What is Crackamite?

[Disbelief]

Wait, wait, wait... I said I thought. I never was in any position to actually prove it. Granted, I think you'll come to the same conclusion if you read some of Zen's last posts and LC's first ones, especially the ones in the thread where I defend Blanchard's and Meigs's reputations, but my point here is that I guessed/inferred/believed LC was a sock for Zen. I don't believe that was ever established, and IIRC, LC denied my accusation.

Sorry to be picky about this, but I'm just trying to live by the same standards I expect out of truthers, so I sorta feel compelled. No offense.

In the protest thread, Wastrel (banned after one post) admitted that LC was in fact Zen. To me, it was obvious by his posting of articles that either had nothing to do with the topic or debunked his point. There are plenty more of his puppets around, it's just a matter of time until they surface or are discovered. Kind of like "Whack-a- Mole."

 

[ElMondoHummus]

In the protest thread, Wastrel (banned after one post) admitted that LC was in fact Zen. To me, it was obvious by his posting of articles that either had nothing to do with the topic or debunked his point. There are plenty more of his puppets around, it's just a matter of time until they surface or are discovered. Kind of like "Whack-a- Mole."

Ah. Okay. Good to know; I don't remember reading that thread (although I don't remember reading a lot of threads here, only to end up perusing them and tripping over some of my own posts. So take my recollection with a grain of salt ). Anyway, like I said, if I'm going to demand distinction between inference and actual proof, I need to practice that level of discernment as well. Otherwise, I'm not living up to my own standard.

Thanks for the info.

 

[Dave Rogers]

The OP, however, is a wonderful example of trying to find anything to make the incongruent, ever increasingly complex truther narrative a little less so.

Don't you mean "a little more so"?

Dave

 

[Disbelief]

Ah. Okay. Good to know; I don't remember reading that thread (although I don't remember reading a lot of threads here, only to end up perusing them and tripping over some of my own posts. So take my recollection with a grain of salt ). Anyway, like I said, if I'm going to demand distinction between inference and actual proof, I need to practice that level of discernment as well. Otherwise, I'm not living up to my own standard.

Thanks for the info.

No problem. Even though I would have bet a paycheck that LC was in fact Zen, you are correct that it was not proven until admitted to. However, it does make for a new sig for me and I imagine that I will continue to add to it in the future.

 

[Par]

Truthbydecree has been banned as a sockpuppet of LastChild.

Pfft. Daaays ago:

TruthByDecree, speculate as to how thermate would be used to demolish the towers. How would it be done, in other words?

I don’t think that LastChild is likely to do anything that could be perceived as substantiating his conspiracy theories.

They should make me a moderator. (I’m only joking. I’d be terrible.)

 

[Par]

Zensmack (LastChild, Laughing Assassin, Wastrel, TruthbyDecree) - Working his way up the sock puppet chain, trying to overtake P'Doh. Or, are they the same?

You're missing "Razetheflag".

 

[Disbelief]

You're missing "Razetheflag".

Thanks. I had it and for some reason removed it while I was changing it.

Edit:
Boy, that was a crappy sentence! I accidentally removed the name while changing my sig.

 

[T.A.M.]

Don't you mean "a little more so"?

Dave

No. I meant that they were attempting to find a product ALREADY IN EXISTENCE, that filled their need to have a silent explosive readily available and usable in this fashion. Thermite is not working out for them, so this guy went with crackamite. It makes it a little simpler, less complex for them, if they can find a product already in existence that fills up the holes in their complex story, rather then just label it "Silent Explosive X"...lol

TAM