Video on Pentagon to be released

[imported_Aelius]

Originally posted by: Meuge

Originally posted by: Aelius

Originally posted by: Meuge
Oh for the love of God...

Think of what you're saying... just follow the logical chain.

Key Aim (let's call it X): damage the pentagon in order to claim terrorism, etc...
^ This is an assumption in and of itself, but let's (for the sake of the argument) leave it as an axiom.

The conspiracy theorists are saying that this is what happened:
1. A conspiracy to damage the Pentagon commences
2. A conspiracy to fire some object that is not an airliner at it commences
3. A missile (or a UFO according to some claims) crashes into the Pentagon.
4. A collossal conspiracy, involving EVERY person inside the Pentagon at the time (?!), as well as EVERY person within the U.S. air command and ALL missile monitoring stations... required in order to conceal this fact and make it LOOK like an airliner commences.

Yet this conspiracy on an unprecedented scale manages to overlook what seems (from the conspiracy nut videos) like a million obvious clues that such an attack would leave, and which would undoubtedly lead to the outing of this conspiracy.
5. Claims of terrorism are made (the X is achieved)
6. After years, a video is released to quell the naysayers... yet this video, which could have (in the meantime) been altered to have Big Bird realistically crash into the Pentagon, seems to only prove (in the eyes of the conspiracy theorists) their previous claims.

If there are any of you, who don't see that this fails Occam's Razor AT EVERY STEP, you must be out of your minds.

If you can't see that there is absolutely NO NEED for 2-4, in order to get to 5, then you lack any kind of logical thinking.

(1)You are thinking in linear two dimensional terms. (2)Someone much smarter then you can think three steps ahead with three dimensional thinking which most people lack.

(3)All you did is prove them right. I won't even bother addressing your points because they are, while valid statements, constitute no conclusions.

Now that's a fact.

Personal attacks: Check
Baseless Statements: Check
Openly ignoring logic and reason: Check
Sweeping conclusion with no supporting evidence: Check

Says you.

 

[Meuge]

Originally posted by: Aelius

Originally posted by: Meuge

Originally posted by: Aelius

Originally posted by: Meuge
Oh for the love of God...

Think of what you're saying... just follow the logical chain.

Key Aim (let's call it X): damage the pentagon in order to claim terrorism, etc...
^ This is an assumption in and of itself, but let's (for the sake of the argument) leave it as an axiom.

The conspiracy theorists are saying that this is what happened:
1. A conspiracy to damage the Pentagon commences
2. A conspiracy to fire some object that is not an airliner at it commences
3. A missile (or a UFO according to some claims) crashes into the Pentagon.
4. A collossal conspiracy, involving EVERY person inside the Pentagon at the time (?!), as well as EVERY person within the U.S. air command and ALL missile monitoring stations... required in order to conceal this fact and make it LOOK like an airliner commences.

Yet this conspiracy on an unprecedented scale manages to overlook what seems (from the conspiracy nut videos) like a million obvious clues that such an attack would leave, and which would undoubtedly lead to the outing of this conspiracy.
5. Claims of terrorism are made (the X is achieved)
6. After years, a video is released to quell the naysayers... yet this video, which could have (in the meantime) been altered to have Big Bird realistically crash into the Pentagon, seems to only prove (in the eyes of the conspiracy theorists) their previous claims.

If there are any of you, who don't see that this fails Occam's Razor AT EVERY STEP, you must be out of your minds.

If you can't see that there is absolutely NO NEED for 2-4, in order to get to 5, then you lack any kind of logical thinking.

(1)You are thinking in linear two dimensional terms. (2)Someone much smarter then you can think three steps ahead with three dimensional thinking which most people lack.

(3)All you did is prove them right. I won't even bother addressing your points because they are, while valid statements, constitute no conclusions.

Now that's a fact.

Personal attacks: Check
Baseless Statements: Check
Openly ignoring logic and reason: Check
Sweeping conclusion with no supporting evidence: Check

Says you.

Actually, you're the one who "says" things. You didn't support anything you claimed. Go ahead and refute this logical chain. In the meanwhile, all you did was prove you're full of it. If you're such a fan of this mysterious three-dimensional thinking, then please by all means go ahead and present it to us. Just saying there are people smarter than I doesn't really get the argument anywhere, just makes it stink more.

 

[imported_Aelius]

Originally posted by: Meuge

Originally posted by: Aelius

Originally posted by: Meuge

Originally posted by: Aelius

Originally posted by: Meuge
Oh for the love of God...

Think of what you're saying... just follow the logical chain.

Key Aim (let's call it X): damage the pentagon in order to claim terrorism, etc...
^ This is an assumption in and of itself, but let's (for the sake of the argument) leave it as an axiom.

The conspiracy theorists are saying that this is what happened:
1. A conspiracy to damage the Pentagon commences
2. A conspiracy to fire some object that is not an airliner at it commences
3. A missile (or a UFO according to some claims) crashes into the Pentagon.
4. A collossal conspiracy, involving EVERY person inside the Pentagon at the time (?!), as well as EVERY person within the U.S. air command and ALL missile monitoring stations... required in order to conceal this fact and make it LOOK like an airliner commences.

Yet this conspiracy on an unprecedented scale manages to overlook what seems (from the conspiracy nut videos) like a million obvious clues that such an attack would leave, and which would undoubtedly lead to the outing of this conspiracy.
5. Claims of terrorism are made (the X is achieved)
6. After years, a video is released to quell the naysayers... yet this video, which could have (in the meantime) been altered to have Big Bird realistically crash into the Pentagon, seems to only prove (in the eyes of the conspiracy theorists) their previous claims.

If there are any of you, who don't see that this fails Occam's Razor AT EVERY STEP, you must be out of your minds.

If you can't see that there is absolutely NO NEED for 2-4, in order to get to 5, then you lack any kind of logical thinking.

(1)You are thinking in linear two dimensional terms. (2)Someone much smarter then you can think three steps ahead with three dimensional thinking which most people lack.

(3)All you did is prove them right. I won't even bother addressing your points because they are, while valid statements, constitute no conclusions.

Now that's a fact.

Personal attacks: Check
Baseless Statements: Check
Openly ignoring logic and reason: Check
Sweeping conclusion with no supporting evidence: Check

Says you.

Actually, you're the one who "says" things. You didn't support anything you claimed. Go ahead and refute this logical chain. In the meanwhile, all you did was prove you're full of it. If you're such a fan of this mysterious three-dimensional thinking, then please by all means go ahead and present it to us. Just saying there are people smarter than I doesn't really get the argument anywhere, just makes it stink more.

What would be the point in putting forth the effort when it's meet with hostile intent. I don't neccessarily think I'm smarter then you. You may know a lot more then me or have a higher IQ.

However I am thinking several steps ahead here and I learned that regardless of what I write it won't change anything so I decided to go a different route and point out the fault in the conclusive logic you use. I alluded to the fact that I could describe things from the other point of view just as you had but it would make no difference. My point was that people smarter then you could think ahead of you and they have an advantage. They control the system and the system will say or do whatever they wish, therefore you see what they want you to see. You live in a more or less controlled bubble. Like it or not. Thankfully the Internet and free thinking isn't outlawed yet but there have been more then a few efforts to start controlling that too.

There really isn't anything else to say about this subject. I just thought I try a different approach and obviously you felt the need the lash out.

Truth hurts.

 

[Genx87]

Well isnt that an easy copout.

 

[Polish3d]

Originally posted by: Aelius

Originally posted by: Meuge
Oh for the love of God...

Think of what you're saying... just follow the logical chain.

Key Aim (let's call it X): damage the pentagon in order to claim terrorism, etc...
^ This is an assumption in and of itself, but let's (for the sake of the argument) leave it as an axiom.

The conspiracy theorists are saying that this is what happened:
1. A conspiracy to damage the Pentagon commences
2. A conspiracy to fire some object that is not an airliner at it commences
3. A missile (or a UFO according to some claims) crashes into the Pentagon.
4. A collossal conspiracy, involving EVERY person inside the Pentagon at the time (?!), as well as EVERY person within the U.S. air command and ALL missile monitoring stations... required in order to conceal this fact and make it LOOK like an airliner commences.

Yet this conspiracy on an unprecedented scale manages to overlook what seems (from the conspiracy nut videos) like a million obvious clues that such an attack would leave, and which would undoubtedly lead to the outing of this conspiracy.
5. Claims of terrorism are made (the X is achieved)
6. After years, a video is released to quell the naysayers... yet this video, which could have (in the meantime) been altered to have Big Bird realistically crash into the Pentagon, seems to only prove (in the eyes of the conspiracy theorists) their previous claims.

If there are any of you, who don't see that this fails Occam's Razor AT EVERY STEP, you must be out of your minds.

If you can't see that there is absolutely NO NEED for 2-4, in order to get to 5, then you lack any kind of logical thinking.

You are thinking in linear two dimensional terms. Someone much smarter then you can think three steps ahead with three dimensional thinking which most people lack.

All you did is prove them right. I won't even bother addressing your points because they are, while valid statements, constitute no conclusions.

I'm not saying there was a coverup or that a plane did not hit the Pentagon or that the WTC didn't fall along with building 7 all at once like a house of cards.

What I am saying is that you are ignoring things to make it suit your own beliefs. You are no better then a full blown conspiracy nut.

Now that's a fact.

LOL, why don't you describe for us what "thinking three steps ahead in three dimensional thinking" means

 

[Meuge]

Originally posted by: Aelius
What would be the point in putting forth the effort when it's meet with hostile intent.

Well, unless you do, then what you're saying is baseless bullshit. I am not being offensive, just emphasizing the fact.

Originally posted by: Aelius
I don't neccessarily think I'm smarter then you. You may know a lot more then me or have a higher IQ.

I don't care whether you're smarter than I or not. All I did was to demand that if you make a claim that you support it, if not with evidence, then at least with logical conjecture.

Originally posted by: Aelius
However I am thinking several steps ahead here

You're not. You're thinking AROUND. Like Dick Cheney, you simply skip over the points you can't refute, and continue hammering home what you want to say.

Originally posted by: Aelius
...and I learned that regardless of what I write it won't change anything so I decided to go a different route and point out the fault in the conclusive logic you use.

You haven't. You just concluded that someone smarter than I must've somehow seen all this ahead of time, an assumption that is truly blind.

Originally posted by: Aelius
My point was that people smarter then you could think ahead of you and they have an advantage. They control the system and the system will say or do whatever they wish, therefore you see what they want you to see.

My post didn't refer to any physical evidence. It was a logical exploration of the issue that nobody can control other than I.

Originally posted by: AeliusYou live in a more or less controlled bubble. Like it or not. Thankfully the Internet and free thinking isn't outlawed yet but there have been more then a few efforts to start controlling that too.

Again, you're merely appealing to emotion.

Originally posted by: AeliusThere really isn't anything else to say about this subject. I just thought I try a different approach and obviously you felt the need the lash out.

The approach you tried is reminiscent of that done by the White House - simply ignore the facts and logic, and if you say something enough times, it'll appear to be true. Goebbels would've been proud.

Originally posted by: Aelius
Truth hurts.

And what's that? Blanket statements do nothing to prove your point in front of an educated audience. This is not a counter-argument, it's just a variation on a smear campaign, wherefore the content of your rhetoric is somehow meant to supercede the facts and logic of your opponent.

I am open to all kinds of debate, as long as it's real debate, and not biased demagogy.

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: Meuge
Oh for the love of God...

Think of what you're saying... just follow the logical chain.

Key Aim (let's call it X): damage the pentagon in order to claim terrorism, etc...
^ This is an assumption in and of itself, but let's (for the sake of the argument) leave it as an axiom.

The conspiracy theorists are saying that this is what happened:
1. A conspiracy to damage the Pentagon commences
2. A conspiracy to fire some object that is not an airliner at it commences
3. A missile (or a UFO according to some claims) crashes into the Pentagon.
4. A collossal conspiracy, involving EVERY person inside the Pentagon at the time (?!), as well as EVERY person within the U.S. air command and ALL missile monitoring stations... required in order to conceal this fact and make it LOOK like an airliner commences.

Yet this conspiracy on an unprecedented scale manages to overlook what seems (from the conspiracy nut videos) like a million obvious clues that such an attack would leave, and which would undoubtedly lead to the outing of this conspiracy.
5. Claims of terrorism are made (the X is achieved)
6. After years, a video is released to quell the naysayers... yet this video, which could have (in the meantime) been altered to have Big Bird realistically crash into the Pentagon, seems to only prove (in the eyes of the conspiracy theorists) their previous claims.

If there are any of you, who don't see that this fails Occam's Razor AT EVERY STEP, you must be out of your minds.

If you can't see that there is absolutely NO NEED for 2-4, in order to get to 5, then you lack any kind of logical thinking.

While I personally believe it is a virtual certainty it was Flight 77 that hit the Pentagon, your comments and attitude don't help your case one bit. Your fourth bullet is sheer nonsense. There is no reason the people in the Pentagon would need to know anything. Except for a handful of people who happened to be looking out the right windows in the right direction at the right time, they'd have no idea what hit the building. It's also specious to claim that the "U.S. Air Command", etc. would have to be in on it. It would be trivial to equip a missle with a transponder matching Flight 77, irrelevent in any case if it were below radar. Mind you I still believe it would require the cooperation of too many people to keep it a secret for long, but overblown denials like yours ("EVERY person inside the Pentagon") discredit everything else you said. You need to counter irrational claims with well-reasoned arguments and solid, documented fact, not equally irrational counter-claims.

I think this is, as much as anything, an example of the Bush administrations' compulsive obsession with secrecy biting them in the butt. There are valid questions unanswered. What is the significance of Minetta's testimony, and why isn't it included in the 9/11 Report? (Disclaimer, I haven't personally verified it's not there.) What is the story behind the fall of WTC 7? WTC 1 and WTC 2 are plausible because of the heavy structural damage they received, but WTC 7 sustained relatively minor damage. If it were truly so easy for a modern skyscraper to collapse due to fire, why has it never happened before or since? It was probably just a fluke, yet the question has never been answered clearly to my knowledge. Where were the fighters that should have intercepted Flights 77 and 93? Why did Rumsfeld stop flying commercial beginning in July (IIRC) 2001? Why did so many Pentagon officials cancel their 9/11 flights on 9/10?

There are probably reasonable answers to all these questions, but BushCo stonewalling doesn't foster confidence and trust. Because they so stubbornly refuse to fully disclose the whole story behind the 9/11 attacks, they blow the door wide open for people to fill in the blanks on their own.

 

[imported_Aelius]

Originally posted by: Frackal

Originally posted by: Aelius

Originally posted by: Meuge
Oh for the love of God...

Think of what you're saying... just follow the logical chain.

Key Aim (let's call it X): damage the pentagon in order to claim terrorism, etc...
^ This is an assumption in and of itself, but let's (for the sake of the argument) leave it as an axiom.

The conspiracy theorists are saying that this is what happened:
1. A conspiracy to damage the Pentagon commences
2. A conspiracy to fire some object that is not an airliner at it commences
3. A missile (or a UFO according to some claims) crashes into the Pentagon.
4. A collossal conspiracy, involving EVERY person inside the Pentagon at the time (?!), as well as EVERY person within the U.S. air command and ALL missile monitoring stations... required in order to conceal this fact and make it LOOK like an airliner commences.

Yet this conspiracy on an unprecedented scale manages to overlook what seems (from the conspiracy nut videos) like a million obvious clues that such an attack would leave, and which would undoubtedly lead to the outing of this conspiracy.
5. Claims of terrorism are made (the X is achieved)
6. After years, a video is released to quell the naysayers... yet this video, which could have (in the meantime) been altered to have Big Bird realistically crash into the Pentagon, seems to only prove (in the eyes of the conspiracy theorists) their previous claims.

If there are any of you, who don't see that this fails Occam's Razor AT EVERY STEP, you must be out of your minds.

If you can't see that there is absolutely NO NEED for 2-4, in order to get to 5, then you lack any kind of logical thinking.

You are thinking in linear two dimensional terms. Someone much smarter then you can think three steps ahead with three dimensional thinking which most people lack.

All you did is prove them right. I won't even bother addressing your points because they are, while valid statements, constitute no conclusions.

I'm not saying there was a coverup or that a plane did not hit the Pentagon or that the WTC didn't fall along with building 7 all at once like a house of cards.

What I am saying is that you are ignoring things to make it suit your own beliefs. You are no better then a full blown conspiracy nut.

Now that's a fact.

LOL, why don't you describe for us what "thinking three steps ahead in three dimensional thinking" means

I already did and it obviously went over your head. /shrug

 

[morkinva]

Originally posted by: JEDIYoda

Originally posted by: morkinva

Originally posted by: Nocturnal
I wonder if this will shut up the conspiracy theorists or if it will only fuel their fire even more?

Wonder no longer!

Boy that video was really a slam dunk! Hahahahahah best laugh I've had in quite awhile LMAO.

Anyhow, even if this single point is conceded, there still remains about 145 other points which have not. So if this 'video' (a couple of frames) turns out to be correct, this answers less than 1% of outstanding questions and problems with the official conspiracy theory. Please watch the second video link in my sig and educate yourselves, ignorami!

Your parents must be proud of you.

You post a new story yesterday about the Israeli palestinian issue claiming the US press is being duped and used by the Israelis........which gets locked!

Of course that should have been my clue you were one of those tinfoil peeps....

If being a 'tinfoil peeps' means I can detach from the propaganda and use my brain, then fine, call it what you will.

The thread about the Israeli palestine issue was first posted and you felt the need to private message me and gloat that the thread was locked. You are goading me again in this thread about the same subject.

So I had reposted it with different input to satisfy the mod. It wasn't locked because of a problem with the documentary, but because of some of the language by one of the respondents. If you watched it, as you claimed, and do not agree with its primary conclusion, then you are clearly too hypnotized. It is, in fact, you who requires a figurative type of tinfoil -- to keep out the thoughts of others which end up controlling your own.

Please learn to start thinking for yourself.

 

[imported_Aelius]

*points above his last post*

It's too easy.

Shocking.

 

[Meuge]

Originally posted by: Aelius
*points above his last post*

It's too easy.

Shocking.

LOL. It figures that you'd appreciate the above post, given that it has zero content besides rhetoric.

 

[imported_Aelius]

Originally posted by: Meuge

Originally posted by: Aelius
*points above his last post*

It's too easy.

Shocking.

LOL. It figures that you'd appreciate the above post, given that it has zero content besides rhetoric.

Aim higher. I said my last post. That's above the one I said it in.

 

[Meuge]

Originally posted by: Aelius
I already did and it obviously went over your head. /shrug

Did you mean this lame copout?

 

[imported_Aelius]

Originally posted by: Meuge

Originally posted by: Aelius
I already did and it obviously went over your head. /shrug

Did you mean this lame copout?

Sorry but I don't have a cure for what ails you.

 

[RichardE]

Judicialwatch.org just got owned

 

[Polish3d]

Originally posted by: Aelius

Originally posted by: Frackal

Originally posted by: Aelius

Originally posted by: Meuge
Oh for the love of God...

Think of what you're saying... just follow the logical chain.

Key Aim (let's call it X): damage the pentagon in order to claim terrorism, etc...
^ This is an assumption in and of itself, but let's (for the sake of the argument) leave it as an axiom.

The conspiracy theorists are saying that this is what happened:
1. A conspiracy to damage the Pentagon commences
2. A conspiracy to fire some object that is not an airliner at it commences
3. A missile (or a UFO according to some claims) crashes into the Pentagon.
4. A collossal conspiracy, involving EVERY person inside the Pentagon at the time (?!), as well as EVERY person within the U.S. air command and ALL missile monitoring stations... required in order to conceal this fact and make it LOOK like an airliner commences.

Yet this conspiracy on an unprecedented scale manages to overlook what seems (from the conspiracy nut videos) like a million obvious clues that such an attack would leave, and which would undoubtedly lead to the outing of this conspiracy.
5. Claims of terrorism are made (the X is achieved)
6. After years, a video is released to quell the naysayers... yet this video, which could have (in the meantime) been altered to have Big Bird realistically crash into the Pentagon, seems to only prove (in the eyes of the conspiracy theorists) their previous claims.

If there are any of you, who don't see that this fails Occam's Razor AT EVERY STEP, you must be out of your minds.

If you can't see that there is absolutely NO NEED for 2-4, in order to get to 5, then you lack any kind of logical thinking.

You are thinking in linear two dimensional terms. Someone much smarter then you can think three steps ahead with three dimensional thinking which most people lack.

All you did is prove them right. I won't even bother addressing your points because they are, while valid statements, constitute no conclusions.

I'm not saying there was a coverup or that a plane did not hit the Pentagon or that the WTC didn't fall along with building 7 all at once like a house of cards.

What I am saying is that you are ignoring things to make it suit your own beliefs. You are no better then a full blown conspiracy nut.

Now that's a fact.

LOL, why don't you describe for us what "thinking three steps ahead in three dimensional thinking" means

I already did and it obviously went over your head. /shrug

Hahah.. yeah sure...where did you, I must have missed it

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Frackal

Originally posted by: Aelius

Originally posted by: Frackal

Originally posted by: Aelius

Originally posted by: Meuge
Oh for the love of God...

Think of what you're saying... just follow the logical chain.

Key Aim (let's call it X): damage the pentagon in order to claim terrorism, etc...
^ This is an assumption in and of itself, but let's (for the sake of the argument) leave it as an axiom.

The conspiracy theorists are saying that this is what happened:
1. A conspiracy to damage the Pentagon commences
2. A conspiracy to fire some object that is not an airliner at it commences
3. A missile (or a UFO according to some claims) crashes into the Pentagon.
4. A collossal conspiracy, involving EVERY person inside the Pentagon at the time (?!), as well as EVERY person within the U.S. air command and ALL missile monitoring stations... required in order to conceal this fact and make it LOOK like an airliner commences.

Yet this conspiracy on an unprecedented scale manages to overlook what seems (from the conspiracy nut videos) like a million obvious clues that such an attack would leave, and which would undoubtedly lead to the outing of this conspiracy.
5. Claims of terrorism are made (the X is achieved)
6. After years, a video is released to quell the naysayers... yet this video, which could have (in the meantime) been altered to have Big Bird realistically crash into the Pentagon, seems to only prove (in the eyes of the conspiracy theorists) their previous claims.

If there are any of you, who don't see that this fails Occam's Razor AT EVERY STEP, you must be out of your minds.

If you can't see that there is absolutely NO NEED for 2-4, in order to get to 5, then you lack any kind of logical thinking.

You are thinking in linear two dimensional terms. Someone much smarter then you can think three steps ahead with three dimensional thinking which most people lack.

All you did is prove them right. I won't even bother addressing your points because they are, while valid statements, constitute no conclusions.

I'm not saying there was a coverup or that a plane did not hit the Pentagon or that the WTC didn't fall along with building 7 all at once like a house of cards.

What I am saying is that you are ignoring things to make it suit your own beliefs. You are no better then a full blown conspiracy nut.

Now that's a fact.

LOL, why don't you describe for us what "thinking three steps ahead in three dimensional thinking" means

I already did and it obviously went over your head. /shrug

Hahah.. yeah sure...where did you, I must have missed it

Like all good conspiracy theories, you need to look much much much harder, duh!

 

[imported_Aelius]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Frackal

Originally posted by: Aelius

Originally posted by: Frackal

Originally posted by: Aelius

Originally posted by: Meuge
Oh for the love of God...

Think of what you're saying... just follow the logical chain.

Key Aim (let's call it X): damage the pentagon in order to claim terrorism, etc...
^ This is an assumption in and of itself, but let's (for the sake of the argument) leave it as an axiom.

The conspiracy theorists are saying that this is what happened:
1. A conspiracy to damage the Pentagon commences
2. A conspiracy to fire some object that is not an airliner at it commences
3. A missile (or a UFO according to some claims) crashes into the Pentagon.
4. A collossal conspiracy, involving EVERY person inside the Pentagon at the time (?!), as well as EVERY person within the U.S. air command and ALL missile monitoring stations... required in order to conceal this fact and make it LOOK like an airliner commences.

Yet this conspiracy on an unprecedented scale manages to overlook what seems (from the conspiracy nut videos) like a million obvious clues that such an attack would leave, and which would undoubtedly lead to the outing of this conspiracy.
5. Claims of terrorism are made (the X is achieved)
6. After years, a video is released to quell the naysayers... yet this video, which could have (in the meantime) been altered to have Big Bird realistically crash into the Pentagon, seems to only prove (in the eyes of the conspiracy theorists) their previous claims.

If there are any of you, who don't see that this fails Occam's Razor AT EVERY STEP, you must be out of your minds.

If you can't see that there is absolutely NO NEED for 2-4, in order to get to 5, then you lack any kind of logical thinking.

You are thinking in linear two dimensional terms. Someone much smarter then you can think three steps ahead with three dimensional thinking which most people lack.

All you did is prove them right. I won't even bother addressing your points because they are, while valid statements, constitute no conclusions.

I'm not saying there was a coverup or that a plane did not hit the Pentagon or that the WTC didn't fall along with building 7 all at once like a house of cards.

What I am saying is that you are ignoring things to make it suit your own beliefs. You are no better then a full blown conspiracy nut.

Now that's a fact.

LOL, why don't you describe for us what "thinking three steps ahead in three dimensional thinking" means

I already did and it obviously went over your head. /shrug

Hahah.. yeah sure...where did you, I must have missed it

Like all good conspiracy theories, you need to look much much much harder, duh!

Point to where I said in this thread that it's a conspiracy.

I'm going to stop responding to stupid comments starting right now.

 

[Polish3d]

I just want to know about the 3-dimensional thinking

 

[alchemize]

Originally posted by: Aelius

Point to where I said in this thread that it's a conspiracy.

I'm going to stop responding to stupid comments starting right now.

Well I don't know about years to figure out but the military did have a plan in place to do this.

 

[imported_Aelius]

Originally posted by: alchemize

Originally posted by: Aelius

Point to where I said in this thread that it's a conspiracy.

I'm going to stop responding to stupid comments starting right now.

Well I don't know about years to figure out but the military did have a plan in place to do this.

Documented evidence shown previously where plan was in place to use planes against their own citizens as a political tool. Which was then later abandoned.

You want me to link you the document or just threads on this board where it was already linked.

Got anything else or you just trollin?

 

[Genx87]

What does the planned hatched by some military fools in 1962 have to do with 2001?

 

[Gibsons]

Originally posted by: Frackal
I just want to know about the 3-dimensional thinking

Me too.

 

[Aimster]

what is going on in this thread? .. stop it

im on my 6 round of popcorn.. gonna make me fat.

 

[alchemize]

Genx87 said it first. And it wasn't abandoned - it was rejected. Which sets precedent and really weakens the case rather than strengthens it.

We also used to have Slavery and Jim Crow laws. How are they relevant to today?

Your general tone and questions also show that you believe there was a conspiracy - you've never once said you were being a "Devil's Advocate".

And tell us about 3 dimensional thinking, please