Answering a Comment
Here's one that strikes me as good enough from the CT community to deserve a response on the front page. I'm going to respond paragraph by paragraph to this comment by FeltMountain:
Would anyone mind if I interrupted for a moment to ask this: Why is this conversation even taking place? (Not the conversation about Jews controlling Porn, the conversationg about 9/11 in general.) More to the point, why are people who believe in the official story, when your views are in line with every major media outlet and every official piece of documentation on the tragedy, even responding to whackos who talk about holographic planes and massive government conspiracies?
Because I got angry one afternoon when I watched Loose Change. Because we get hundreds of hits every day from people performing Google searches looking for "Loose Change Lies", "Loose Change Mistakes", etc., telling me that people are out there looking for the facts. Because every time there's a Looser spamming a forum, chances are that the next person will be telling them about Screw Loose Change (look in our referring logs for the evidence).
I'll tell you why. Because you're terrified of what's going on in this country right now. Shocked by the correlations between 1930s Germany and 2000s USA. Horrified by the fact that a fascist regime has taken over your government and is treading all over your constitution, destroying the democracy your forefathers shed blood and tears to create and igniting the fires of war the world over.
That's delusional. Many of the best debunkers are politically liberal, hate Bush and the Republicans. Take Perry Logan, please! ;)
So you think:
"Maybe if I shot my eyes hard enough, or if I scream loud enough... Maybe if I go to sleep tonight and the Bomb hasn't dropped by the time I wake up...
Mmmmm, the screaming is generally not recommended, nor is shotting the eyes. I'm 51 years old and the bomb has not dropped in my lifetime, so I'm not about to start sweating it.
Maybe if I debunk just one whacked-out 9/11 theory...
Hah! Show me one that isn't fairly easy to debunk!
Then this isn't actually happening.
It will be OK."
But, it is happening.
And you are not going to be OK.
Do something about THAT problem now, please, and twenty years on we'll all be able to write and read long-winded books about what actually did or did not happen on 9/11. (Assuming we'll all be alive to do so, which is becoming questionable.)
Thank you for your time.
Hysteria doesn't work with me; I have to be reasoned to. Nobody has reasoned to me anything about the supposed government conspiracy on 9-11 that didn't collapse faster than the Twin Towers.
posted by Pat @ 8:21 AM
46 comments
46 Comments:
This doesn't have much to do with the article, however, I figured everyone should see this.
Because I got angry one afternoon when I watched Loose Change.
Anger screwed up your perception and the rest was history.
BTW, checkout this diagonally cut "gypsum" steel column, LOL!
Picture..
theres no way in hell thermite can cut that straight, so what may i ask do you think did that nessie?
I'm saying it's thermite but I have never tried to cut a steel column with thermite so I'm not 100% sure, have you? Doubtful.
But look at it! How did that get cut so perfectly? Torches wouldn't leave that residue on the outside like that (not exactly perfect as you point out).
Column was cut by thermal lance
during cleanup/recovery.
Look below, what purpose did cutting that column right there accomplish?
Anger screwed up your perception and the rest was history.
Senor Pot, I'd like to introduce you to Sir Kettle.
I'm saying it's thermite
And you'd be wrong.
Thermite is controlled by gravity.
Gravity doesn't go sideways.
I figured everyone should see this.
It's unreal how the Democrats (and the nutroots) are reacting to the miniseries.
The lapses that allowed 9/11 to happen didn't just occur over the nine months Dubya was in office.
WTF? Hey, crackhead, it was part of the cleanup effort. When you're trying to cart away assloads of wreckage, it helps if you can cut it into manageable pieces first. How the FUCK can you be THIS retarded? Pull your head out of your ass before you choke on your own shit.
Gravity doesn't go sideways.
The pictures clearly shows gravity works! :D
When you're trying to cart away assloads of wreckage, it helps if you can cut it into manageable pieces first.
Thought you said is was part of the recovery effort? Regardless, even the location of the column would be hard to get any torch on it. Facts are facts, this piece shows how the building was fractured during the collapse and not the cleanup/recovery.
The pictures clearly shows gravity works! :D
No, it would have gone straight down.
To a person with brain cells that looks an awful lot like someone cut it with a torch.
Might wanna find pictures from before the tower collapsed and clean up began.
Thought you said is was part of the recovery effort?
Cleanup, recovery, irrelevant, it was cut in order to make it easier to move/handle. Only a moron like you could insist that a steel column was cut with thermite on a 45 degree angle in order to demolish a building.
Facts are facts, this piece shows how the building was fractured during the collapse and not the cleanup/recovery.
Nazi retards are Nazi retards, this entire argument shows just how fractured your frontal lobes are.
Facts are facts
Unless you're nesnyc, where "facts" mean "any unsupported nonsense I happen to believe".
at a 45 degree angle?
No the irregular residue on the sides of the column show how gravity pulled the molten steel down un-uniformly.
No, I hate to speculate, but that's exactly what you guys are asking me to do. So I will entertain the idea for a bit..
If the thermite charge was placed, say in a type of C4 type of plastic base and then ignited via electrical charges, wouldn't this putty type of material, if placed along a 45 degree angle like that, burn all the way through where it was placed? Now, I have speculated and conceptualized, I'm sure this principal is applicable in this case. Did it happen this way? I'm not sure, could have just been RDX or other type of cutter charges. Point is, the evidence is right there in your face yet you still want to believe the hogwash the government is trying to spin. Snap out of it.
BTW,
There is no such thing as "Al Qaeda"
There is no such thing as "Al Qaeda"
There is no such thing as "Al Qaeda"
There is no such thing as "Al Qaeda"
the evidence is right there in your face yet you still want to believe the hogwash the government is trying to spin.
So following unsupported speculation he continues with his religious hymn.
if you're gonna do that, you may as well do it right:
It should be "Nesnyc Heil" or "Heil Nesnyc".
The word "sieg" means "victory", so what you've been saying so far translates to roughly "victory hail nesync", which, while not exactly nonsensical, is certainly not the way it should be phrased.
Note he links the same retarded site over and over.
If the thermite charge was placed, say in a type of C4 type of plastic base and then ignited via electrical charges, wouldn't this putty type of material, if placed along a 45 degree angle like that, burn all the way through where it was placed?
Yeah, because thermite will burn through steel, but not plastic.
You really are an utter and complete moron.
Point is, the evidence is right there in your face yet you still want to believe the hogwash the government is trying to spin. Snap out of it.
Point is it's NOT FUCKING EVIDENCE IF YOU CAN'T EXPLAIN HOW IT WAS DONE!
We HAVE given you an explanation which MAKES SENSE. We KNOW that steel can be cut with a thermal lance and that the resulting steel will look exactly like the picture you've shown. We also know for a fact that thermite CANNOT do what you claim it has done! So how in the &*@)#*#($@!!!! can you claim it's proof WHEN YOU CAN'T EVEN EXPLAIN WHAT IT'S PROOF OF???!?!?!!!
Here, a thermal lance you f***ing idiot.
See how he's cutting on an angle? See the power of the lance? See the slagged metal flying all over the place? Is it clear now that I've drawn you a picture? Or do I need to get the KKK to come here and back me up before you'll beleive the truth?
Geez...lately you can't come on here without having the comments section clogged with useless banter. Nessie is always the instigator, and we all seem to play along...but it is getting boring.
My comment, on the Blog Post:
I got involved in the 9/11 Debunking because I have friends who fell for the other side. I did it because I saw easily they fell. I did it because for my friend, and many others, "Loose Change" was the "gateway" drug that lead to the rest of the 9/11 conspiracy shit.
I also did it because I want to understand fully, what happened that day. I want to understand based on FACTS, SOLID ONES, and I want to hear from the REAL EXPERTS on what happened.
I also wanted to, as best as I could, contribute to the gathering of RESOURCES so that when the fence sitters, and the REAL TRUTH SEEKERS come looking for answers, they get some honest ones.
AND BEFORE YOU START NESSIE, just shut up and leave it alone.
TAM
Anger screwed up your perception and the rest was history.
It's funny how the truthers use every tiniest scrap of wording, picture, or film that can be used, even when it makes them look completely moronic.
Note he links the same retarded site over and over.
And you guys aren't guilty of linking wild dot gov conspiracy theories? :D
And you guys aren't guilty of linking wild dot gov conspiracy theories? :D
It isn't a conspiracy theory, it's an actual conspiracy.
You link to a site whose poster and commenters believe in some vast Jew conspiracy that doesn't exist.
.gov is more reliable than wakeupfromslumber. Hell, the name alone betrays its idiocy.
Here, a thermal lance you f***ing idiot.
LOL! I'm an idiot??? Like I said, look at the heavy equipment used to power that thing. Now look at the picture and tell me where was the platform the worker was standing to do that cut! Go ahead; make yourself look even stupider than you just did.
and I want to hear from the REAL EXPERTS on what happened.
Real "PAID" experts.
It isn't a conspiracy theory, it's an actual conspiracy.
It's such a wild conspiracy theory the FBI has yet to charge the alleged main culprit! How's that for "theory?"
Real "PAID" experts.
I guess he missed how much money it'd cost to buy off every expert.
*nesnyc covers his ears*
"I'm not listening!
I'm not listening!
I'm not listening!
I'm not listening!"
It's such a wild conspiracy theory the FBI has yet to charge the alleged main culprit!
You think if they captured him (no, none of your "he actually works for us lolz!") they wouldn't charge him with it?
I guess he missed how much money it'd cost to buy off every expert.
Well, the NIST "report" cost 20 million so that buys a LOT of "experts" (paid liars) and I'm sure you'd be happy with a fraction of that.
You think if they captured him (no, none of your "he actually works for us lolz!") they wouldn't charge him with it?
He was charged with the Embassy bombings 3 months after the fact. Why is 911 so different?
I'm sure you'd be happy with a fraction of that.
I can't be bought.
If you guys had the evidence I'd be right with you.
Unfortunately (for you anyway) you're all wrong on all counts.
LOL! I'm an idiot???
Yes. That's not even a question at this point. Put as many question marks on it as you want, it'll still be a statement.
Like I said, look at the heavy equipment used to power that thing. Now look at the picture and tell me where was the platform the worker was standing to do that cut!
How about this platform.
Or maybe this one.
Or maybe this one"?
How incompetent can you possibly get?
Nessie;
Even if there were only 20 experts that worked on the WTC sites for NIST (and I am sure there were alot more) and they used every cent of that 20 Million to buy them off, that would only be 1Million each...not a whole lot to live off for a lifetime, and to bury the guilt of covering up the murder of 3000 people.
That's what a discussion requires, two sides. Which is also why I also admire Loose Change, because before it the national, public conversation was fairly one-sided.
The idea that there are two sides to every story is childish.
if wanting to honor the constitution and protect America from the fascist takeover
There is no fascist takeover. This is why we don't respond to hysteria.
If these "CTers" throw out 1000 and 1 whacked out theories and five valid points (or even just valid questions that need answering), then you are in a nice position to rhetorically slay them, thereby justifying in your mind (on a small level) your entire world outlook, allowing you to take a deep sigh and say "See. It's all going to be Ok".
And as I have said before, in my humble opinion, things are NOT going to be Ok.
That's rather the point. When we take the time to "rhetorically slay" 996 points (1001 minus 5), and CT nuts STILL keep insisting on insisting that 9/11 was "an inside job", it's rather difficult to take them, or you, seriously. Because at that point all you're really going on is your "humble opinion". No fact. No logic. Not even a reasonable suspicion. Just a little voice somewhere in the back of your head which keeps insisting that the government did it.
So what it comes down to is basically...if you can't put forward a valid theory...if you can't provide evidence which truly provides a logical basis for some suspicion...then why are you trying to convert people to your point of view? It's one thing to ask questions, listen to the answer, and modify your theories based on those answers. It's quite something else when you demand questions, ignore the answers, and continue to tell anyone who will listen that your questions haven't been answered and you want "an impartial investigation". That's the sign of a truly imbalanced individual.
Besides which, since when does C4 have a "plastic base"? For some reason I originaly thought he was talking about a C19 Claymore (plastic casing). Now, reading it over, I understand what he's talking about:
The idiot thinks you could actually make a brick of thermite with the consistency of C4.
In other words, instead of a "plastic explosive" you'd have a "plastic incendiary" :p
Just another insight into the empty cavern that is Nazinyc's skull.
feltmountain:
You seem, from your reply to be a reasonable person. The tone in the posting here often has a little venom in it, and that is usually due to the number of people who visit the sites here, claiming to be "on the fence" wrt 9/11, or are "just asking questions", and then when you provide them with some facts, you soon discover they were a Conspiracy Theorist just looking to pick a fight.
If you are seriously looking for answers, than keep looking here, and on JREF...you will find them. There is no answer for every problem, or every "coincidence" or "inconsistency" but such it is with a scenario as complex as the attacks of 9/11.
Oh and Shawn, I couldn't tell if you were being sarcastic or not, but in my opinion, dealing with many people on opposite sides of things (do you know how many relationships I have helped people through) there are almost always 3 sides, as the cliche goes, yours, theirs, and the truth.
TAM
I couldn't tell if you were being sarcastic or not
I wasn't. By "side" I mean the truth (or at least someone with some support to their contentions).
For instance there was once a Holocaust segment on some show (I believe on CNN) and to "balance" it they had a Holocaust denier on.
It's why I say the idea that there are two sides to every story is childish.
Horrified by the fact that a fascist regime has taken over your government and is treading all over your constitution, destroying the democracy your forefathers shed blood and tears to create and igniting the fires of war the world over.
Interesting bit of turnspeak that. In my lifetime the loss of rights and destruction of democracy has almost always come from the left, not the right. Also anybody who calls this administration "fascist" does so out of a complete ignorance of history of even of the definition of the word fascist. And finally, we ignite the fires of war the world over by defending ourselves from aggressors that wish to destroy us? Turnspeak at it's finest.
@Blind Avocado: Saddam Hussein was going to destroy the US?
Global Islamism supported by tyranical regimes will. Saddam's just a small part of the equation.
This administration came into power through a coup de'tat
People are entitled to their opinions but not their own facts. Bush was fairly elected. Get used to it. BTW, what changes to the bill of rights? You mean Bush Is trampling all over private property rights? Oh, that’s right, it is Democrats doing that. I know, he has been going around imposing speech codes on collage campuses. Oh wait, that is democrats again. I know! Bush is trying to censor a TV movie that is very critical of him. Oops, democrats again. I know, they are denying free speech to political candidates through "campaign Finance reform" Ok I concede that one, as that was a bipartisan effort. The only thing I can think of is that he is monitoring the phone calls of foreign nationals calling foreign nationals overseas only. What a bastard!
"Turnspeak"? That's not accurate. To use turnspeak would be to deliberately contrive my language or distort facts in a way that I know in my heart to be underhanded in attempt to bring you around to my side of the argument. What I said there I meant.
You got me there. I was assuming a level of intelligence high enough to manipulate people. Apparently you are just stupid.
Global Islamism supported by tyranical regimes will. Saddam's just a small part of the equation.
Are you saying Saddam Hussein is a global islamist?
This administration came into power through a coup de'tat
Proof? Details? Sources?
I wrote my own name in on the ballot, because they're ALL full of shit, and frankly I was the best man for the job.
Spooky, I did the exact same thing for the exact same reason.
Are you saying Saddam Hussein is a global islamist?
No.
Well I hate to be a dick Alex, but WHAT part of the "equation" does Saddam Hussein represent in this Global Islamic conspiracy?
It's not a conspiracy so much as a movement. As to what part, the "have WMD's, will sell to highest bidder part". At least, that's the image he went out of his way to project pre-invasion, and everyone bought it.
I'm not going to debate the issue with you because we've gone over it before. The invasion of Iraq was fully justified based on their violation of the ceasefire alone.
Were they the best target? No. I'd rather have hit Iran or possibly Pakistan. However, a full out invasion of those two countries could never be justified. If we wanted to overturn a tyrannical government, create a new battleground to face the terrorists, and have a shot at creating a second democracy in the middle east, all without losing all international and homefront support on day 1 of the invasion, what other country could the US have attacked? Would YOU have supported an invasion of Iran or Pakistan? How many people do you suppose would have? maybe 15% of the population? How many governments? 1?
propping up these regimes is leading America deeper into war and literally recruiting enemies on a daily basis.
No shit, really? Wow. I would never have guessed.
Show me where I claimed US foreign policy is perfect.
Saddam and the Baathist party could have stopped that. The monarchs and Mullahs were scarred to death of this party that wanted to create a modern, secular Pan-Arab nation.
Bullshit. Saddam had no capacity to carry out such pipe dreams, and the Mullahs had no reason to fear him. With religious extremism on the rise, and the extremists being convinced that the heathanism of the west would cause our downfall, you're telling me Saddam could have turned the Middle East into a secular nation? That's gotta be the biggest load of crap I've heard yet.
No Alex, no matter how much you wish, the attack was not justified. If such a thing constituted justification, WHY oh WHY would the Bush administration make asses of themselves talking about WMDs and the "threat" he posed to the world when they could have just cited the violation of the ceasefire?
That's not a logical line of argument. Imagine you've got a convict in court charged with both rape and murder. He gets convicted of rape, but found not guilty of murder. Well, by your logic, he shouldn't serve time for rape either. After all, "WHY oh WHY would the prosecutors make asses of themselves talking about murder when they could have just cited the rape", right?
If you'd actually been paying attention you would have noticed that the Bush admin talked about a LOT more reasons for invading Iraq. Unfortunately, WMD were "sexy" to the media. What sells more papers:
1) Pictures of a mushroom cloud on the front page with the text saying "IRAQ HAS WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION!!!"
or
2) An article saying "well, it turns out that Iraq hasn't been following the terms of the 1991 ceasefire agreement....something we've known for, oh, about EIGHT YEARS NOW...but NOW we're going to do something about it".
What do you think? Which of those justifications do you think the newspapers and television networks would be more likely to latch on to?
Also would you care to cite the source for that "WMDs to the highest bidder bit"?
We know he supported terrorist organizations in Palestine. Even you should be aware of that so I'm not going to go looking for specific info unless you ask for it. We also had some intel tying him to Al Qaeda, although it wasn't conclusive. So, while there's no specific intel to indicate he would have sold NBC weapons to terrorists, it's a small step to go from supporting them with money to supporting them with weaponry. No, there was no direct evidence it was going to happen, but it was a valid concern.
Next you asked which country would I have preferred the US to attack?
Straw man. That's not what I asked.
You don't think the radical Islamists were afraid of Saddam? Well one fellow named Osama Bin Laden was afraid enough to warn the Saudis that Saddam would invade Kuwait- BEFORE HE ACTUALLY DID.
I'm aware of that, and if you're talking about their fears back in the 1980's then yeah, you're correct. On the other hand, by 2002 he'd become irrelevant, and that's what I was referring to. You really need to qualify your statements by specifying whether you're talking about the past, ancient past, or the present. Your arguments always jump all over the timeline, which gets rather confusing.
Post a Comment
<< Home