September 11th: Real or Fraud?

[GenerationW]

I knew it, Pee-Wee was in on 9-11!!!

 

[Second_in_pie]

I myself am both entertained and shocked/annoyed at how long this has been going on. Even better is that it's been going in circles most of the time!

 

[GenerationW]

"going in circles most of the time"

That's part of the conspiracy!

 

[kettal]

Kamuix , ever heard of Occam's razor? It goes like this:

The simplest theory is usually the correct theory.

This holds true in all kinds of applications, in science, philosophy, criminology, and biology. It has been shown as valid all throughout history.

Any convoluted conspiracy involving missiles, mass executions, fake phone calls, secret government agencies installing explosives in buildings when nobody is looking, they're all ridiculously complex. The more complex something is, the less likely it is to be true.

Interesting that I asked Kamuix this question TWICE, and he is yet to respond. Meanwhile he complains that other people are dodging his questions...

 

[Kamuix]

Yes I've heard of that theory and it's probably true. But we're not dealing with a theory.

See.. i answered the question. I answered it before in different words. So there you go.

Honestly guys wake up..

How the buildings fell isn't a theory it's a deception and load of crap(at least the official report) How the Edmund Fitzgerald sank is a theory because no one was there to see it happen except the people who died. This obviously isn't a theory considering it happened in the middle of a city. Make sense?

And others are dodging my questions because i asked many times "Are you skeptical of the official story?" and no reply. You've been conditioned to believe whatever the establishment tells you, end of story.

An ignorant generalization is when you use a simple logic like that to dismiss something huge just like that. And apparently all of Alex Jones millions of fans are all mentally ill. It's that easy for you guys to dismiss the possibilities? Common...

 

[PinkLucy]

It is a THEORY about how the buildings fell. The fact that they fell is a fact. You have a THEORY that they didn't fall in the way we were told they fell. You don't have facts or proof. You have theoretical evidence.

 

[Kamuix]

I have more than a theory in my opinion. But I understand your point. So a question.. are you skeptical of the official report Pinklucy?

Let's say i don't have proof.. why use that to justify it all as BS? I mean.. I'm just asking you to consider the possibilities. Watch some documentaries.. Do some research.. See what others think. And don't close your mind to the possibility that government can be corrupt. The government has lied to us too many times to just simply trust them is like trusting an untrustworthy cheating girlfriend or boyfriend. Be skeptical. "Decent-ion is the greatest form of patriotism" By Thomas Jefferson. And by Goering in natzi Germany says it's easy to make a country go to war, all you have to do is convince the people that the country is under attack and accuse anyone who questions the government that they're being unpatriotic and are a threat to the country.

So always be skeptical. Ever see someone who complains about something to do with the government/law/taxes that's unfair but they won't do anything about it because they don't think they can. If everyone has the attitude that "well I'm only 1 person and there's nothing i can do" Then obviously nothing gets done. And that's where they take advantage. I'm just asking that you be open minded. Not an easy thing to ask apparently?

By the way it was admitted that the incident that brought us into the Vietnam war never happened. That resulted in 100,000's of deaths. And yet you guys are not even skeptical of 9/11, why?

 

[gristle]

"Decent-ion is the greatest form of patriotism" By Thomas Jefferson.

Actually, the word you are grasping for is "dissent." Add to that, on the basis of his writings, no such specific quote ever has been accurately attributed to Jefferson. This is a case of something being repeated so many times that people assume it to be real when it isn't - much like the entire 9/11 conspiracy movement.

Let's say i don't have proof.. why use that to justify it all as BS?

Because otherwise there is no basis for your assertions. None.

So always be skeptical.

On the basis of the now well-established fact that you lack any evidence to back up your charge of a conspiracy, why are you not skeptical of your own beliefs regarding a conspiracy?

By the way it was admitted that the incident that brought us into the Vietnam war never happened. That resulted in 100,000's of deaths. And yet you guys are not even skeptical of 9/11, why?

Engaging in false analogies or spurious comparisons is not proof of a conspiracy regarding the events of 9/11. It shows poor reasoning to think this way.

 

[Kamuix]

That's odd many sites do claim he may not have said that. Well read through his quotes and you'll see many that may interest you.

A Bill of Rights is what the people are entitled to against every government, and what no just government should refuse, or rest on inference.

And yet the government continues to shred the amendments and take away our freedoms to "protect us".

Because otherwise there is no basis for your assertions. None.

I was asking someone else. And there is tons of evidence i've given you. Research the rest for yourself.

On the basis of the now well-established fact that you lack any evidence to back up your charge of a conspiracy, why are you not skeptical of your own beliefs regarding a conspiracy?

I'm asking you to look outside the box and consider the possiblity that governments can become corrupt. It's happened several times in history if you know anything about history. 1776.

Engaging in false analogies or spurious comparisons is not proof of a conspiracy regarding the events of 9/11. It shows poor reasoning to think this way.

You keep doing the same thing.. i'm not trying to prove anything atm. i'm just asking you to be skeptical remember? Government hasn't proved anything so to demand instant proof against a side but don't demand proof of the side you're defending is kind of hypocritical. This shows that you've been conditioned to believe anything the establishment tells you. Whenever i ask grissie something he won't answer it. Hey guys watch this.. hey grissie.. do you believe the official 9/11 report? Watch he won't directly answer the question. Of course most people posting here are also conditioned to believe whatever the government/establishment/media tells them so.. you're obviously going to take Grissies side.

 

[gristle]

That's odd many sites do claim he may not have said that. Well read through his quotes and you'll see many that may interest you. And yet the government continues to shred the amendments and take away our freedoms to "protect us".

Rather than reading web site content, read the actual works and grasp the historical context of the time.

I was asking someone else. And there is tons of evidence i've given you. Research the rest for yourself.

You have provided no evidence whatsoever. Shall I cite the passage where you state clearly that you have no evidence? As for research, since you have made the claim of a conspiracy, you ought to back it up with evidence to support that assertion. As noted, you operate only on a belief and nothing else. Stop trying to pass the buck for your failings.

I'm asking you to look outside the box and consider the possiblity that governments can become corrupt. It's happened several times in history if you know anything about history. 1776.

I can say confidently that I know far more about history than you do. That some governments can become corrupt does not mean that all governments are corrupt. Moreover, given that measures of corruption are relative and can change from one jurisdiction to another, an accusation regarding corruption can become quite murky. But we have to stop there because this concept is either to complicated for you, and you will simply ignore it.

You keep doing the same thing.. i'm not trying to prove anything atm. i'm just asking you to be skeptical remember?

Based on the skepticism of your claims of a conspiracy and the overwhelming lack of evidence to support your assertions, we can safely say that my sense of skepticism is quite intact. I'm completely skeptical of your claims, and you have offered nothing whatsoever to alter that stance. You, on the other hand, make weak passes at avoiding what you have failed to provide over and over: proof for your claims. Try as you might, you can't change the fact there is nothing to support your conspiracy beliefs. Add to that, you have provided no refutation for what you refer to as the "official" story. Those are two complete and unambiguous failings on your part.

Government hasn't proved anything so to demand instant proof against a side but don't demand proof of the side you're defending is kind of hypocritical.

Incorrect. No "government" has made any claims here like you have, so there is nothing remotely hypocritical about my stance. As for "instant" proof, this thread has been running for weeks and in that time you have offered nothing in the way of evidence. The point is quite clear: you have no evidence. Your paranoia is what guides you, and as has been noted earlier, paranoia is not proof.

This shows that you've been conditioned to believe anything the establishment tells you.

Here is more evidence illustrating the failings of your abilities to make reasonable statements. On the one hand, you demand to know what I think about the "official" story. You make this request on the basis of not knowing what I think. On the other hand, you then go on to assume that you know my thoughts and accuse me of being "conditioned." As I have noted earlier, not only do you operate as a propagandist, but you are a very poor propagandist.

Hey guys watch this.. hey grissie.. do you believe the official 9/11 report? Watch he won't directly answer the question.

Actually, I have not read the entire report that you provide the incorrect name for. But let's face it Kamuix, you haven't read the report either. Asking someone to comment on something you have not read is quite disingenuous. I see no reason to comment on a report that I have not read. You, however - on the basis of a complete and total absence of any evidence - assert a conspiracy regarding government involvement in the events of that day. Beyond these foggy remarks on government complicity, you have not offered a thing that resembles an actual narrative of events. You certainly have offered no evidence, indicated no key participants or people complicit in any such action, or a clear and evident rationale for those actions.

You've provided zero.

On the basis of these failings, you have attempted to now make me the subject of this thread. The ploy is superficial, poorly thought out, and obviously a desperate attempt to gloss over the very real bankrupt assertions you cling to on the basis of your conspiratorial and paranoid beliefs. The ploy was a failure even before you tried it.

Of course most people posting here are also conditioned to believe whatever the government/establishment/media tells them so.. you're obviously going to take Grissies side.

This is a temper tantrum. It is indicative once again that ultimately you offer nothing to support your claims. So you conjure yet a greater world of conspiracy, collusion an brainwashing. Only you can see the truth, everyone else is a dupe, blinded by the evil troika of government, establishment and media. Oh poor Kamuix, alone in the world of total clarity of understanding (the type of understanding not requiring pesky evidence or annoying facts). No, it is the knowledge that has come down from the heavens. Your clarity is certain, all others are delusional in their thoughts.

Go on Kamuix. Start supporting your claims with actual evidence, or finally show some backbone and admit you can't prove in any way, shape or form your conspiratorial beliefs.

I dare you.

 

[Kamuix]

Rather than reading web site content, read the actual works and grasp the historical context of the time.

I have.

You have provided no evidence whatsoever. Shall I cite the passage where you state clearly that you have no evidence? As for research, since you have made the claim of a conspiracy, you ought to back it up with evidence to support that assertion. As noted, you operate only on a belief and nothing else. Stop trying to pass the buck for your failings.

I feel i am 100% sure that 9/11 was an inside job. It's much more then just a belief, it's based on tons of evidence and putting things together about how the government and governments operate.

I can say confidently that I know far more about history than you do. That some governments can become corrupt does not mean that all governments are corrupt. Moreover, given that measures of corruption are relative and can change from one jurisdiction to another, an accusation regarding corruption can become quite murky. But we have to stop there because this concept is either to complicated for you, and you will simply ignore it.

Implying that the US government isn't corrupt, you're so blind!. You're too conditioned and closed minded obviously. What's even more foolish is how even though you reject any possibility of a corrupt government, you've somehow managed to convince yourself that there's millions of people out there who are mentally ill and delusional.

Based on the skepticism of your claims of a conspiracy and the overwhelming lack of evidence to support your assertions, we can safely say that my sense of skepticism is quite intact. I'm completely skeptical of your claims, and you have offered nothing whatsoever to alter that stance. You, on the other hand, make weak passes at avoiding what you have failed to provide over and over: proof for your claims. Try as you might, you can't change the fact there is nothing to support your conspiracy beliefs. Add to that, you have provided no refutation for what you refer to as the "official" story. Those are two complete and unambiguous failings on your part.

And you fail to see my point that I'm trying to make. It's getting people to consider something completely possible and from an open-minded point of view, quite obvious after a bit of research. And yet you make the same stupid point over and over. You're not skeptical of my claims.. you reject it without question.

Incorrect. No "government" has made any claims here like you have, so there is nothing remotely hypocritical about my stance. As for "instant" proof, this thread has been running for weeks and in that time you have offered nothing in the way of evidence. The point is quite clear: you have no evidence. Your paranoia is what guides you, and as has been noted earlier, paranoia is not proof.

See you're doing it again... it's about proof it's about getting people to consider it. But you'll never get that I've stated that over 10 times lol. I'm just trying to remind people to be skeptical of their government and not to just believe everything they tell you. The governments appointed people made the official 9/11 report. It doesn't make claims, it does it through phony reports etc.. So because it appears more professional, you just go ahead and believe it? You didn't actually counter-act what i said about you not needing to see proof from government reports etc.. So you are being hypocritical.

Here is more evidence illustrating the failings of your abilities to make reasonable statements. On the one hand, you demand to know what I think about the "official" story. You make this request on the basis of not knowing what I think. On the other hand, you then go on to assume that you know my thoughts and accuse me of being "conditioned." As I have noted earlier, not only do you operate as a propagandist, but you are a very poor propagandist.

You're the one who gives into propaganda. I was just asking again because you seem to dodge that simple yes/no question for some weird reason. Whenever you point out something i didn't answer or address i immediately address it for you, yet you've dodge numerous things I've asked. Assume i know your thoughts? you've made it obvious you were never skeptical of the 9/11 official report, that's conditioned when you immediately accept what the establishment tells you without question or skepticism.

Actually, I have not read the entire report that you provide the incorrect name for. But let's face it Kamuix, you haven't read the report either. Asking someone to comment on something you have not read is quite disingenuous. I see no reason to comment on a report that I have not read. You, however - on the basis of a complete and total absence of any evidence - assert a conspiracy regarding government involvement in the events of that day. Beyond these foggy remarks on government complicity, you have not offered a thing that resembles an actual narrative of events. You certainly have offered no evidence, indicated no key participants or people complicit in any such action, or a clear and evident rationale for those actions.

You're right i haven't read it, but neither have you so we're on the same page...I know the gist of the claim to how towers supposedly fell, I know it's complete BS.

This is a temper tantrum. It is indicative once again that ultimately you offer nothing to support your claims. So you conjure yet a greater world of conspiracy, collusion an brainwashing. Only you can see the truth, everyone else is a dupe, blinded by the evil troika of government, establishment and media. Oh poor Kamuix, alone in the world of total clarity of understanding (the type of understanding not requiring pesky evidence or annoying facts). No, it is the knowledge that has come down from the heavens. Your clarity is certain, all others are delusional in their thoughts.

Ok well anyone here who does think conspiracy "theorists" are nuts, are going to take your side either way. But anyway.. Delusional? Common.. There's millions of us. How could you convince yourself that there's that many scientists, cops, judges, professors, lawyers, climatologists, historians, governors, doctors and millions of others etc.. That are all delusional paranoid people. Alex Jones has had so many high profile people of any thinkable profession on his show who support & agree with him. So how can you convince yourself this? just curious, maybe you're right who knows.. :S

Go on Kamuix. Start supporting your claims with actual evidence

This is what concerns me about your request MR. We've already established that you don't require evidence from the establishment to believe what they tell you. It goes through the media.. and you believe it. You haven't yet mentioned anything about you ever being skeptical of it. I've given you a lot of good information. What about the fact that Obama went against everything he promised to do and after having the highest approval rating of any president at the beginning, he's now got the lowest ever recorded after only 10 months in office? 9/11 is one thing, but everything else the government does is fraudulent, the stimulus package, job creation, obamacare, global warming. he tried to come out and say the recession was over when it's worse then ever and job continue to get lost and economy continues to fall. Not to mention forcing to pass a health care bill that the majority of Americans are AGAINST. majority is supposed to rule. My point is it's not just the evidence I've seen about 9/11 specifically but all the fraudulent things the government has done since decades ago.

http://www.youtube.com/user/drinkingwithbob?blend=1&ob=4#p/u/2/D7_ey2qrxeA

So will i bring up some evidence to support my claims? Well I've shown you quite a bit. At least enough for you to be skeptical and go out and research more on your own. Since we've already established that you won't consider it period due to your conditioning. And on top of that you don't demand any sort of evidence from the side you defend. Does this really make much sense?

Honestly sometimes i think Grissie is a little skeptical of what really goes on in government. Maybe just subconsciously..

 

[urbandreamer]

Did nuclear weapons bring down WTC1&2?

 

[kettal]

Yes I've heard of that theory and it's probably true. But we're not dealing with a theory.

See.. i answered the question. I answered it before in different words. So there you go.

Honestly guys wake up..

How the buildings fell isn't a theory it's a deception and load of crap(at least the official report) How the Edmund Fitzgerald sank is a theory because no one was there to see it happen except the people who died. This obviously isn't a theory considering it happened in the middle of a city. Make sense?

You obviously don't know what a theory is.

An ignorant generalization is when you use a simple logic like that to dismiss something huge just like that. And apparently all of Alex Jones millions of fans are all mentally ill. It's that easy for you guys to dismiss the possibilities? Common...

The pope has many more followers than Alex Jones, so I guess anything the pope says is that much more truthful??

How about cults? When a cult has more than 1000 members, does the leader become the voice of truth?

 

[Kamuix]

Well wether or not you consider it a theory, if it was a staged than that logic wouldn't apply. just saying..

 

[PinkLucy]

Logically, staging something that massive would be an extremely difficult task.