Title: Re: WTC Tower 7: Examining Conspiricist Claims Source:
[None] URL Source:[None] Published:Mar 31, 2012 Author:- Post Date:2012-03-31 10:12:48 by Eric Stratton Keywords:None Views:362 Comments:39
Poster Comment:
I was just thinking, I wonder if any of the good people that work for the Gestapo/KGB (i.e. the CIA) or Motherland Sekurity in the soon to be Cyber Sekurity Center established by the same Zio-loving psychos and ignoramuses, ... [hi y'all!] ... ever watch any of these videos and are somewhat surprised at what they see.
Ah well, I guess we'll never know. LOL
Anyway, nothing to see here, move along, ... just another building that was gutted by fire and stood.
Yes, everything is fake. The people were fake, the witnesses were fake, the victims were fake, the buildings were fake, etc. Maybe New York City is fake and doesn't really exist?
You should stop insulting peoples' intelligence. Nobody is buying this "it's all fake" disinformation.
Don't you find it frustrating to read some of that though? I wonder what the logical fallacy the respondent is using there.
"For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth, to know the worst, and to provide for it.” ~ Patrick Henry
Yes, everything is fake. The people were fake, the witnesses were fake, the victims were fake, the buildings were fake, etc. Maybe New York City is fake and doesn't really exist?
You should stop insulting peoples' intelligence. Nobody is buying this "it's all fake" disinformation.
Don't you find it frustrating to read some of that though? I wonder what the logical fallacy the respondent is using there.
5. Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule. This is also known as the primary 'attack the messenger' ploy, though other methods qualify as variants of that approach. Associate opponents with unpopular titles such as 'kooks', 'right-wing', 'liberal', 'left-wing', 'terrorists', 'conspiracy buffs', 'radicals', 'militia', 'racists', 'religious fanatics', 'sexual deviates', and so forth. This makes others shrink from support out of fear of gaining the same label, and you avoid dealing with issues.
9. Play Dumb. No matter what evidence or logical argument is offered, avoid discussing issues except with denials they have any credibility, make any sense, provide any proof, contain or make a point, have logic, or support a conclusion. Mix well for maximum effect.
17. Change the subject. Usually in connection with one of the other ploys listed here, find a way to side-track the discussion with abrasive or controversial comments in hopes of turning attention to a new, more manageable topic. This works especially well with companions who can 'argue' with you over the new topic and polarize the discussion arena in order to avoid discussing more key issues.
"“Believe nothing merely because you have been told it. Do not believe what your teacher tells you merely out of respect for the teacher. But whatsoever, after due examination and analysis, you find to be kind, conducive to the good, the benefit, the welfare of all beings - that doctrine believe and cling to, and take it as your guide.” ~ Gautama Siddhartha — The Buddha
Don't you find it frustrating to read some of that though? I wonder what the logical fallacy the respondent is using there.
I don't know as I'd call it frustrating because I kind of expect it but I'd like to ask them if they realize that not a single one of the alleged witnesses they point to was under oath. I think what they're doing there is called the "How dare you" gambit -- become incredulous and indignant: #2 at 25 rules of disinformation.
Edited for grammar.
-------
"They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
From that source, I would say the fallacy of Relevance (considerations that they offer in support of their conclusion are irrelevant to determining whether that conclusion is true)/see also the subcategory: Appeals to Consequences (like Ridicule) and the fallacy of Presumption (Fallacies of presumption begin with a false or at least unwarranted assumption, and so fail to establish their conclusion)/see also the subcategory: False Dilemma (someone is asked to choose between two options when there is at least one other option available.)
From this source, Logical fallacies, the Bare Assertion fallacy (premise in an argument is assumed to be true purely because it says that it is true) would apply to the alleged witness testimonials and reports that they point to as if Gospel.
Edited both paragraphs.
-------
"They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
Thank you very much. I'm hoping there's a specific type that would fit it exactly, but I know it's not always such an exact science this logical fallacies thing. I find it confusing, but know it probably wouldn't be so with some studying and practice. Very useful stuff this logic. Well, sometimes. The flagrant abuse of it is annoying and can be countered easily if one knows what they're doing and how to defend against it. It's childish really, like yukon's "I know you are, but what am I?" offense. I mostly just avoid joining in on the common LP type argument now as it's counterproductive at least. Maybe O_I can say precisely what the name of that sort of logical misuse is. "Yeah, it's fake. Everything's fake. New York's fake." Haha It'd be nice to be able to counter that with something more intelligent than "fuck you", which is often my first thought.
"For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth, to know the worst, and to provide for it.” ~ Patrick Henry
Very useful stuff this logic. Well, sometimes. The flagrant abuse of it is annoying and can be countered easily if one knows what they're doing and how to defend against it. It's childish really, like yukon's "I know you are, but what am I?" offense.
I think that's called Begging the question (petitio principii): where the conclusion of an argument is implicitly or explicitly assumed in one of the premises. To whit, you reply with something like: "Confused. Lost? An amnesiac? You tell me."
"Yeah, it's fake. Everything's fake. New York's fake." Haha It'd be nice to be able to counter that with something more intelligent than "fuck you", which is often my first thought.
Try responding to flippancies like that with just a link to this series of videos by Ace Baker:
Never forget that people who don't believe what is clearly obvious just through observing what they can see with their own eyes are not playing. No modern skyscraper has EVER fallen due to fire before or since 9/11 and yet on that day three did. And for those who argue "it was de plane boss, de plane" no plane hit the Salomon Bros. Bldg. (WTC 7). I guess it is all just some peculiar oddity about that day that we will never figure out.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Lord Acton
The human herd stampedes on the fields of facts and the valleys of truth to get to the desert of ignorance. Saman Mohammadi
"If a politician found he had cannibals among his constituents, he would promise them missionaries for dinner." Mencken
"..if the military is going to defend our freedoms, then we need freedoms to defend. Our freedoms must be restored before the military can defend them..." Lawrence M. Vance
Você me trata desse jeito só porque eu sou preto. Junior (my youngest son)
The relationship between morality and liberty is a directly proportional one.
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”
You're welcome for the link. Resounding thanks and accolades to Ace Baker for his Awesome work -- even though his views of the Reynolds and Wood legal efforts could have been somewhat less harsh, imo; not less harsh on the lawyer or the court -- just them and their peaceful pursuit of 9/11 Justice, despite so many others not even trying to file charges in all of these years.
-------
"They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
Smoke obviously rises, perhaps it is because there are enough pathways through the interior of the building to allow the smoke to rise, but not at the top.
IDK ...
There was some analysis being done sometime back on the building-smoke at the WTC but it got derailed. I think that investigation should be restarted.
-------
"They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
The relationship between morality and liberty is a directly proportional one.
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”
The relationship between morality and liberty is a directly proportional one.
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”
Never forget that people who don't believe what is clearly obvious just through observing what they can see with their own eyes are not playing. No modern skyscraper has EVER fallen due to fire before or since 9/11 and yet on that day three did. And for those who argue "it was de plane boss, de plane" no plane hit the Salomon Bros. Bldg. (WTC 7). I guess it is all just some peculiar oddity about that day that we will never figure out.
It boils down to two problems really.
1. They're stupid or moral cowards who are unable or unwilling to look at what the evidence is rather than what the talking heads say it is.
2. A lot of the naysayers are one flavor of shill or another - spooks or hasbarfa.
"“Believe nothing merely because you have been told it. Do not believe what your teacher tells you merely out of respect for the teacher. But whatsoever, after due examination and analysis, you find to be kind, conducive to the good, the benefit, the welfare of all beings - that doctrine believe and cling to, and take it as your guide.” ~ Gautama Siddhartha — The Buddha
2. A lot of the naysayers are one flavor of shill or another - spooks or hasbarfa.
And many of them are just grade a, garden-variety idiots.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Lord Acton
The human herd stampedes on the fields of facts and the valleys of truth to get to the desert of ignorance. Saman Mohammadi
"If a politician found he had cannibals among his constituents, he would promise them missionaries for dinner." Mencken
"..if the military is going to defend our freedoms, then we need freedoms to defend. Our freedoms must be restored before the military can defend them..." Lawrence M. Vance
Você me trata desse jeito só porque eu sou preto. Junior (my youngest son)
Building #7 fell in its own footprint. That is a sure sign of a demolition. ;)
Well, I would have agreed with you at one time until those masterminds like BeAChooser and Badeye said that it was all just like the government said it was and that there was nothing to see so just move along. /s
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Lord Acton
The human herd stampedes on the fields of facts and the valleys of truth to get to the desert of ignorance. Saman Mohammadi
"If a politician found he had cannibals among his constituents, he would promise them missionaries for dinner." Mencken
"..if the military is going to defend our freedoms, then we need freedoms to defend. Our freedoms must be restored before the military can defend them..." Lawrence M. Vance
Você me trata desse jeito só porque eu sou preto. Junior (my youngest son)
I'm convinced that SOMETHING hit the buildings and that whatever hit the WTC tower that they showed over and over again on tv looked like a plane (you know, they just showed it hitting the second one, the first one was not caught on film or so they say anyway). As to what hit the Pentagon I don't know. The government could clear that little mystery up if they would release the videos from the Pentagon itself and from the other cameras in the area that have never been released. But whatever hit the buildings the impact didn't knock them down and no fire before or since that day ever caused one to fall. And no plane hit #7. As I said a long time ago, I know what happened there. 7 had been over there all the time looking over at his big brothers and then that day when he looked over cross da skreet they had fallen down. So he got lonesome and decided he would fall down too! Makes as much sense as the fairy tale the government told.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Lord Acton
The human herd stampedes on the fields of facts and the valleys of truth to get to the desert of ignorance. Saman Mohammadi
"If a politician found he had cannibals among his constituents, he would promise them missionaries for dinner." Mencken
"..if the military is going to defend our freedoms, then we need freedoms to defend. Our freedoms must be restored before the military can defend them..." Lawrence M. Vance
Você me trata desse jeito só porque eu sou preto. Junior (my youngest son)
The relationship between morality and liberty is a directly proportional one.
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”
#31. To: Eric Stratton, Original_Intent, James Deffenbach, *No Planers* (#30)
my current belief is that they were remote controlled military jets, at least at the Twins.
That was my belief previous to learning that all the videos are fake.
One might ask themselves, "how could ALL the videos be fake?".
There were no planes. Therefore, any videos of a plane hitting the wtc are fake. It's that simple.
Some say it's not important or the no plane theory is a "distraction".
That's because they think there were planes. If there were no planes then any idea that there were is the Real distraction.
The people responsible for this psyop understand human psychology. Start a lie. Get everyone to believe it and ridicule anyone that points out the obvious truth.
Obvious truth:
1. WTC controlled demolition.
2. No planes
(or at least no video of them that's not fake)
Why no video?
How could there be so many people in New York, so many cameras and not one unfaked video of the collision?
Because there were no planes.
"For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth, to know the worst, and to provide for it.” ~ Patrick Henry
The relationship between morality and liberty is a directly proportional one.
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”
My point was that there will be no serious investigation until such a time as there is a tipping point of people demanding it.
Perhaps I'm getting a poor read on the overall attitude of Duhmerikans on this issue, but here where I live, not far from the Crapitol/District-o-Criminals, there may be some people that think that there "is more to it than what we've been told," but if I suggest that the entire thing was a false flag, then I lose them.
Imo, a very serious and transparent investigation has been conducted openly by We the People -- and internationally too -- for over a decade. Tell the locals there the fact that our country never went to DEFCON 1 that day, as it should have if we were actually under attack, and they might still choose to stay in their mythological dimension but our job isn't to be bean counters ad infinitum to calculate some illusory "critical mass tipping point". Law Enforcement doesn't wait to proceed with filing charges and prosecution until a majority of the population believes they have enough evidence that they agree with. Reference the 9th Amendment for why we don't have to wait for that either.
Edited for capitalization.
-------
"They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
The official story was packaged and sold to the world all day long on 9/11 with [Edit: media-verbiage, film of damages and trauma,] and supposed images of one alleged plane -- alleged Flight 175.
-------
"They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
