding 7/7 and you played games, ran away and tried to be a smartmouth. Then you come crying in here saying I am rude to you?

Hypocrite much?

Thanks for letting me know about your tongue in your cheek. I'd never have guessed but will look out for it in the future. You have brought up the thread you refer to in various random places since. It obviously offended you deeply. It went leftfield for me when I graciously conceded a mistake only to witness you jumping up and down on my grave like a demented cartoon bully, metaphorically speaking.

It is strange to me that you then assumed I would continue to dance meekly to your tune, though not so strange that you got so upset and outraged when I didn't! The latter is what I expect from habitual bullies.

BTW: I consider your last sentence: "Then you come crying in here saying I am rude to you?" to be cartoon schoolboy bully-speak. We obviously have very different ideas of what constitutes verbal thuggery.

Perhaps you could make use of the emoticons to help avoid any further misunderstandings e.g.:

"Then you come crying in here saying I am rude to you? "

 

[funk de fino]

Thanks for letting me know about your tongue in your cheek. I'd never have guessed but will look out for it in the future. You have brought up the thread you refer to in various random places since. It obviously offended you deeply. It went leftfield for me when I graciously conceded a mistake only to witness you jumping up and down on my grave like a demented cartoon bully, metaphorically speaking.

It is strange to me that you then assumed I would continue to dance meekly to your tune, though not so strange that you got so upset and outraged when I didn't! The latter is what I expect from habitual bullies.

BTW: I consider your last sentence: "Then you come crying in here saying I am rude to you?" to be cartoon schoolboy bully-speak. We obviously have very different ideas of what constitutes verbal thuggery.

Perhaps you could make use of the emoticons to help avoid any further misunderstandings e.g.:

"Then you come crying in here saying I am rude to you? "

Show me where you conceded that you made a mistake about the emergency drills, the cctv images, evidence in the public domain and the incorrect claims of almost immediate naming of suspects.

You ignored the drills once I pointed out the true nature of them.

You tapdanced and moved goalposts on the CCTV images and evidence in the public domain

You ignored the fact I showed your claims about immediate naming to be incorrect

Even if you had conceded all your mistakes it would never have been graciously.

You even forgot there had been a court case where evidence was shown.

The last statement was not tounge in cheek. You act like a child and take the cream puff when I ask you questions or show you to be incorrect. If its your football and you want to go home with it then fine but it does nothing for your credibility.

As I suspected, you cannot show me where I have been consistently rude and abusive to you. I showed many more where I took it from you first and did not cry about it. These were only pulled here to prove a point, not to complain.

 

[T.A.M.]

bump, to remind people that not every thought that crosses your mind needs its own thread (noticed that the new thread count for minor, and often remotely relevant issues, is up last 1-2 days).

TAM

 

[TexasJack]

I only came here for some fresh air after viewing this thread
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=128473

Now I feel better

 

[JoeyDonuts]

I only came here for some fresh air after viewing this thread
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=128473

Now I feel better

Really? I had to drop a massive deuce and bean myself in the head with a mallet to decompress from all of that kooky Belgian anti-Semitism.

 

[T.A.M.]

yes, I found the ignore function to help tremendously with that.

TAM

 

[HyJinX]

Is anybody else getting completely bored with the 9/11 "inside job" topic? I haven't posted much in the last few weeks. Whenever I stop by...it's the same old stuff that has been posted about for weeks and weeks. Pizza Boxes. Lightpoles. NoC. Blah...blah...blah. It seems as though every topic has been covered by both sides in every way imaginable...with a few exceptions of course...like facts and stuff. The regular truthers can be counted on two hands. They offer nothing new or interesting. The debunkers have regurgetated the same information time and time again without penetrating the thick and dense skulls of those they appose. This place used to be mind stimulating...but that was long ago.

Any thoughts?

 

[Dave Rogers]

Any thoughts?

Dude, that argument is so 2007. This year it's even worse.

Dave

 

[TexasJack]

Is anybody else getting completely bored with the 9/11 "inside job" topic? I haven't posted much in the last few weeks. Whenever I stop by...it's the same old stuff that has been posted about for weeks and weeks. Pizza Boxes. Lightpoles. NoC. Blah...blah...blah. It seems as though every topic has been covered by both sides in every way imaginable...with a few exceptions of course...like facts and stuff. The regular truthers can be counted on two hands. They offer nothing new or interesting. The debunkers have regurgetated the same information time and time again without penetrating the thick and dense skulls of those they appose. This place used to be mind stimulating...but that was long ago.

Any thoughts?

I agree, most of the stuff that has been posted has come from the extreme end of the truther spectrum (the thought of that is mind-boggling, I know), in particular the no-planers. The absurdity of their ideas, for me, is just worth viewing for a few laughs.

 

[T.A.M.]

Is anybody else getting completely bored with the 9/11 "inside job" topic? I haven't posted much in the last few weeks. Whenever I stop by...it's the same old stuff that has been posted about for weeks and weeks. Pizza Boxes. Lightpoles. NoC. Blah...blah...blah. It seems as though every topic has been covered by both sides in every way imaginable...with a few exceptions of course...like facts and stuff. The regular truthers can be counted on two hands. They offer nothing new or interesting. The debunkers have regurgetated the same information time and time again without penetrating the thick and dense skulls of those they appose. This place used to be mind stimulating...but that was long ago.

Any thoughts?

I completely agree. I come here now, out of boredom more than anything else. I like other areas of the forum now, so I have reasons to stay, but posting here is really pointless, as there is nothing new.

TAM

 

[MikeW]

There's the possibility of some new topics next year, as the 9/11 Commission documents will be unsealed in around 8 weeks. And we might get some interesting exhibits released for the various Guantanamo trials, too. So I think things might revive for a while, just a few months, until that effect wears off and most people give up the topic for good.

 

[TexasJack]

There's the possibility of some new topics next year, as the 9/11 Commission documents will be unsealed in around 8 weeks. And we might get some interesting exhibits released for the various Guantanamo trials, too. So I think things might revive for a while, just a few months, until that effect wears off and most people give up the topic for good.

Yes, this will definitely interest me, and with Obama hinting on getting many of these trials moving, 2009 could prove intriguing.

 

[RedIbis]

There's the possibility of some new topics next year, as the 9/11 Commission documents will be unsealed in around 8 weeks. And we might get some interesting exhibits released for the various Guantanamo trials, too. So I think things might revive for a while, just a few months, until that effect wears off and most people give up the topic for good.

Just out of curiosity do you expect those trials to end in convictions?

 

[JihadJane]

Show me where you conceded that you made a mistake about the emergency drills, the cctv images, evidence in the public domain and the incorrect claims of almost immediate naming of suspects.

I conceded a point about cctv clips having been shown in court which I'd forgotten about. You reacted in your usual gentlemanly manner!

You ignored the drills once I pointed out the true nature of them.

I considered your explanation a non-sequitur and self negating.

You tapdanced and moved goalposts on the CCTV images and evidence in the public domain

My position was and is that no cctv images have been put in the public domain placing the alleged bombers in London on the day of the attacks

You ignored the fact I showed your claims about immediate naming to be incorrect

True. That was my response to your frenetic hectoring.

Even if you had conceded all your mistakes it would never have been graciously.

I conceded the point about cctv evidence having been shown in court perfectly graciously.

You even forgot there had been a court case where evidence was shown.

True. I conceded this point (graciously! ).

The last statement was not tounge in cheek. You act like a child and take the cream puff when I ask you questions or show you to be incorrect. If its your football and you want to go home with it then fine but it does nothing for your credibility.

You believe your own perceptions uncritically.

As I suspected, you cannot show me where I have been consistently rude and abusive to you. I showed many more where I took it from you first and did not cry about it. These were only pulled here to prove a point, not to complain.

There is no need as you have provided examples yourself in your comments in this thread.

I don't consider my responses particularly rude, just a little bit cheeky sometimes in response to your S&M dom game-playing.

 

[JimBenArm]

I completely agree. I come here now, out of boredom more than anything else. I like other areas of the forum now, so I have reasons to stay, but posting here is really pointless, as there is nothing new.

TAM

I still read some threads in here, and made my first post in probably two weeks in here. It's become a wasteland. There's just nothing in here any more, even of comedic value!

 

[twinstead]

Oh I don't know. Just about everything has SOME comedic value.

 

[MikeW]

Just out of curiosity do you expect those trials to end in convictions?

I think it's more likely than not, yes, especially for people like Binalshibh (there's plenty of evidence revealed about him already, for example in the Moussaoui trial). But I wouldn't completely rule out some surprises, if say Obama opts to run trials in criminal courts & the defence can get enough evidence thrown out. My guess is he won't go that far, but even using the military court martial system will pose some problems. It's going to be a dilemma.

 

[funk de fino]

I conceded a point about cctv clips having been shown in court which I'd forgotten about. You reacted in your usual gentlemanly manner!

See below.

I considered your explanation a non-sequitur and self negating.

You were wrong and you ignored it

My position was and is that no cctv images have been put in the public domain placing the alleged bombers in London on the day of the attacks

You were wrong and you moved the goalposts when shown them

True. That was my response to your frenetic hectoring.

The fact that you ran away from your incorrect claim and could not back it up. Thats your MO is it? Just ignore incorrect claims and continue to make more.

I conceded the point about cctv evidence having been shown in court perfectly graciously.

One time, after this reply to my post that gave you all the links showing you were wrong.

What's the matter? Have you lost your twooferometer?

Gracious? You did not even acknowledge them.

then your gracious reply was

I knew about the court evidence but forgot.

Gracious?

True. I conceded this point (graciously! ).

Linked to above

You believe your own perceptions uncritically.

Lie

There is no need as you have provided examples yourself in your comments in this thread.

Lie again

I don't consider my responses particularly rude, just a little bit cheeky sometimes in response to your S&M dom game-playing.

Hypocritical and irrelevant.

Tell you what, make some claims that are based in reality and fact and you can turn this around. If you make false claims you will get called on them and not be expected to run away from them because you have made yourself look silly.

Not quite got the hang of the no claimers game yet have you. Getting there though. Not be long.

 

[MikeW]

Good news! Maybe. The Secret Service FOIA office say they sent something to me on Monday re: my request for Norman Mineta's 9/11 entries from the White House visitor logs. It's probably either a "thanks for your request, we'll get back to you one day" letter, or maybe "no you can't have that because...", but there's a small chance that in a day or two I'll have actual documentary evidence of when he arrived at the White House. Which would be a very nice early Christmas present.

 

[T.A.M.]

Glad to see you still plugging away Mike.

Look forward to seeing these, as well as anything else that FOIA requests obtain.

TAM