Why would you watch that when you can just watch the rebuttal? Why do you need to watch a truther spin on a debate? That doesn't seem very honest to me, for being a "truther" that is. Uh...yeah. Anything to back that up, or just more paranoid conspiracy thoughts? Funny how they are only "owned" when you guys aren't using them as sources. When they say something that helps your cause, though, they are rock solid. I'm not wasting my life on more of your youboob crap. Get something factual or save it. There's a moron born every minute. Care to list that scientists credentials? Any evidence or factual information to back that up? Don't worry, I'll wait. Relevance? Duly noted. Are you referring to the 1% of the overall workforce that believes 9/11 was a conspiracy? What about all of the other scientists that say those scientists are wrong?
Davis Chandler is a (*)(*)(*)(*)ing moron, and that is putting it lightly. He's received his ass on a platter by Ryan Mackey on a few occasions, it's pretty entertaining.
I just watched the first three minutes of this. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gUazHEBlDGI Ryan Mackey is using the no-planer straw man strategy. http://www.opposingdigits.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1222 (excerpt) --------------------------------------------------- 4. Use a straw man. Find or create a seeming element of your opponent's argument which you can easily knock down to make yourself look good and the opponent to look bad. Either make up an issue you may safely imply exists based on your interpretation of the opponent/opponent arguments/situation, or select the weakest aspect of the weakest charges. Amplify their significance and destroy them in a way which appears to debunk all the charges, real and fabricated alike, while actually avoiding discussion of the real issues. --------------------------------------------------- No real truther believes that no planes hit the towers. No-planers are infiltrator agents trying to make the truthers look silly. Start watching this at the 7:20 time mark. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HYedTmaHt1A This article is off-line now but, luckily, I'd quoted part of it on another forum. http://pseudonautics.blogspot.com.es/2008/11/disinformation-techniques.html (excerpt) -------------------------------------------------------------- The best way to harm a cause is to defend it using wrong arguments. This is why, every time there is a government conspiracy, you have a load of kooks making ridiculous claims to discredit critics by association. Concerning 911, you have pod people, holograms, WTC nuclear devices, and directed energy weapons from space. -------------------------------------------------------------- I can't find any videos in which Ryan Mackey debates Davis Chandler. Could you post something? So far his stuff looks like typical sophistry by a PR firm.
Yet you admit to also being a no planer, does that make you an infiltrator? Please tell me any difference between the insanity that is 'no planes hit the towers', and the insanity that 'no plane hit the Pentagon'. Both ignore radar, witnesses, video, debris, flight documents, and more..
The theory is that a craft that was smaller than a 757 hit the Pentagon. I dealt with all of the issues you mentioned on pages two and three of this thread. http://www.politicalforum.com/9-11/275987-few-debunking-links.html
It is not possible, and nobody can convince an experienced military fire fighter, construction worker or trained asron investigator that anything smaller could have made the wing and tail prints where they did. And you do not need three years of training in Special Needs Education with all the psych classes that involves to tell that that slimey horndog Stubblebine had long since lost his marbles.
Bull (*)(*)(*)(*). Nobody is going to stop me from calling Stubblebine unqualified, nobody is going to tell me that I have to agree to mass murder.
And if nobody died ? For the most probable scenario is just that, that nobody died. Smoke for 'special effect' digitally add onto some digital Towers some very odd looking planes coming in and up at some very odd angles, digital fireballs. Add a few cutouts as jumpers and what knots meanwhile just pull the buildings in the normal fashion. Cut to a film set with actors and of course the whole area is in lock down Artsy fartsy photo shoppy photos..................... And well paid actors and others fear for their jobs and their lives and would never get near the Main Media anyway ....................... They do it all the time. The News Soap Opera of Everyday Life on Planet Earth, it is fiction. Bad Hollywood.
Real truthers believe that planes did hit the towers. I made a post about this on page 3. http://www.politicalforum.com/9-11/294445-9-11-controlled-demolition-proven-3.html#post1062428746
I don't care what people believe.There were no planes. No plane could hit at those angles nor cut through the buildings as though they were butter. No planes, empty buildings, controlled Demos. With a few added touches of Hollywood and viola a legit reason for the Wars some had been itching to have. .
What thousands of eyewitnesses ? I have only ever heard from less than a handful,over and over again, the same ones.
You think the two tallest buildings in lower Manhattan were demolished and only a handful of people saw?
I answered a question about planes ....................not demolitions. And anyway, do you know NY ? From which angles and from where would anyone have a good view ? They fell from a place which is tall buildings.
What is your question ? Since you misunderstood what my answer was about. How am I now supposed to know what you are talking about ?
I have only ever seen a small handful of people interviewed about 9/11 full stop. Those who say they saw planes are very very few. Mainly we are shown very odd angled digital composite film of planes or somethings coming in a very odd impossible angles and digital composite fire balls coming out of the buildings. With cut out figures badly animated and imposed onto the Fiery Infernos. Pure Hollywood, all of it.
My question was the part of the post that preceded the question mark. If you don't remember it please review. And it's a bit presumptuous of you to think that I didn't understand you.
Ah huh so you don't even remember your question ? Couldn't have been important then could it ? - - - Updated - - - Insults is it ?
The same sad avoidance tactics once again at play. One of the great benefits of a text based forum is that posts are retained for people to review. I remember my question quite well. Anyone who wants to can read it. You have obviously read it and refuse to respond because you realize how stupid it is to claim that only a handfull of people watched as the second plane struck.
