Nope, just curious as to why you don't challenge posts like that. I'll just take it you agree with him, then.
So you don't question the post at all. Excellent work. Odd, you seem to question a lot, except where it comes to 'truthers'. You accept those posts without hesitation.
Am I supposed to? Does it matter? Why are you interested? I do? I'm sure glad you know what I'm thinking...
What is this supposed to mean? This thread is called "A Genuine Discussion". So let's have one. Again: Am I supposed to? Does it matter? Why are you interested? Three separate questions.
The OP also suggests that if you want to have one, you should start a thread and present your evidence. Why is that so difficult?
As I clearly said: "This thread is called "A Genuine Discussion". So let's have one." Answer my questions, please. All four of them.
As I clearly stated: the OP invites anyone who wishes to have one to start a thread and present your evidence. Which of these words are you having trouble with? 1) Start 2) Thread 3) Present 4) Evidence I created the thread, I know what it's about. Four? Did you grow a new one? The answer is: "You're right. I don't care. Enjoy the cult."
You don't see four 'question marks' in post #106? - - - Updated - - - And I don't give a damn what the OP says. Quit trying to hide behind it.
Then we obviously can't have a discussion. I answered your questions: You don't challenge the 'truthers' on their wild theories, but you pick apart any minute point you think you can find among those who support the accepted narrative and its evidence. You feign outrage when called on it. And I don't care, but I will point out that you constantly show your true colors. 1) It means you quietly support him. 2) Nope. See above. 3) Nope. See above. 4) I thought you were objective. It's clear you aren't. But who cares? Enjoy the cult.
Hyperbole. You know I do, and have. I will not stand for certain things. I believe my posting history reflects that, both here, and elsewhere. Isn't that an unwritten rule on this forum, and the Internet in general? As in, if you state something incorrect, expect to be called out on it? "Outrage"? Really? I'd like to see your subjective interpretation of my emotions on the Internet based off posts I've made.
Yes, really. Until you're ready to give a damn about the OP, just continue on as always. Your focus shows your agenda.
I certainly hope so. I wouldn't want to align myself with those that claim "no one died on 9/11", "no plane hit the Pentagon", "the FDNY were complicit in 9/11". You can continue to enjoy that company. No objectivity needed.
Why are you trying, as hard as you can, to lump me in with people that have thought patterns like that?
True, 'truthers' can provide neither evidence nor rational discussion. Funny that a cult that accusses all sorts of innocent people of murder at a whim, calls everyone liars, even calls the victims liars, and refers to those outside their cult as slaves, sheeple, and shills on a regular basis, has such a problem when they get called anything at all. They even whine now over "truther", the moniker they have stupidly gave themselves.
More because of a failure on your part to discuss things rationally. Gish gallop is not a rational debating technique.
