Again, for comprehension F2:
con·text [kon-tekst]
noun
1.
the parts of a written or spoken statement that precede or follow a specific word or passage, usually influencing its meaning or effect: You have misinterpreted my remark because you took it out of context.
2.
the set of circumstances or facts that surround a particular event, situation, etc.
Either you are ignorant of the above, or are simply lying in a vain attempt at narcissism. Either way, you desperately need the following:
per·spec·tive [per-spek-tiv] noun
5.
the state of one's ideas, the facts known to one, etc., in having a meaningful interrelationship
So, again, allow me to supply it champ.
What does P.C. mean? Personal computer? Primary care? Politically Correct? Pro choice? All of those? None of those? What?
F2, it means all of them...DEPENDING ON CONTEXT.
Point.
Blank.
End.
If one is talking about computers, and use the acronym PC...it means 'Personal Computer'. Each and every time. Without fail. If it doesn't, one is not talking about computers. Thus, in a conversation about computers, PC means personal computer.
If one is talking about Political left thinking ideals regarding language and behavior, P.C. means Political Correctness/Politically Correct. Each and every time. Without fail. If it doesn't, one is not talking about left thinking ideals regarding language and behavior. Thus, in a conversation about left thinking ideals regarding language and behavior PC means Political Correctness/Politically Correct.
Shall I go on? I think I don't need to.
So, F2, when you say "MIHOP"....it CAN mean many things.....but that all depends on CONTEXT.
con·text [kon-tekst]
noun
1.
the parts of a written or spoken statement that precede or follow a specific word or passage, usually influencing its meaning or effect: You have misinterpreted my remark because you took it out of context.
2.
the set of circumstances or facts that surround a particular event, situation, etc.
So, the fact stands..when you used, or anyone uses, MIHOP, when talking about the events of 9/11, on a conspiracy theory forum, in a 9/11 conspiracy theory sub forum..they are saying elements within the USG (scope undefined) MIHOP! They are taking a stance against the official narrative, which has been funded and overseen by the USG. The "what" and "who" are defined by default by the context.
And, By USG..I didn't mean University System of Georgia, or United Stated Gypsum.
Of course, everyone know this..because of the....CONTEXT.
Even more damning is the use of "it" in the English language. "It" always, every-time, without fail, refers to the subject being discussed. That is why "Pull IT" was so absurd...because the subject was never building 7, and always the rescue and fire fighting attempt's around it.
So, to re-cap: "It" = the subject matter. This is perhaps where your argument fails most dynamically and dramatically. When you say MIHOP...the "It" is made clear by the subject. Read that again. The "It" is made clear by the subject. The context. So, therefor, when talking about 911..the "It", by definition, by default, is the events of 9/11. More specifically, when talking about the collapse of the WTC's, the "It" is just that...the collapse of the WTC's.
So, when you told a fellow (as in like yourself) truther, when discussing the collapse of the WTC's, at the 911 forum that you where, quote "MIHOP"..it is abundantly and crystal clear what your meant.
The Who. The What. All made perfectly clear by context. If that (USG M WTC collapse OP) is not what you meant, then it is you who has the problem communicating your thoughts, and should thus admit so.
That, F2, is the bottom line.
No If's.
No And's.
No But's.
