9/11

[scalyblue]

It's been proven since the very start of this thread that not one person here would change their views on this subject; And I'm just here to inquire upon the mental justifications as to why this is so. I can't fight your blind trust for authority, and you should know how this feels because you see it in the religious you argue against. You'll see this as a white flag on the subject, but it's merely a lack of interest on my part.

When, not if, you finally readjust your reality check so it points within and not without, you'll see what I mean. Until then, I'm just a fuel for your ignorance.

It's not a blind trust of authority, it's the ability to recognize the verisimilitude of facts. It is not blind trust in authority to conclude from evidence the same thing that others have concluded from evidence. The conclusions come from evidence, not some sort of dogmatic faith. The only dogmatic faith I have is that the universe exists and is observable as it exists. Facts, niocan. The things you don't have on your side. All you have are complex questions such as: "Don't you find it strange at all that there have been no yaks roaming the streets of manhattan since 9/11 >nudge nudge< eh? eh? Because I can ask the question there must be some grain of truth to it, musn't there?

Why should I change a view of mine that has been founded on a combination of empirical, replicable evidence and sound, demonstrable concepts of material physics and engineering? Because you think it might be teh conspiracy?

The reason you're not interested is because you have lost any credibility on this site, nobody buys your nonsense, and everybody's wise to your trolling ways.

How do you seriously go through life maintaining the belief that spending years learning about a subject makes somebody less authoritative about it? Next time you need surgery, you should get an orderly to do it because asking help from the surgeon would be a blind-faith appeal to authority.

--edit
Furthermore, if you bail from this thread after you've been intellectually cornered, you're sure as hell not going to do it under the delusion that you're standing on some sort of moral or spiritual high ground. You're the same soulless organic filth that everybody else is, the only thing that makes you special is that you're so gullible to fringe theories.

 

[TheExylos]

I was in the building at impact, I was a emergency Med tech at the time working at Walter Reid, I was there from the second the plane hit for three fucking days. Because I was also an NCO was constantly in and out of t he command tent, I remember when they ordered the camera taken and I heard why.

They have not been released because they are Evidence in an active investigation, which you would know if you took the time to actually investigate the reasoning. Since i was also part of the Body clean up I can tell you with 100 percent certainty that it was a plane. Not a rocket, not a missile of some kind but a plane.

So no it doesn't bother me they haven't released more than the one and they only released the one to appease people like you who have no idea what you are talking about.

Why isn't the grass messed up, Its Astroturf you can probably drop a bomb on it and not damage it.

Why did the plane not go all the way through and only one side collapse because that is is what it was designed to do.

To make the this crazy theory work, you have to draw conclusions that people, who were not there would not know make no sense.

You have had a multitude of people tell you how you were wrong, and I would say you were a troll, accept your arguments are less thought out and make less sense than a troll.

I am hoping someone locks this post, though I do not see that happening no matter how much we wish we would.

 

[RickyPayneTV]

It's been proven since the very start of this thread that not one person here would change their views on this subject; And I'm just here to inquire upon the mental justifications as to why this is so. I can't fight your blind trust for authority, and you should know how this feels because you see it in the religious you argue against. You'll see this as a white flag on the subject, but it's merely a lack of interest on my part.

When, not if, you finally readjust your reality check so it points within and not without, you'll see what I mean. Until then, I'm just a fuel for your ignorance.

Erm. Why would someone change their views on a subject when they know they are right? Of course you want everyone to change their views on a subject. dur . If someone came to you and said that the sun goes into the sea at night for a bath. And that a Copernican model is a conspiracy. Would you be closed minded and deluded just because you didn't change your views?

What a rediculous argument this whole section has been. You seem to think you know better than an engineer on the subject of engineering. I am guessing that you are quoting from a conspiracy website.

Why is it that conspiracy theorists have hijacked the term "Freethinker"? Why is it that they swarm to websites like this one, thinking that we all will share their craziness..

Freethinking = Unhindered, emprical, rational thought.

 

[5810Singer]

Also, surely the russians, or another anti-american nation

Sorry, but who the hell says the Russians are anti-American?

They might not be pro-American, but why should they be? America isn't pro-Russian after all.

I hear a lot of Americans talking about things being "anti-American", and most of the time it's a total crock.

Whenever this sort of thing comes up I'm reminded of George W. Bush's "you're either with us or against us" speech, which (as has been noted by political thinkers the world over) was the ultimate nadir of international diplomacy.

The world isn't black and white, it's not "with us or against us", it isn't anti-American or pro-American,.....it's a large three dimensional complicated entity, and we must not forget that.

 

[RickyPayneTV]

Also, surely the russians, or another anti-american nation

Sorry, but who the hell says the Russians are anti-American?

They might not be pro-American, but why should they be? America isn't pro-Russian after all.

I hear a lot of Americans talking about things being "anti-American", and most of the time it's a total crock.

Whenever this sort of thing comes up I'm reminded of George W. Bush's "you're either with us or against us" speech, which (as has been noted by political thinkers the world over) was the ultimate nadir of international diplomacy.

The world isn't black and white, it's not "with us or against us", it isn't anti-American or pro-American,.....it's a large three dimensional complicated entity, and we must not forget that.

Of course.. But as if I am going to go into micro specifics in a blog post.. I was'nt trying to insult americans. I was just saying that there are countries out there that would stand to gain (Russia for example) from soiling americas reputation. But also, even any american democrat or someone who would love to smear the government could blow the lid off of the whole 9/11 thing. The liberals supposedly own run media after all.

I am just saying. sheesh. There are many people who hate the UK. Dont get touchy about it. Its not ideal, but its real.

 

[Master_Ghost_Knight]

Seriously dude, if 9/11 was indeed a goverment conspiracy and if i were to engineer it, I would get real suicidal Islamic extremists, to fly really hijacked planes, it would be simple, safe and effective, noone in their right mind would create an over elaborated plan to pull out such a feat (whit stunt pilots, stunt planes, stunt buildings) while that being more expensive and less effective.

You seem to underestimate the need for such an event at that time.

What kind of fucktarded answer is that?
It is like me making the objections that no sane person would try to eat icecream with their forehead given that they have a perfectly good mouth to do so, and you reply. "You seem to underestimate the need for eating ice creams with the forehead at that time".
Really the fuck?

Many people don't have anything else to do with their lifes then to create horse shit conspiracy theories like this, ask your self this, is it possible that who ever told you this stuff is wrong? And sense you have the habit of thrusting the word of people self entilted profets rather then sense, how many times does it take to show you that they are wrong before you start to doubt that maybe they are just fooling you?

Information is free, and I trust the evidence not the authority whom speaks the loudest.

How many more false flag operations do *you* need to witness before you start to realize that the trust you hold for the old institutions is based on psychological conditioning consented through your own apathy?

[/quote]
I'm sorry but that is complete bullshit. "Information is free" is generaly a poor excuse for an ignorant not to educate themselves, i can give you all the information requiered to solve a particular problem, one that I would solve in 5 mins I would be surprised if you could solve it in 5 months. Information is useless when you don't know how to use it (which is a somewhat redundant statment).
Secondly this was not even the point I was trying to make, you had the guts to quote my statment, and as you replyed you complete ignore everysingle one of the points and questions made in it. I have given you a chance to be honest about your position, and yet you have made it really clear that you wouldn't even consider your position to be wrong in any circunstance. You are not interested in reason or facts, what you want is to hear your opinion with someone else's voice and get credited for how awsome you are for having this hiden truth.
You are a moron!

 

[darthrender2010]

Niocan = PCS^3 = Poster-boy for Conspiratorial Stupidity

 

[Laurens]

One of the most prevelant conspiracies surrounding 9/11 is that the WTC was subject to a controlled demolition. I really don't understand how this theory has taken hold of so many people. A controlled demolition takes months to set up, and that doesn't take into account the effort they would have had to have gone to, to conceal the detonators and cables. I guess they don't mention that fact in any of their theories.

When did they have the opportunity to prepare WTC for a controlled demolition? They couldn't have done it when people were there because they would have noticed people putting detonators in various places, and alarm bells would start to ring. So when did they do it? I do not see any opportunity for them to have done so.

To me that utterly disproves the controlled demolition theory and attempts to get round the inconvinient fact that it would have been impossible for them to have set up a controlled demolition are just utter fantasy.

Laurens

 

[Finger]

The conspiracy theory exploits the uneducated, relying on their ignorance of how the world actually works. This is why the conspiracy theorists will usually answer criticisms like yours with half-baked rationalizations like "They could have used remote bombs!" or "Several floors were 'shut down for maintenance' a week before 9/11. Coincidence?!" [EDIT: either that or they do what Niocan did in this thread and simply ignore those types of questions, pretending that the details don't matter.] My guess is that they envision a few men with briefcases walking around each tower, going into supply closets, and placing "charges" in vents or behind desks. These people have no idea how building demolitions actually work and they're more than willing to fill in the gaps with whatever bad movie science lets them believe it was an inside job.

 

[australopithecus]

It's been proven since the very start of this thread that not one person here would change their views on this subject.

Just to refresh your memory...

now if anyone can show me evidence that doesn't rely on x, y or z subjective, unsupported claims, "it looks like" or "could've's" then I will happily revaluate my position on the subject

No one is changing their views, or I should say no one is agreeing with YOU because YOU have not offered any evidence nor a single valid argument that better explains both the attack and collapse of the towers. That you have consistantly demonstrated that you will believe any bullshit spoon fed to you via Youtube is not our problem, nor is your extremely obvious lack of knowledge and understanding in the related sciences that have EVERYTHING to do with explaining what happened on that day. Nor is it our problem that you seemingly see yourself as the only one who can see 'the truth' in an ocean of cover ups, conspiracies and media 'bias', but seeing as you just will not stop with your ill thought out and ill evidenced nonsense we have to keep correcting on very basic things.

We're not changing our views, not because we're part of the herd or just like denying everything in the whole wide world, it's because you haven't evidenced anything worth changing our views over.

 

[Laurens]

I would like to see someone offer a conspiracy theory on the events of 9/11 that doesn't use an overwhelming amount of fallacies, and offers some evidence that cannot be debunked and explained by the so called "official explanation".

If someone can do this I might start to accept their theory.

Also I distinctly dislike being called closed minded by conspiracy theorists, especially since they have completely closed their minds to anything other than the notion that it was an inside job.

 

[Raistlin Majere]

It's been proven since the very start of this thread that not one person here would change their views on this subject; And I'm just here to inquire upon the mental justifications as to why this is so. I can't fight your blind trust for authority, and you should know how this feels because you see it in the religious you argue against. You'll see this as a white flag on the subject, but it's merely a lack of interest on my part.

When, not if, you finally readjust your reality check so it points within and not without, you'll see what I mean. Until then, I'm just a fuel for your ignorance.

You've essentially failed in every statement you've made in this post. Let me break it down for you.

It's been proven since the very start of this thread that not one person here would change their views on this subject

False. I have, courtesy of Finger, ImprobableJoe and Th1sWasATriumph. If you had actually read the whole thread you might know this.

And I'm just here to inquire upon the mental justifications as to why this is so.

No, you're here to piss people off. Trollin' hard. If you actually considered what other people said in replies and just couldn't figure it out, I'd take this back. But you just completely ignore each and every point that eviscerates your arguments over and over again.

I can't fight your blind trust for authority, and you should know how this feels because you see it in the religious you argue against

Fail. You still cannot comprehend (or choose not to) the difference between an argument from authority that is valid and one that is invalid. If someone is an expert in a field, there's a reason for it, and they're judgment is deserving of trust IN THAT FIELD.

You'll see this as a white flag on the subject, but it's merely a lack of interest on my part.

Sounds like trollin'.

When, not if, you finally readjust your reality check so it points within and not without, you'll see what I mean. Until then, I'm just a fuel for your ignorance.

What the fuck are you even talking about? Get your shit together.

 

[Niocan]

Here's a recent FOIA request, enjoy <3

http://www.aclu.org/files/assets/CIA.pdf

"But diz not mentioned by teh media!" Tough luck, kiddo's.

Edit: *ahem* My apologies, the interesting information is located on page 26:
"There is, however, a line that the Commission should not cross -- the line separating the Commission's proper inquiry into the September 11, 2001 attacks from interference with the Government's ability to safeguard the national security, including protection of Americans from future terrorist attacks. The Commission staff's proposed participation in questioning of detainees would cross that line."

National security eh, I seem to recall another individual whom kept repeating that justification for withholding secrets...

 

[TheExylos]

Just shakes his head at the pure unadulterated stupidity.


That was a memo from one person to the commission this was an attempt by the Bush administration to ensure that its torture of certain detainees, which has since been widely documented, remained secret. anyone who has done any research in 9/11 has already seen this report as well as the investigators of the torture and abuse, this is the crime that they didn't want exposed. Please stop taking evidence of a fire and trying to make it evidence of a murder, when there is no body nor anything else to agree with it.

 

[scalyblue]

"But diz not mentioned by teh media!" Tough luck, kiddo's.

Er, it's on youtube. Youtube is part of 'teh media'
Damned media shill, trying to push google's agenda on all of us.

 

[Laurens]

I have a question...

How long do you think Loose Change would be if you edited out all the lies, fallacies, cherry picked quotes and misrepresented evidence?

My guess is about 8 seconds.

 

[IBSpify]

I have a question...

How long do you think Loose Change would be if you edited out all the lies, fallacies, cherry picked quotes and misrepresented evidence?

My guess is about 8 seconds.

You actually think there is 8 seconds or content that wouldn't be cut? you have more faith in them then I do.

 

[Laurens]

I have a question...

How long do you think Loose Change would be if you edited out all the lies, fallacies, cherry picked quotes and misrepresented evidence?

My guess is about 8 seconds.

You actually think there is 8 seconds or content that wouldn't be cut? you have more faith in them then I do.

Yeah, I mean there is that bit where he explains the "official story" - just cut that right before he starts appealing to the numbers of morons that don't believe it and you probably have about 8 seconds or so.

 

[Master_Ghost_Knight]

I don't don't there are allot of lenghty parts where they are shut up.

 

[Commander Eagle]

I have a question...

How long do you think Loose Change would be if you edited out all the lies, fallacies, cherry picked quotes and misrepresented evidence?

My guess is about 8 seconds.

Judging by Screw Loose Change, not very.