Loose Change - Part III

[brumsen]

Al-Queada knocks over the WTC.

America and allies go to war against Al-Queada.

Truthseekers rise up, cry "false flag" and (here's where we go into the hypothetical) place nations leaders on trial, withdraw troops from the front and Al-Queada gets the land they lost back again.

As I said, they could be doing it willfully or out of ignorance. Either way, Al-Queada benifits.

I may have missed something - but why, then, was Iraq invaded if AQ is the enemy? Anyway this is not a politics thread I suppose.

No, Sword, it was not offensive really, it just made me sigh.

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

I may have missed something - but why, then, was Iraq invaded if AQ is the enemy? Anyway this is not a politics thread I suppose.

No, Sword, it was not offensive really, it just made me sigh.

In the context of the conspiracy theories, the Afghan operation is just as "misguided" as the Iraqi one.

I wasn't trying to be offensive, at least not to you. I was actually rather impressed that you were holding Truthseeker1234 to a high standard of proof and didn't hesitate to question what you saw as flaws in his analysis.

 

[gumboot]

Personally, I think we can do without juvenile sexist comments on this board. Go away and grow up.

What was sexist about his comment?

-Andrew

 

[gumboot]

Anyone here (abby?) posting in Killtown's "ordnance plume" thread might want to link to this video of a B-52 crashing.

I hate that video... apparantly the pilot in question was suspected of being a bit of a cowboy, so the squadron CO was onboard the aircraft for the rehearsal to watch him. Such a waste.

-Andrew

 

[gumboot]

johndoeX was asked about flight 77's circling maneuver just before it hit the Pentagon. After asserting that he had done a lot of study and that it was in a certain thread, then finding that it wasn't really posted there, he has come up with this as his guess of 77's flight path:

http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=3800&view=findpost&p=6063420

That's completely stupid...

Not only does the approach not match the ATC path as indicated in the 9/11 Commission Report, and not only does the turn not at all reflect what any eyewitnesses reported, but such movement would be completely and utterly illogical. Why interrupt a direct approach to make a single tight turn, before resuming on the same path? That's just... stupid.

-Andrew

 

[Gravy]

That's completely stupid...

Not only does the approach not match the ATC path as indicated in the 9/11 Commission Report, and not only does the turn not at all reflect what any eyewitnesses reported, but such movement would be completely and utterly illogical. Why interrupt a direct approach to make a single tight turn, before resuming on the same path? That's just... stupid.

-Andrew

Ugh. With a turn radius of about 150 feet, let's hope he wasn't trying to draw the turn to scale.

About the approach: the 9/11 Commission report says flight 77 was at 7,000 feet at 38 miles out. When it finished the turn it was descending through 2,200 feet. It doesn't say what the altitude was at the start of the turn.

 

[60hzxtl]

However, I do not see how truthseekers have aided the enemy.

Putting on my hypothetical hat:

The US, (or for that matter the Gov't. of Afghanistan or Pakistan) captures a high value target in the chain of Quaida command.

That figure is brought to trial. The way the civilized world conducts itself since Nuremberg.

His defense team turns to CT stuff, (controlled demolition, Pods on airplanes, No plane at the Pentagon, WTC as cover up for the murder of John O'Neil, execution of FDNY Chaplain by hypodermic needle, etc, etc.)

Defense attorneys create a glimmer of a doubt in the court of the world, (imagine this theoretical trial ['cause its my hypothetical hat here] could even take place in the Hague.)

Now the parade of expert witnesses ( Fetzer, Jones, Les Raphael, Jones again, and [drum roll] Ray Ubinger!) takes over the center ring, while the professional anarchists take up the two side rings left and right.

After months of testimony, sidetracks by "experts" the court (or committee) hopelessly confused by the haystack of nonsense, (they were just asking questions [and not listening to the answers just loading up another question] no harm in that.) the accused, has now been elevated to statesman, or at least political prisoner status. And walks away or is given a suspended sentence.

Impossible? Tojo faced the hangman. Pol Pot changed his shirt and went home.



AND, welcome to the forum, Brumsen.

 

[60hzxtl]

Gypsy really needs to trim her grass.

Interpret that any way you'd like...

The analogy is just perfect.

Ignore the foreground, and have a good look at the background:

Gypsy can run the world, but her own back yard is a mess!

 

[brumsen]

Putting on my hypothetical hat:

The US, (or for that matter the Gov't. of Afghanistan or Pakistan) captures a high value target in the chain of Quaida command.

That figure is brought to trial. The way the civilized world conducts itself since Nuremberg.
<snip>

Of course, we need to assume fair trial. If not, the problem lies there, not with CT's.

 

[60hzxtl]

Of course, we need to assume fair trial. If not, the problem lies there, not with CT's.

Did I presume too much?

Built into that above is:

Trial in public

Defense of accused.

I can put on my hypothetical hat, but I can't put on the hypothetical (law) suit!

 

[MarkyX]

I may have missed something - but why, then, was Iraq invaded if AQ is the enemy? Anyway this is not a politics thread I suppose.

No, Sword, it was not offensive really, it just made me sigh.

Because Bush is an idiot

I might be right-wing (GASP SHOCK) but he is someone who should not be leading office of the world's most powerful nation.

 

[Brainster]

Because Bush is an idiot

I might be right-wing (GASP SHOCK) but he is someone who should not be leading office of the world's most powerful nation.

The argument that led us to Iraq was that a rogue regime could not be allowed to pursue WMD in the world after 9-11. It was an argument that was convincing to over half the Democratic senators (including all those with presidential aspirations), and to such clearly non-dim bulbs as Condoleezza Rice, Colin Powell and Tony Blair.

And anyway, it's not like Bush was going up against towering intellects. I'd love to appear on Jeopardy! against Albert Gore and John Kerry.

 

[JamesB]

Formally speaking, I resigned. He suspended me for a week for rather unclear reasons, which interestingly were unclear to his co-chair as well; and in the email exchange which I had with him following that I saw reasons to resign from SfT.

Having exchanged e-mail with Mr. Fetzer, I can understand. He avoided just about every question I asked while hurling uncreative insults.

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

The analogy is just perfect.

Ignore the foreground, and have a good look at the background:

Gypsy can run the world, but her own back yard is a mess!

Gypsy is a man with gynecomastia and microphallus.

 

[Belz...]

johndoeX was asked about flight 77's circling maneuver just before it hit the Pentagon. After asserting that he had done a lot of study and that it was in a certain thread, then finding that it wasn't really posted there, he has come up with this as his guess of 77's flight path:

http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=3800&view=findpost&p=6063420

I had accepted that he is/was a commercial pilot, but his guess is so completely, totally clueless that I can no longer keep from questioning his credentials.

He has the flight making an almost complete circle (at a fairly high speed presumably) with a diameter of about 1/4 mile. No wonder he's skeptical of whether this could be done!

I'm not even sure a cesna could do that.

 

[Belz...]

Hola brothers and sisters.

How goes the war on Sylvia Browne and Bigfoot? Are you winning yet?

How goes your search for something clever to say ?

Fight on people! I am considering going over to fight the evil and unjust, warlike Muslims with the empathetic and peaceful Israelis.

Everybody's warline, man. Let's just drop the sarcasm.

 

[gumboot]

I'm not even sure a cesna could do that.

A Cessna 172 could at low speed, but then I can't imagine a Cessna 172 inflicting much damage on the reinforced blast-proof walls of the Pentagon...

It'd probably bounce off.

-Andrew

 

[milesalpha]

Hola brothers and sisters.

How goes the war on Sylvia Browne and Bigfoot? Are you winning yet?

Fight on people! I am considering going over to fight the evil and unjust, warlike Muslims with the empathetic and peaceful Israelis.

This is an example of one of the real weak points of the CTers (at least for me). They seem to be incapable of separating the idea that rejecting their improbable ideas is completely different from political belief. Simply because I reject Loose Change does not mean I am pro-Bush (I have considered him an idiot for far longer than he has been president), anti-patriot (being Canadian, my patriotism is, of course, limited to hockey), anti-Jewish, anti-Muslim, or anything else they attribute to people who have a higher standard of evidence than those who can just stare at a few videos.

On the political discussion,
The CT folks often like to use the Hitler and Reichstag fire (incorrectly, of course) as proof of the conspiracy idea. Using the actual story, that the fire was begun by one nutty communist leading to Hitler seizing on the opportunity to eliminate political resistance and pursue his agenda ahead of schedule, creates a much more reasonable comparison. Bush and crew seized on the convenient event to pursue an agenda that they could not have forced so quickly.
They had to go to Afghanistan, it was too obvious a place not to strike. The attack on Iraq indicates one of two things to me, both of which are strangely plausible. First, the idea that the oil boys in the White House wanted to destabilize the middle east and drive oil prices sky high to create recording breaking profits for the oil industry. Or second, that Bush and his posse of chicken-hawk cowboys really didn't have a clue what they were doing and chose a target they thought they could beat easily and get away with it. I do think that the CT cause hurts what should be the real imperative in the US, getting that nutty administration out of there.

 

[WildCat]

This is an example of one of the real weak points of the CTers (at least for me).

To me, it is this: They apparently believe that the government is completely corrupt, controlled by shadowy forces who have no qualms about killing 3,000 innocents in order to achieve their diabolical goals. So what does jenabell do about it? He trolls a skeptic message board. Way to fight the evil power jenabell!

 

[sophia8]

What was sexist about his comment?

-Andrew

OK, maybe not technically sexist. But as a woman, I was getting pretty tired of the mysogynistic nature of the comments about Gypsy. Criticise her politics all you like, by why descend into stuff about her appearence? (SOT, I'm looking at you.)
The Loosers already do plenty of that.