Ed Pentagon - TruthMakesPeace

000063 said:
I still find it amazing that every CT I've read always starts at a ridiculous level of complexity, rather than a simpler scheme that would produce the same result.

Every. Single. One.
Click to expand...

The more obvious 9/11 gets the more idiocy and fake road signs the trusters defecate.

Will they ever pull anything out of the HAT better than gravity collapse?
 
What do you think collapses a building that gets demolished?

Hint: it's not rockets.
 
Clayton Moore said:
The more obvious 9/11 gets the more idiocy and fake road signs the trusters defecate.

Will they ever pull anything out of the HAT better than gravity collapse?
Click to expand...
Yes, because simple plans aren't less prone to failure, or anything.
 
Clayton Moore said:
The more obvious 9/11 gets the more idiocy and fake road signs the trusters defecate.

Will they ever pull anything out of the HAT better than gravity collapse?
Click to expand...

Unlikely. Seeing as though that's the right answer. 2+2=4. Always has, always will. Are you going to lose sleep waiting for it to = 5?
 
NoahFence said:
Unlikely. Seeing as though that's the right answer. 2+2=4. Always has, always will. Are you going to lose sleep waiting for it to = 5?
Click to expand...

That's a typical lame bee dunker argument. How many positive integers are there? There must be lots - at least a million, let's say. What are the odds that 2 + 2 = 4, every time? It's got to be at least a thousand to one against. So if you work out 2 + 2 three times, and it always comes out four, that's three thousand to one against. You expect me to believe that, shill?

Dave
 
Dave Rogers said:
That's a typical lame bee dunker argument. How many positive integers are there? There must be lots - at least a million, let's say. What are the odds that 2 + 2 = 4, every time? It's got to be at least a thousand to one against. So if you work out 2 + 2 three times, and it always comes out four, that's three thousand to one against. You expect me to believe that, shill?

Dave
Click to expand...

Shill.

pffft.... right. :boggled:

This crap ain't free, bro. I'm a PAID disinformation agent. I didn't go to disinformation school for SIX YEARS to be a shill.
 
Clayton Moore said:
A no name SEC investigation. Staggering delusion.
Click to expand...
The SEC has a mandate to investigate terrorist attacks? Prove the put orders had anything to do with 9/11. How many put orders are normal for airlines?

Oh, and who are the mass murderers you talked about recently?
 
NoahFence said:
Unlikely. Seeing as though that's the right answer. 2+2=4. Always has, always will. Are you going to lose sleep waiting for it to = 5?
Click to expand...

[pedantic mode]5? I don't know about that but 2+2=11 can occur.

In a base three system you would count 0, 1, 2, 10, 11, 12, 20, 21, 22... etc.

In such a system then 2+2 = one 3 plus one 1 therefore 11(base 3)

[/end pedantic mode]
 
Craig4 said:
The SEC has a mandate to investigate terrorist attacks? Prove the put orders had anything to do with 9/11. How many put orders are normal for airlines?

Oh, and who are the mass murderers you talked about recently?
Click to expand...

Clayton Moore said:
Who had put orders?
Click to expand...

Craig4 said:
You tell me. Prove the put orders were related to the attacks.
Click to expand...

You were asked how many put orders were normal for this time of year and for this industry. I did not see where you answered the question.

If a fire destroys a Nabisco factory tomorrow and it tunrns out that the day before someone had put orders against Nabisco will that be 'proof' of arson?
 
jaydeehess said:
You were asked how many put orders were normal for this time of year and for this industry. I did not see where you answered the question.

If a fire destroys a Nabisco factory tomorrow and it tunrns out that the day before someone had put orders against Nabisco will that be 'proof' of arson?
Click to expand...

If that someone was Rumsfeld's brother in law or Elie Wiesel further scrutiny would be required.

It was 9/11 for goodness sake. Why would the names of who made put orders be kept secret?
 
Clayton Moore said:
If that someone was Rumsfeld's brother in law or Elie Wiesel further scrutiny would be required.

It was 9/11 for goodness sake. Why would the names of who made put orders be kept secret?
Click to expand...

Investigations by the Securities and Exchange Commission
Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) investigations are conducted confidentially to protect evidence and reputations. Important documents could be destroyed if an investigation is publicly announced, so confidential treatment may help to preserve key evidence in a case. A confidential process also protects the reputations of companies and individuals where the SEC finds no wrongdoing by the firm or the individuals that were the subject of the investigation. As a result, the SEC generally will not confirm or deny the existence of an investigation unless and until it becomes a matter of public record.
 
16.5 said:
Investigations by the Securities and Exchange Commission
Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) investigations are conducted confidentially to protect evidence and reputations. Important documents could be destroyed if an investigation is publicly announced, so confidential treatment may help to preserve key evidence in a case. A confidential process also protects the reputations of companies and individuals where the SEC finds no wrongdoing by the firm or the individuals that were the subject of the investigation. As a result, the SEC generally will not confirm or deny the existence of an investigation unless and until it becomes a matter of public record.
Click to expand...

I'm sure the MSM could get the names if they weren't protecting neocon involvement with the attack on America that was 9/11.
 
Clayton Moore said:
I'm sure the MSM could get the names if they weren't protecting neocon involvement with the attack on America that was 9/11.
Click to expand...

I gotta tell you, there ain't no argument like a "Clayton is sure" argument because a "Clayton is sure" argument Don't Stop!

Classic! Say Clayton Moore, I assume that you issued your own FOIA to get this information, right?

I'm mean you are "sure" and all, tell me you aren't just JAQ'ing on the internet, now are you?

lulz.
 
Clayton Moore said:
I'm sure the MSM could get the names if they weren't protecting neocon involvement with the attack on America that was 9/11.
Click to expand...

Great, show us some evidence now. Prove any put orders were related to 9/11. Was it common or uncommon to have put orders on airline stocks? What other factors might explain put orders?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom