Mobertermy's Pentagon Evidence

Yea, we certainly aren't preventing another investigation. I just don't want my tax dollars to pay for it.
 
It might be interesting to see -if- a "blue ribbon committee" of respected investigators independent of the gummit might be assembled to search the information without any overt bias.
But if only to please (not possible) the CTwinkies, a waste of money no matter who foots the bill.
 
Why doesn't ae911truth use their $70k for another investigation, instead of wasting it on "Building What" TV ads?
 
Mobertermy said:
Lets say that it is a known fact on many occasion that you have raped children. That you were even tried and convicted of child rape.
Click to expand...

Poor analogy. Let's suggest, rather, that a bunch of people who've never met Oystein and know very little about him have made repeated accusations that he's raped children, and even at one point staged a mock trial at which they claimed to have found him guilty of raping a child, but none of these children actually seem to exist.

That would be a better analogy to the conspiracist's reasoning for government guilt; you use your older fantasies to support your newer, shinier ones.

OK, now let's hear about the Kennedy assassination, Operatin Northwoods, Gulf of Tonkin, Pearl Harbor, the Maine,.....

I'll be over here in the corner yawning.

Dave
 
I'm talking about the nature of Gov't Dave. If you look at history is it commonplace for gov'ts to kill their own citizens?

But there's no need to answer because I realized what the miscommunication is here. You guys don't find the notion of gov't killing ridiculous. You find the notion of conspiracies ridiculous.
 
Mobertermy said:
I'm talking about the nature of Gov't Dave. If you look at history is it commonplace for gov'ts to kill their own citizens?

But there's no need to answer because I realized what the miscommunication is here. You guys don't find the notion of gov't killing ridiculous. You find the notion of conspiracies ridiculous.
Click to expand...


No. Straw man. We find the notions of *conspiracy theories* ridiculous. You know, no evidence, ignorance, idle speculation, logical fallacies, falsehoods and distortions, incoherent, self-contradicting, inconsistent with the facts, theories. That kind of thing.
 
Maybe we should re-focus our attention on the title of this thread:

Mobertermy's Pentagon Evidence.



So far, here is the evidence he presented:
  1. One witness (Lloyd England), who was talked by the CIT guys into thinking his cab was somewhere north of the bridge
  2. ...

Alright, there is no 2nd, as far as I can see.

Mobertermy?
 
Mobertermy said:
I'm talking about the nature of Gov't Dave. If you look at history is it commonplace for gov'ts to kill their own citizens?
Click to expand...

No. It's unusual. That's not to say there aren't many examples, but that's because the sample size is very large. But, in general, governments prefer to kill other governments' citizens when they can. But it's also commonplace for peoples who see themselves as oppressed and relatively weak to find alternative ways of attacking the strong, that the strong weren't ready to counter.

Mobertermy said:
But there's no need to answer because I realized what the miscommunication is here. You guys don't find the notion of gov't killing ridiculous. You find the notion of conspiracies ridiculous.
Click to expand...

Again, we decline to participate in your delusion. We find the specific theories advanced by the truth movement ridiculous, including the suggestion that the best way to fake a plane crash into the Pentagon is to falsify a whole load of evidence to indicate that a plane actually crashed into the Pentagon and crash a plane into the Pentagon too. If you're going to crash a plane into the Pentagon anyway, why bother faking the evidence to look like a plane crashed into the Pentagon?

Specifically, we find your personal theory, as expounded in this thread, ridiculous.

Dave
 
Mobertermy said:
Actually you suck at analogies


A better analogy would be that you got a 58% on the test. Did you fail?


Only 58% of the populace agrees with them. Did they fail?
Click to expand...


And yet again, Mobertermy fails so comprehend the logic presented by his opponent. And when such logic includes the word "you," Mobertermy responds with a logically disconnected personal attack.

By providing context, you have been shown that the your mined quote does no mean what it you imply it means. (That is, you have been proven wrong, you argument has been torn down.) Yet, you keep running around in circles insisting on your quote, implying that your minded quote means what you would like it to mean. Do you really believe that we are so dumb that when we have dismantled your argument we are persuaded by it when you present it for a second or a third time?
 
Jesus Christ, guys! Stop beating your heads against this brick-wall of self-imposed ignorance. If Mobertermy isn't a troll, this has to be the dumbest thread I've read. If he is a troll, well played.

Hint: This is your chance for a clean getaway, Mobert. Just say you're a troll and we'll applaud you for your brilliance.
 
I see ya'll still feeding the troll. I guess it is something to do :D
 
Mobertermy said:
Actually you suck at analogies

A better analogy would be that you got a 58% on the test. Did you fail?

Only 58% of the populace agrees with them. Did they fail?
Click to expand...

Whether or not a fact-finding mission succeeded is not determined by popular acclaim or opinion polling.

Consider this:
According to a Gallup Poll, 46% of the American populace agreed in 2006 that "God created human beings pretty much in their present form at one time within the last 10,000 years or so"
Are they right?

At the same time, 36% believed that "Human beings have developed over millions of years from less advanced forms of life, but God guided this process"
Are they right?

These two disjoined groups cannot both be right, as they believe mutually exclusive things.


I happen to think that both groups are wrong, and that the smallest group (only 13%) is right who opined that "Human beings have developed over millions of years from less advanced forms of life, but God had no part in this process"


What do you believe there? And does the opinion poll help you in any way to make up your mind? If so, how? If not, why not?
 
Oystein said:
Because there is no physical evidence for a NoC path. If a plane had hit the Pentagon from NoC, there would be huge amounts of physical evidence inside the Pentagon. Such as a path of destruction, dead people, and the like.

You seem to have admitted in the meantime that you do not know of any physical evidence for NoC. As wrong as the CIT are, they have one up on you: They already know that there is no such physical evidence.
Click to expand...

Actually from a NoC standpoint, the flyover + explosives makes a lot more sense than hitting the Pentagon at speed and leaving no trace of the actual flight path.

(I feel creepy saying that now, ick)
 
Several bickering and otherwise uncivil posts moved to AAH. Cut it out.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Tricky
 
Mobertermy said:
John sorry I didn't bother to read your nonsense after the first few sentences
Click to expand...


Apology accepted, though I'm skeptical of your claim that you read just the first few sentences. I'm disappointed that you missed/ignored my questions at the bottom of the post, but not the least bit surprised. Why should you be any different from the other Truthers I've asked?
 
I Ratant said:
It might be interesting to see -if- a "blue ribbon committee" of respected investigators independent of the gummit might be assembled to search the information without any overt bias.
But if only to please (not possible) the CTwinkies, a waste of money no matter who foots the bill.
Click to expand...
Several years ago the truthers put together a kangaroo court of other truthers to "try" Cheney, Bush et al.

In yet another in a long list of truther fail, they failed to convict!

IIRC.
 
Edited by Darat: 
Multiple breaches of the Membership Agreement removed.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Mobertermy said:
Edited by LashL: 
Removed quote of moderated content
Click to expand...

As soon as you provide evidence for your claim that the US government did mass-murder its own citizens on 9/11, or drop that accusation.

Note however, that I am not really calling you a child rapist. I am merely mimicking your rhetoric, and apparently you feel how ill-conceived it is.
You, on the other hand, really accuse an entire group of mass-murder, without evidence.


ETA: I just received my own yellow card ;)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom