The Story of 9/11

deprave

New Member
My friend didn't know about 9/11 so I showed him this video so he would better understand the events on that tragic day

[video=youtube;qt8ykKH2GMY]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qt8ykKH2GMY[/video]
 

kpmarine

Well-Known Member
How do you figure? It was one guy on a clearly biased rant without sources. I have my fair share of questions about Sep. 11, but this answers nothing. The video states alot of "facts", but doesn't back them. It gives no clearer understanding, it's a jumbled bunch of speculation and circumstantial crap. Seriously, a person could not be convicted of anything with this level of circumstantial evidence. All this indicates is a possibility, it really does nothing to clear anything up man. This guy's (the video maker's) logic is "It's possible, and there are some suspicious things happening, so it must be true!". If you wish to educate people on the events; credible, objective sources, trump fast-talking speculators any day. This guy could be entirely right, but he fails to make that case from an evidentiary(sp?) perspective.
 

deprave

New Member
How do you figure? It was one guy on a clearly biased rant without sources. I have my fair share of questions about Sep. 11, but this answers nothing. The video states alot of "facts", but doesn't back them. It gives no clearer understanding, it's a jumbled bunch of speculation and circumstantial crap. Seriously, a person could not be convicted of anything with this level of circumstantial evidence. All this indicates is a possibility, it really does nothing to clear anything up man. This guy's (the video maker's) logic is "It's possible, and there are some suspicious things happening, so it must be true!". If you wish to educate people on the events; credible, objective sources, trump fast-talking speculators any day. This guy could be entirely right, but he fails to make that case from an evidentiary(sp?) perspective.
Well its based on facts and common questions that are asked, you can go ahead and start reading through the hours of material if you want but that kinda defeats the purpose of a 5 minute video, your critisizing a 5 minute video for not being thorough enough, common dude. I thought its a pretty good summary. Also I think its obvious very few people know all the facts, we should all have lots of questions.
 

doc111

Well-Known Member
Well its based on facts and common questions that are asked, you can go ahead and start reading through the hours of material if you want but that kinda defeats the purpose of a 5 minute video. I thought its a pretty good summary. Also I think its obvious that hardly anyone knows all the facts, we should all have lots of questions.
Most of these "qestions" can never be answered.
 

tip top toker

Well-Known Member
Doc was there, as such it can't possibly have been other story than the governments. The man knows too much.

How do you figure? It was one guy on a clearly biased rant without sources. I have my fair share of questions about Sep. 11, but this answers nothing. The video states alot of "facts", but doesn't back them. It gives no clearer understanding, it's a jumbled bunch of speculation and circumstantial crap. Seriously, a person could not be convicted of anything with this level of circumstantial evidence. All this indicates is a possibility, it really does nothing to clear anything up man. This guy's (the video maker's) logic is "It's possible, and there are some suspicious things happening, so it must be true!". If you wish to educate people on the events; credible, objective sources, trump fast-talking speculators any day. This guy could be entirely right, but he fails to make that case from an evidentiary(sp?) perspective.
So no real difference to the US governemnts story then, facts without any evidence, oh right, wait, they found all the passports, how silly of me :D They just figured to hell with any evidence for our "facts" and bombed a whole few thousand civilians anyways :D
 

deprave

New Member
Doc was there, as such it can't possibly have been other story than the governments. The man knows too much.



So no real difference to the US governemnts story then, facts without any evidence, oh right, wait, they found all the passports, how silly of me :D They just figured to hell with any evidence for our "facts" and bombed a whole few thousand civilians anyways :D

Really now he was there, so no other scenario is possible? They found all the passports you say? Open and shut! That had to be it, Cnl Mustard in the Library with a candlestick! case closed johnson!
 

tip top toker

Well-Known Member
Really now he was there, so no other scenario is possible? They found all the passports you say? Open and shut! case closed johnson!
Well i appologise to the Doc if i'm thinking of a different person, but he (if i'm correct) always goes on about how he was a firefighter at the scene and spoke to people, and as such it would not be possible for the real story to be antyhing other than the "official" story (might as well call it unfounded instead of official lol). i was always under the idea of him being a firefighter at the scene being of fuck all emrit to whether it was or wasn't such and such an incident. So far as i'm concerned, little to nothing of what the US government has stated makes any credible sense, so seems odd to simply agree with it, one would think if it was as they said they would have viable evidence to prove it, and as such justify the slaughter of thousands and thousands and thousands of innocent civilians. But hey, they're just rag heads, fuck em, right?

Even if it were as the government states, they blew up some buildings, the US went to war. It's not hard to work out who is more evil :) Last time i checked murdering untold thousands of innocent families was not a moral, ethical, or justified means of retaliation.

Hohum, they're all terrorists though, gotta bomb em!
 

deprave

New Member
Well i appologise to the Doc if i'm thinking of a different person, but he (if i'm correct) always goes on about how he was a firefighter at the scene and spoke to people, and as such it would not be possible for the real story to be antyhing other than the "official" story (might as well call it unfounded instead of official lol). i was always under the idea of him being a firefighter at the scene being of fuck all emrit to whether it was or wasn't such and such an incident.
While I commend him for his heroism I don't see how this qualifies much of anything really, I know people that were there also, many of them "truthers". I don't see how this makes him or them any sort of authority regarding the entire situation such as the reasons it happened or the motive.


So far as i'm concerned, little to nothing of what the US government has stated makes any credible sense, so seems odd to simply agree with it, one would think if it was as they said they would have viable evidence to prove it, and as such justify the slaughter of thousands and thousands and thousands of innocent civilians. But hey, they're just rag heads, fuck em, right?
ummm.....yea...no

Even if it were as the government states, they blew up some buildings, the US went to war. It's not hard to work out who is more evil :) Last time i checked murdering untold thousands of innocent families was not a moral, ethical, or justified means of retaliation.

Hohum, they're all terrorists though, gotta bomb em!
I don't think any violence is either way, further.....Governments and idelogies themselves have no moral or philosophical basis...they are immoral and unjust, it is their very essence, to treat humans as animals is just plain wrong any way you shake it. Government is kind of an exscuse for violence in of itself. Regardless I am not convinced "The government" in its entirety would be to blame for this or would have conspired this, likely a group involved with a government, afterall government is a giant monopoly of power that isn't ever held accountable for its actions therefore attracts evil people like flys to shit, Lets face it your pretty bad at being evil if you don't crave giant monopolies of power and the abillity to not be held accountable for your evil deeds, you should probably hang it up. As more evidence surfaces it is on trail now that the saudi government in particular funded this little operation. I most certainly don't buy for one second that it was Osama Bin Laden lol
Minimum text required is here, responses are in red above.
 

kpmarine

Well-Known Member
Doc was there, as such it can't possibly have been other story than the governments. The man knows too much.



So no real difference to the US governemnts story then, facts without any evidence, oh right, wait, they found all the passports, how silly of me :D They just figured to hell with any evidence for our "facts" and bombed a whole few thousand civilians anyways :D
Didn't say theirs was any better, did I?
 

Canna Sylvan

Well-Known Member
Here's the story. A group of Arabs with small dicks are pissed off. Besides having genetalia too small to please a humming bird, they're also pissed off a haram McDonalds invade their country which smells like shit and piss, what Ronald the insane calls blow back. Because these pathetic pieces of shit have no coping skills, they hijack some jet passenger planes. Those planes hit a couple buildings. Because of factors those planes caused, two skyscrapers fall. Nearly 3,000 people die. The end.

Since I told the story. Can a moderator close
this fucking thread before people start posting crazy shit we used to lock people up for?
 

NoDrama

Well-Known Member
Yep, Arabs did it, thats why we went and attacked the non Arabs. 11 years and people still don't have a clue.

BTW it was 3 buildings, not 2.
 

Canna Sylvan

Well-Known Member
BTW it was 3 buildings, not 2.
cou·ple

4. Informal A few; several:

I guess I have to tell people, "hey fucking dumb shits. I'm using informal language. So get off my dick already. So I'm not going to mention the bullshit Pentagon."

Do I need to post the country of origin, names and pictures. Then we will get a sociologist to identify what cultural background that makes them. :dunce:
 

NoDrama

Well-Known Member
cou·ple

4. Informal A few; several:

I guess I have to tell people, "hey fucking dumb shits. I'm using informal language. So get off my dick already. So I'm not going to mention the bullshit Pentagon."

Do I need to post the country of origin, names and pictures. Then we will get a sociologist to identify what cultural background that makes them. :dunce:
I saw a cute couple kissing in the Park. How many people am I talking about?

PS. who said anything about the pentagon? I don't remember it being totally destroyed.?
 

NoDrama

Well-Known Member
And for the record, we use formal English around here, not the obscure 4th version, try listing the first three instead of using some "trick" to make yourself look not so dumb.

what preceded your definition said:
1. Two items of the same kind; a pair.

2. Something that joins or connects two things together; a link.

3. (used with a sing. or pl. verb)a. Two people united, as by betrothal or marriage.

b. Two people together.
 
Top