Forum index / General Chat / Tell The Forums Things They Won't Agree With

Tell The Forums Things They Won't Agree With

191 posts · page 5 of 7

post #121
17 August 2009, 14:49 UTC#121
QUOTE(Ray @ Aug 17 2009, 03:36 PM) [snapback]556422[/snapback]

Now, if someone has legit information about it all, I'll listen and be more willing to give it my time. And that's why I think Rice, Cheney, and Bush haven't addressed it at all - it would only validate the claims, or at least give them some legitimacy.

Surely that's like a bloke in court choosing which evidence is presented against him?

"Ooh, no thanks, I don't want that bloodstained knife to be considered by the jury, because it was found by a fat guy with a beard who's a little bit weird."

If anything, they've blown this out of proportion by shying away from the accusations of conspiracy. Unfortunately, just like in the case of Maddy McCann's parents refusing to be interviewed by the police "out of principle", it just makes the accused look more and more guilty. The 9/11 report was pathetically biased and was the result of Bush and his cabinet meeting the investigatory commission as a group instead of individually as was requested. Why do that? Why go for strength in numbers if you were completely assured of your innocence?

All it would take is the release of security camera footage showing the plane hitting the Pentagon (lol) and some reliable evidence to cover their asses, and I'll sleep easy. But the more they deflect serious questions with "THAT'S DUMB, BLOW UP OUR OWN TOWERS HAHAH YOU'RE STUPID", the worse it looks for them.
post #122
17 August 2009, 14:57 UTC#122
Again, I'm not saying there wasn't inside shit going on, but I'm not going to say with any confidence at all that there was either. And that's what pisses me off - when people who really have no basis for the accusations to say that they know THE TRUTH. When no one does.

I get what you're saying. I'm glad you're not screaming it, and stating opinion as fact like I've seen a lot of the conspiracy theorists do.
post #123
17 August 2009, 15:05 UTC#123
The Rolling Stone article I posted a few pages back is more geared towards entertainment than actual debate but raises good points in a mock-up discussion:

BUSH: So, what's the plan again?

CHENEY: Well, we need to invade Iraq and Afghanistan. So what we've decided to do is crash a whole bunch of remote-controlled planes into Wall Street and the Pentagon, say they're real hijacked commercial planes, and blame it on the towelheads; then we'll just blow up the buildings ourselves to make sure they actually fall down.

RUMSFELD: Right! And we'll make sure that some of the hijackers are agents of Saddam Hussein! That way we'll have no problem getting the public to buy the invasion.

CHENEY: No, Dick, we won't.

RUMSFELD: We won't?

CHENEY: No, that's too obvious. We'll make the hijackers Al Qaeda and then just imply a connection to Iraq.

RUMSFELD: But if we're just making up the whole thing, why not just put Saddam's fingerprints on the attack?

CHENEY: (sighing) It just has to be this way, Dick. Ups the ante, as it were. This way, we're not insulated if things go wrong in Iraq. Gives us incentive to get the invasion right the first time around.

BUSH: I'm a total idiot who can barely read, so I'll buy that. But I've got a question. Why do we need to crash planes into the Towers at all? Since everyone knows terrorists already tried to blow up that building complex from the ground up once, why don't we just blow it up like we plan to anyway, and blame the bombs on the terrorists?

RUMSFELD: Mr. President, you don't understand. It's much better to sneak into the buildings ourselves in the days before the attacks, plant the bombs and then make it look like it was exploding planes that brought the buildings down. That way, we involve more people in the plot, stand a much greater chance of being exposed and needlessly complicate everything!

CHENEY: Of course, just toppling the Twin Towers will never be enough. No one would give us the war mandate we need if we just blow up the Towers. Clearly, we also need to shoot a missile at a small corner of the Pentagon to create a mightily underpublicized additional symbol of international terrorism -- and then, obviously, we need to fake a plane crash in the middle of fucking nowhere in rural Pennsylvania.

RUMSFELD: Yeah, it goes without saying that the level of public outrage will not be sufficient without that crash in the middle of fucking nowhere.

CHENEY: And the Pentagon crash -- we'll have to do it in broad daylight and say it was a plane, even though it'll really be a cruise missile.

BUSH: Wait, why do we have to use a missile?

CHENEY: Because it's much easier to shoot a missile and say it was a plane. It's not easy to steer a real passenger plane into the Pentagon. Planes are hard to come by.

BUSH: But aren't we using two planes for the Twin Towers?

CHENEY: Mr. President, you're missing the point. With the Pentagon, we use a missile, and say it was a plane.

BUSH: Right, but I'm saying, why don't we just use a plane and say it was a plane? We'll be doing that with the Twin Towers, right?

CHENEY: Right, but in this case, we use a missile. (Throws hands up in frustration) Don, can you help me out here?

RUMSFELD: Mr. President, in Washington, we use a missile because it's sneakier that way. Using an actual plane would be too obvious, even though we'll be doing just that in New York.

BUSH: Oh, OK.

RUMSFELD: The other good thing about saying that it was a passenger jet is that that way, we have to invent a few hundred fictional victims and account for a nonexistent missing crew and plane. It's always better when you leave more cover story to invent, more legwork to do and more possible holes to investigate. Doubt, legwork and possible exposure -- you can't pull off any good conspiracy without them.

BUSH: You guys are brilliant! Because if there's one thing about Americans -- they won't let a president go to war without a damn good reason. How could we ever get the media, the corporate world and our military to endorse an invasion of a secular Iraqi state unless we faked an attack against New York at the hands of a bunch of Saudi religious radicals? Why, they'd never buy it. Look at how hard it was to get us into Vietnam, Iraq the last time, Kosovo?

CHENEY: Like pulling teeth!

RUMSFELD: Well, I'm sold on the idea. Let's call the Joint Chiefs, the FAA, the New York and Washington, D.C., fire departments, Rudy Giuliani, all three networks, the families of a thousand fictional airline victims, MI5, the FBI, FEMA, the NYPD, Larry Eagleburger, Osama bin Laden, Noam Chomsky and the fifty thousand other people we'll need to pull this off. There isn't a moment to lose!

BUSH: Don't forget to call all of those Wall Street hotshots who donated $100 million to our last campaign. They'll be thrilled to know that we'll be targeting them for execution as part of our thousand-tentacled modern-day bonehead Reichstag scheme! After all, if we're going to make martyrs -- why not make them out of our campaign paymasters? Shit, didn't the Merrill Lynch guys say they needed a refurbishing in their New York offices?

RUMSFELD: Oh, they'll get a refurbishing, all right. Just in time for the "Big Wedding"!

ALL THREE: (cackling) Mwah-hah-hah!
post #124
17 August 2009, 15:26 UTC#124
That's pretty good stuff, actually. Again, I'm not convinced one way or another, but I'm sure the truth lies right in the middle of each opinion somewhere. Not orchestrated by them, but maybe an intentional lapse of memory or accidental mishandling of information somewhere along the line. But not the inane "we shooted rockets and bush gives bin laden blowjorbz."
post #126
17 August 2009, 15:43 UTC#126
yadda yadda yadda, it's done now and people are dead, move on.

[/mythoughtsonthematter]
post #127
17 August 2009, 15:44 UTC#127
Yeah let's get back on topic. Chemistry and physics suck
post #128
17 August 2009, 15:47 UTC#128
It's accepted amongst many engineers that when an assembly of objects containing thousands of individual parts hits severe resistance at 500mph, the objects shatter and pretty much disintergrate. Recognisable pieces were found. The hole was made by the fuesalage pounding through and shattering the outer ring of the Pentagon.

Widely accepted theory outside those 'engineers' who appeared in Loose Change (one of whom was an engineer of teeth, ffs). The Bush administration must have pretty deep pockets to bribe many hundreds of thousands of experts to corroborate their evidence.
post #129
17 August 2009, 16:04 UTC#129
Nirvana had some pretty good songs, but Cobain's idolization and legend status is far from earned. Elliott Smith did the angst-filled forewarned suicide bit way better than Kurt could ever imagine.
post #130
17 August 2009, 16:16 UTC#130
Agreed. But it's like that with everyone who dies unnaturally and prematurely. I feel the same way about The Doors, Tupac, Brandon Lee and the rest.

MJ and Freddy Mercury are among the only ones who deserve the post mortal glory IMO. Probably forgetting about a few
post #131
17 August 2009, 16:22 UTC#131
Elvis and Johnny Cash
post #132
17 August 2009, 16:31 UTC#132
Cash died naturally, but yeah Elvis. Huge props to Cash too though.
post #133
17 August 2009, 16:36 UTC#133
QUOTE(benCKa @ Aug 17 2009, 04:44 PM) [snapback]556438[/snapback]

Yeah let's get back on topic. Chemistry and physics suck

quiet you, phsyics is fucking awesome. I hate you ben.


back on topic, if you can't grow a beard by the age of thirty you should consider a sex change, you're already halfway there.
post #134
17 August 2009, 16:44 UTC#134
QUOTE(iammarcmason @ Aug 17 2009, 07:36 PM) [snapback]556453[/snapback]

QUOTE(benCKa @ Aug 17 2009, 04:44 PM) [snapback]556438[/snapback]

Yeah let's get back on topic. Chemistry and physics suck

quiet you, phsyics is fucking awesome. I hate you ben.


back on topic, if you can't grow a beard by the age of thirty you should consider a sex change, you're already halfway there.

Kidding <3 ;)
post #135
17 August 2009, 16:46 UTC#135
I'm 22 in 10 days, and I can't grow a beard. :unsure:
post #136
17 August 2009, 19:20 UTC#136
QUOTE(iammarcmason @ Aug 17 2009, 11:43 AM) [snapback]556436[/snapback]

yadda yadda yadda, it's done now and people are dead, move on.

[/mythoughtsonthematter]


you would say that you sand nigs. you know it was an inside job, but you want your people to believe it was all you. this boat goes both ways you know, its not just the american government trying to say it was towelheads. them their themselves (:P) want their own people to believe they can pull off an attack like that. how come no one hasnt address the eastern side of this situation??
post #137
17 August 2009, 19:49 UTC#137
QUOTE(benCKa @ Aug 17 2009, 05:44 PM) [snapback]556456[/snapback]

QUOTE(iammarcmason @ Aug 17 2009, 07:36 PM) [snapback]556453[/snapback]

QUOTE(benCKa @ Aug 17 2009, 04:44 PM) [snapback]556438[/snapback]

Yeah let's get back on topic. Chemistry and physics suck

quiet you, phsyics is fucking awesome. I hate you ben.


back on topic, if you can't grow a beard by the age of thirty you should consider a sex change, you're already halfway there.

Kidding <3 ;)

I <3 you too.

QUOTE(Ray @ Aug 17 2009, 05:46 PM) [snapback]556457[/snapback]

I'm 22 in 10 days, and I can't grow a beard. :unsure:

aw give it a few ray, you'll catch up.
post #138
17 August 2009, 20:27 UTC#138
some linkin park songs are good.
post #139
17 August 2009, 20:30 UTC#139
I gotta agree with you, Adem. I find myself singing a couple of their tunes every now and then. Oh yeah, and Hybrid Theory was one of the first albums I memorized every word for.
post #140
17 August 2009, 21:15 UTC#140
I also sadly is in the linkin park mix.
post #141
18 August 2009, 00:39 UTC#141
they just have too bad of a rep. an embarrassing rep, not to mention followers.
post #142
18 August 2009, 02:28 UTC#142
I LOVE Canadian chicks
post #143
18 August 2009, 02:52 UTC#143
QUOTE(Ray @ Aug 17 2009, 11:46 AM) [snapback]556457[/snapback]

I'm 22 in 10 days, and I can't grow a beard. :unsure:


Surely you can grow at least a goatee or mustache?

Unpopular opinion.... hmm.... TOMATOES SUCK!
post #144
18 August 2009, 02:56 UTC#144
Tomatoes do suck. I can grow facial hair, it's just patchy and not cool.

Jack Daniels is gross as fuck.
post #145
18 August 2009, 03:54 UTC#145
-white people are lame
-most of the world sucks, sadly we focus on shitty people more than awesome ones so our countries are all given bad names by them
-america is the greatest country in the world, anyone who says other wise is a retard, you can think you country is the best place to live but we are so awesome you all wanna be like us, think you can do it better but still are on our dicks. sorry but it's true. they all move here, and only move out there when they turn into fags.

madonna thinks london is a better place to live than america.

christian bale on the other hand realizes america is were it's at.

-christian bale is the greatest actor ever
-harsh times was the shit.
-boy meets world was a good series

-white people only have it good due to being white.

-getting your dick cut is fucking retarded, yeah I don't wanna feel as good on the head of my dick cause some bible said some crazy fucker cut his dick with a rock as a promise to god.

we put people like that in asylums now.


post #146
18 August 2009, 04:29 UTC#146
QUOTE(Funk Master Steven @ Aug 17 2009, 08:54 PM) [snapback]556518[/snapback]

-america is the greatest country in the world, anyone who says other wise is a retard, you can think you country is the best place to live but we are so awesome you all wanna be like us, think you can do it better but still are on our dicks. sorry but it's true. they all move here, and only move out there when they turn into fags.




I dissagree, if you are judging by living standards, canada, finland, austrailia, and other countrys are pretty much equal.
post #147
18 August 2009, 04:48 UTC#147
canada and finland is cold. australia is full of bugs and just retarded.
post #148
18 August 2009, 04:51 UTC#148
Canada is not very cold, that is a common missconception made by americans.
post #149
18 August 2009, 04:53 UTC#149
everyone in canada is wearing a jacket.

I like having all seasons.
post #150
18 August 2009, 06:44 UTC#150
QUOTE(Rob764 @ Aug 17 2009, 04:47 PM) [snapback]556440[/snapback]

It's accepted amongst many engineers that when an assembly of objects containing thousands of individual parts hits severe resistance at 500mph, the objects shatter and pretty much disintergrate. Recognisable pieces were found. The hole was made by the fuesalage pounding through and shattering the outer ring of the Pentagon.

so that's why the plane wouldn't fit through the entry hole? just seems highly coincidental that plane wreckages often leave obvious evidence whilst in this case 90% of it seems to magically disappear. When you also consider the missing CCTV frame of the actual impact, and then the fact the FBI immediately confiscated all footage from surrounding areas as well as a petrol station that faced the site it all seems slightly suspicious. also, in terms of the twin towers - the fact that the buildings fell EXACTLY like a controlled demolition should raise questions with anyone.

IPB Image

who am I kidding, it was clearly the starship enterprise.

External image not preserved — inspect source: http://blogs.mysanantonio.com/weblogs/geekspeak/archives/enterprise%201701d-pentagon.jpg