Ok, v. sorry for the delay. Go to the General Gaming section to see what I spent my time on.
My responses will be written "inline" this time. The quote has been re-formatted to facilitate ease of reading:
[quote name='cindersphere']
Chapter 1
On the Birth Cert
Firstly, bull I did read what it had to say on the matter and personally anyone who really doubts it, imo, is someone with a pretense against authenticity. I read the damn blurb and while they did admit that there were some inconsistencies to say it was "doctored"
I was just saying that it's not untouched, the reason behind it doesn't concern me ATM. is just wishful thinking. There is not merit, other than being stubborn and generally being clinging onto debunked rhetoric (which is actually hard to shake somebody from
Again, I really AM flexible - just show me a proper scan of the cert, debunk the thermate-on-steel theory, and show how socialism is good in the long run. once an opinion has been formed), is baseless and detracts from actual policy attention.
Secondly, why does it matter? No offense but he made sure the proper people knew his birth documentation was good.
To who & when? I know you are going to say this is a false equivalency
Yes. but if I get a job with say Wal-Mart, there are only about 3 people who should know my birth status, the manager, personnel, and maybe pay roll dept.
What if you're the CEO? While on a theoretical level, everyone at my job should know if I am eligible to work legally, it is really none of their business and not a right given for them to know constitutionally. Same thing with the Pres. birth cert. YOU are not guaranteed the right to view his birth certificate. ONLY a select few are given that privileged and even then NOT by the constitution (which by the way doesn't even delve into what a natural citizen is, the current definition of which is more or less based on the early 1900's definition developed by the horrible doctrine of nativism, aka racism against all minorities.
My POV as to why having been born here is a pre-requisite is that it makes the odds of growing up here better, and doing so is supposed to help you understand what makes the country tick. But where you're from doesn't bother me personally. I'm just worried about the president possibly hiding the document that is the only proof that he's following the constitution in full. (Ignore the Federal Reserve for now.) Honestly in my opinion is a horrible prerequisite for presidency, because someone like Arnold (whome I really dislike because of his politics position taken mid-term) cannot be president, but a natural born terrorist is A-OK to become the President of the United States. This form of picking a leader is antiquated at best and xenophobic at worst). The very fact that you want to see his birth cert (Even though I believe you said it doesn't matter to you) is really a moot point. Is he hiding something? Probably not (considering he wrote a book about his fathers alcoholism and bigotry) but if you want to pretend that he is, keep on trucking.
Again I fully expect the false equivalency defense, just get it over with quickly if you respond.
Chapter 2
Conspiracy theories
Why bother killing them? Are you seriously kidding me? Why did our government bother to make leaking state secrets a crime? or better yet lets look at our government on a smaller scale, look at Julian Assange (putting aside personal opinions) what he was leaking to the press is not even close to the level as inflammatory as what the 9/11 theorists were saying, and he has multiple govt's trying to shut his ass up.
Again, keyboard commandos. Has anything from Wikileaks done severe, irreparable harm to any government? So if a bunch of people are saying that this was incited by the US govt, and the govt is NOT trying to stop these people says something, IMO, about the validity of those claims. Further more lets look at a country where a similar situation MIGHT have happened. (Bear with me, to prove a point I am going into conspiracy theorist zone) But in Russia with the Apartment bombings, which many believe to be orchestrated by Putin to ensure his election to Russian PM, they actually have a list of possible people implicated with the plot. The ONLY real people that can be implicated in the 9/11 theory are nebulous people in our govt like Bush or Cheney (okay maybe Silverstein or Marvin). Really no actual evidence points to how the event was planned or any materials being used to do it.
There may be little evidence as to just who did it, but it's clear that the official report IS full of holes. Has anyone been able to prove that those trusses existed? Further more, your point of "1. I'm sure that there's more than one way to blow up a building." come on, tell me of which ways you are talking about. I would really love to hear them, or was your thermite theory what you meant?
I'll elaborate. Standard controlled demoltions are done the way they're done for safety & accuracy. The towers needed to come down (in order to maximize the impact of the event) in a way that made it look like a plane did it without leaving any obvious trace. Is it too hard to believe that cutting the steel with thermate at the point of impact then blowing the lower portions with standard explosives the rest of the way down could not be done?
Chapter 3
How things fall, why they fall, and pondering on what my engineer neighbor does on his weekends with his small supply of thermite and solid steel girders.
Further more in you the video you posted, which I will be attacking on every level imaginable, the dude pushing the nano-thermite story. Seriously? Are you really
ing kidding me? Even the Jones mentioned in the video had to revise his OWN damn theory and is now saying the termite was in the PAINT, for further effect, THE PAINT. Further more the journal this theory was published in was sketchy at best, the peer reviewer had connections to Jones (which would explain why it even got published), Jones has refused to let his samples be evaluated by outside sources
Please show that he did this - maybe nobody WANTS to evaluate it?, and even the EDITOR of the journal it was published in said the paper had NO merit whatsoever. The thermite "experiments" your video did are note even good science to begin with. They were done under conditions not anywhere near those in the towers, where forces such as pressure, available oxygen, and confined burning places would radically change the actions of the situation.
But he did prove that thermate CAN cut through steel, no? That's the only reason why I made a link to that video. I will give that the dude is an engineer, and I will take it at face value. But what the hell does this engineer know about controlled explosives? What are his credentials? Is he a materials engineer? Nuclear Engineer? Structural Engineer? For all I know the dude could be a damn electrical engineer with NO ability to even know what he is looking for in terms of explosions. True the dude know how to build shit, but hell half of what he did is shit I was doing in my grandfathers garage when I was in middle school (not the thermite, but making shit go boom. All he really proved is he know how to mix A and B and make it go boom and has access to beam and welding material. Nothing more nothing less.) Hell Jones paper did not even check for the usual explosives, which further tests by other professionals
The official report was also written by "professionals". revealed there was none of. Further more the pulses and white smoke are also caused by normal explosive, of which there was none.
But you know what, just for you I will play along for a hot minute. Okay then lets assume Jones is correct and the paint was the culprit. How is one going to distribute it in the Tower? You know what lets go even more basic, the paint when sprayed would naturally create dust when dried, meaning a good percentage of the thermite would not even stay on the girders/places where it really needs to be, resulting in an uneven displacement of explosive paint (which actually sounds kind of cool when I think about it). So even to say that paint caused it is really quite a stretch considering the tower was built in the 70's and the paint would need to stay in those place, despite the pressures present in the building which could dilute the presence in certain key places such as the presence of natural winds, air conditioning, and just plain gravity. Now why would the building be pre rigged with explosives for about 30 years just to detonate years later? But you know what lets go with you gleaming hope of Bush’s relative or something (I am assuming you mean Marvin Bush). You still need to get around the explosion problem, which I showed your thermite idea probably holds very little to no water. Further more if you are suggesting that they were able to do structural changes to the building, which BTW would be under the auspices of another dept. and would require a great deal of planning just to accomplish (and yes it would as I will hopefully articulate) where is the proof? Hell even in the Russian apartment bombings there is cursory proof of certain people buying some explosives and transporting them to the area, but with 9/11 nothing tangible, and the only thing present is video science done by people who have no expertise in the topics they are broadly covering. Futhermore are you really implying that Silverstein has the power to either A- change the very fabric of reality to hide the truth, or B had the resources to silence every researcher that dared to study the tower? That is just plain here say man. None of the facts you are so proud of and allege rule your life. This is just rumor and looking at the glass half conspiracy.
Now to add the final piece of why this would have been difficult to keep completely off of the books, just how do you think they got both the building inspectors, which makes me giggle with the image of a building inspector taking a bribe in front of crate of thermite saying all is okay.
All things considered, I don't think lowly building inspectors would have been a problem. Do you really think people wanting to destroy a building to start perpetual war wouldn't be able to find MANY ways to get around such people?
Chapter 4
In which I ponder the implications of your comment upon the cleanup crews (addendum, no real “science” or “debate” here, just a general response to a statement you made which threw me for a loop in more ways than one)
Personally your view on the cleanup kinda disgusts me. Seriously you are questioning the people and volunteers that braved cancer and early death to help our country recover from this attack and casting them as liars?
I'll clarify my statement. The grunts doing the heavy lifting likely just wanted to get the job done and didn't bother taking a close look at the wreckage, and those in charge likely coordinated the work very carefully to lessen the chances of anything incriminating getting discovered (keeping things moving, using "special" crews for the more sensitive areas, etc.). Yes, that sounds a little far-fetched, but if you have the know-how to destroy the towers, you probably have all of your ducks in a row regarding the cleanup as well. Damn that is a low I will not even sink to but you just blow right past it. But you know what lets put my feeling aside and soldier on. This is not even a decent point to make at all in my opinion, who cares what the cleanup crew saw? This was a debate only the science of the towers collapse (which you seemed to have abandoned somewhere around Marvin).
The COLLAPSE is the scientific portion. Whoever may have helped get the explosives INSTALLED is entirely separate. I will not speak of the cleanup anymore out of respect for those involved with that horrible day (which honestly was a horrible day for me as well considering I actually had family that worked in the towers). Hopefully this has not turned you off on reading my reply, because I still have so much ground to cover.
Chapter 5
Further ponderings about conspiracies
Could it be the President? Nope. That is too big a stretch probably even for you (or are you going to say Nixon/Johnson were planning this even then, with materials which weren’t even created yet). CIA? Maybe, but considering no information even hinting at their participation (Jullian has released video of Americans getting killed in Iraq that was intentionally hid, but not finding an one iota of proof of a conspiracy this big and planned for over 30 years.
Who ever said 30 years? Poppycock I say. Hell even planning for a few years would produce more proof than the shooting of the reporters). This rules out the CIA as well. Sorry, but same general idea goes for them as well.
Forward to this paragraph, this may seem condescending, and if it is I apologize, I am truly trying to not only understand conspirators but also give them some leeway. The entire 9/11 thing is pure fantasy, which I can totally understand. As a human we want there to be a bigger picture, and for the disaster to be caused by just a man with a box cutter pushed to this act by our own foreign diplomacy is a tall order to swallow, and one in which a antagonistic scapegoat that is not doing things for you looks attractive, say a rogue government beholden to a secret agenda not aimed at the everyman. I fully accept that some people will deal with this tragedy with escapism and I truly can understand it, however that does not make it so.
That paragraph = pure opinion.
Chapter 6
The revenge of Hurst?
Okay lets look at the media, all your points are pretty much moot with Julian Assange, IMO at least. Out of all the shit he released not one even hinting at US involvement with 9/11? Something says your theory is fishy, considering some of the info released by him was as minute as saying that certain emissaries though certain leaders were dirt bags. But you know what lets again soldier on at look at your points even further. Were all Presidencies corrupt? Yeah to a certain extent. Don’t you think the revealing of this information would
ing destroy the right? So why hasn’t the Democrat’s released this info? Because it does not exist. Secondly the media is listening to
ing keyboard commandoes but you conveniently believe even someone like Alex Jones, or whatever his name is, wouldn’t have a govt official testifying that 9/11 was an inside job on his show in less than a second? I think he would. Finally what do you mean the media is neutral on this matter? When is the media neutral on any matter? This isn’t even a point and really deserves no place in your world of facts. Even Hurst had problems trying to start a war, and information was more controlled back then than it is now.
See link below:
http://www.dailypaul.com/96132/cont...ust-read-for-everyone-in-the-liberty-movement
I hope this is enough for you to admit that I have not dismissed your theory “out-of-hand”.
Afterward
As for your age discrimination post, who cares, I was just trying to remember if that was you or not. If you think a person with no formal education on a matter educated only by the power of Google is good enough for you my points are about as valid as hers were.
I think I might have said once before that everyone has something to offer.
And you know what, I will just say this, you may think me of me as the left, and that would probably be fair considering I consider myself an liberal egalitarian. But in all honesty the men whom I take most of my points of view from is F.A. Hayak and Robert Nozick, both darlings of the right, whose theories allowed for egalitarianism to a certain extent (which honestly was easier to in Hayek than in Nozick, well at least at the time of the printing of Anarchy, State, and Utopia)
Final edit- Yeah this is the longest thing I ever posted for a BBS. Half whiney, half bad logic and 100 percent crazy, and quite possibly the worst thing I ever wrote, even by my standards, I quite like what I posted, even if it is torn to shreds and incites disgust towards me.
In summation to your post it was honestly tl;dr material, but I soldiered on.[/QUOTE]
You don't really strike me as being very open to new ideas... :/
"
