• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Cindy Approaches the Twoof

So I should just let lying liars who lie about 9/11 go unchallenged because a person like you might think I vote differently to the way I actually do?
Not bloody likely.

BTW The expression is "Tarred by the same brush" not tarnished.
 
William Rea said:
I spend most of my time over at the real Politics forum now having been subjected to the politics of this forum. The range of views over there is good and the people on the whole are "civil and polite" in the spirit of the way JREF is advertised.

The Conspiracy forum has a rabidly orthodox politics which likes to think of itself as libertarian but beneath the veneer is simply bullying and intolerant.

If you don't like being tarnished with the same brush then stop posting here is my suggestion (not my command).
Click to expand...

Yes, it requires logic, reason, and facts; which are absent in the 9/11 truth movement of lies, fiction and fraud.

Take your orthodox politics and your CT ideas to the cult meeting on 9/11 truth that should be called 9/11 fraud/lie movement. So you seem to have drank the Kool-aid of the truth movement, yet you only have opinions in fight of facts. The CT movement promotes lies, not the truth about 9/11.

The CT world wants to talk and spread lies. Why would anyone support lies about 9/11 thru veiled statements like you make? Are you a fact challenged 9/11 truther?

Yes bullies for facts.

Intolerant of lies and disrespect.

Back up your rant with some facts to support the CTers. List the proof that CTers lack on 9/11 so you can lead the pack of lemmings and make them logical, knowledgeable and credible people!

Can you do that? NO.

You could take this back to the political forum and discuss; why people tolerate lies when you know them to be lies, but look the other way because of your political ideas.

This is why you are wrong about the political orthodox crap. You are letting your political ideas blind you, or let you turn your head to outright lies, fiction and fraud by the 9/11 truth movement. You are the only political orthodox method in operation, trying to paint your stripes on others who use facts, logic, and reason to counter lies of 9/11. Why?

Guilty of using facts! You are guilty of not researching the months of facts to back up what you see as some political orthodox crap. You must read thousands of post to catch up to learn why there is such an intolerance for lies about 9/11. You have failed to research the CT forum, or you just are a CTer afraid to post what you believe on 9/11 because you have no facts. My, you protest too much.
 
Last edited:
beachnut said:
Yes, it requires logic, reason, and facts; which are absent in the 9/11 truth movement of lies, fiction and fraud.

Take your orthodox politics and your CT ideas to the cult meeting on 9/11 truth that should be called 9/11 fraud/lie movement. So you seem to have drank the Kool-aid of the truth movement, yet you only have opinions in fight of facts. The CT movement promotes lies, not the truth about 9/11.

The CT world wants to talk and spread lies. Why would anyone support lies about 9/11 thru veiled statements like you make? Are you a fact challenged 9/11 truther?

Yes bullies for facts.

Intolerant of lies and disrespect.

Back up your rant with some facts to support the CTers. List the proof that CTers lack on 9/11 so you can lead the pack of lemmings and make them logical, knowledgeable and credible people!

Can you do that? NO.

You could take this back to the political forum and discuss; why people tolerate lies when you know them to be lies, but look the other way because of your political ideas.

This is why you are wrong about the political orthodox crap. You are letting your political ideas blind you, or let you turn your head to outright lies, fiction and fraud by the 9/11 truth movement. You are the only political orthodox method in operation, trying to paint your stripes on others who use facts, logic, and reason to counter lies of 9/11. Why?

Guilty of using facts! You are guilty of not researching the months of facts to back up what you see as some political orthodox crap. You must read thousands of post to catch up to learn why there is such an intolerance for lies about 9/11. You have failed to research the CT forum, or you just are a CTer afraid to post what you believe on 9/11 because you have no facts. My, you protest too much.
Click to expand...

I'll take this post as evidence of my point proven. Nice rant.
 
William Rea said:
I'll take this post as evidence of my point proven. Nice rant.
Click to expand...

Thank you.

As your post proves you to be what my rant proves you to be. A no fact CTer who seem afraid to post his 9/11 ideas since he has no facts.

Cindy, will have no fact to help 9/11 truth either. Do you agree?
 
Last edited:
pomeroo, is this the thread to gather examples of insane right-wing and libertarian Inside Job Cultists, or should there be a particular thread for each political category? ;)

You do approach a nagging issue, though. At DU, I've been accused of being a right-wing shill / republican troll in disguise, and its always only been an accusation meant as an insult leveled by a few of the most woo-laden and dishonest lefties. (astrologers and 9/11 CTists) Iow, they seem to have the idea that the litmus test for being a true progressive is profession of faith to the Inside Job Cult. We both know they're deranged, but I'm curious if you think right-wing Inside Job Cultists use the same tactic against their respective debunkers.
 
beachnut said:
Thank you.

As your post proves you to be what my rant proves you to be. A no fact CTer who seem afraid to post his 9/11 ideas since he has no facts.

Cindy, will have no fact to help 9/11 truth either. Do you agree?
Click to expand...

Point to the evidence that I am CTer?

You have demonstrated more than adequately the rabid nature of this forum. I am slightly unorthodox and therefore must be attacked, that is the plain fact.

I don't care if Cindy Sheehan sh*ts gold dust or if Loose Change farts diamonds, the OP and subsequent posts were plain assassin job, neither rational nor based upon any facts and I am afraid to say symptomatic of this forum.
 
Let's look at the facts then....

A simple wordcount of this thread, which btw is only 27 posts old...

Twoof...

leftwing loon...

full twooferhood...

"da twoof"...

another twoofer...

truther "Loon" territory...

conspiracy woo...

is a form of woo...

Cindy Sheehan isn't fit to call herself a human being...

Troofers and those like Cindy...

pandering to the kooks...

woowoos...

A no fact CTer...

insane right-wing and libertarian...

woo-laden and dishonest lefties...

We both know they're deranged...

I'll add nothing more to that.
 
William Rea said:
Covered that in post 20.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I saw your claim in post 20, but I haven't seen what you're describing with my own eyes. Is it just my ignorance?

edit: Fyi, I also see pomeroo saying "brainless, America-hating leftist loon", but that's only emotional hyperbole by one guy.
 
Last edited:
greyleonard said:
Yeah, I saw your claim in post 20, but I haven't seen what you're describing with my own eyes. Is it just my ignorance?

edit: Fyi, I also see pomeroo saying "brainless, America-hating leftist loon", but that's only emotional hyperbole by one guy.
Click to expand...

Ignorance is an emotive word when used out of context. I prefer to say that until you have been subjected to it, it is difficult to see it.

The other problem being of course that when you try to defend it you end up being accused of being a whiny CTer.
 
I would like to retract what I said in my first post in this thread, regarding Cindy Sheehan. It was definately going too far.

I have a sincere dislike for this woman, as is probably obvious. But as I said above, I will not get into that any further here. It's definately political and not CT related in any way. I just felt guilty about what I said and wanted to address it. It was an emotional reaction to Perry's post, and I should have been more in control of myself.

My apologies.
 
yes that is my point. On the 9/11 issue, most, if not all of us here, including Perry, try to put our political views aside, to discuss and argue on behalf of what we believe to be the truth on 9/11. Our logical brains take over, and we are able to be civil, and discuss the facts.

With politics, emotion will invariably ooze in, and then it becomes personal, pitting at times one against another. For gods sake (sorry, religion oozing into politics, oozing into CT Forum) I consider both Pomeroo (Ron) and Perry to both be articulate and smart posters on 9/11, and seeing them going tit for tat at each other here is....well....it is why I AVOID the Politics forum.

TAM:(
 
Anybody else find the timing of Rea's posts to be an attempt to cover the Tikkun magazine story by DRG?
 
T.A.M. said:
yes that is my point. On the 9/11 issue, most, if not all of us here, including Perry, try to put our political views aside, to discuss and argue on behalf of what we believe to be the truth on 9/11. Our logical brains take over, and we are able to be civil, and discuss the facts.

With politics, emotion will invariably ooze in, and then it becomes personal, pitting at times one against another. For gods sake (sorry, religion oozing into politics, oozing into CT Forum) I consider both Pomeroo (Ron) and Perry to both be articulate and smart posters on 9/11, and seeing them going tit for tat at each other here is....well....it is why I AVOID the Politics forum.

TAM:(
Click to expand...

The irony being that I have now made several posts in the Politics section and have yet to be abused in any way remotely like the rabid way I have on the CT forum.

That is why I now tend to avoid the CT section unless something really catches my eye.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom