[extracted] New(?) 9-11 stuff
KSM got a plea deal. The guy who supposedly masterminded the 9/11 attacks is not getting the death penalty.
If you still
Is that a yes?
I have no idea if you did and I personally don't care in an anon forum. It's all argumentative fun. I can promise you that I dislike you a lot less than you think. I just get annoyed with people who are fake. It's a pet peeve. But anyways, I looked back and I will concede that you didn't mention that you'd do the killing but preferably them or someone else.
I'd make every anti-communist kill themselves. I don't consider myself a "tankie", but I find anti-communism to be the 1-1 trait with abject inhuman scum. .
I do want the people who have been abusing humanity to be punished. I probably want that more than anything. I don't think we're going to get that, but it would be sweet.
This is true.
Have you even been browsing what those who have been reading the Epstein files are reporting? It should be pretty obvious who needs to be punished, and punished severely.
This is where you start softening up. You've obviously been at this before Epstein and nothing would obviously change if Epstein didn't happen. It's all just more ammo for you to portray the moral high ground while pushing your underlying desire. I really just want to figure out if your way of thinking is correct in regard to that.
2. Deuces has introduced a new deflection technique to his arsenal: his opponents have a psychological disposition to reject the truth.
This is far from new. He's been doing that for the year and a half this thread has been going, and I have a strong suspicion much, much longer than that. His whole life probably.
If you can't back up a single of assertion of yours without evidence, refuse to show any math, lie about being a mechanical engineer, and generally don't discuss things intellectually honestly, not a single human being here is going to take your space laser dustification bullsht seriously.
Just letting you know ahead of time.
Note to self: quit throwing pearls to swine.
Over and out.
Sent from my SM-A366B using Tapatalk
Yes. Run along, like I said.
Cool. That would be more than double an object in free-fall. It would take 9.2 seconds to reach the ground in free-fall from a height of 1,362 ft (the height of WTC 2).
t = √2h/g
t = √2724/32.174 (ft/sec^2)
t = √84.665
t = 9.2013
Hey... actual high school physics. Only took years and doesn't actually help any truther arguments. But at least we got some.
I wouldn't demand math from others without being able to do it myself.
I KNOW you've been programmed. You are regurgitating word for word what those df conspiracy sites told you.
Well there are a million conspiracy theories out there. How do I choose among them and in what way does it benefit me to even do so? While there is a clear motivation to comply with authority, I don't see what how conspiratorial musings benefit any endeavor other than getting some truth and trying to use that information to make things better for yourself and other.
BTW there is a memo going around detailing how the conspiracy theorists were right and you are wrong. It's called the Epstein files. You should check it out.
If you do, I'd like your opinion on whether or not we continue to support elites and believe all the nonsense they tell us given that they engage in and tolerate pedophilia and torture and God only knows what else.
Should we allow ourselves to be led by people who bond over child sacrifice.
There were a lot of children in Gaza, and a lot of them were slaughtered. In light of the Epstein files, should we consider that a child sacrifice? I mean, the elites were cool with it. They have banded together against the majority in supporting it. It seems like a child sacrifice to me. Any thoughts?
The answers are all around us. You just have to have the guts to look. Maybe you should read the best commentary on the Epstein files first, then come back and see what you think of 9/11 with, perhaps, an adjusted point of view.
2. Deuces has introduced a new deflection technique to his arsenal: his opponents have a psychological disposition to reject the truth.
To be specific, it's the disposition to believe what authority tells you without examining their premises. And I've always said that this is usually the reasonable thing to do. If the national weather forecast says snow, it's probably the best guess. But on certain claims of high dollar value, like this guy over there has weapons and we need to spend a trillion dollars and American lives to address the threat, then we need to examine the arguments. I don't believe anyone arguing the official story even knows the basic arguments purporting to hold up the official story.
It's not being stupid and thinking all the fire proofing was magically jolted off in both towers by the plane impacts. Make your case if you think that makes sense. It's that you don't even know that this is a fundamental premise that had to be made in order to make the models look a few degrees less unbelievable. That is a psychological phenomenon.
Well he seems to think Gorgo is worth talking to, so he clearly believes in things that have been scientifically proven to be false so I have to give you that one.
Good lord you are an insufferable twat.
BTW there is a memo going around detailing how the conspiracy theorists were right and you are wrong. It's called the Epstein files. You should check it out.
Nope. Conspiracy theorists were led by the nose. The perpetrators put out the pizzagate story to deflect blame and you ate it right up, leading to them being put in power and delaying exposure by a good 10 years. Good job gullible idiot. The worst part is you think it means you were right. What a fing idiot.
And what exactly do you think I was wrong about, dumbass? I never made any claims about the Epstein files, pedophiles, or pizza gate, so what was I wrong about. You have no idea what you are talking about on literally ANY level.
Still waiting on those answers, dunce cap.
Particularly for this one, LOL
"What do you see when steel-framed highrise skyscrapers collapse from fire like the one in Brazil did, Deuces?"
. But on certain claims of high dollar value, like this guy over there has weapons and we need to spend a trillion dollars and American lives to address the threat, then we need to examine the arguments. I don't believe anyone arguing the official story even knows the basic arguments purporting to hold up the official story.
Yeah, I think when govt invokes national security as a weapon to justify massive spending on war, citizens should understand the arguments instead of just auto deferring for w/e reason. There is supposed to be skepticism in a functioning democracy. But it’s hard to interpret information in a way that doesn’t just reinforce what the person already believes.
BTW there is a memo going around detailing how the conspiracy theorists were right and you are wrong. It's called the Epstein files. You should check it out.
Hey Deuces, it's weird how you conspiracy guys were totally right all along and yet you didn't tell us about Epstein until after everyone else knew. Why did you sit on this info for years?!?
I think it's been amply demonstrated why I stopped engaging with these dishpits about 10 years ago.
To be specific, it's the disposition to believe what authority tells you without examining their premises. And I've always said that this is usually the reasonable thing to do. If the national weather forecast says snow, it's probably the best guess. But on certain claims of high dollar value, like this guy over there has weapons and we need to spend a trillion dollars and Amer
In our view the ability to design skyscrapers and analyze the mechanism of their collapse after being hit with airplanes takes specialized training. You said the NIST report is trivially wrong at a high school level but can't explain it. When an actual HS level mistake was made by a truther it was super easy to show and nobody had any doubts. Because you are unable to do that, despite your insistence you could, people correctly point out you have not made your case. Burden shifting or changing the subject to pop psychology doesn't help your case on something high school physics level that should be very basic if it exists.
Hey Deuces, have any steel-framed high rise skyscrapers collapsed from fire besides the ones on 9/11?
Nope. Conspiracy theorists were led by the nose. The perpetrators put out the pizzagate story to deflect blame and you ate it right up, leading to them being put in power and delaying exposure by a good 10 years. Good job gullible idiot. The worst part is you think it means you were right. What a fing idiot.
No. I didn't know exactly how deep that went as a psy-op but I knew it was BS and I said so in this forum while also maintaining that the sort of crimes being claimed were in fact happening. I can't claim credit for knowing it was so intentional. Usually, believe it or not, it will turn out I wasn't enough of a conspiratard to get things exactly right.
And what exactly do you think I was wrong about, dumbass? I never made any claims about the Epstein files, pedophiles, or pizza gate, so what was I wrong about. You have no idea what you are talking about on literally ANY level.
I will admit to making some assumptions about your beliefs. There is a certain type of poster here who is democrat voting, who thinks of themselves as reasonable good people, who will acknowledge the CIA/deep state/security state/Military industrial complex, whatever you want to label the actual power in this country, are serial liars only after it's been officially acknowledged. But they will then go on believing everything they are told by these people when it is beyond obvious that they are being lied to again. If that's not you tell me where you every disagreed with the nightly news. Show me where I can't predict everything you think on any foreign policy or security issue.
Were you saying Epstein was obviously Israeli intelligence before the files came out, for example? It's a decently informative issue into who can think for themselves and who is trapped in programming. Those trapped will say there was no smoking gun so they will go with Israel's denials, despite the mountain of circumstantial evidence to the contrary. That's you, right?
"What do you see when steel-framed highrise skyscrapers collapse from fire like the one in Brazil did, Deuces?"
I'm not familiar with that case. I'm not terribly interested in reexamining premises that, among more serious researchers of the topic, are settled. In this case that premise is that no large steel framed building had ever collapsed due to fire prior to 9/11. I'm not interested in refuting what is a weak argument of yours because if I do you just ignore it and move on to the next weak argument. But if you are right and you did find a true counter example, it doesn't do a ton for you anyway. I am interested in falsifying my beliefs if possible, but this doesn't have that potential. That said, I will look it up just for curiosity.
Hey Deuces, have any steel-framed high rise skyscrapers collapsed from fire besides the ones on 9/11?
Google it telling me that one in Sao Paulo was concrete, not steel framed. It was 24-26 stories depending on which report you view. The video shows that it was engulfed in flames from top to bottom. The explanation given for that is that it was totally occupied by squatters who had not only filled the interior with particle board partitions and filled up the elevator shafts with random garbage, but also jerry rigged all kinds of unregulated electricity into the building which might have sparked the fire.
I don't see how filling a concrete building with flammable materials and makeshift electrical systems, which facilitate a fire spreading the totality of the building, shows that a giant steel framed skyscraper complying with U.S. fire codes can collapse from localized office fires, and to collapse in the manner in which it did. I honestly don't see that you are contradicting not just me, but the many serious supporters of the official story who acknowledge that steel framed skyscrapers had never before collapsed due to fire.
You're just grasping and this is why I don't indulge your every lazy, uninformed "argument".
Key structural and composition details include:
Structure: Reinforced concrete, featuring four central "H" columns and cantilevered, ribbed floor slabs.
Facade: An early example of a curtain wall or "skin of glass" with aluminum frames.
Materials: Concrete, steel reinforcement, and glass, with a marble and stainless steel hall.
Condition: The building was abandoned and occupied by residents, with flammable, makeshift wooden rooms built inside that contributed to the rapid, 90-minute collapse
No sht sherlock.
There are two kinds. Knowledgeable and Dunning-Kruger-afflicted. You are quite demonstrably the latter. And I couldn't give the slightest sht about your guesses about what I think on any issue.
I know you're not, which is why you said stupid things like "no steel-framed high rise skyscraper had ever collapsed from fire."
Guess you were wrong about that. Not knowing anything about a subject has certainly never stopped you from running your ignorant mouth about it, though, has it?
