My first clue it is bull(*)(*)(*)(*) is if it is from you. Almost guaranteed class A1 bull(*)(*)(*)(*). Take your last post, for example. You're so incredibly dishonest that now you're going to try and pretend that because the word story is used that the story is made up? BWAAAHAHAHAHA!!! BULL(*)(*)(*)(*)! Definition of story: Awww. Poor koko. Has to wipe his own bull(*)(*)(*)(*) off his face again. Any more blunders you wish to grace us with?
Hey, I'm just doing what Patriot has said, not taking things so black & white, and yeah, you are lying, for like the third time now. So are you going to list the deficiencies in the official story or what?
Thanks for proving you are lying, Jango. He tore your entire bull(*)(*)(*)(*) claim apart and exposed the truther bull(*)(*)(*)(*) compared to the official story for what it is; bull(*)(*)(*)(*). Until you truthers can present evidence that the official story is wrong, the official story is airtight. Does the possibility exist? Absolutely. So how about you present evidence your bull(*)(*)(*)(*) claims are true? I keep asking. You keep running. Now run along like usual.
If what you say or post or cite were correct, you would be able to address the facts. You can't. Maybe you should address the fact you're wrong. Still waiting for some evidence. Got any?
I would like everyone to notice a little fact. Most normal people, when they are confronted by the fact that their opinion is fatally flawed and that they cannot address said flaws, will simply change their opinion now that they know the truth. Truthers, on the other hand, when confronted with the truth that they cannot address, don't consider the fact they may be wrong. They find excuses for why their theories keep getting trashed. Jango isn't the first truther to pretend that this site is somehow locked down tight as an excuse for his failures. Have Jango's posts been changed? Altered? Deleted? No. Jango's positions have been challenged, refuted, and shown flawed by other posters on this forum. He cannot address the points brought up by the other posters, so he comes up with excuses as to why he can't rather than address the flaws in his own theories. Any thoughts on why truthers deal with the truth in such a manner? Rather ironic given that they proclaim to be all about the truth....
Yeah, I did just that when I watched three buildings just start free falling a year ago when I hadn't seen the footage in a decade. That's not true. I consider the possibility that I am wrong all the time. But then I remember that our government does do all kinds of things and has allowed so many things to happen before. Everything, if not in agreeance with you, is an excuse, or running away, or whining. Like that last sentence, it was just noise to you. Not what you want to hear. So tell me, what "excuses" do I use? So you categorically deny that this forum isn't locked down by you and your gang? Never even thought or claimed they were. They have been challenged. Refuted? Says who? You've tried to refute "A Clean Break" by just throwing it out the window as fast as you could. Usually, I address whatever is presented to me. That seems to be the operating procedure around here, right? Look at you talking about truth. Any time I talk about truth, you run from it. "It's not pertinent to 9/11!" Or some bull(*)(*)(*)(*).
But they didn't free fall. If they had been in free fall, they would have fallen in less time. They didn't. Truthers refuse to look at the facts like the fact the collapse of the WTC 7 happened quite a few seconds before the outside even started to collapse.... all without the sound of explosives going off. So you consider that you might be wrong, and then justify that you should continue on even if you are wrong because the government is bad. Got it. What I stated is still exactly right. You refuse to address the fact you are wrong through excuses like the government is bad so they must somehow be involved or that this site is too tightly controlled. Thank you very much for proving my point so eloquently. What you stated is EXACTLY what I expected to hear from you. It is an excuse. You might be wrong, but THEN you suddenly remember that the government does all kinds of bad things, therefore you need not address the fact you might be wrong. HOW IS THAT NOT AN EXCUSE?!?!? Seriously. If you answer nothing else, answer that one. Me and "my gang"? Yes I catagorically deny that this forum is locked down by ANYONE. It is not my fault you cannot address the truth. Thanks for confirming once again you are using the excuse of this forum being locked down. My gang.... that is funny! Didn't say you did. I was addressing your claim that this forum is locked down. That would imply some kind of heavy handed treatment of posts, right? Says the fact you have zero evidence to back up your claims as shown in the next sentence.... I refuted clean break because it is only your retarded opinion based on a logical connection. You have zero evidence that actually backs up this opinion of yours, yet you want people to accept it as fact. No, usually you cherry pick one point out of many while running as fast as your little legs will carry you from addressing the thrashing you received on the rest of the points. As evidence I present your response to my thread where the only thing you could address is the fact I claimed that if you really are a Marine, then you are a disgrace to the Marines. I then backed that opinion up with evidence including a statement of the Marine core values which you have repeatedly broken in a misguided attempt to overthrow the US government. OK, so you admit the one true thing you've talked about is that the US government has done some shady and even some outright wrong and disgraceful things. 9/11 isn't one of the things the government is guilty of, thus you whining about how bad the government has been in the past is not pertinent to the discussion of 9/11. Get it now? Still need your hand held?
This is what I named the "shill dance", and it is the primary reason why trying to debate specifics is completely pointless in here. This is as far as you'll ever get Jango, dancing and games. When you finally give up and stop responding to their dancing, they'll then say you "ran away". Specifics are not possible for honest debate because the objective of some here is to distract, refocus, ridicule, or any number of other tactics. All you can do is post information and hope the reader is intelligent enough to see what's going on. I believe many read and never post. So...my personal desire to debate certain folks has been replaced with my desire to make certain points and present obvious distortions in the "official" BS story, and let the reader verify it for themselves. It's clear actual, honest debate here is completely pointless. I don't know why you continue it brother but, good luck to you.
Now....you're learning....Trust me...they have responses and courses of action for every possible "problem" area and they have it down pat. It is pointless brother. But as long as you realize that, then you can dance their dance and throw their own tactics right back at 'em. It's actually kinda fun!
Well, you're certainly doing much better over at thepoliticalforums.com. What other sites does Phil have you spamming?
they NEVER do! and they hope people do not notice. Instead they jump up on their soapboxes and rant a lot.
And that's your problem. You look at everything through that prism regardless of what the evidence -- or lack thereof -- tells you.
they run off of a script, that is why they cant respond to my Mr Demo thread except by whats on their script. NONE of them have taken up the challenge and if they knew (*)(*)(*)(*) from shinola about this that chalenge I posted is 101, they would be able to run right down them all and describe everything in detail from raw observations but THEY CANT! NO SCRIPT!
Might as well be a cartoon about truthers,after all,they can't get their stories straight. face it jojo,your 'challenge' is spurious,not worth our time...
It's not just that they can't get their stories straight, but they can't even decide which story is the right one because to pick a story is certain death for a truther. After all, one has to have a strategy of jumping from story to story as the stories get shot down in flames or one risks going down in flames with the story.
yeh but it went down in a cloud of dust not flames. There has to be a fire to go down in flames. the building collapsed so fast it exploded on all 4 sides at the same time. Even the sides without damage.
Wow. Maybe you should work on them non-existant reading comprehension skills of yours, koko. I said it is truther stories that go down in flames. You know.... like the truther bit of bull(*)(*)(*)(*) you like to push where you pretend the government can somehow insert CGI images not only into a live broadcast without the network's knowledge, but on to every video camera filming an event. Could you explain this little bit of wizardry? Nope. That is why your bull(*)(*)(*)(*) story went down in flames like the rest of them. Sounds to me like you believe a little too much in Harry Potter type magic than anything here in the real world.
"live" broadcast? like wtc 7 demolition announcement 20 minutes in advance by 3 networks? Now thats just plain voodoo!
Now you've taken up blatant lying? Wow. The only ones who announced it was the BBC. So why aren't you upset with the FDNY? They announced the WTC 7 would probably collapse HOURS before it did, and even informed the press, including the BBC, about it. Oh wait. That would be a known, proven fact. Know proven facts have no place in truther la la land where the conspiracy is so huge even the foreign media is in on it. Tell me something, koko..... do you ever feel like you're the only one NOT in on the conspiracy?
