PDA

View Full Version : The Topic Of Conspiracy



Slack
1st Sep 2010, 16:30
If you like Deus Ex you like a good conspiracy theory. Post here videos, texts, images or anything else related to conspiracy that you find. Did you found a conspiracy related to Deus Ex 1 or 2? Post here too!

Slack
1st Sep 2010, 16:33
Former KGB Agent Explains the Brainwashing of America 1980's :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJ2fMeer5Mw

Pretentious Old Man.
1st Sep 2010, 17:46
http://www.abandonia.com/games/140/Floor13.htm

A brilliant old DOS game, in which you play as a secret agent who in theory reports only to the Prime Minister, but in practice are part of a masonic order. A must for Deus Ex fans.

TrickyVein
1st Sep 2010, 18:13
Actual conspiracy theorists think that the US allowed the towers to come down. Some of these people also believe - I kid you not - that people never landed on the moon.

Stay far, far away from these people. Fun in a game? Sure. Not so much in real life.

pha
1st Sep 2010, 19:42
Actual conspiracy theorists think that the US allowed the towers to come down.

I know this is a touchy subject, but hypothetically, if I had to choose from those paranoid conspiracy theorists and naïve people who sincerely believe that some middle eastern vagabonds hijacked those planes with flawless coordination and crashed them into WTC, setting those colossal towers on fire and eventually demolishing them, they are not the ones I'd stay far, far away.

Dead-Eye
1st Sep 2010, 20:29
pha, you may have just made it on to my ignore list. Keep it up, and we'll see.
*edited out*

Yes insults, that's the sprite. Flout you're indoctrination and ego to us some more please. It's almost funny because the vary first conspiracy on this list talks about how people are so indoctrinated by what the KGB was doing that they can't even see the truth even when they are shown facts right up front. Then you show up and start acting like 9-11 truthers are idiots based on wait what?? Oh nothing? It's almost like you proved the first conspiracy posted just by being here.

I'm not going to show any proof that 9-11 was a set up because, as the KGB guy said, you won't believe me even if I show you facts. Also I'm not so egotistical as to suggest I actually know. I'm simply going to say that being open minded, knowing the limitations of you're perception, not trusting everything you hear, questioning what you read are the things that separates the people who can "see" from the people who are blind.

..and the problem is that so many people are blind.

Cronstintein
1st Sep 2010, 21:13
i'm simply going to say that being open minded, knowing the limitations of you're perception, not trusting everything you hear, questioning what you read are the things that separates the people who can "see" from the people who are blind.

qft

Anasumtj
1st Sep 2010, 22:06
9/11 conspiracies are bull****. It's one thing to question a few holes in the official story (they're always there and can't always be accounted for), but that doesn't legitimize the the rantings of people who simply suppose a myriad of conspiracy connections in the gaps of knowledge or outright fabricate falsehoods to make them feel like champion underdogs fighting the system or some crap.


Yes insults, that's the sprite. Flout you're indoctrination and ego to us some more please. It's almost funny because the vary first conspiracy on this list talks about how people are so indoctrinated by what the KGB was doing that they can't even see the truth even when they are shown facts right up front. Then you show up and start acting like 9-11 truthers are idiots based on wait what?? Oh nothing? It's almost like you proved the first conspiracy posted just by being here.

Truthers are idiots because they inject unsubstantiated fantasy into their explanations of the event. Even when they do make a credible point, they often build tier after tier of unbridled ******* lunacy that ultimately discredits their arguments, totally failing with Occam's Razor. If the government/professionals/experts can't give a satisfactory answer, then conspiracy is assumed. That's no way to go about about making a theory. All 9/11 conspiracies are based on disconnected fragments and all truthers do is fill the gaps with their own paranoid delusions.

We can talk all we want about being open minded. But at a certain point, the plain truth of the matter is that there are many people on this planet who are simply not worth listening to. Truthers are one of them. Some may be worse than others, but they all operate on fallacious reasoning; implying and speculating so much more than they can actually back up.


I'm not going to show any proof that 9-11 was a set up because, as the KGB guy said, you won't believe me even if I show you facts.

Sure, dude.

ANY WAY, HERE'S MY FAVORITE CONSPIRACY (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=saHs6J0OXVI&feature=player_embedded)

Cronstintein
1st Sep 2010, 22:42
So basically anyone with a theory that doesn't fit into your belief system = truther and thus not worth listening to? Pretty sure that's the definition of close minded.

Anasumtj
1st Sep 2010, 23:22
Pretty sure that's not what I said *edited out*.

Do you lend credence to every gooftard theory that's propped up by the scantest of support just because it might, maybe, possibly (not plausibly), on the off-chance be true? I don't think so. That's not being intolerant of other "belief systems" or whatever the **** you're talking about. It's about expecting people to make reasonable arguments; to formulate a theory based on the data you're given, not supposing the unverifiable involvement of CIA ghosts or Illuminatus punching bags. Anything less is a waste of time and a road leading nowhere. You wouldn't let that fly in any other aspect of life, professional or otherwise. Why make the exception here?

And really, what's with the hard-on for open mindedness. You should be receptive to the ideas of others, but that doesn't mean you should just accept or put up with stupid ideas. If you have a 9/11 conspiracy theory that's not stupid, we can talk.

Or not, because I don't think such a thing exists. At the very least, it's not something I wish to repeat because I think every truther explanation has been debunked or otherwise proven invalid at this point.

Deus_Ex_Machina
2nd Sep 2010, 00:13
The truthers are going about it all wrong. Here's how to do it rite...

bush was a pretty cool guy. eh killed towers and doesn't afraid of teh truth. soisoisoisoisoisoisoisoisoisoisoi

amirite? :D

xsamitt
2nd Sep 2010, 00:22
Here's one for ya.I hear Megan fox has a thing for Deus EX.More as events unfold.

Slack
2nd Sep 2010, 00:33
CHECK OUT this:
is THE conspiracy documentary (the name is 'zeitgeist'):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UHiuaGJ46zo

Deus_Ex_Machina
2nd Sep 2010, 00:34
CHECK OUT this:
is THE conspiracy documentary (the name is 'zeitgeist'):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UHiuaGJ46zo

Zeitgeist? Really?

soisoisoisoisoisoisoisoisoi

Slack
2nd Sep 2010, 00:40
Zeitgeist? Really?

soisoisoisoisoisoisoisoisoi

Just to mention it, because when you talk about conspiracy without citing Zeitgeist is like talking about Physics without mentioning Newton.

Anasumtj
2nd Sep 2010, 00:50
Well, my last post was deleted. But the short version is this:
It is not close minded to expect somebody to argue reasonably. Most if not all 9/11 conspiracy theories fail to do this. Pointing to a few gaps is not evidence of conspiracy. The plain truth of the matter is that both government and independent investigations of the hijackings and the fall of the towers have offered offered far simpler and plausible explanations of these events, whereas the conspiracy theories always introduce more complexity and unaccountability into their reasoning. We don't give credence to ideas and theories just on the grounds that they're possible. Truthers have yet to make a cohesive case out of all the so-called inconsistencies they find with the established story, which makes them hard to take seriously.

And by Truthers I mean people who believe in 9/11 conspiracy theories, not just anybody who doesn't fit into my "belief system", whatever that means.

Angel-A
2nd Sep 2010, 02:20
My two cents and a third on the Twin Towers: I have too much doubt between all the things that have been presented to rule out one side or the other. At first it seems rock solid that what occured was a terrorist attack... But I get rather hung up on the fact that all seven of the WTC buildings came down (?!). Also, many eyewitnesses have said that the planes appeared military, not commercial (and several of the videos show evidence supporting this...). Can you see what I mean?
I don't know what to tell you on the WTC. Although, I do believe beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Pentagon attack was planned, and was a conspiracy. The whole story hasn't got a leg to stand on...

From the top, even though a plane thousands of feet in the air makes very loud noise all the way to the ground, the plane that crashed into the Pentagon purportedly was amazingly quiet as it approached the building, though it should have been ear-shattering noise. The hi-jack was suposedly purpetrated by an amateur pilot, but the maneuver that it was reported to make as it crashed was one that was extremely complicated, something that very few pros could even pull off. That, and the maneuver (which was basically a very tight circle turn into that area) was one that to caused it to crash into the one side of the building that was very reinforced and had the fewest people in it. Why so much effort to cause the least amount of damage possible? If they wanted to actually destroy and damage the Pentagon, why not just a straight dive into the middle of it?
The plane does not appear to have ever existed. The only footage of the crash that was around was inexplicably confiscated, and even what was released showed no dicsernable plane. There was zero evidence that a commercial airliner was what crashed into the building. The damage left was miniscule compared to WTC (7 buildings collapsed vs a relatively small hole and relatively light damage in the Pentagon?), and there was not even a trace of a plane anywhere (Accordind to the manufacturer, the parts found are not from any plane of theirs). Say it all disintigrated from the damage? Fine, but how is it that the building doesn't show damage anywhere near consistant with that? Little damage where the wings would've gone in, yet they can't be found.
I'm paraphrasing on all I've researched, for the record, so some things may be fuzzy, but I have yet to see an argument in favor of "Terrorists did it" on the Pentagon attack that wasn't knocked pretty flat. :mad2:


Here's one for ya.I hear Megan fox has a thing for Deus EX.More as events unfold.
Watwatwat? Where'd you hear that?

neoWilks
2nd Sep 2010, 03:15
My two cents and a third on the Twin Towers: I have too much doubt between all the things that have been presented to rule out one side or the other. At first it seems rock solid that what occured was a terrorist attack... But I get rather hung up on the fact that all seven of the WTC buildings came down (?!).

Are you suggesting there was a controlled demolition? Do you have any idea how difficult that would be to pull off? You'd have to have huge teams of workers going all around the buildings installing explosive devices. This would have to be done while thousands of people come and go on a regular basis. Even if they manage to perform this feat undetected, the entire demolition team and their superiors would have to be totally okay with killing thousands of people to not come forward before or after the fact.


Also, many eyewitnesses have said that the planes appeared military, not commercial (and several of the videos show evidence supporting this...). Can you see what I mean?

Not really. What evidence suggests they were military planes? What videos are you talking about? I'd certainly love to see them. I'm sure the families of the victims would love to see them, too. Because if this attack was accomplished with military airplanes, we've got a few commercial jets worth of passengers and crew who are totally cool themselves with being associated with a plot to kill thousands of civilians and never see their families again.


I don't know what to tell you on the WTC. Although, I do believe beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Pentagon attack was planned, and was a conspiracy. The whole story hasn't got a leg to stand on...

From the top, even though a plane thousands of feet in the air makes very loud noise all the way to the ground, the plane that crashed into the Pentagon purportedly was amazingly quiet as it approached the building, though it should have been ear-shattering noise. The hi-jack was suposedly purpetrated by an amateur pilot, but the maneuver that it was reported to make as it crashed was one that was extremely complicated, something that very few pros could even pull off. That, and the maneuver (which was basically a very tight circle turn into that area) was one that to caused it to crash into the one side of the building that was very reinforced and had the fewest people in it. Why so much effort to cause the least amount of damage possible? If they wanted to actually destroy and damage the Pentagon, why not just a straight dive into the middle of it?
The plane does not appear to have ever existed. The only footage of the crash that was around was inexplicably confiscated, and even what was released showed no dicsernable plane. There was zero evidence that a commercial airliner was what crashed into the building. The damage left was miniscule compared to WTC (7 buildings collapsed vs a relatively small hole and relatively light damage in the Pentagon?), and there was not even a trace of a plane anywhere (Accordind to the manufacturer, the parts found are not from any plane of theirs). Say it all disintigrated from the damage? Fine, but how is it that the building doesn't show damage anywhere near consistant with that? Little damage where the wings would've gone in, yet they can't be found.

They found the plane 77's black box, debris proven to be that of 77, and identified bodies of passengers from the flight. Phone calls were received from passengers on the flight that confirmed it had been hijacked. The damage was minimized because one wing first hit the ground and the second was sheered off by a load-bearing column. And again, you run into the issue of a whole plane full of passengers that would need to totally disappear forever for this to have any chance of staying secret.


I'm paraphrasing on all I've researched, for the record, so some things may be fuzzy, but I have yet to see an argument in favor of "Terrorists did it" on the Pentagon attack that wasn't knocked pretty flat. :mad2:

Where have you obtained the facts for this research? It seems patently clear it's not any sort of reliable source. I guess if you're willing to trust sites that purport to know the "truth" of the situation that have zero expertise in the fields they intend to comment on this isn't a problem. But most people hopefully require more conclusive evidence then the ramblings of random people on the internet.

tartarus_sauce
2nd Sep 2010, 03:25
@Angel-A

Everything you just said was uncited, which is to say unsupported. Unless you can cite some credible sources, you can't make the assertions your making and expect them to be taken seriously. In point of fact, many of the assertions you've already made are highly suspect. To give just one example, you suggest that it's suspicious that the damage done to the Pentagon is much less dramatic than that done to the WTC building. Anyone who has played with children's blocks knows that throwing a ball at a tall tower made of blocks is going to be more destructive than throwing it at a squat, flat tower. The French military theorist and engineer Vauban was the pioneer of applying this to fort construction, in response to the invention of rifled cannon. That's why forts made after the 17th century are squat, geometric shapes with open space in the middle for muster and formations... like the Pentagon. The pentagon a series of concentric pentagon-shaped buildings. The center of the building is actually a very large open area, basically a big park. I understand there used to be a hot dog stand there- not exactly a priority target for terrorists.

I'm not going to argue about 9/11 conspiracies here, so don't bother replying unless you want to make a thread about 9/11 specifically. The point I'm making is that the 9/11 Truth brigade make the same mistake as most conspiracy theorists: lazy thinking, cherry-picking of facts and data, etc. It's not at all naive to accept the official account, especially when the official account takes into account more of the availible data than any conspiracy theory yet presented.

What Deus Ex did particularly well was build a sort of meta-conspiracy theory; bringing together all these different disembrained perspectives of the world. What made it really interesting was how successful it was at predicting the zeitgeist of the early 21st century. Even now, with the Tea Party movement, we're seeing Deus Ex still demonstrating its own prophetic power. What is the Tea Party but a kind of embryonic NSF?

Deus_Ex_Machina
2nd Sep 2010, 03:41
What is the Tea Party but a kind of embryonic NSF?

I'll have to disagree with any comparison concerning th

Anasumtj
2nd Sep 2010, 04:15
Why is there no big debris left over from the plane that hit the pentagon?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T5XTsQ-9vvo

TrickyVein
2nd Sep 2010, 04:21
I'm sure the families of the victims would love to see them, too. Because if this attack was accomplished with military airplanes, we've got a few commercial jets worth of passengers and crew who are totally cool themselves with being associated with a plot to kill thousands of civilians and never see their families again.

This is really so, so sad to me. I'm agreeing with you, Tartarus Sauce.

The naivete and sheer lack of compassion required to hold such a position - as certain people do - that the 911 attacks were somehow engineered by the US government astounds me. It is so very insulting.

tartarus_sauce
2nd Sep 2010, 07:00
I wouldn't say it lacks compassion to hold the loony, conspiratorial view. One isn't necessarily cruel just for being ignorant and misguided. It's only insulting to credulity. There are Truthers who lost friends and family in the towers, and whose grief is reflected in their inability to square such a staggering loss with such a mundane course of events. Excepting those Truthers who were nuts to begin with (Zeitgesit-watchers), I think a lot of them suffer in the same way. They simply can't believe something so terrible could be brought about so easily What's scary is that after all the increased security, the wars abroad, the time and money and ink spent wrestling with the issues of rights vs. security, you could do the same thing again with a ceramic knife and a copy of MS Flight Simulator. Deus Ex asks the question: is the price of freedom worth the cost of occasional calamity? And, wonderfully, it leaves it up to the player to decide what the answer to that question is.

Dead-Eye
2nd Sep 2010, 08:57
Are you suggesting there was a controlled demolition? Do you have any idea how difficult that would be to pull off? You'd have to have huge teams of workers going all around the buildings installing explosive devices. This would have to be done while thousands of people come and go on a regular basis. Even if they manage to perform this feat undetected, the entire demolition team and their superiors would have to be totally okay with killing thousands of people to not come forward before or after the fact.

Seeing as you want some kind of proof I can offer you this. Some might say the smoking gun...: http://www.infowars.com/danish-scientist-on-tv-nano-thermite-behind-collapse-of-wtc-buildings-on-911-not-planes/

The thing that tips me off is that after this news came out the public media pretended it didn't exist. I think I found only one debunking article and it was rather illogical. Other then that complete media black out.



The naivete and sheer lack of compassion required to hold such a position - as certain people do - that the 911 attacks were somehow engineered by the US government astounds me. It is so very insulting.
See, I'm pondering if this statement is implying that Truthers are somehow unpatriotic. If it is then let me just say that I find it very insulting.

If our government is lieing to us about 9-11 then you are continuing to prove that our nation is indoctrinated to such a point that, even when shows facts, you will not believe it because you think that somehow this insults the name of America. You're own emotional attachment becomes a weapon used by the people in power to propagate a fabrication that was programed into you by the school system, by family, etc. It's not so much what the real story is but more what the people around you believe and because the majority believes a lie you end up believing it too. So when someone questions the lie you think that somehow we are insulting you're friends, family and country.

Yet If 9-11 was planed by the New World Order, SKB (Skull And Bones), ilumaniti our own government, etc. Truthers become the only ones who are actually doing what our four fathers asked us to do. I don't think I need to recall the line about duty that Harley Filben said to JC in the bar when they (usually) first met.



Not really. What evidence suggests they were military planes? What videos are you talking about? I'd certainly love to see them.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_80YfdwJAVk&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jRC4lCQuBmc&feature=related

xaduha
2nd Sep 2010, 09:38
American Conspiracies (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Conspiracies)

This book covers it all in a thoroughly enjoyable way as JESSE VENTURA &
DICK RUSSELL team up again and spell it out loud & clear in their patented
Let's-cut-through-the-b.s. style.
from review on Amazon

Anasumtj
2nd Sep 2010, 16:22
On thermite:

http://ronmossad.blogspot.com/2009/04/final-word-on-niels-harrit-nanothermite.html
http://www.debunking911.com/thermite.htm

The media didn't make a big deal out of it because there is really nothing to report on. All the supposed signs and symptoms of sinister thermite usage can be explained by the structural damage to the buildings, their materials, and their housed contents. If there's any confusion over some of the technical details of the towers falling, it's probably because we've never had a frickin' simulation of an event of that magnitude to compare it against. Nevertheless, more reasonable explanations exist than those provided by Alex Jones & Co.

Looking at the broader scope of most 9/11 conspiracy theories, I'm just gonna copypasta something I posted on another forum back in the day (which is itself a copypasta job).


All the people who would have to be involved in order to pull this massive conspiracy off...

-The Bush Administration, who failed at everything they ever did. Yet all of them and the people below are helping him cover up the largest mass murder in US history... Some of them like Richard Clarke and Paul O'Neil have come out for less.

-The NYC Fire fighters who know more about building collapses than most, if not all, of them. It's their LIFE to know. Literally! Yet they don't call for an investigation into the MASS MURDER of over 300 of their brothers... Why?

-The NYC Police department who lost over 20 lives. They didn't ask for an investigation. Motive? None...

-The NYC port Authority who lost personnel. Motive?

-All the people in the Pentagon who have not called for an investigation. Many who are liberal and centrist. They did or said nothing while people supposedly trucked in airplane parts to cover the crime. Why? Again, no answer...

-The more than 1,600 widows and widowers of 9/11 who would rather have investigations of the decisions which led to the terrorist getting away with this. They don't want to waste time investigating the mass murder of their loved ones. Even the Jersey Girls. Why? They say it's the money... [note: Whenever killing someone, pay off the relative. They won’t say anything.]

-The media (This one I almost believe) who doesn't follow up on the biggest mass murder and conspiracy in American history. It seems no one wants a Nobel prize for journalism. Not only the American media but foreign press like the BBC and Al Jazeera. Why? No answer here either...

-The photographers from around the world who took pictures of the towers which clearly show bowing of the perimeter columns. These photos support the NIST hypothesis that the sagging trusses lead to the collapse. Some photos also show the core intact shortly after collapse which also not only support the NIST hypothesis but discredits the "Controlled demolition" account.

-Popular Mechanics who debunked these sites are also helping Bush commit the biggest mass murder in history.

-PBS Nova since they created a documentary explaining in detail how and why the buildings fell. None of it said bomb.

-Everyone in the NIST who covers up the largest mass murder in US history. This independent organization doesn't have a moral person in hundreds of employees because not one has come out exposing this so called "Conspiracy". In fact, the hundreds of scientist who signed onto the report are willing to not only lie for Bush but cover up the largest mass murder in American history. Some suggest only a handful can do the job but that's simply impossible. The team in charge of the computer modeling has to be in sync with the team of structural engineers and so on. There are hundreds involved in this investigation and every team has to work with other teams using the same evidence and specifications.

-NY Governor Pataki because he sold steel from the WTC for the construction of the USS New York. If the argument is the government sold the steel in order to cover up the crime then Pataki is one of the criminals.

-The NY city scrap yards because they also sold steel to China before all of it was tested. Bush would have needed to call them up and tell them to sell it before they could have investigated every beam. A task which would have taken years and years not to mention millions more. Ironically the republican Mayor Bloomberg could not be involved since he asked the scrap yards not to sell the steel on behalf of the firefighters.

-EVERY STRUCTURAL ENGINEER IN THE WORLD who doesn't write a paper for a mainstream peer reviewed journal saying the towers were brought down and could not have fallen due to fire. If laymen can prove things just by looking at videos and reading interviews out of context, then all those structural engineers MUST be working for Bush right? Even the ones in other countries. Why? The answer they give is that the engineers don't know about Jones’ work. So in all this time no one has e-mailed Jones' work to any structural engineer?

-Structure Magazine who published a report saying the collapse of WTC 7 may have been due to one column failing.

-The liberals who don't believe the towers were brought down. (Like me) They're helping a neo-con cover-up the largest mass murder in this nation’s history. Why? No clue...

-The CIA

-The FBI

-FEMA

-The American Society of Civil Engineers who have produced peer reviewed papers showing how what Conspiracy Theorists say is impossible is possible.

-NORAD

-The FAA who saw planes which conspiracy theorists say never existed.

-The Silverstein Group who they say got together with Bush to blow up the building for insurance money.

-Silverstein's Insurance Company who didn't question the collapse and paid out over 2 billion to Silverstein. Why? Conspiracy Theorists say the insurance company just wants to pass on the bill to the public but they already fought Silverstein in a number of law suits concerning the amount.

-American Airlines (Pentagon)

-United Airlines (Pentagon)

-Logan, Newark and Dulles Airport for losing the planes

-Scientists and engineers who developed the remote control plane technology

-Installers of the remote control devices in the planes (Pentagon)

-Remote controllers of the planes (Pentagon)

-Scientists and engineers who developed the new demolition technology and carried out practical tests and computer models to make sure it would work.

-Installers of the demolitions devices in the three buildings

-People who worked at the company(s) the installers used as cover

-Airphone etc employees who said they got calls from passengers (Pentagon)

-Faux friends and relatives of the faux passengers or just the faux relatives who claim to have been called by their loved ones or just the psyops who fooled relatives into thinking they really were their loved ones. (Pentagon)

-People who detonated the buildings

-Anyone who thinks the conspiracy is a diversion to take liberal activist focus off of real crimes.
http://www.debunking911.com/massivect.htm

New World Order? The Illuminati? These are phantom organizations; bogeymen for conspiracy theorists and convenient scapegoats. And suggesting our government's involvement holds little water once you realize the sheer number of people that would have had to be involved in order to pull it off.

Not only to pull it off, but to stay completely silent for all this time afterward.

No secret conspiracy, especially one on the scale of the WTC attack, is that airtight. It's even more ludicrous to think that the Bush administration, with its propensity for ****ups and its hamfisted approach to dealing with anything, could have enacted such a plot with any level of success. People sure are quick to condemn a government as an inefficient failure yet still hold the belief they are masterminds at killing their own people. Weird.

Pretentious Old Man.
2nd Sep 2010, 16:45
people never landed on the moon.

Oh, I believe they landed there. Just not in 1969.

Dead-Eye
2nd Sep 2010, 17:58
Oh, I believe they landed there. Just not in 1969.

That's what I always thought.



No secret conspiracy, especially one on the scale of the WTC attack, is that airtight. It's even more ludicrous to think that the Bush administration, with its propensity for ****ups and its hamfisted approach to dealing with anything, could have enacted such a plot with any level of success. People sure are quick to condemn a government as an inefficient failure yet still hold the belief they are masterminds at killing their own people. Weird.

See, the way I look at it is that all of Bush's is screw ups where by design. He wanted to screw up so much to cover up the fact that he was actually doing his job flawlessly. We are something like 11 trillion dollars in debt and peoples faith in America is shattered. Soon our money will be worthless and when that happens they can establish the North American Union and throw our rights out the window. Not that we really have rights anymore.

Anasumtj
2nd Sep 2010, 23:22
http://img.chan4chan.com/img/2009-04-21/1240265992468.jpg

Deus_Ex_Machina
2nd Sep 2010, 23:39
Joker Pic

lol

You sir have successfully rofld mah wafflez!!111

Abram730
3rd Sep 2010, 05:11
@Angel-A
What is the Tea Party but a kind of embryonic NSF?

Well now that you mention it.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4055475701520885985#
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oxDKQgyQ8UE

JK... Actually the Tea Party is sponsored by neocon elites. It's part grass roots, and part Astroturf. Much of the funding came from elite billionaires, wallstreet and health insurance corps.. You've got people like Dick Armey claiming to to be the leader.. A man who has had government health care most of his life, campaigning against health care... But he's a lobbyist who makes millions for such activities, a man that admitted politics is 97% lies and 3% fantasy.

I mean the reality is that if politicians didn't take bribes they wouldn't be able to buy campaign ads on the privatized public air waves.

TrickyVein
3rd Sep 2010, 14:55
Oh, I believe they landed there. Just not in 1969.

You're right. History tells us that 50,000 years ago, Atlanteans came down from Luna to plant the seeds of all subsequent human civilization.

Pinky_Powers
3rd Sep 2010, 15:06
You're right. History tells us that 50,000 years ago, Atlanteans came down from Luna to plant the seeds of all subsequent human civilization.

And they were real seeds too. But most of them got eaten up by the early herbivores.

TrickyVein
3rd Sep 2010, 15:10
It's true! People and plants are actually of the same stock. Linnaeus was a reptilian who imposed his arbitrary system of classifying species in order to deceive us.

See? Conspiracy theories can be fun!

Pinky_Powers
3rd Sep 2010, 15:17
"Can be" fun? Conspiracies are always fun!

Slack
3rd Sep 2010, 18:43
You're right. History tells us that 50,000 years ago, Atlanteans came down from Luna to plant the seeds of all subsequent human civilization.

I think I understood a little your point of view, but good conspiracy theories are actually stories so well told that leave us in doubt whether they are true or not.Tell ANY conspiracy theory everyone can do, but tell good conspiracy theories, I think that is a matter for good writers and researchers interested in maintaining a kind of literature, a alternative history, often more interesting than real ones. Other things that these theories inspire us is to keep alive our ability to tell stories and even think about some aspects of reality, because questions that are made in a good conspiracy theory are often the same that are made in good literature.

TrickyVein
3rd Sep 2010, 20:08
Should we be critical and ask good questions about what we think we know?

All the time.

Conspiracy theorists, however, prey upon people's ignorance in order to advance their own persona/agenda which they themselves - most of the time - know to be untrue. The worst kinds of conspiracy theorists aren't far different from con-men.

If you really want to raise the public's awareness about important issues in order to illuminate people's minds and bring us all into a better, more prosperous age, talk about SCIENCE - something which (most) scientists themselves are horribly lacking in ability to do - to communicate the respective knowledge of their discipline(s) to the general public in order to affect policy-making and bring about change.

Because lets face it - most people are really, exceptionally stupid and lazy - especially intellectually lazy - and it probably is the case the most people really aren't able to understand complexity. Conspiracies offer quick, easy, and very simple answers to big questions. No wonder people like them.

RandomJunkie
3rd Sep 2010, 22:06
Conspiracists are individuals not smart enough to actually come out with an original or insightful point of view, so they make up the weirdest **** to sound like they are "above" the common individual. If everyone around them would come to agree with them, they would come up with something else.

Lady_Of_The_Vine
3rd Sep 2010, 22:42
^

Imagine a conspiracy. Write a book. Wait for it to become a best-seller. Get rich.
Kind of "smart" in a way... ;)

RandomJunkie
3rd Sep 2010, 22:53
I wouldn't mix imagination and intelligence. Also if you look at most conspiracies from a storytelling point of view, they are full of plot holes. They are bad stories. They are popular because people want to believe that they "know" what is going on, but don't want to put the actual energy to understand the complexity of this world.

And I'm not saying they aren't any conspiracies. And I'm not saying there are stuff that we don't know of, that potentially shock us. It's just that most conspiracies don't resist a good debunking. Some have more credibility than others. I'm not sure who killed JFK and why, and the some conspiracy theories do make some sense. But 600 secret FEMA camps in the United States ? Ready to purge the population of potential ennemies ? REALLY ? I laughed when I found out that one of image used by those who support this theory was an actual North Korean camp.

Lady_Of_The_Vine
3rd Sep 2010, 23:30
I wouldn't mix imagination and intelligence. Also if you look at most conspiracies from a storytelling point of view, they are full of plot holes. They are bad stories. They are popular because people want to believe that they "know" what is going on, but don't want to put the actual energy to understand the complexity of this world.

Doesn't every conspiracy going have at least one book written about it?

Fluffis
3rd Sep 2010, 23:50
I wouldn't mix imagination and intelligence. Also if you look at most conspiracies from a storytelling point of view, they are full of plot holes. They are bad stories. They are popular because people want to believe that they "know" what is going on, but don't want to put the actual energy to understand the complexity of this world.


If you check out this post closely... (Highlighted and underlined for clarity)

Coincidence? I think not!

tartarus_sauce
4th Sep 2010, 07:19
If you check out this post closely... (Highlighted and underlined for clarity)

Coincidence? I think not!

Fluffy, you are on to something!

The Illuminati, as we all know, has been gunning to create the North American Union as part of their over-arching plan for one world government. 9/11 was an inside job in order to create conditions that make the gullible masses acquiesce to the increased surveillance and systems of control necessary to ensure minimum disruption when the North American Union is announced. Once there's a North American Union, passports will be replaced with RFID chips implanted under our skin, the infamous Mark of the Beast and-

Haha, sorry, I couldn't keep it up. I can't believe there are such gullible people out there. It's the same brigade of brain-dead know-nothings who watch Zeitgeist and vote for Ron Paul.

Rindill the Red
4th Sep 2010, 07:36
I heard that there is a super secret Deus Ex: Human Revolution forum conspiracy that is in the fina1 stages of replacing the 1ead designers on Deus Ex: Human Revolution with doubles, and 7hat they send messages to each other through otherwise innocuous looking thr3ad posts.

RandomJunkie
4th Sep 2010, 07:39
Zeitgeist and Ron Paul actually bring some interesting points, unlike guys like Alex Jones who is clearly just making **** up.

Abram730
4th Sep 2010, 08:14
There is no global terrorist group called Al Qaedia.. It's a conspiracy theory... An intentionally manufactured one, but still a conspiracy theory.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ta_T6uNq6EI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GsUtvOW6SR0

Abram730
4th Sep 2010, 08:35
Fluffy, you are on to something!

Haha, sorry, I couldn't keep it up. I can't believe there are such gullible people out there. It's the same brigade of brain-dead know-nothings who watch Zeitgeist and vote for Ron Paul.

I think Ron Paul points to some important issues. It's when he brings up his solutions that I part ways.. Bringing back the gold standard? lol.. perhaps a broad basket of commodities, but Gold? Would he bring back the stock and foil to fill the money shortage? His backers must have lots of gold lol.

PS: No brain death here, nor foolish naivety.

Lady_Of_The_Vine
4th Sep 2010, 12:32
If you check out this post closely... (Highlighted and underlined for clarity)

Coincidence? I think not!

Love it! :D

JCpies
4th Sep 2010, 16:24
There's no way 9/11 is a conspiracy guys.

It was just a few people who'd been living in a poor country, managed to smuggle themselves into the US by plane, take flying lessons then subsequently fail and leave a plane parked in the middle of a runway. In the coming weeks they hijack some commercial flights and with complete precision flew them into major targets in the US, facing no problems at all (Including the fact they managed to hit a low lying building in the shape of a pentagon). Damn good amateurs I say.

I mean yeah, a few months before those guys were on the other side of the world living in some not so luxurious premesis.

RandomJunkie
4th Sep 2010, 20:11
There's no way 9/11 is a conspiracy guys.

It was just a few people who'd been living in a poor country, managed to smuggle themselves into the US by plane, take flying lessons then subsequently fail and leave a plane parked in the middle of a runway. In the coming weeks they hijack some commercial flights and with complete precision flew them into major targets in the US, facing no problems at all (Including the fact they managed to hit a low lying building in the shape of a pentagon). Damn good amateurs I say.

I mean yeah, a few months before those guys were on the other side of the world living in some not so luxurious premesis.

Well not exactly. These guys were paid by people who have a lot of money and they also paid their flight school. Some of them had past experiences with terrorism (fighting in Bosnia, Chechnya). Other had actually been living decent lives in Europe. They didnt smuggle in the US, they went through official canals, they applied for american visas. I would say that as far as terrorists goes, these guys weren't exactly amateurs. It was well planned and with the right individuals, which is why it worked.

Someone mentionned Al Quaida being a myth. The group itself does exists but it is much smaller than what most people think. They do have the ability to help financially terrorists all over the world, but they can't really give out "orders". The name Al Quaida was created by the americans (not 100% sure about this) and the media has been using it to identify any islamic terrorists. Al Quaida is a codename for "islamic terrorists with unknown or saudi funding".

Also the posted video links are from The Power of Nightmares from Adam Curtis and I strongly recommend anyone to watch it. And also The Trap and Century of Self for the same guy. He's no crackhead, he's a serious filmaker working for the BBC.

tartarus_sauce
4th Sep 2010, 21:33
Things that have never happened:

-The government perpetrated 9/11
-Zeitgeist raising "interesting points"

Pinky_Powers
4th Sep 2010, 22:13
Things that have never happened:

-The government perpetrated 9/11
-Zeitgeist raising "interesting points"

Prove it. :p

Donvermicelli
4th Sep 2010, 22:28
in response to all the 9/11 conspiracies.
Now just go with me for a second I'm not saying I support this and whatnot but let's just say:

US government realises the world is leaving them behind, the dollar is failing and nobody sees the US as the war hero any more. Now if there was war there would be no problem, half of the industries are war based. while the US is able to wage war their economy will grow and if it's an enemy of others than the US can gain respect by defeating this foe. Now if the US decided to blow up their own trade centre. (this means not telling the citizens involved having this handled by black ops and cover whatever tracks they can). They blow it up, it's world news. All the eyes are focused on the US, what happened? who did this?. Now the US has attention what do they need? war, with whom? a large nation would be dangerous since theres a change of actually doing more harm than good. A small nation would result in them winning too fast meaning there would be minimal economical gain. Terrorists would be the perfect enemy especially if they are nationless since they can wage war all over the world and there would be no definite end. War on terrorism found! oh and while we are at it, Iraq has nukes so we need to invade them first to secure that oil..ehh democracy of the people.

You see where I'm going with this? I could go on and on but why would it so hard to believe that a small group of elites decided that a loss of citizens is justifiable if they can get economic growth in return? Heck why do you think Hitler wanted to kill all the Jews? They were the ones with jobs and money, all the Jews were killed so all the assets returned to the state etc. Don't be so quick to trust the ones that rule you, if anything you are but a number that can serve it's purpose for the greater good. If that purpose turned out to be that you had to die then the state could call it fair.

Pretentious Old Man.
4th Sep 2010, 22:31
nobody sees the US as the war hero any more.

Like they ever did.

Fluffis
5th Sep 2010, 00:14
Like they ever did.

To be fair, I think most of Europe did during WWII. Granted, they were a bit "Johnny-come-lately", but it was still appreciated. ;)

TrickyVein
5th Sep 2010, 01:26
Like they ever did.

You bet your sweet hide they did, and still do. Know your history, goddammit!!!

RandomJunkie
5th Sep 2010, 01:30
in response to all the 9/11 conspiracies.
Now just go with me for a second I'm not saying I support this and whatnot but let's just say:

US government realises the world is leaving them behind, the dollar is failing and nobody sees the US as the war hero any more. Now if there was war there would be no problem, half of the industries are war based. while the US is able to wage war their economy will grow and if it's an enemy of others than the US can gain respect by defeating this foe. Now if the US decided to blow up their own trade centre. (this means not telling the citizens involved having this handled by black ops and cover whatever tracks they can). They blow it up, it's world news. All the eyes are focused on the US, what happened? who did this?. Now the US has attention what do they need? war, with whom? a large nation would be dangerous since theres a change of actually doing more harm than good. A small nation would result in them winning too fast meaning there would be minimal economical gain. Terrorists would be the perfect enemy especially if they are nationless since they can wage war all over the world and there would be no definite end. War on terrorism found! oh and while we are at it, Iraq has nukes so we need to invade them first to secure that oil..ehh democracy of the people.

You see where I'm going with this? I could go on and on but why would it so hard to believe that a small group of elites decided that a loss of citizens is justifiable if they can get economic growth in return? Heck why do you think Hitler wanted to kill all the Jews? They were the ones with jobs and money, all the Jews were killed so all the assets returned to the state etc. Don't be so quick to trust the ones that rule you, if anything you are but a number that can serve it's purpose for the greater good. If that purpose turned out to be that you had to die then the state could call it fair.

Maybe so. But you'd need good evidence to prove this, not the retarded stuff that most 9/11 conspiracists use on YouTube.

Anasumtj
5th Sep 2010, 01:45
in response to all the 9/11 conspiracies.
Now just go with me for a second I'm not saying I support this and whatnot but let's just say:

US government realises the world is leaving them behind, the dollar is failing and nobody sees the US as the war hero any more. Now if there was war there would be no problem, half of the industries are war based. while the US is able to wage war their economy will grow and if it's an enemy of others than the US can gain respect by defeating this foe. Now if the US decided to blow up their own trade centre. (this means not telling the citizens involved having this handled by black ops and cover whatever tracks they can). They blow it up, it's world news. All the eyes are focused on the US, what happened? who did this?. Now the US has attention what do they need? war, with whom? a large nation would be dangerous since theres a change of actually doing more harm than good. A small nation would result in them winning too fast meaning there would be minimal economical gain. Terrorists would be the perfect enemy especially if they are nationless since they can wage war all over the world and there would be no definite end. War on terrorism found! oh and while we are at it, Iraq has nukes so we need to invade them first to secure that oil..ehh democracy of the people.

You see where I'm going with this? I could go on and on but why would it so hard to believe that a small group of elites decided that a loss of citizens is justifiable if they can get economic growth in return? Heck why do you think Hitler wanted to kill all the Jews? They were the ones with jobs and money, all the Jews were killed so all the assets returned to the state etc. Don't be so quick to trust the ones that rule you, if anything you are but a number that can serve it's purpose for the greater good. If that purpose turned out to be that you had to die then the state could call it fair.

Yes, it's not hard to imagine how such a scenario would come to pass. But do you have any evidence that this was the case? I can speculate and envision all kinds of scenarios. But these ultimately need to be substantiated.

SquidPirate
5th Sep 2010, 02:53
New World Order? The Illuminati? These are phantom organizations; bogeymen for conspiracy theorists and convenient scapegoats. And suggesting our government's involvement holds little water once you realize the sheer number of people that would have had to be involved in order to pull it off.


Rather than quote your entire post, I will simply say I agree with you completely.

I despised the Bush administration, and I looked with an honest eye at the truther claims. I studied them, I researched them, from thermite to gravity falls to white smoke to holograms. I went into it as a professional agnostic... but wouldn't have been terribly surprised if it turned out to be a MIHOP. And I ultimately came away with the following:

1: A conspiracy of the magnitude claimed is logistically impossible. Government is depicted in fiction as being an uber-powerful god... but it isn't. This isn't like a spy film where a few people sneak in and plant a ticking bomb. How did no one notice thousands of charges being rigged throughout their workplace? You'd need entire teams to drive those explosives to the location, to plant those explosives, to evade security, to pay off security, to pay off maintenance, to pay off police. The instant you involve such numbers, you've already run into a problem: People don't all think alike. Imagine being approached to murder your own countrymen. Would you agree to it? The truther position is that everyone who was approached agreed -- that no one declined and went running to the press at any point. Even anonymously. That's impossible. But we're not done.

For those who would have agreed to murder, how much money were they offered? Again, how much money would it take you to do this? We're not talking about a fistful of dollars; it would have to millions. Let's not even get into where this money would have come from; let's focus on the impossibility of everyone who is offered the money taking it, and then no one -- not their wives, girlfriends, buddies, coworkers, family members, or the IRS -- noticing how a $17-an-hour security guard is an overnight millionaire. Did reporters fail to follow up on this? Or were the reporters -- most of whom were itching for data against the Bush administration -- also paid off? Did all of these reporters, many of whom love fame and glory more than cash, accept a bribe?

Then there's the cleanup crews. Explosives leave debris -- they don't all disintegrate into ash. There are blasting caps, there are wires, there is material. These things would have been noticed. At this point, I usually hear that the cleanup crews have been paid off.... and that's where I end the discussion. Because now we're talking about thousands of people, in broad daylight over the course of weeks, in full view of cameras and witnesses. It is absolutely inconceivable that such a thing could be kept quiet once you've involved this order of magnitude. In fact, let's look at it another way. Suppose the buildings were somehow wired. Now... the airplanes on 9-11 hit the buildings..... and succeed in bringing them down on their own. No demolition proves necessary.

What happens when cleanup crews discover thousands of unexploded charges in the rubble?

And then there's one little postscript: those who claim a government could have this power, could either silence or pay off so many people, could go through all kinds of antics to keep their secret quiet... this uber-powerful government is then unable to take down a few truther websites or stop distribution of a handful of videos? And remember that for a long time, there was only the Loose Change video.

2: The Pentagon. There is no evidence for a missile. All the evidence shows that a real 757 took off that day, and left very very real debris all over the place. I've seen the photos -- and they are available on just about any reputable news site. Again, the truther claim is that a missile hit the Pentagon... and so we must wonder (since we know a real plane with real passengers took off that morning) where on Earth did the real plane go if what they're saying is true?

3: In my investigations, I repeatedly came away with the distinct impression that the truther crowd -- much like the birther crowd -- is NOT interested in the truth. They appear to be interested only in being proven correct. When I honestly questioned their claims, the tidal surge of vehemence and wild accusations hurled in my direction was highly suspect. Largely, they are touchy and extremely emotional. Those are the hallmarks of belief -- not of a cool-minded scientist. And it was an old tactic, too: If you disagree, the claim goes, then you are part of the conspiracy! I had one gentleman ask me how much Rupert Murdoch paid me. What can a person say to that? (And that fellow, BTW, insisted that the planes which hit the twin towers were missiles displaying holograms.)

In fact, I found that the deeper I delved into the truther claim, the more it all came apart. Their ultimate position was to rely on misinformation, and this had a habit of snowballing into ever-more complex layers of a conspiracy which would make The Joker's plans in The Dark Knight look like a child's plot to snatch a cookie from an open jar in a deserted kitchen.

JCpies
5th Sep 2010, 12:14
Well not exactly. These guys were paid by people who have a lot of money and they also paid their flight school. Some of them had past experiences with terrorism (fighting in Bosnia, Chechnya). Other had actually been living decent lives in Europe. They didnt smuggle in the US, they went through official canals, they applied for american visas.

ikr


Oh yeah and don't forget the EMP that the government used to stop electrical devices from working, on the same day.

Donvermicelli
5th Sep 2010, 13:38
Maybe so. But you'd need good evidence to prove this, not the retarded stuff that most 9/11 conspiracists use on YouTube.


Yes, it's not hard to imagine how such a scenario would come to pass. But do you have any evidence that this was the case? I can speculate and envision all kinds of scenarios. But these ultimately need to be substantiated.

My entire point with that post was not to say that this was the case, my point was that you shouldn't be so quick to trust your own government, all of the media is controlled by the government and whether you like it or not the media is controlling you.

I find it funny that people start saying that conspiracies of this magnitude are impossible and that this is the stuff of spy movies etc. This is exactly the thing that makes it feasible, if you said in the dark ages that someday people would be walking on the moon they would laugh at you and say that it was downright impossible. Get my point? This entire thing becomes feasible because it sounds impossible, and if they actually pulled something like this off nobody would suspect them and even if they did the people would simply think it to be downright impossible.

And also that it would be impossible to get that amount of explosives etc into the building and bribing that many people. How's this: undercover agent who is willing to stay quiet etc is placed into the maintenance crew months maybe even years before this happened, maintenance on such a large building would be going 24/7 so each day he could sneak a certain amount in, place it during his work and then move over to the next spot.

Again this is just an example there are virtually millions of ways to go about this but it certainly can be done.

mad825
5th Sep 2010, 14:39
meh.

attempt #1 - failed

terroist confessed on a possible second attempt so U.S does nothing about it.

attempt #2 - successful

people are surprised (and got stupid), the government angry and kills....turns out CIA/NSA was withholding evidence on attack and science got 4 or more cookies

perhaps it was the scientific community who did this >.>

SquidPirate
5th Sep 2010, 14:51
all of the media is controlled by the government and whether you like it or not the media is controlling you.... How's this: undercover agent who is willing to stay quiet etc is placed into the maintenance crew months maybe even years before this happened, maintenance on such a large building would be going 24/7 so each day he could sneak a certain amount in, place it during his work and then move over to the next spot.



This is easily one of the most ridiculous I have ever read. For starters, media is not controlled by the government. But more to the point of what made me laugh, you honestly think that one person, or teams of people, could be wiring up the buildings for months or years and not one bomb-sniffing dog or coworker sees the explosives? Really?

I also notice that you fall back on the conspiracy default line: "You shouldn't be so willing to trust your government." This has nothing to do with the government or trust. This is about the logistical absurdities inherent in the truther claims, as I wrote above (and which you ignored.)

As Anasumtj wrote, it's not hard to imagine someone deciding to do this. We can all come up with scenarios that sound credible. At the end of the day, it's what you can prove... and the truther claims prove nothing but people's willingness to be part of America's prevailing culture of belief.

Donvermicelli
5th Sep 2010, 17:07
For starters, media is not controlled by the government.
What makes you say that? Officially it is not, but the government most definitely has direct influence on it. Whether you like it or not if the government decides that a certain piece of information is classified, no matter how important it might be to the public the government can decide that prohibit the publishing of said information. This can also be done in a multitude of ways by making use of laws they themselves implemented.


not one bomb-sniffing dog or coworker sees the explosives? Really?
Said explosives that were claimed to be used were on nano scopic level. Meaning you can barely see them. Chances of a guard recognizing something smaller than dust as explosives are abysmally small. bomb sniffing dogs wouldn't recognize said explosive as one, this is a scientifically used material(read stuff that even scientists barely work with) that is used to melt metal and consists of elements that are pretty common. Naturally I have no way to back this up with the exception of said used explosive.


This is about the logistical absurdities inherent in the truther claims, as I wrote above (and which you ignored.) I did not ignore it, I was merely stating that there are a million ways to go about it and you shouldn't simply cross out a scenario because it seems logistically impossible. Yet you yourself keep falling back on it. I ask you to watch this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UHiuaGJ46zo
and then tell me what sounds more absurd, The story the US government told the public or the story numerous scientists and ex-government workers have told with evidence.

Again I am not saying what is true and what is not, I am asking you what sounds more logical if you think about it.

Icarus AI
5th Sep 2010, 18:11
I thought about writing a long post, but Chomsky can explain my point better.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TwZ-vIaW6Bc&feature=related

JCpies
5th Sep 2010, 20:26
Said explosives that were claimed to be used were on nano scopic level. Meaning you can barely see them. Chances of a guard recognizing something smaller than dust as explosives are abysmally small. bomb sniffing dogs wouldn't recognize said explosive as one, this is a scientifically used material(read stuff that even scientists barely work with) that is used to melt metal and consists of elements that are pretty common. Naturally I have no way to back this up with the exception of said used explosive.
.

I heard a story that there were dangerous chemicals used in building the towers and that it would cost an insane amount of money to fix or dismantle the buildings... something like that. I don't know the authenticity.

Anasumtj
5th Sep 2010, 20:33
I did not ignore it, I was merely stating that there are a million ways to go about it and you shouldn't simply cross out a scenario because it seems logistically impossible. Yet you yourself keep falling back on it. I ask you to watch this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UHiuaGJ46zo
and then tell me what sounds more absurd, The story the US government told the public or the story numerous scientists and ex-government workers have told with evidence.

Again I am not saying what is true and what is not, I am asking you what sounds more logical if you think about it.

Aaaannnndddd we finally get the link to the two hour long Youtube video.
No. I do not have the patience for this.

I don't see what's so confusing about this. We have a thoroughly researched and evidenced explanation that's gone through peer review and independent investigation offering a cohesive and understandable explanation for the events. Then we have your vacuous speculation supported by amateur analysts and fringe professionals who base their claims on dubious reasoning and science. But we're supposed to lean towards your case because the government is potentially spooky and can't be trusted.

What exactly differentiates your theory from mere fantasy out of a Tom Clancy or Bourne novel?

tartarus_sauce
5th Sep 2010, 23:32
What exactly differentiates your theory from mere fantasy out of a Tom Clancy or Bourne novel?

Robert Ludlum novels don't affirm a worldview that priveleges the basement-dwelling bong-collector who "knows the truth," over degree-holding experts and professionals working in a dozen disciplines ranging from architecture to materials science to public policy. The conspiracy nuts are people who resent a world that priveleges those who work to achieve positions of credibility and authority, because it necessarily precludes the participation of ignorant nobodies who are frustrated because next month mom is going to start charging rent.

pringlepower
6th Sep 2010, 02:48
Robert Ludlum novels don't affirm a worldview that priveleges the basement-dwelling bong-collector who "knows the truth," over degree-holding experts and professionals working in a dozen disciplines ranging from architecture to materials science to public policy. The conspiracy nuts are people who resent a world that priveleges those who work to achieve positions of credibility and authority, because it necessarily precludes the participation of ignorant nobodies who are frustrated because next month mom is going to start charging rent.

No it's simple: everyone's brainwashed in higher education, hence all "experts" are just zombies and puppets for the Patriots. la li lu le lo.

Donvermicelli
6th Sep 2010, 07:24
Aaaannnndddd we finally get the link to the two hour long Youtube video.
No. I do not have the patience for this.

I don't see what's so confusing about this. We have a thoroughly researched and evidenced explanation that's gone through peer review and independent investigation offering a cohesive and understandable explanation for the events.

Right so you believe that the thoroughly researched and evidenced explanation claiming that the twin towers collapsed due to FIRE and that wtc #7 wasn't even listed in their report and collapsed without explainable reasons. to be thoroughly researched and evidenced? I guess the same goes for those terrorists who supposedly did the hijacking? sure they entire plane + passengers and crew disintegrated during the crash but the terrorist pilot and his passport survived unscathed? and then was released WITHOUT CHARGES.

Now sorry if I think this is NOT thoroughly researched and evidenced.

And if the commission is so keen on their thoroughly researched and evidenced investigation how come they still refuse to release the video tapes that would actually prove they were right? EDIT: for the record it was 80 diffirent video tapes that were confiscated and since then they have refused to release them.

Naturally it is also blasphemous to believe testimonies of government officials who had perfectly good positions within the government to throw their jobs away for their ten seconds of fame.

Their thoroughly researched and evidenced investigation summed 19 hijackers on 4 different planes, yet by some magic force half of them seemed to be able to survive their suicide bombing? And naturally they arrested them when they found out. And naturally with all due respect they were released without charges. If they had done thorough research they would have discovered that these men were never aboard these planes, but I guess it's still thoroughly researched and evidenced like you said. Especially considering their names were not on the flight manifests of any of these flights, and the committee just decided they were there while there wasn't a single arab name on the list? But I guess that if you insist you can tell abdulaziz al-omari and 5 of the other so called hijackers that they flew a plane into the world trade center and died with the rest while they were unable to fly a plane and are clearly alive.

And now I quote from their thoroughly researched and evidenced investigation report:

At 8:46:40, American 11 crashed into the North Tower of the World Trade Center in New York City. All on board, along with an unknown number of people in the tower, were killed instantly.
Now explain to me via sheer logic, if all these people were killed instantly and nothing was left of them. Why is a passport of all things still unscathed after a huge explosion? and is found in the rubble?

More quoutes from the thoroughly researched and evidenced investigation report:

American 77 was 5 miles west-soutwest of the Pentagon and began a 330-degree turn. At the end of the turn, it was descending through 2,200 feet. Do they even believe what they are saying here? a 330-degree turn with a jet liner? Not just that but that within 5 miles while going down 2,200 feet?! <-- guess I should point back here to the 'logistically impossible' here.

And if you don't believe me you can read the bull**** commission report yourself here:http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report.pdf And Yes I actually bothered to read the entire thing despite the contents.

Anasumtj
6th Sep 2010, 08:28
The ace up your sleeve is a passport on the ground?

Predictable. And also explained away easily enough. (http://www.911myths.com/html/passport_recovered.html) As for the identities of the hijackers, that was most likely a case of mistaken identities. Your theory implies something much more absurd: That the US government deliberately and knowingly picked alive and documented Saudis for their fall guys conveniently just so intrepid super-sleuths such as yourself can unravel the whole darned mystery. Methinks not. I don't think you even comprehend the basic, fundamental issues people take with your argument. Here's how it's broken down:

1) Recovered passport!
2) Missing video!
3) ???
4) ???
5) ???
6) ???
7) ???
8) ???
9) ???
10) CONSPIRACY

See, you have to explain how you go from a few odd little details straight to the government's slaughter of its own citizens. I don't think anybody needs to even bother reading the Commission Report (of all things) to verify your claims when the basic oeuvre of your logic is facile as all hell with ridiculous implications.

But what would I know? I'm just a Bush-run automaton who can't see reality because the Matrix has been pulled over my eyes yap yap yap yap yap yap yap

Donvermicelli
6th Sep 2010, 08:53
my string of logic?
1)FBI employees testify that they were ordered to contruct a bomb, that same bomb was used for the initial bombing on the WTC.
2)Terrorist attack on the twin towers occur: at the same time the government is conducting a test with false radar signals that plays that very exact same scenario?
3) WTC workers testify that casualties occur in the basement before planes even hit the tower?
4) Rescue workers testify that they found streams of molten metal? where on earth did the required temperature come from?
5) WTC#7 collapses without any reason at all, said government investigation even refuses to comment on this.
6) President will only come before the committe while together with the vice president, no camera's present no records taken and no outside witness are to be present. Have something to hide here, did I forget to mention he refused to take oath while giving his testimony?
7) Government investigation that is so accurate claims 330 degree turns with jetliners and in turn claims that the resulting crash removed any and all traces of the plane including the titanium built engines but still managed to recover the bodies?
8) government discoveres existence of security footage and claims all 80 tapes that can actually prove their innocence and their claims.
9) Government investigation that is so accurate states that the funder of the attacks is unknown and is deemed of little importance. - half of the media knew who funded it, and why would it be of little importance? this is one of the most important parts of the investigation, he's the one directly responsible.
10) Said proven funder was having breakfast with government officials during 9/11
11) Said government investigation that seems to know accurately where all of the terrorist hijackers were turns out to be 'mistaken' while they claim to know their every move at each minute during the events while flight records state that no arabs were present during the flight.
12) US representative of the BinLaden assets in the US turns out to be a close friend and pilot of Bush.
13) Said claimed terrorist network and cave fortresses have NEVER been found.
14)....

goes on and on, and you find my doubts questionable? you quote only the two weakest but still vallid arguments I have and completly ignore the others.

As to why this would be a conspiracy?

The government profits in every single way, I could put an entire list here on how they benefit and why if you wish.

Deus_Ex_Machina
6th Sep 2010, 09:32
No it's simple: everyone's brainwashed in higher education, hence all "experts" are just zombies and puppets for the Patriots. la li lu le lo.

"What are these Patriots? Are they Human?"

hem dazon 90
6th Sep 2010, 09:37
conspiracy theories are bull.


they make entertaining stories but are almost never plausable




The ace up your sleeve is a passport on the ground?

Predictable. And also explained away easily enough. (http://www.911myths.com/html/passport_recovered.html) As for the identities of the hijackers, that was most likely a case of mistaken identities. Your theory implies something much more absurd: That the US government deliberately and knowingly picked alive and documented Saudis for their fall guys conveniently just so intrepid super-sleuths such as yourself can unravel the whole darned mystery. Methinks not. I don't think you even comprehend the basic, fundamental issues people take with your argument. Here's how it's broken down:

1) Recovered passport!
2) Missing video!
3) ???
4) ???
5) ???
6) ???
7) ???
8) ???
9) ???
10) CONSPIRACY

See, you have to explain how you go from a few odd little details straight to the government's slaughter of its own citizens. I don't think anybody needs to even bother reading the Commission Report (of all things) to verify your claims when the basic oeuvre of your logic is facile as all hell with ridiculous implications.

But what would I know? I'm just a Bush-run automaton who can't see reality because the Matrix has been pulled over my eyes yap yap yap yap yap yap yap

I... I agree with Asumtaj!?




CATNAROCK IS NIGH!

Donvermicelli
6th Sep 2010, 11:26
conspiracy theories are bull.
they make entertaining stories but are almost never plausable

Government theories on terrorism are bull.
they make entertaining stories but are almost never plausable.


The ace up your sleeve is a passport on the ground?

Predictable. And also explained away easily enough. (http://www.911myths.com/html/passport_recovered.html)
So a story about worms surviving a space shuttle crash can be compared to a suicide pilot surviving a suicide bombing unharmed?
The thing is, it's not that the passport survived it, it's that the person who this passport belonged to survived it along with it.

And I also want to know about your ace up the sleeve, what evidence do you have that this was perpetrated by radical Muslims led by Bin Laden's Al Qaeda network?

mad_red
6th Sep 2010, 14:19
I can't know with a 100% certainty about what's true or not, so I figure I'll just link some stuff that I found interesting (vids on lazytube mostly). It's not an exhaustive list of consiracy theories (you might have guessed). Check them out if you like, don't if you don't.

Here's a bunch of interviews of eyewitnesses to the Pentagon attack:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j5FhQc-LJ-o

Here's some buggery about WTC7 freefall:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eDvNS9iMjzA&feature=PlayList&p=206C1F5EDFC83824&index=0&playnext=1


How about a different kind of conspiracy theory?
Here's George Tran, millionaire and inventor of "shopping cart", which you use when ordering from Amazon.com.
He's blowing it all on the loony freeman-on-the-land - often conflated with the patriot and teabag movement - conspiracy theory. Kinda like Wesley Snipes.
www.freeandclearin90.com

Check out benlowrey doing an audiobook number on George's work:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MbXQnPJPjzs&p=F847357E5F201E2C&index=1

I also recommend Robert Menard and Marc Stevens, both are quite entertaining.

Here's some other perspectives on the sovereign/freeman story:
http://www.adl.org/Learn/ext_us/SCM.asp?xpicked=4&item=20
http://www.fbi.gov/page2/april10/sovereigncitizens_041310.html
http://bearmarketnews.wordpress.com/2010/08/19/intelligence-report-right-wing-movement-at-root-of-recent-police-murders-growing/


Meh enough of that, let's move on to the crazy stuff:
Here's Marco Rodin's Vortex Mathematics:
http://www.markorodin.com/content/view/25/55/

That stuff might be look familiar to some of you. Maybe it looks like hyperdimensional physics, maybe it's the Daoist Dao or the Confucian Li, or maybe the Hebrews were onto something, as Stan Tenen claims at the Meru Foundation:
www.meru.org

Whoa there, that brings us to the topic of ancient science, which will eventually lead you dangerously close to the wonderland of ancient high technology and reptilian shapeshifters and alien creator-gods.

Of course there's one group that doesn't buy the ancient spaceman story, but despite that they have some other strange ideas about physics and mythology. Phil Plait doesn't like them much, but you can at www.thunderbolts.info

Speaking of Phil Plait, I'm not sure what's gotten into him, but he's alledgeding there's some skeptics that are being dicks about it. To me, an admission of guilt is just hearsay or circumstantial evidence at best, but judge for yourself:
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/08/17/dont-be-a-dick-part-1-the-video/

If you do suspect you're dealing with a dick, not because he/she's a dick, but because he/she's trying to be a skeptic, here's a handy identification guide, so that your righteousness will not be sullied by association:
http://sciencedigestive.blogspot.com/2010/08/begginers-guide-to-skeptical-dickery.html

That's the loonies in my bin which I can bother to mention for now. But by all means, don't let all these Terrence Moonseeds discourage you. We don't need cowards, humourless killjoys. We need humble folks who will waste a good chunk of their lives, which they will never get back, to step into the surreal and entertain the notions of some of the strangest and most unusual people on the planet, and walk away disgusted, reinvigorated and doubly sure of their good purpose. And if that won't convince you, ask me to try again.

SquidPirate
6th Sep 2010, 21:38
Don,
Your side is very tiring. You still haven't responded to my post, and instead you do what truthers do best -- offer up a whole bunch of out-of-context tidbits. And then you claim -- TWICE -- that there are "a million ways" to pull off controlled demolition in the twin towers.

Really? A million?

I dare you to list me ONE that makes any sense in light of the following (and I'm reposting because you ignored this entirely.) And if you're going to fall back on nanothermite or nanoexplosives, you might as well start talking about Jedi Force, too.

1: A conspiracy of the magnitude claimed is logistically impossible. Government is depicted in fiction as being an uber-powerful god... but it isn't. This isn't like a spy film where a few people sneak in and plant a ticking bomb. How did no one notice thousands of charges being rigged throughout their workplace? You'd need entire teams to drive those explosives to the location, to plant those explosives, to evade security, to pay off security, to pay off maintenance, to pay off police. The instant you involve such numbers, you've already run into a problem: People don't all think alike. Imagine being approached to murder your own countrymen. Would you agree to it? The truther position is that everyone who was approached agreed -- that no one declined and went running to the press at any point. Even anonymously. That's impossible. But we're not done.

For those who would have agreed to murder, how much money were they offered? Again, how much money would it take you to do this? We're not talking about a fistful of dollars; it would have to millions. Let's not even get into where this money would have come from; let's focus on the impossibility of everyone who is offered the money taking it, and then no one -- not their wives, girlfriends, buddies, coworkers, family members, or the IRS -- noticing how a $17-an-hour security guard is an overnight millionaire. Did reporters fail to follow up on this? Or were the reporters -- most of whom were itching for data against the Bush administration -- also paid off? Did all of these reporters, many of whom love fame and glory more than cash, accept a bribe?

Then there's the cleanup crews. Explosives leave debris -- they don't all disintegrate into ash. There are blasting caps, there are wires, there is material. These things would have been noticed. At this point, I usually hear that the cleanup crews have been paid off.... and that's where I end the discussion. Because now we're talking about thousands of people, in broad daylight over the course of weeks, in full view of cameras and witnesses. It is absolutely inconceivable that such a thing could be kept quiet once you've involved this order of magnitude. In fact, let's look at it another way. Suppose the buildings were somehow wired. Now... the airplanes on 9-11 hit the buildings..... and succeed in bringing them down on their own. No demolition proves necessary.

What happens when cleanup crews discover thousands of unexploded charges in the rubble?

And then there's one little postscript: those who claim a government could have this power, could either silence or pay off so many people, could go through all kinds of antics to keep their secret quiet... this uber-powerful government is then unable to take down a few truther websites or stop distribution of a handful of videos? And remember that for a long time, there was only the Loose Change video.

2: The Pentagon. There is no evidence for a missile. All the evidence shows that a real 757 took off that day, and left very very real debris all over the place. I've seen the photos -- and they are available on just about any reputable news site. Again, the truther claim is that a missile hit the Pentagon... and so we must wonder (since we know a real plane with real passengers took off that morning) where on Earth did the real plane go if what they're saying is true?

3: In my investigations, I repeatedly came away with the distinct impression that the truther crowd -- much like the birther crowd -- is NOT interested in the truth. They appear to be interested only in being proven correct. When I honestly questioned their claims, the tidal surge of vehemence and wild accusations hurled in my direction was highly suspect. Largely, they are touchy and extremely emotional. Those are the hallmarks of belief -- not of a cool-minded scientist. And it was an old tactic, too: If you disagree, the claim goes, then you are part of the conspiracy! I had one gentleman ask me how much Rupert Murdoch paid me. What can a person say to that? (And that fellow, BTW, insisted that the planes which hit the twin towers were missiles displaying holograms.)

In fact, I found that the deeper I delved into the truther claim, the more it all came apart. Their ultimate position was to rely on misinformation, and this had a habit of snowballing into ever-more complex layers of a conspiracy which would make The Joker's plans in The Dark Knight look like a child's plot to snatch a cookie from an open jar in a deserted kitchen.

TrickyVein
6th Sep 2010, 22:10
In my investigations, I repeatedly came away with the distinct impression that the truther crowd -- much like the birther crowd -- is NOT interested in the truth. They appear to be interested only in being proven correct.

:)

Thank you. That needed to be said.

Anasumtj
6th Sep 2010, 23:27
So a story about worms surviving a space shuttle crash can be compared to a suicide pilot surviving a suicide bombing unharmed?
The thing is, it's not that the passport survived it, it's that the person who this passport belonged to survived it along with it.

Hint: He didn't survive.


And I also want to know about your ace up the sleeve, what evidence do you have that this was perpetrated by radical Muslims led by Bin Laden's Al Qaeda network?

Their admission? Or was Bin Laden just a prop created and employed by Bush? You honestly don't have any better suspects.

I'm sorry, I don't have some magic trick to pull out for you. I'm not the one making grand, unsubstantiated, and ridiculous claims here. And pumping out a laundry list of disconnected tidbits without any kind of sourcing doesn't inspire me to evidence your theory for you. You still don't understand our grievances with your case, so I'll bold it in caps for you:

CAN YOU MAKE A COHERENT CASE OUT OF ALL THESE DISPARATE DATA POINTS?

I know that would probably require you to write an essay (which just isn't as fun as bullet points) and apply some and a more systematic approach to researching, but I'm sure you can do it. Ask yourself if your argument would truly hold up to any kind of credible scientific scrutiny. Actually, natch that. I forgot that most scientists were paid off by the government and can't be trusted.

Because I could infer whatever the **** I wanted from your "evidence" and you'd be in no position to verify me right or wrong. How could you stop me from arguing that Jewish space lizards are the culprits behind 9/11 (Yes, that is an actual conspiracy theory (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Icke))? If the official story is insufficient for you then you need to provide an alternative that is moreso, because there's nothing in your argument that can't be chalked up to happenstance, coincidence, or possibly just you distorting information to fit you case (which the 911myths site I cite frequently exposes truthers of doing). Even if you do have some credible indications of shadowy behavior, you still have nothing that comes close to suggesting that the government perpetrated mass murder on its people.

Angel-A
7th Sep 2010, 20:02
Are you suggesting there was a controlled demolition? Do you have any idea how difficult that would be to pull off? You'd have to have huge teams of workers going all around the buildings installing explosive devices. This would have to be done while thousands of people come and go on a regular basis. Even if they manage to perform this feat undetected, the entire demolition team and their superiors would have to be totally okay with killing thousands of people to not come forward before or after the fact.
How odd, I distinctly remember not writing that. Please, show me where in my post I'm saying this.


Not really. What evidence suggests they were military planes? What videos are you talking about? I'd certainly love to see them. I'm sure the families of the victims would love to see them, too. Because if this attack was accomplished with military airplanes, we've got a few commercial jets worth of passengers and crew who are totally cool themselves with being associated with a plot to kill thousands of civilians and never see their families again.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jdB5iMydROM
As for the passengers, it can very well be another part of the conspiracy.


They found the plane 77's black box, debris proven to be that of 77, and identified bodies of passengers from the flight. Phone calls were received from passengers on the flight that confirmed it had been hijacked. The damage was minimized because one wing first hit the ground and the second was sheered off by a load-bearing column. And again, you run into the issue of a whole plane full of passengers that would need to totally disappear forever for this to have any chance of staying secret.
So, the wing was sheered off on the ground? Would you show me a photograph of just where this wing hit?

The passengers' bodies and the black box managed to survive all fine and well while the plane, made of metal, vaporized and disintegrated completely? Thanks, this is so much clearer now.


Where have you obtained the facts for this research? It seems patently clear it's not any sort of reliable source. I guess if you're willing to trust sites that purport to know the "truth" of the situation that have zero expertise in the fields they intend to comment on this isn't a problem. But most people hopefully require more conclusive evidence then the ramblings of random people on the internet.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s1JbB8Of27I
http://911review.com/errors/pentagon/aerobatics.html
http://911review.com/errors/pentagon/witnesses.html
Just a few to cite what I'm talking about...

RandomJunkie
7th Sep 2010, 20:08
My entire point with that post was not to say that this was the case, my point was that you shouldn't be so quick to trust your own government, all of the media is controlled by the government and whether you like it or not the media is controlling you.

I find it funny that people start saying that conspiracies of this magnitude are impossible and that this is the stuff of spy movies etc. This is exactly the thing that makes it feasible, if you said in the dark ages that someday people would be walking on the moon they would laugh at you and say that it was downright impossible. Get my point? This entire thing becomes feasible because it sounds impossible, and if they actually pulled something like this off nobody would suspect them and even if they did the people would simply think it to be downright impossible.

And also that it would be impossible to get that amount of explosives etc into the building and bribing that many people. How's this: undercover agent who is willing to stay quiet etc is placed into the maintenance crew months maybe even years before this happened, maintenance on such a large building would be going 24/7 so each day he could sneak a certain amount in, place it during his work and then move over to the next spot.

Again this is just an example there are virtually millions of ways to go about this but it certainly can be done.

Dude it's not because I don't make a bunch of assumptions about 9/11 that I trust the government. What is your problem ? Oh you don't make big assumptions about such and such event so you must be blindly following what the government says !

Seriously.

RandomJunkie
7th Sep 2010, 20:12
The thing is that -most- of the videos/infos posted here have already been debunked.

Unless, of course, the debunkers are part of the conspiracy.

OH NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

Pinky_Powers
7th Sep 2010, 23:54
I found this video series quite interesting.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l0yk2BDGxXk&feature=related

And some strange pervert directed me to this resource.
http://visibility911.com/index.php

RandomJunkie
8th Sep 2010, 00:11
The only way to deal with all this technical mumbo jumbo is to watch 9/11 truthers videos, watch debunkers videos, watch the debunking the debunkers videos, watch the debunking of the debunking of the debunkers video and so on. It's the only way. The only way. The only way.



But yea a hole 20 stories tall in the building might be the cause of it's collapse. Just saying.

Pinky_Powers
8th Sep 2010, 00:29
^... Yeah, paying attention to debunkers is equally important.

I was watching a video called 911 Loose Change. And it seemed all too easy. So after about five or ten minutes into it, I did a Google search for the debunking sites I knew had to exists. And sure enough, a lot of their claims were terribly contrived and factually unsound.

That said, there's no way around it; the three WTC buildings were brought down by controlled Demolitions.

RandomJunkie
8th Sep 2010, 00:45
But there was a UK peer reviewed paper on it which concluded that the WTC buildings were not brought down by controlled demolitions. It was written by engineers.

The only people that we should listen to on such subject would be engineers.

Pinky_Powers
8th Sep 2010, 01:35
The only people that we should listen to on such subject would be engineers.

I agree (http://www.ae911truth.org/)

RandomJunkie
8th Sep 2010, 02:36
But those people support the need for a new investigation, they don't necessary support a conspiracy theory.

Also, these petitions remind me of the Oregon petition against human caused climate change. It is one thing to say ''I think this'', but the only really meaningfull thing when it comes to science, is actual research.

Like I said, the only peer reviewed study that came out concluded that the cause of the collapse of the towers was not due to explosive. After nearly 10 years, why hasn't AE911 never published an actual study on the subject ? And correct me if I'm wrong, correct me If they did publish something.



Found a bunch of non-reviewed and reviewed articles
http://www.ae911truth.org/en/evidence/35-key-facts/73-technical-articles.html

Will be an interesting read. I'm still highly skeptical about the presence of explosives, since it seems that it wouldn't have been necessary it first place.

mad_red
8th Sep 2010, 12:15
And some strange pervert directed me to this resource.
http://visibility911.com/index.php

Ick! It's designed to look like the Wall-Mart of 9/11 conspiracy.


The case on Kurt Sonnenfeld seems to have reopened recently. I always liked the guy, although for no other reason that his claims remind me of this extremely amusing rant on France 24 TV news (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSwWy4E6I04) by Max Keiser.

But what I don't understand is why no H+ junkies have cried out in jubilation over my little reference to Marko Rodin???? C'mon guys, the Technology! The Geekiness!
THE FLUX THRUSTER ATOM PULSER!!!!!
Sheesh, what's it take?!

I will now compulsively wash my hands 7 1/2 times, and then rub the soap of the last 1/2 wash into my eyes, and construct a ship in a bottle while yodelling edelweiss before rinsing it out. I must wash my hands of this tainted conspiracy talk!

RandomJunkie
8th Sep 2010, 16:45
It won't come off.

TrickyVein
8th Sep 2010, 17:59
Just so long as you don't go shining a black-light on anything, you should be fine.

mad_red
9th Sep 2010, 00:12
It won't come off.

Then either I sever my hands, or I end up like this guy (http://uncensored.co.nz/2008/08/27/apology-from-hospital-for-misdiagnosis-as-delusional-owing-to-political-beliefs-at-last/).


Anyway, for anyone here who has ever played Deus Ex 1, check this out it's SWEET! At around 39:00 minutes, you'll hear some words that will sound very familiar.
Link: http://www.archive.org/details/Psywar_277