• 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.

Loose Change

Status
Not open for further replies.
aggle-rithm said:
Wouldn't help. The loosers would just say, "A real plane wouldn't produce that much exhaust! And it would be in color, not black and white! WHAT ARE THEY HIDING!?!"
Click to expand...
As painful as it would be to watch, I would like to see this video all the same.

I'll never forget the first time I caught the profile of the plane in the first frame of the security camera footage. An ominous shape just suddenly leapt out at me. I got this tinge of absolute terror seeing a plane swooping in fast that low like a raptor diving on its prey. My stomach churned when I realized I was seeing one of the only images of the last fraction of a second of so many lives. For an irrational instant, I tried to think of a way to stop it, to save them.

But we can't save them. We can only remember them. Watching that video would help me remember.
 
What I don't get, is why the Loosers haven't yet claimed that, yes there is a konspirasee, but it's not de eevil gumbmint wo dunnit, but some soooper seekrit organization that has made de eevil gubmint appear the fall guy for THE REAL COVER UP so that the population will turn against its eevil gubmint as cannon fodder in a revolt masterminded by this soooper seekrit organization.

OTOH, if there really were such an organization with such powers, I don't think it would be stooopid enough to enlist the help of the cerebally challenged CT Loosers - t'would manage quite well without them, thank you very much.

I simply cannot fathom the depths of inanity these CT'ers have slipped into. To an extent, I can understand how, say, JFK assasination CTs came to prominence (though I never could, and still can't, figure out how anyone could interpret the Zapruder film as evidence of a shot from the front), but with 9/11 there is simply so much live footage, so many corroborating eyewitness accounts, in general so much evidence (even Bin Laden claiming responsibility and a motive), that it seems to me there is absolutely nothing to base a 'no planes + controlled demolition' theory on. The folly of mankind takes on a new dimension with the 9/11 CT'ers.
 
Anders W. Bonde said:
What I don't get, is why the Loosers haven't yet claimed that, yes there is a konspirasee, but it's not de eevil gumbmint wo dunnit, but some soooper seekrit organization that has made de eevil gubmint appear the fall guy for THE REAL COVER UP so that the population will turn against its eevil gubmint as cannon fodder in a revolt masterminded by this soooper seekrit organization.
.
Click to expand...

Apparently you havent been reading that forum
 
I still don't understand why they feel the need to make the conspiracy so convoluted. Why not just fly a plane into the WTC and Pentagon and be done with it? Why not just use explosives to destroy either of them? What purpose is there to rig a building for the worst controlled demo on record, why even make it a controlled demo when you can just take out the support structure, fly a plane into it, wait for firefighters and police to arrive, then detonate the buildings. Then they have to wait several hours to destroy a seperate building, that wasn't hit by a plane, and raise unnesessary suspicion.

They also decide to hire witnesses to view a plane flying over the interstate in DC. They bring in wreckage from an airliner and bomb the Pentagon. Finally, they take flight 93, decide to save the lives of all the innocent civillians, which they had no concern for before, by dropping them off in Cleveland. Then recreate a crash site in Pennsylvania. Why? What exactly does this accomplish? Oh, no, wait, 93 was shot down. But why would they shoot 93 down if it was part of the conspiracy? Wouldn't it just be easier to fake a uranium purchase by Saddam if they wanted to go to war so bad?
 
bob_kark said:
I still don't understand why they feel the need to make the conspiracy so convoluted. Why not just fly a plane into the WTC and Pentagon and be done with it? Why not just use explosives to destroy either of them? What purpose is there to rig a building for the worst controlled demo on record, why even make it a controlled demo when you can just take out the support structure, fly a plane into it, wait for firefighters and police to arrive, then detonate the buildings. Then they have to wait several hours to destroy a seperate building, that wasn't hit by a plane, and raise unnesessary suspicion.

They also decide to hire witnesses to view a plane flying over the interstate in DC. Bring in wreckage from an airliner and bomb the Pentagon. Finally, they take flight 93, decide to save the lives of all the innocent civillians, which they had no concern for before, by dropping them off in Cleveland. Then recreate a crash site in Pennsylvania. Why? What exactly does this accomplish? Oh, no, wait, 93 was shot down. But why would they shoot 93 down if it was part of the conspiracy? Wouldn't it just be easier to fake a uranium purchase by Saddam if they wanted to go to war so bad?
Click to expand...
Their conspiracy has to be so complicated because, in a twisted way, they follow the evidence. Unfortunately they have already decided that 9/11 wasn't everything it seamed, so they jump on the discrepancies between what they saw and what they "expected" to see. These people have zero understanding of structural engineering and the anatomy of a building collapse, and so they see "squibs" and they therefore know that it was a controlled demolition. They cannot question the "squibs" evidence, because it is actually one of the strongest buts of "evidence" for a conspiracy (even thought it is easily debunked), because if the "squibs theory" is wrong, what else have they got wrong?
 
brodski said:
Their conspiracy has to be so complicated because, in a twisted way, they follow the evidence. Unfortunately they have already decided that 9/11 wasn't everything it seamed, so they jump on the discrepancies between what they saw and what they "expected" to see. These people have zero understanding of structural engineering and the anatomy of a building collapse, and so they see "squibs" and they therefore know that it was a controlled demolition. They cannot question the "squibs" evidence, because it is actually one of the strongest buts of "evidence" for a conspiracy (even thought it is easily debunked), because if the "squibs theory" is wrong, what else have they got wrong?
Click to expand...

Sure, I could see that for your average CT. But why would a physicist, who should know better, approach it from such a bizzare angle? I know he's a bit nutty in his own right, it just seems so odd to me.
 
bob_kark said:
Sure, I could see that for your average CT. But why would a physicist, who should know better, approach it from such a bizzare angle? I know he's a bit nutty in his own right, it just seems so odd to me.
Click to expand...
Because being a physicist gives you no great insight into the way buildings collapse.
And also, if you want to be a loan maverick, dispensing truth which the establishment and hidebound orthodoxy won't let the public hear, being a real individual instead of a "sheeple" it's much easier to do that as part of a large group of people who have already reached the same basic conclusion as you, than by actually going out on your own.
Remember, physicists are human too. ;)
 
senorpogo said:
Has anyone posted this?
Click to expand...

From the link
About This Site
Click to expand...
This site was created for the sole purpose of educating the population of America of the vile act that was commited solely by Jews, and is maintained by two homosexual black equalists.
Click to expand...
Well, I guess "homosexual black equalists" couldn't possibly be anti-semtic whackjobs!
And who teh hell refer to tehmslevs as a "homosexual black equalist" anyway? What is an "equalist"?
 
brodski said:
Because being a physicist gives you no great insight into the way buildings collapse.
And also, if you want to be a loan maverick, dispensing truth which the establishment and hidebound orthodoxy won't let the public hear, being a real individual instead of a "sheeple" it's much easier to do that as part of a large group of people who have already reached the same basic conclusion as you, than by actually going out on your own.
Remember, physicists are human too. ;)
Click to expand...

I agree, but physicists should be instilled with a higher degree of critical thinking than your average joe. I would hope his BS meter would have exploded long ago. Perhaps he does want to play the lone maverick, it just seems a bit disgusting to me. Not surprising, but disgusting none the less.
 
bob_kark said:
I agree, but physicists should be instilled with a higher degree of critical thinking than your average joe.
Click to expand...
If you need an example of how a physicist can be a brilliant scientist in one field, but bat-guano crazy in another you only need to look at some of the secret societies Newton joined
bob_kark said:
Perhaps he does want to play the lone maverick, it just seems a bit disgusting to me. Not surprising, but disgusting none the less.
Click to expand...
I agree that it is disgusting, and I'm not trying to defend this jerk at all, but I can see a possible path which he has taken to lala land.
 
brodski said:
If you need an example of how a physicist can be a brilliant scientist in one field, but bat-guano crazy in another you only need to look at some of the secret societies Newton joined.
Click to expand...

Well, I suppose the search for Christ in South America should be evidence that he's a bit off his rocker. Perhaps I expected too much.

I can't fault Newton too much for becoming a Freemason. It was a different time.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom