Bill Clinton Takes On 9/11 Conspiracy Protesters

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: TehMac
You know...the democrats are just as elitest if not more so than Republican candidates. Probably more so, because they're busy condescending to people and making people dependent on the government to garner votes.

Money buys votes, which begets power. Both parties are guilty of it.

Exactly. Like its ideological opposite, libertarianism, populism exists on both the right and left side of the political spectrum.

Democracy and capitalism balance each other. Neither would work without the either. Without capitalism, the voting minority would have no rights within a democracy. Likewise, the majority in a capitalism without democracy.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: TehMac

Originally posted by: Victhe Elites are trying to crush us the common people, with the only things changing are the particular "they" and "us" based on who the charismatic figure seeking election is trying to appeal to popularity to.

You know...the democrats are just as elitest if not more so than Republican candidates. Probably more so, because they're busy condescending to people and making people dependent on the government to garner votes.

Think about this for a minute, do you really believe that there is one politician who would not risk thousands of Americans deaths if it meant that they would win?

I'm mot American but i have a hard time figuring out ANY politician who would not do that.

Isn't that fucking sad though? "We the people"

I'm going to go with the Churchill quote that democracy is the worst form of government... except for all other forms of government.

 

[JohnOfSheffield]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: TehMac
You know...the democrats are just as elitest if not more so than Republican candidates. Probably more so, because they're busy condescending to people and making people dependent on the government to garner votes.

Money buys votes, which begets power. Both parties are guilty of it.

Exactly. Like its ideological opposite, libertarianism, populism exists on both the right and left side of the political spectrum.

Democracy and capitalism balance each other. Neither would work without the either. Without capitalism, the voting minority would have no rights within a democracy. Likewise, the majority in a capitalism without democracy.

HAY, you be careful now... I'd might just nominate this as post of the year.

Mixed economy, the way every first world county exists, excellent, i am impressed.

 

[sadguy]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: sadguy

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
The most compelling evidence that the US government had nothing to do with 9/11 is the lack of any real evidence from those on the inside. Where are the secret memos? If the someone in the government did this there is no way it would stay a secret long. Telling someone in government to keep a secret is like telling the school blabbermouth something you don't want anyone else to know.

Considering this government conpspiracy was covered up for several decades, you really have no idea what you're talking about.

He knows exactly what he's talking about. The problem is your poor comparison.

You're comparing a plan that never came to fruition to one that did. Besides that, Northwoods was struck down by JFK. It was a blue sky suggestion that never saw the light of day.

You mean a conspiracy involving America's top military leaders?
and all that was missing was JFK's signature?


A bit ironic you mention JFK, since nobody has come forward about the JFK conspiracy either.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: sadguy

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: sadguy

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus
The most compelling evidence that the US government had nothing to do with 9/11 is the lack of any real evidence from those on the inside. Where are the secret memos? If the someone in the government did this there is no way it would stay a secret long. Telling someone in government to keep a secret is like telling the school blabbermouth something you don't want anyone else to know.

Considering this government conpspiracy was covered up for several decades, you really have no idea what you're talking about.

He knows exactly what he's talking about. The problem is your poor comparison.

You're comparing a plan that never came to fruition to one that did. Besides that, Northwoods was struck down by JFK. It was a blue sky suggestion that never saw the light of day.

You mean a conspiracy involving America's top military leaders?
and all that was missing was JFK's signature?


A bit ironic you mention JFK, since nobody has come forward about the JFK conspiracy either.

No, I mean a recommendation that was never acted upon. JFK nixed the plan along with Operation Mongoose and Operation Dirty Trick. Coming up with a plan and putting it into action are two different things and the fact that our government did NOT act on those plans pretty much blows your claim out of the water because it demonstrates that our government is not in the habit of initiating such plans in the first place. Besides that, Northwoods is little more from a diversion from the fact that the conspiracy theorists have absolutely zero proof that any similar plan was put into action for 9/11. Making some whacky-tobbacky plan, never acting on it, filing it away, and keeping it secret for years is completely different than actually putting such a plan into action; particularly one that would involve the massive amount of secrecy, personnel, and planning that 9/11 would have required to pull off flawlessly if it were a government inside job. It's laughable to think that the bumbling Bush admin could ever do anything remotely like 9/11 and pull it off perfectly.

And nobody is coming forward about JFK because this thread concerns the 9/11 conspiracy nuts, not the JFK assasination conspiracy nuts.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: jdelrio22
All I know is that when people talk about 9/11, everyone appears to have forgotten about the "plane" that hit the Pentagon. Nobody mentions it in the media, everyone is focused on the towers and to this date we still don't have any hard evidence proving that a plane was what actually knocked down the light posts on the way to its target.

**WARNING: BURNED BODIES IN THIS LINK**

 

[umbrella39]

Originally posted by: kevinthenerd
"How dare you"

Is that supposed to be some kind of argument or something?

I don't think him saying "fuck you" would have been apropos nor do I think he should have felt compelled to debate them there. That wasn't what he was there for.

 

[manowar821]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: sadguy
Clinton is no newcomer to cover ups.

I'd like to see him confront these members of government and the military who are 9/11 truthers., including Navy Seal Jesse Ventura.

9/11 Truth is spreading.

edit: It's no secret that Clinton and the Bush family are best buddies :shocked:

Jesse Ventura? lmao that guy is a known liar and all around douchebag.

Yeah, sounds kind of like Bush and anyone working under him, right?

 

[kevinthenerd]

Originally posted by: umbrella39

Originally posted by: kevinthenerd
"How dare you"

Is that supposed to be some kind of argument or something?

I don't think him saying "fuck you" would have been apropos nor do I think he should have felt compelled to debate them there. That wasn't what he was there for.

If he wasn't prepared to take the podium on the issue, so to speak, he shouldn't have touched it. The very same argument can be made the other way: how dare they kill so many Americans for political and economic gain?

 

[First]

Originally posted by: kevinthenerd

Originally posted by: umbrella39

Originally posted by: kevinthenerd
"How dare you"

Is that supposed to be some kind of argument or something?

I don't think him saying "fuck you" would have been apropos nor do I think he should have felt compelled to debate them there. That wasn't what he was there for.

If he wasn't prepared to take the podium on the issue, so to speak, he shouldn't have touched it. The very same argument can be made the other way: how dare they kill so many Americans for political and economic gain?

Except your argument isn't based in any reality that exists or can be proven. Clinton's outrage, as anyone sane will attest to, is well founded. If you're going to say that the gov't was in on the attacks, at least present your case intelligently, be it a paper or hard evidence, instead of interrupting unrelated political fund raisers.

 

[Siddhartha]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: yllus
I love the conspiracy nutjob thought process. It's very binary.

IF Person SUPPORTS CONSPIRACY THEORY {
PRAISE Person;
}
ELSE {
HE IS ONE OF THEM;
}

You can't really blame them. They just copied the pseudo-religious mindset of the recent radical populist movement, of which the 9/11 "truth" movement is merely a part.


On topic, I love Bill. There's a reason I voted for him both times. He's as true a liberal as they come. I wish he could run again so I could vote for him a third time, 'cause I won't vote for his wife.

I guess Mr Clinton is a liberal, if you think Mr Bush is a moderate. But if you place his policies with the political spectrum of the last 40 years he is a moderate.

 

[glugglug]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Plane parts were found. There are pictures of those plane parts available on the web. The black box was found. Human body parts were recovered. DNA tests were performed on those body parts. The coroner's report, using those DNA tests, accounts for every single passenger on Flight 77.

I call shens. I know there are hundreds if not thousands still waiting for any type of positive body part identification from the towers, and severely doubt they would have identified all the bodies from the planes as well, even if the official story were true (which it clearly isn't).

 

[glugglug]

Originally posted by: GeezerMan
Why did building 7 collapse?

Inspection of the damage to tower 7 from tower 2 would have revealed explosive residue too clearly, so that evidence needed to be destroyed.

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: glugglug
Inspection of the damage to tower 7 from tower 2 would have revealed explosive residue too clearly, so that evidence needed to be destroyed.

Please, start another moonbat thread for your conspiracy theories. Keep them out of mine.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: glugglug

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Plane parts were found. There are pictures of those plane parts available on the web. The black box was found. Human body parts were recovered. DNA tests were performed on those body parts. The coroner's report, using those DNA tests, accounts for every single passenger on Flight 77.

I call shens. I know there are hundreds if not thousands still waiting for any type of positive body part identification from the towers, and severely doubt they would have identified all the bodies from the planes as well, even if the official story were true (which it clearly isn't).

http://www.washingtonpost.com/...Nov20?language=printer

Since that story was written in 2001 all but one on Flight 77 has been identified through DNA testing, and that one was a small child.

So put your serious doubts to rest.

 

[manowar821]

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: glugglug
Inspection of the damage to tower 7 from tower 2 would have revealed explosive residue too clearly, so that evidence needed to be destroyed.

Please, start another moonbat thread for your conspiracy theories. Keep them out of mine.

So if I made a thread about the conspiracy, and you came in whining about how much of a sheep you are, could I tell you to leave?

No.

Look, you made a thread that is a 100% troll magnet, suck it up.

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: manowar821
Look, you made a thread that is a 100% troll magnet, suck it up.

Well, it did attract you. :laugh:

 

[SSSnail]

Because they can't publicly say "Yes, it was a cover up".