Merged Continuation - 9/11 CT subforum General Discussion Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
000063 said:
Wait, so you have no argument whatsoever? You don't think the attacks were faked?
Click to expand...

No, it's more that making a specific argument places a burden of proof on him/her/others to support, and the less evidence he/she/others have, the less practical it is for hi/her/others to share it.
 
tsig said:
Horse flatulence?
Click to expand...

tsig said:
And that reason would be?
Click to expand...

tsig said:
Why condescending? Do you have better data or are you just innately superior?
Click to expand...

You don't actually think he reads and puts thought into his posts?

If you do, PM me and I will seed you a voucher for 7 days R&R at the NWO "rehabilitation house".

Don't worry it's all good. Actually, Areosmith is playing next week. (Steve needed a rest after that "Idol" thing).





:cool:
 
Clayton Moore said:
What's the great shakes about designing a building?
Click to expand...
Well... If you were to use your "common sense". The building would likely fail.

A good example would be the planter the St. George cast is building at the faire. 3 years ago, they used "common sense" to build it & it fell apart. They are now using "common sense" to repair it & in 3-4 years it will fall apart again. How do I know this? My dad was one of the best brick masons in the southeast & I am an experienced brick layer.
 
Redtail said:
Well... If you were to use your "common sense". The building would likely fail.

A good example would be the planter the St. George cast is building at the faire. 3 years ago, they used "common sense" to build it & it fell apart. They are now using "common sense" to repair it & in 3-4 years it will fall apart again. How do I know this? My dad was one of the best brick masons in the southeast & I am an experienced brick layer.
Click to expand...

Then you know, of course, that if you were building something I was designing you'd let me know damn quick if the design wasn't safe or there was some other problem.
 
Childlike Empress said:
Watch it and read #6051 again. Report back.
Click to expand...
Why bother? Last time anyone here watched one of your links, it was full of the same old trutherisms which have been disproven time and time again.

And further more, who cares what you said in #6051? You dodge explanation at every turn; people who comprehend points they raise normally are unafraid to expound on them. It's the folks missing full understanding who try to be vague and mysterious with their arguments. If you had any confidence in your arguments, you wouldn't be wasting your time being supercilious and dismissive, you'd be highlighting specific points and showing how you think we got them wrong.

We need no further display of your lack of confidence in you argument. We're getting it full force in your posts dodging explanation.
 
Yeah, why bother, my friend. Good question. Thing is, it's highly unlikely that one of you duhbunkies will be convinced by me about any aspect of 9/11. All I can do is help you (and the lurkers, of course) to put your thinking cap on and do your own research, if YOU CHOOSE TO DO SO. By posting stuff like PDS's lecture. Everything else is art and my fascination for surrealism.

If you are so annoyed by my posts and think that i'm "trolling", like some have accused me of, you could stop generating half a page of crap under every post of mine, couldn't you? Don't feed the troll etc.? Well, in reality, you guys are deeply insecure and irrational and HAVE to jump at me in reflex, to defend your believes which insult your intelligence. While I am very confident of what I state and what I don't state, even if feeble minds try to "pressure" me to make unfounded statements (i.e. speculate).

90% of what you accuse "truthers" of doing is projection of your own behaviour.
 
Childlike Empress said:
PNAC. The "Project for a New American Century". Suggests that there was an old american century, doesn't it? With all international institutions in effect still based on the outcome of WWII, the Empire which was saved for another decade (not a century) by the false-flag event of 9/11 is now coming to an end.

And you better help dismantling it in an orderly fashion so that a functioning republic and not only chaos remains.
Click to expand...


Childlike Empress said:
Spare me your rhetoric.
Click to expand...


Spare the rhetoric, spoil the irony!

CE, you could have spared me 55 minutes by just admitting the truth about the Scott video clip. Something like "You're right, Myriad, that video has absolutely no information about any actions taken by Cheney or Rumsfeld that indicate involvement in the events of 9/11, other than the basic performance of the duties of their offices. It's just a lot of speculation and innuendo (based mostly on spinning castles in the air off the erroneous Mineta timeline, elaborate enough to make the Mandelbrot Set envious) that doesn't even reach the level of actual accusation." But no, you had to get a YouTube view count and a "ha, ha, I wasted your time you fool" jolly out of it. Well, congratulations.

To save anyone else the time, Scott mentions the following actions and alleged actions by Cheney:

1. Issuing an early order of unknown nature.

2. Issuing a second order, to ground all air traffic. (Sources differ on who actually issued it, but if Cheney was the one who actually did so, no reason was given why that would not be a proper exercise of his provisional authority under the circumstances.)

3. Issuing a shoot-down order for aircraft determined to be hostile.

4. Conversing by telephone with the President about matters including continuation of government measures -- which, despite continuation of government being the main concern and function of the entire office of the Vice Presidency, is apparently highly improper, according to Scott.

5. Doing #4 (and possibly #7) by means of a secure telephone and not releasing information about that conversation to the 9/11 Commission, apparently for national security reasons. But why would information about emergency procedures and actions taken in the course of executing those procedures at the highest level of the Executive Branch be considered security matters? Scott has no idea, so it's probably evil.

6. Arriving twice at the Operations Center, just to confuse everybody.

7. Maybe ordering the Combat Air Patrol over Washington.

Furthermore, if Griffin is right (says Scott) when he made up a story about Cheney giving a stand-down order instead of a shoot-down order, it would be very significant. (This is about as meaningful as saying if water were dirt, our clothes dryers would be washers.) Scott thinks that the fact that an aide asked if the order were still in effect is evidence that it was a stand-down order, because a shoot-down order -- let us keep in mind that means an order to shoot down U.S. civilian passenger planes full of innocent civilian hostage passengers -- would be so routine as to not be questioned.

Oh, and Scott thinks Cheney should be impeached without further delay.

Overall: utter claptrap from beginning to end; implausible where it is not utterly illogical; paranoid to clinical perfection; irrelevant even before it was out of date which was long ago; rhetorically almost in Timecube's league (being addressed to the "educated stupid," the Timecube guy should sue for infringement -- okay, Scott actually says "educated ignorant" which is different enough to defend that lawsuit, I suppose). And it wasn't even in rhyme or iambic pentameter, despite an intro blathering about what a great poet the guy is. Dr. Adequete, he's not. Nor even just adequate.

But, the video does now have one more view on it. So it must be winning the battle to dismantle the U.S., somehow.

Respectfully,
Myriad
 
Childlike Empress said:
Yeah, why bother, my friend. Good question. Thing is, it's highly unlikely that one of you duhbunkies will be convinced by me about any aspect of 9/11. All I can do is help you (and the lurkers, of course) to put your thinking cap on and do your own research, if YOU CHOOSE TO DO SO. By posting stuff like PDS's lecture. Everything else is art and my fascination for surrealism.

If you are so annoyed by my posts and think that i'm "trolling", like some have accused me of, you could stop generating half a page of crap under every post of mine, couldn't you? Don't feed the troll etc.? Well, in reality, you guys are deeply insecure and irrational and HAVE to jump at me in reflex, to defend your believes which insult your intelligence. While I am very confident of what I state and what I don't state, even if feeble minds try to "pressure" me to make unfounded statements (i.e. speculate).

90% of what you accuse "truthers" of doing is projection of your own behaviour.
Click to expand...

I'll ignore the petulant outburst. What has your research told you? Why do you keep avoiding that question? You say that you have confidence in your statements,but you haven't said anything,apart from complaining. Make a statement,tell me what you think happened on 911.
 
Clayton Moore said:
Yeah sure gravity. First three times for everything. Duuuuuuuuuuuh.
Click to expand...

Yeah, gravity. The nemesis of all buildings.

And you're making a big deal about how this was a "first time?"

Prior to 9/11 how many steel framed skyscrapers had ever been subjected to fires under those conditions?

Answer: none.

Unprecedented circumstances produce unprecedented results. That's the way reality works.
 
Myriad said:
Spare the rhetoric, spoil the irony!

CE, you could have spared me 55 minutes by just admitting the truth about the Scott video clip. Something like "You're right, Myriad, that video has absolutely no information about any actions taken by Cheney or Rumsfeld that indicate involvement in the events of 9/11, other than the basic performance of the duties of their offices. It's just a lot of speculation and innuendo (based mostly on spinning castles in the air off the erroneous Mineta timeline, elaborate enough to make the Mandelbrot Set envious) that doesn't even reach the level of actual accusation." But no, you had to get a YouTube view count and a "ha, ha, I wasted your time you fool" jolly out of it. Well, congratulations.
Click to expand...


So what you're telling me is that i should have "admitted" that the video is crap before I even posted it? Your summary is a joke, given that you don't even mention "continuity of government", and the rest of it is, well, pure rhetoric, as usual. My summary above is much more accurate and uses only a fraction of the words you chose to throw at me.

If this would be a genuine controversy, you'd get some responses to your points by people other than me. But it isn't.
 
For convenience, here's the video again, if you want to check the legits of Myriad's summary and my dismissal of it:
Google Video This video is not hosted by the ISF, the ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE
 
Clayton Moore said:
Then you know, of course, that if you were building something I was designing you'd let me know damn quick if the design wasn't safe or there was some other problem.
Click to expand...
.
If it's "no great shakes" to design a building, why should there ever be any problems?

And why do you try to shift the blame to the builder to correct *your* mistakes?
.
 
Childlike Empress said:
So what you're telling me is that i should have "admitted" that the video is crap before I even posted it?
Click to expand...


No, after you posted it. When I said it was probably crap, and instead of admitting it's crap you continued to act as if I should read it.

Your summary is a joke, given that you don't even mention "continuity of government"
Click to expand...


Actually I did, unless you are unable to recognize the similarity of both structure and meaning of the words "continuity" and "continuation" (just in case: they mean the same thing). I pointed out that continuity of government is the primary (and almost the entire) purpose of the office of the Vice Presidency, so it makes quite a bit of sense that the Vice President would be concerned with that during an emergency.

and the rest of it is, well, pure rhetoric, as usual. My summary above is much more accurate and uses only a fraction of the words you chose to throw at me.
Click to expand...


If there were anything in my posts you could show with evidence is wrong, I'm sure you'd point that out rather than focusing on their rhetorical quality. Rhetoric is the art of persuasive or effective communication. Your constant description of my posts as rhetoric thus acknowledges that even you can tell they are persuasive and effective. Thank you, but I already know that.

(Rhetoric does have limits, of course, as do evidence and reason. For instance, I do not expect to ever be able to persuade you of anything.)

You posted a link to a video, without constructive comment of your own. You even refused, when asked, to specify its relevance to the prior dialog concerning what illicit actions Cheney and Rumsfeld had taken in their "involvement" with 9/11. So I watched the video and found, as I had expected and openly predicted, that it had none at all. Despite that, I summarized it for others' benefit.

You're correct that I was a bit wordy, though. Everyone: It's a pile of crap. Better?

If this would be a genuine controversy, you'd get some responses to your points by people other than me. But it isn't.
Click to expand...


Right. If other members post in agreement with me, that means we're all mindlessly echoing each other and piling on like cowards, but if they don't, they don't care about whatever I'm posting and probably don't even agree with me. Write that one down, you can use it later.

Faced with tactics like that, the U.S. is as good as dismantled already. By Tuesday, do you think?

Respectfully,
Myriad
 
TSR said:
.
If it's "no great shakes" to design a building, why should there ever be any problems?

And why do you try to shift the blame to the builder to correct *your* mistakes?
.
Click to expand...

My point was that nobody designs without help.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom