You mean, what?

Northwoods was rejected as a bad plan.

Why would I defend it as a good plan?

I am not wondering where people and planes went, because I saw the planes hit the towers.  I have relatives in New York that saw it with their own eyes, one of whom exited the World Trade tower 1 some fifteen minutes before it was struck.

As far as I am concerned, you can have a conspiracy theory about 911 and be sincere.

But if your conspiracy theory does not stand up to critical examination, you are a propagandist.

Take your pick, buddy.

Look, why don't you just come clean and state what your affiliations are? 

Obviously you are a big hater.

You have posted no arguments that have not been posted before.

So what is it?

+1

Here is your problem.  You are trying to make up something then claim that I believe it.

That's called lying.

Why not just look at what I have actually said or calculated.

I'm sure there's enough there you won't like.

Well, you are wrong.

First, because several warring tribal groups can each claim to be "liberating" the same country from "occupation."

In fact they are just all power hungry.

Second, because if the country is not "occupied" they'll just claim the current tyrant is in bed with the Evil Satan America, blah blah blaah and go on with their violence.

Third, because there never was anything wrong with an advanced Western culture going to a primative third world place and making a deal with a tribal chief or warlord for some of the local resources, which he didn't even value.  Then over some decades, the local people actually get some education, and start to understand things.  THAT'S when they want a bigger share for themselves. 

But the origin of the deal wasn't oppression.

It's not just this forum.  It's a large number of forums, and a small number of jew haters likely posting all day long.  And you can guess who they are and why they are doing it. 

Go back and read what I said.  I don't have any complaint with conspiracy theories.  Just with physics and chemistry that are flat wrong. 

This is all pretty simple.

Many of these thread titles or answers are from non English speakers using google translate.  Not to be criticized in my opinion.

Badecker only moved to personal criticism, after one after another of his crazy 911 ideas were refuted.  Ad hominem is all he had left.  Similarly it doesn't matter how you attempt to "explain the behavior of someone who refutes crazy ideas about 911."

All that matters is that you make a statement about 911, and then someone address the chemistry and physics of it from first principles.  Is that the way the physics works?  what do the numbers show?  Aside from that, make any conspiracy theory you like.  Makes no difference to me.

However, if you defend a conspiracy theory about 911 based on wrong understanding of the physics, prepare to have it destroyed. 

I come back again and again to ridicule the "Evil Jews theories" because they crop up continually, always without any evidence whatsoever.  Because those are particularly ridiculous.  I ridicule them, instead of "disproving them."  Specific facts can be disproven, but irrefutable hypothesis cannot be disproven.  Example.

"There is a God."

"No, there is not."

"Oh really?  If there's no God, then prove it!"



Another curiousity of 911 conspiracy theories is the extent to which various conspiracy theories are mutually contradictory.  This is in opposition to the JFK killing, where the was simply "Was there just one gunman?"

This is a question that can be examined with statistics.

Oh wait...you are just learning that Islamic propagandists are on these threads?

No kidding?

And this one's "not a true muslim?"

Well, what will you do with an entire crowd of people who, led by their holy cleric reciting versus from an old holyo book, stone a woman to death?

Okay, let's play the game of "guess the religion."

Data item:  They shouted Allah Ackbar, then detonated their bomb.

Religion:

A) Islam
B) Jewish
C) Christian
D) Atheist

I just don't know what to answer.  I just don't know.   How can I tell?  It's so so confusing.

Lol, I can't be a rejector of science, because I have repeatedly used basic physics math to refute poorly thought out "theories of 911."

Does not mean you are not welcome to come up with a well reasoned theory.  Be my guest.  But if you would do it based on "nano thermite" or "puddles of melted steel" or one in a million wacho claiming it wasn't a jet that hit the towers, when hundreds of thousands were watching the second jet hit the towers, expect your theory to be destroyed.

Then there's the "no airliners" lunatics.  Where did the people and the planes go?

And best of all, there's the "Evil Jews did it" bug eyed fanatic defenders of Islam.

Your problem is the choice between batshit crazy and apeshit crazy. 

Bats shit on you from above, and apes throw shit at you.

You like to fly, of course, but forget that apes get pissed if flying things shit on them.  They snatch them out of the air and bite their little heads off.

I'm okay with that perspective too.  But I just keep seeing the image of a guy sitting down in Vegas at a blackjack table, and within five minutes a girl comes over and starts play.  That's called a "shill."  It's a person who is paid to go to tables where there is only one person and play.  Increases total house income, someone to talk to, etc.

I'm okay with that.  Better than saying he was getting a lot of public opinion polls - wait, those who do that don't say they are doing it, do they?

So you mean, this guy Trump, he ACTUALLY ADMITS TO THINKING THINGS OUT?

Damn....an actual thinker?

That could be trouble....

Yeah, somehow I just couldn't resist bringing that up.  Weirdest of worlds we have, isn't it?

No, I mean straw man.  In other words, the Back Room Democrats (or them and the back room Repubs) put up weak candidate and finance him to create the appearance of a real contest.  That requires someone that can at least create the similtude of sincerity and "difference" but who cannot win and whose arguments can be easily refuted.  Hence, a pure socialist.  Which most Americans do not want and would not vote for.

However, Bernie turned out to be stronger than the puppet masters anticipated, and so the question is whether this was due to the conviction of the berniebots or the weakness of Hillary.  As an unbiased outsider, I can tell you that it is weakness of Hillary.

She is the weakest presidential candidate I have ever seen, frankly.

It is in fact a business.

For example, terrorism definitely jacks up oil prices.

And terrorism acts as a blackmail to keep foreign aid coming.

And it takes a lot of people to keep repeating over and over to the world, "Islam is peace."