Momopi, does this convince you that politics is staged?
Author
Message
Winston Site Admin
Joined: 18 Aug 2007
Posts: 13837
Momopi,
Are you saying that this issue is all BS?
My God.
Look, I've researched arguments on both sides, and the conspiracy hypothesis is WAY STRONGER.
That's not only my opinion, but that of MANY CREDIBLE RENOWNED EXPERTS in many fields, including ex-government officials.
Doesn't that tell you that this isn't about nonsense conspiracies? Think!
Now, what are you going to do with hundreds of valid sensible arguments against the official 9/11 story? Some of them are irrefutable and smoking guns too.
What do YOU do with all that Momopi?
Do you erase out of your head and forget about them?
If so, why? Doesn't truth matter to you?
Esp one that's being used for global imperialism by this country?
Do you not care that "the bad guys" are winning and innocent people are getting killed? Or are you a sociopath deep down?
Please answer these points specifically, instead of going off on a tangent. You have a high IQ right? So why can't you address all these points? I can, so why can't you?
"It takes far less effort to find and move to the society that has what you want than it does to try to reconstruct an existing society to match your standards." - Harry Browne, How I Found Freedom in an Unfree World
"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." - George Orwell
Thu Nov 05, 2009 5:51 pm
momopi
Joined: 01 Sep 2007
Posts: 3761
Location: Orange County, California
Vinstonas wrote:
Momopi,
Are you saying that this issue is all BS?
Yes, it's a dead horse to me. If you wish to be a sheeple following the conspiracy gospel, feel free to do so. It matters not to me. As I've stated, my only area of interest in this is Obama's exit strategy (or lack of).
I've long since came to the realiziation that people debate for self satisfaction (intellectual/emotional stimulation). They think doing so shows how smart and intellgient they are to impress others. And by Gawd, if someone holds a "false belief" it irritates the crap out of them. In reality, smart and logical people are dime and dozen, and there's nothing special about them.
If someone want to believe that alien lizards are running the place and dig deeper and deeper into a self-fulfilling answer, that's fine by me. Once, I built a pen and paper RPG web site set in a fictional Atlantis. For years after, I received e-mails from Atlantis researchers asking me to join them. Um... my RPG has flying goldfish and magical transforming squirrels:
Last edited by momopi on Thu Nov 05, 2009 6:41 pm; edited 1 time in total
Thu Nov 05, 2009 5:56 pm
Winston Site Admin
Joined: 18 Aug 2007
Posts: 13837
Sheeple? Why do you call people who believe in conspiracies "sheeple" but not those who believe in the official conspiracy theory?
Explanations please?
I think you've revealed your bias here.
Actually you are the sheeple since you take the official conspiracy theory on faith.
The fact alone that SOME of the 19 hijackers have been found alive should debunk the official story alone, nevermind the hundreds of other arguments.
What do you have to say to that?
Your closed minded dismissals will NOT win any debates or win any critical thinking evidence-based people to your side, you know that right?
Smart and logical people are a dime a dozen? Are you one of them at least? If you were, you'd be answering these points and questions.
Can I ask you, why do you have a blind religious faith based belief in the official conspiracy theory? Can you at least answer that one?
You cite speculations, but why do you ignore so many good arguments and smoking guns against the official story? Why does your mind erase facts and reality?
In this thread, I've asked you about a hundred questions. You've answered none of them, about 0 out of 100 have been answered.
Aren't you smart and intelligent?
I guess you aren't good at this sort of thing huh, only at conventional practical things, right?
Again, can you answer some of these points and questions below?
Quote:
1. Regarding the Pentagon crash, many Airline and Airforce pilots have said that not was the reported maneuver on a 757 near impossible, but that one cannot train on a small Cessna plane and then suddenly fly a 757 like an ace as the government claims. Captain Russ Wittenburg, a 30 year veteran of United Airlines (or American Airlines), said that it would be like "learning how to carve a turkey and then using that skill to do a heart transplant... there's not one chance in a thousand".
How do you respond to that? Do you know any real Airline pilots that you could talk to about this? Can you ask them if it's possible to train on a cessna plane and then fly a 757? What's your take?
2. Also, aviation experts have said that the maneuver of AA77, doing a 270 degree turn and then descending 7000 feet in two minutes, is near impossible on a 757. Only an air force jet fighter could do that. In fact, one of them in the film said that even the BEST pilots have only a 1 in 10 or 20 chance of making such a maneuver on a 757.
Now, if the best pilots have a 1 in 20 chance of making that maneuver, what are the odds that a guy who couldn't even fly a small plane (according to people who trained with him in the flight school) could pull off that maneuver? What would your estimate be? Close to zero?
What's your take on that? Momopi, you are a smart educated guy. So what's your take on that?
3. How do you explain how the WTC could fall at nearly free fall speed? What could remove the resistance of millions of tons of steel and concrete, just like that?
If you believe in the pancake collapse theory, which FEMA already abandoned, where is the "stack" of floors at the bottom and where are the inner core columns?
Plus a pancake collapse cannot occur at near free fall speed.
4. Do you see nothing suspicious that never before 9/11 had large airliners crashed with no debris, and then suddenly on 9/11, it happened twice? Or that never before had steel highrises collapsed from fire before 9/11, and then suddenly on 9/11 it happened three times?
What's your take on Building 7, which collapsed in 5.5 seconds into its own footprint, even though it was never hit by a plane?
None of this raises an eyebrow?
Why is your objectivity an absolute ZERO on this Momopi? My God.
"It takes far less effort to find and move to the society that has what you want than it does to try to reconstruct an existing society to match your standards." - Harry Browne, How I Found Freedom in an Unfree World
"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." - George Orwell
Thu Nov 05, 2009 6:38 pm
Winston Site Admin
Joined: 18 Aug 2007
Posts: 13837
Momopi, is it your position that the official conspiracy theory about 9/11 is the absolute unquestionable truth, and that all arguments against it are false?
True or false?
What if the other side you are biased against is right? Wouldn't you like to know? I guess knowledge isn't important to you unless you can make money from it? Or you have trouble seeing the big picture.
"It takes far less effort to find and move to the society that has what you want than it does to try to reconstruct an existing society to match your standards." - Harry Browne, How I Found Freedom in an Unfree World
"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." - George Orwell
Thu Nov 05, 2009 6:41 pm
momopi
Joined: 01 Sep 2007
Posts: 3761
Location: Orange County, California
10 PRINT "I DONT CARE"
20 GOTO 10
30 RUN
Here's an exercise for you: accepting that someone doesn't care about whatever you're passionate about.
Thu Nov 05, 2009 6:46 pm
Winston Site Admin
Joined: 18 Aug 2007
Posts: 13837
Ok fine. You don't care.
Then admit that you don't know and that you have no knowledge about this issue.
And that you have NOT made a valid case that all conspiracies about 9/11 are false and that only the official story can be true.
You've scored zero points here.
But how can you be heartless and not care or wonder about the real TRUTH about what happened on 9/11 that cost all those lives and started two illegal wars?
Where is your heart?
Truth isn't important to you, right?
I don't get you. I thought you were an intelligent bright guy with morals and is a law abiding citizen.
I love truth. Why don't you?
For Christ's sake, can you at least watch this trailer from "9/11 Blueprint for Truth", one of the films I recommended to you? From it, you can see that this is a GOOD film. It's only 3 minutes long. At least do that.
"It takes far less effort to find and move to the society that has what you want than it does to try to reconstruct an existing society to match your standards." - Harry Browne, How I Found Freedom in an Unfree World
"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." - George Orwell
Thu Nov 05, 2009 7:51 pm
momopi
Joined: 01 Sep 2007
Posts: 3761
Location: Orange County, California
Spock doesn't exist, he's a fictional character in Star Trek, a show that type-casted many of its members and destroyed their future acting careers. There is however, an actor named Leonard Nimoy, who I had the pleasure of meeting along with his wife Susan in Las Vegas (Hilton). Mr. Nimoy and his wife are very nice people, and he thinks fans who want to discuss logic with him needs to get a life.
When people are interested in a topic, they'll care enough to discuss it at length, instead of not posting or claiming that they have no time to spare. It's kind of like dating, if the person is interested in you, he/she will make time. If the person is not interested, no amount of direct approach, or lengthy "undeniable facts" (weasel word alert) and emotional appeal will engage the other person. All you'll get in the room are crickets. The people who are already interested, you'd find them over at places like AboveTopSecrete.com.
To successfully engage someone who is not interested in you, you must find topics that interest the person. People will spend time on things they like, they're not obligated to waste time on anthing that they don't care about. For example, when engaging a chemist on WTC, instead of "blah blah blah", try "could you explain the relationship between temperature and heat in thermodynamic terms?". If the person is an architech, ask "could you explain redundant designs in skyscrapers?".
Most of the late-comer conspiracy followers are those who watched some movie and became a sheeple. It's like those who watched the Di Vinchi Code and decided that the Catholic Church is involved in some grand conspiracy. They bring nothing new to the same old discussion and are just "me too" sheeple joining a circle-jerk, spoon-fed a couple red-colored pills and given the same scripts to repeat like mantras. Chances are, if someone does bring in something new table, the person probably made it up. These people will never know the whole truth in their life time, nor would people who knows the whole truth tell them.
----------
When I choose to engage in a discussion, I consider my level of (or lack of) interest, and I don't allow the other person set terms or parameters to the discussion. For example, "answer these valid questions" is a loaded weasel word question that already came with 2 preconditions. If I have no interest in the topic, then it's a waste of time from start. All of us have a limited time in our life and once it's gone, it's gone. If you want me to do something that I'm not interested in, you had better pay me and make it worth my time.
When someone attemps to set terms or parameters to the discussions, I'd simply drag them all over the map until they foam at the mouth. It doesn't matter to me if I "win" or not or how many points I score, because the topic isn't interesting to me anyway. Debate is an intellecutally dishonest process and winning arguements make enemies. Thus, I only make statements based on my own level of interest. It doesn't matter if the reader cares or not, I have nothing to gain or lose by it.
Fri Nov 06, 2009 4:22 am
Winston Site Admin
Joined: 18 Aug 2007
Posts: 13837
Spock is fictional, but the statements that his character makes are "logical". For example, in STII: The Wrath of Khan, when the Enterprise could not hail Space Station Regula, Spock said, "There are two possibilities. They are unable to respond or they are unwilling to respond."
That was a logical statement. That's my point.
It's also true that your behavior regarding 9/11 is not logical.
You obviously have no knowledge and done no research, yet you jump to conclusions and draw subjective speculations and insinuate that those who believe in conspiracies are "sheeple" without a basis. What is your basis for saying that? You gotta make a case that all critical thinking people believe in the official 9/11 story first. You didn't do that.
Bottom line is that you have no basis in drawing your conclusions, cause you don't know anything about the subject. Nor have you demonstrated that you know anything about it. You haven't seen a single film about it and you can't answer a single question about it.
Even Dianne can see that the WTC collapse was not natural at all, and she is uneducated. How can you be less than that?
Here's a test:
Explain to me how Flight 93 could crash in Shanksville with no debris? A 757 has never crashed on the ground before and left no debris. Explain why no debris were in the photos and why reporters said that they saw nothing that could distinguish that an airplane had crashed there.
If you know anything, then answer that question. Official reports are not enough. The photos show no debris. You want to see them? Would you like me to post them?
Why is it that you can answer simple questions about making money, but you can't answer questions like the above?
True you are not interested in this topic. But then you have no right to call anyone a sheeple either, since you don't know anything about the topic and have not demonstrated that you do.
The logical thing for you to do would be to simple say "I have not researched 9/11 nor do I have any interest in it. Therefore, I have insufficient data upon which to base a hypothesis or conclusion." That's what Spock or Data would have said. Instead, you call every critical thinking expert who disagrees with 9/11 a sheeple with no basis.
So what is your religious faith based belief that the official conspiracy is the correct one, based on? Can you even answer that?
"It takes far less effort to find and move to the society that has what you want than it does to try to reconstruct an existing society to match your standards." - Harry Browne, How I Found Freedom in an Unfree World
"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." - George Orwell
Fri Nov 06, 2009 6:52 pm
Winston Site Admin
Joined: 18 Aug 2007
Posts: 13837
Momopi,
Here are some eloquent clips of Jesse Ventura bashing reporters about 9/11 with good skeptical questions, which none of them can answer.
"It takes far less effort to find and move to the society that has what you want than it does to try to reconstruct an existing society to match your standards." - Harry Browne, How I Found Freedom in an Unfree World
"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." - George Orwell
Fri Nov 06, 2009 6:59 pm
Winston Site Admin
Joined: 18 Aug 2007
Posts: 13837
Momopi,
Here is MIT engineer Jeff King's speech about 9/11 and the WTC collapse. Do you think MIT engineers are "sheeple" too?
200+ Senior Military, Intelligence Service, Law Enforcement, and Government Officials
700+ Engineers and Architects
200+ Pilots and Aviation Professionals
400+ Professors Question 9/11
230+ 9/11 Survivors and Family Members
200+ Artists, Entertainers, and Media Professionals
Or these?
Quote:
CREDIBLE CRITICS OF THE OFFICIAL ACCOUNT OF 9/11
41 U.S. Counter-Terrorism and Intelligence Agency Veterans Challenge the Official Account of 9/11 – Official Account of 9/11: “Terribly Flawed,” “Laced with Contradictions,” “a Joke,” “a Cover-up”
May 18, 2009 English PDF English HTML Danish PDF
French PDF German PDF Greek PDF Norwegian PDF
Polish PDF Swedish PDF
29 Structural & Civil Engineers Cite Evidence for Controlled Explosive Demolition in Collapses of All 3 WTC High-Rises on 9/11 – More than 900 Architects and Engineers have joined call for new investigation, faulting official collapse reports
June 17, 2009 PDF
Respected Medical Professionals Launch New 9/11 Truth Group – Announces Online Petition Calling for New Investigation
Feb. 24, 2009 MS Word Article on OpEdNews
Twenty-five U.S. Military Officers Challenge Official Account of 9/11 – Official Account of 9/11 “Impossible”, “A Bunch of Hogwash”, “Total B.S.”, “Ludicrous”, “A Well-Organized Cover-up”, “A White-Washed Farce”
Jan. 14, 2008 PDF Version Article on OpEdNews
Eight U.S. State Department Veterans Challenge the Official Account of 9/11 – Official Account of 9/11 "Flawed", "Absurd", "Totally Inadequate", "a Cover-up"
Jan. 5, 2008 PDF Version Article on OpEdNews
Seven Senior Federal Engineers and Scientists Call for New 9/11 Investigation – Official Account of 9/11 "Impossible", "Hogwash", "Fatally Flawed"
Dec. 13, 2007 PDF Version Article on OpEdNews
Eight Senior Republican Administration Appointees Challenge Official Account of 9/11 – "Not Possible", "a Whitewash", "False"
Dec. 4, 2007 PDF Version Article on OpEdNews
Since you believe in the official conspiracy theory without basis or knowledge of the subject, aren't you the sheeple then, technically speaking?
Why are you using zero logic about this whole topic? Where are your brains?
If you don't know, just say I DON'T KNOW. Why claim something that you don't know? Why?
"It takes far less effort to find and move to the society that has what you want than it does to try to reconstruct an existing society to match your standards." - Harry Browne, How I Found Freedom in an Unfree World
"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." - George Orwell
Fri Nov 06, 2009 7:03 pm
Winston Site Admin
Joined: 18 Aug 2007
Posts: 13837
Momopi,
What are your qualifications in aviation and NORAD procedures? Do you know more about it than a former NORAD tactical director? Who is the sheeple now? Look below. At least his statements make sense. Why can't you make any sense?
Capt. Daniel Davis, U.S. Army – Former U.S. Army Air Defense Officer and NORAD Tac Director. Turbine engineering specialist. Founder and former CEO of Turbine Technology Services Corp., a turbine (jet engine) services and maintenance company (15 years). Former Senior Manager at General Electric Turbine (jet) Engine Division (15 years). Decorated with the Bronze Star and the Soldiers Medal for bravery under fire and the Purple Heart for injuries sustained in Viet Nam. Also served in the Army Air Defense Command as Nike Missile Battery Control Officer for the Chicago-Milwaukee Defense Area. Private pilot.
* Statement to this website 3/23/07: "As a former General Electric Turbine engineering specialist and manager and then CEO of a turbine engineering company, I can guarantee that none of the high tech, high temperature alloy engines on any of the four planes that crashed on 9/11 would be completely destroyed, burned, shattered or melted in any crash or fire. Wrecked, yes, but not destroyed. Where are all of those engines, particularly at the Pentagon? If jet powered aircraft crashed on 9/11, those engines, plus wings and tail assembly, would be there.
Additionally, in my experience as an officer in NORAD as a Tactical Director for the Chicago-Milwaukee Air Defense and as a current private pilot, there is no way that an aircraft on instrument flight plans (all commercial flights are IFR) would not be intercepted when they deviate from their flight plan, turn off their transponders, or stop communication with Air Traffic Control. No way! With very bad luck, perhaps one could slip by, but no there's no way all four of them could!
Finally, going over the hill and highway and crashing into the Pentagon right at the wall/ground interface is nearly impossible for even a small slow single engine airplane and no way for a 757. Maybe the best pilot in the world could accomplish that but not these unskilled "terrorists".
Attempts to obscure facts by calling them a "Conspiracy Theory" does not change the truth. It seems, "Something is rotten in the State."
* Editor's note: For more information on the impact at the Pentagon, see General Stubblebine, Colonel Nelson, Commander Muga, Lt. Col. Kwiatkowski, Lt. Col. Latas, Major Rokke, Capt. Wittenberg, Barbara Honegger, April Gallop, Colonel Bunel, and Steve DeChiaro.
* Statement in support of Architects and Engineers petition:
"The government conspiracy theory does not hold up to scrutiny. As a professional with over 30 years experience working with gas turbines (jet engines) and fuels - kerosene (jet fuel) does not burn in any open flame hot enough to effect steel - well under 1000 deg F. Also bogus are the explanations regarding why no planes were intercepted. SOP [Standard Operating Procedure] is they are always, always intercepted if they stray off course and/or turn off the transponder like these flights all did. No command decision needed. Has our government ever been untruthful to us?" http://www.ae911truth.org
"It takes far less effort to find and move to the society that has what you want than it does to try to reconstruct an existing society to match your standards." - Harry Browne, How I Found Freedom in an Unfree World
"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." - George Orwell
Fri Nov 06, 2009 7:10 pm
momopi
Joined: 01 Sep 2007
Posts: 3761
Location: Orange County, California
There's a clear trend where people who believe in one conspiracy theory would lean toward believing in another, and those who don't, tend not to believe in other conspiracy theories. To cite an example of confirmation bias, if a pilot speaks in favor of the conpsiracy, the pro-conspiracy group would think "WOW how could you doubt the words of an experienced pilot", versus the opposition would think "There are 585,241 active commerical pilots, not counting retired ones and those serving in the military. The opinions of a few are statistically insignificant". There are a very small % of the population that are truely unbaised, but they're also tiny in number and also insignificant. But, in the end, if the opinion of one "expert" is to be believed becaused of his position and learnings, then that would also make the other 99 opposing experts valid based on their position and learnings. You could alternatively cite the scientific method, but you'd flunk on the final confirmation requirement because you cannot replicate the event with the same environmental factors.
If I wanted to spread the 9/11 conspiracy sheeple gospel, I'd find ways to engage the mainstream opposition sheeples by providing some benefits for them to do so. You cannot change someone's mind once it's made up, at least not with theories and circumstanial evidence. But the goal isn't to change the other person's opinion, it's to give my arguements credit through publicity. i.e. "THREE OUT OF FIVE DENTISTS RECOMMEND CREST" is complete bullsh*t marketing, but it works. Americans are "open minded" to the point where you can tempt them to engage you and give you unwarranted publicity. The same would not be true in say, trying to debate religion in Saudi Arabia.
Conspiracy theories on secretive groups, government, or individuals have probably existed since the dawn of civilization. If it's not the Templars, then it's the Carlyle Group, or Project for New American Century, and so on. The first rule on government or any other powerful groups is that you only have access to incomplete information. For example, only 35% of the 9/11 Commission's records are made public, the rest are classified. How do you make meaninful discussion with 65% of the information missing? Well, that's the reality when dealing with people who make the rules. As I've stated previously, the 2 factions in our government compete in the same game and abide by the same rules. You need 2 factions in polar opposites to un-classify skeletons in the closet. Citing Taiwan's exaple (again), as soon as Ma Yin-Jou was elected, he un-classified all the documents necessary to get Chen Sui-Bian convicted and jailed. That doesn't happen in the US, does it?
The second rule, is that intentions does not equate capability. Project for New American Century (PNAC) is an excellent example. Yes they're pakced with NeoCons and tried to "guide" Bush's foreign policy toward Pax Americana, that's not a hidden agenda. The problem is that the group was packed with chicken hawks, and they faded into the background with Rumsfeld's resignation in 2006.
Like the idiots responsible for Bay of Pigs and Vietnam War, these people have completely unrealistic expectations. The end result is that America's image in the Middle East went from that of Liberator of Kuwait to an oppressive occupier of Iraq. The Arabs went from kissing our flag in the 90's to blowing us up in the 2000's. Furthermore, these chicken hawks actually wanted to micro-manage military procurement and deployement. Almost every procurement recommendation they put forward -- build more F-22's and RAH-66's, axe the JSF and Ford class carrier, install global missile defense shield, re-position US troops from EU to East Asia, etc., have all FAILED. The F-22's production line will be shut down, the RAH-66 was cancelled, over 4,000 JSF's and estimated 10 Ford class carriers will be produced, and Obama did a 180 on the missile defense sysstem in Europe. It's amazing that 3 years after PNAC died of old age, people still think so highly of them to drag them out of the grave.
----------
If you want to engage people in 9/11 discussions, repeating the "700 engineers and architechs, 200 pilots and aviation professions...." sheeple mantra sounds impressive the first time. By the 500-th time it's beginning to sound like another "FOUR OUT OF FIVE DOCTORS RECOMMEND MY PRODUCT". There are 1.5 million actively employed engineers in the US and 700 is a drop in the bucket. If I was bored and wanted to discredit the 9/11 movement, I'd crack open my marketing class textbook and create a few sheeple convincing web sites and fill it with the kind of BS that UFO-believers would suck up like milk.
For people who have already read through the stuff years ago, you're just another 'me too" sheeple and bring nothing new to the table. The people at AboveTopSect.com (a site that I've read for years) know this and take conspiracy theories for what it is. Here's a song for you Winston:
Looking at your pattern of presentation, the only thing that you're doing is turning people off - how many people have you successfully engaged in 9/11 on-topic discussions on this board? And, if you're looking to bash me for my usage of the word "sheeple", I recommend cut and pasting from here:
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread220030/pg1
They do a better job at it, and have been doing 9/11 discussions since 2002. After few years of it, you realize that debating Gulf of Tonkin (1964) in 1974 is really stupid, and only the pullout (honorable or not) matters. Plus, using the word "sheeple" is really enjoyable and makes me happy at annoying others.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
