[ot] CONFRONTING THE EVIDENCE

frankie123 · Post by **frankie123** » Tue Sep 26, 2006 5:29 pm

Scube wrote:
frankie123 wrote:The thing that bothers me about people like that is that they make claims that they stick to without the possibility of them being wrong, and at the same time, they have no HARD EVIDENCE. That is the classic conspiracy theorist.
Please tell me WHO manages this conspitacy against America. Communists? Al Queida? Cina? No globals? I think that it's ridiculous, a LOT of people does not belong to these current of thought (me included). Waiting for your answer..

Scube

Dude, you completely missed my point. I was talking about loose change and its followers. Your post was completely out of context.

steve-o · Post by **steve-o** » Tue Sep 26, 2006 5:41 pm

the_planet wrote:Jesus fuck. I hate our government right now, but I highly, highly doubt that something other than two huge airplanes full of airplane fuel destroyed the buildings.
Seriously, you actually think that two jumbo jets travelling at 500 mph full of jet fuel couldn't topple two buildings after causing intensely hot fires?

Actually, the twin towers were designed to withstand airplane crahses. Buildings older than the twin towers had fires that burned longer and hotter and they didn't collapse neatly into thier own foot print - they didn't collapse at all

Scube · Post by **Scube** » Tue Sep 26, 2006 5:45 pm

frankie123 wrote: Dude, you completely missed my point. I was talking about loose change and its followers. Your post was completely out of context.

Ok, sorry. Anyway I'd like to re-post my question for those interested.

Someone can tell me WHO manages this conspitacy against America? Communists? Al Queida? Cina? No globals? I think that it's ridiculous, a LOT of people does not belong to these current of thought (me included).

Scube

blakejarrell · Post by **blakejarrell** » Tue Sep 26, 2006 10:29 pm

I <3 Maddox
www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net

frankie123 · Post by **frankie123** » Tue Sep 26, 2006 10:29 pm

Scube wrote:
frankie123 wrote: Dude, you completely missed my point. I was talking about loose change and its followers. Your post was completely out of context.
Ok, sorry. Anyway I'd like to re-post my question for those interested.

Someone can tell me WHO manages this conspitacy against America? Communists? Al Queida? Cina? No globals? I think that it's ridiculous, a LOT of people does not belong to these current of thought (me included).

Scube

I really don't see what you're asking dude. Perhaps you're not phrasing your question correctly.

subterFUSE · Post by **subterFUSE** » Tue Sep 26, 2006 11:14 pm

frankie123 wrote:
Scube wrote:
frankie123 wrote: Dude, you completely missed my point. I was talking about loose change and its followers. Your post was completely out of context.
Ok, sorry. Anyway I'd like to re-post my question for those interested.

Someone can tell me WHO manages this conspitacy against America? Communists? Al Queida? Cina? No globals? I think that it's ridiculous, a LOT of people does not belong to these current of thought (me included).

Scube
I really don't see what you're asking dude. Perhaps you're not phrasing your question correctly.

He has a knack for that.

I think there's a minor language barrier.

Apparently he thinks that these conspiracy theories are all being run by a single group. Or, he thinks that someone here is claiming they are all run by one source.

This is not the case, however. The truth is.... there are numerous, independent groups of people all over the world who all have their own ideas about what happened. Some of them share similar ideas, while others have completely differing views.

But no one is overseeing them all, as Scube seems to be asking. It's not this vast worldwide conglomerate conspiracy. It's just pockets of people, spread out around the globe, who think there's a lot more to the story than just some terrorists flying planes.

I just happen to be someone who disagrees with a lot of these elaborate conspiracy theories.

frankie123 · Post by **frankie123** » Wed Sep 27, 2006 1:05 am

subterFUSE wrote:
frankie123 wrote:
Scube wrote: Ok, sorry. Anyway I'd like to re-post my question for those interested.

Someone can tell me WHO manages this conspitacy against America? Communists? Al Queida? Cina? No globals? I think that it's ridiculous, a LOT of people does not belong to these current of thought (me included).

Scube
I really don't see what you're asking dude. Perhaps you're not phrasing your question correctly.

He has a knack for that.

I think there's a minor language barrier.

Apparently he thinks that these conspiracy theories are all being run by a single group. Or, he thinks that someone here is claiming they are all run by one source.

This is not the case, however. The truth is.... there are numerous, independent groups of people all over the world who all have their own ideas about what happened. Some of them share similar ideas, while others have completely differing views.

But no one is overseeing them all, as Scube seems to be asking. It's not this vast worldwide conglomerate conspiracy. It's just pockets of people, spread out around the globe, who think there's a lot more to the story than just some terrorists flying planes.

I just happen to be someone who disagrees with a lot of these elaborate conspiracy theories.

The funniest part about conspiracy theories is that most people are dense enough to believe them. I just happen to take it personally because more then one friend of mine lost a friend or family in the towers.

glu · Post by **glu** » Wed Sep 27, 2006 1:17 am

The story of 9/11 has many holes, regardless of where you stand with it.

Theories are there to offer possible realities because the official story has yet to convince many many people- scientists, scholars, and spectators alike. This doesn't devalue anyone who died on that day.

What I find more freightening than any 9/11 conspiracy theory is the history of the CIA. It makes some of these 9/11 theories more tangable.

point is, no one is devaluing anyone's death because they question the US gov's role in 9/11.

frankie123 · Post by **frankie123** » Wed Sep 27, 2006 1:51 am

glu wrote:The story of 9/11 has many holes, regardless of where you stand with it.

Theories are there to offer possible realities because the official story has yet to convince many many people- scientists, scholars, and spectators alike. This doesn't devalue anyone who died on that day.

What I find more freightening than any 9/11 conspiracy theory is the history of the CIA. It makes some of these 9/11 theories more tangable.

point is, no one is devaluing anyone's death because they question the US gov's role in 9/11.

Dude, you are way out of your element. If you are telling me that people aren't offended by the fact that these brats from loose change are essentially saying peoples family and friends were killed by the government and not terrorists, you have NO IDEA what you're talking about.

Secondly, I've already stated, the only people that AREN'T open to any idea besides there own, are the conspiracy theorists.

glu · Post by **glu** » Wed Sep 27, 2006 2:00 am

frankie123 wrote:

Dude, you are way out of your element. If you are telling me that people aren't offended by the fact that these brats from loose change are essentially saying peoples family and friends were killed by the government and not terrorists, you have NO IDEA what you're talking about.

Secondly, I've already stated, the only people that AREN'T open to any idea besides there own, are the conspiracy theorists.

Hey homie, I am not "way out of my element" that is a low jab, man.

trying to remain friendly...

and to answer your "if" hypothetical argument, I did not say what I highlighted in bold. YOU are saying that, and possibly trying to put words in my mouth. be careful there. Of course people get offended, humans get offended for thousands of reasons. My statement had very little to do with that...

I stated it twice in my last post to be clear on my intentions

I guess I failed

allow me to try again...

#3

I am saying that the deaths of those that died are not devalued because there are alternative theories out there.

subterFUSE · Post by **subterFUSE** » Wed Sep 27, 2006 2:09 am

glu wrote:
frankie123 wrote:

Dude, you are way out of your element. If you are telling me that people aren't offended by the fact that these brats from loose change are essentially saying peoples family and friends were killed by the government and not terrorists, you have NO IDEA what you're talking about.

Secondly, I've already stated, the only people that AREN'T open to any idea besides there own, are the conspiracy theorists.

Hey homie, I am not "way out of my element" that is a low jab, man.

trying to remain friendly...

and to answer your "if" hypothetical argument, I did not say what I highlighted in bold. YOU are saying that, and possibly trying to put words in my mouth. be careful there. Of course people get offended, humans get offended for thousands of reasons. My statement had very little to do with that...

I stated it twice in my last post to be clear on my intentions

I guess I failed

allow me to try again...

#3

I am saying that the deaths of those that died are not devalued because there are alternative theories out there.

Walter: "Donnie, you're out of your element..... Dude, the Chinaman is not the issue here. I'm talking about taking a stand. About drawing a line in the sand. About, across this line you DO NOT..... Oh, and Dude.... Chinaman is NOT the preferred nomenclature. Asian-American, please."

frankie123 · Post by **frankie123** » Wed Sep 27, 2006 2:10 am

glu wrote: I am saying that the deaths of those that died are not devalued because there are alternative theories out there.

Dude, to most of the people that lost friends and families, the commentary on "alternative theories" is what OFFENDS them. It makes them feel like the death of there friends and families is being toiled with. Get it?

glu · Post by **glu** » Wed Sep 27, 2006 3:30 am

yes, i do "get it."

all i was saying was

in my belief, people who question it
are not diminishing the deaths of those that died.

granted~ that would offend some people.

~but to others who have lost family from 9/11, they may
be offended that people have accepted the official story.

peace

g

frankie123 · Post by **frankie123** » Wed Sep 27, 2006 3:36 am

glu wrote:
~but to others who have lost family from 9/11, they may
be offended that people have accepted the official story.

peace

g

Sorry dude, but you're wrong. I'm a new yorker and I know for a fact that the grand majority (if not everybody) of people that lost somebody in the towers don't attribute it to anything else other then terrorism. I'd be surprised if you could find one citation of somebody that lost somebody in the towers saying "I don't think it was terrorist".

glu · Post by **glu** » Wed Sep 27, 2006 5:21 am

SPONSOR: 911truth.org is a coalition of researchers, journalists and victim family members working to expose and answer the hundreds of still unresolved questions concerning 9/11, especially the nearly 400 questions that the Family Steering Committee filed with the 9/11 Commission. Initially welcomed by the commissioners as their "road map," these queries cut to the heart of 9/11 crimes and accountability, specifically raising the central issues of motive, means and cui bono (who profited?). The Commission ultimately ignored 80% of these issues, however, opting only to explore system failures, miscommunications and incompetence. The victim families' most incisive questions remain unaddressed to this day.

http://www.911truth.org/article.php?sto ... 2022041421