Link to where I asked it and to your answer please.Originally posted by ivan astikov
Link to where I asked it and to your answer please.
I've given you a figure of authority who is contesting the official account of 9/11 as told to the American people and the rest of the world. Let's start off by dismissing the opinions of this particular rebel, shall we?
To sleep, perchance to experience amygdalocortical activation and prefrontal deactivation.
Ok I've dismissed them. Next.
Erm, right here in the same post!?
< snipped for emphasis >
Or are you going to try and tell me they are 2 different questions? Go on, this should be good.
To sleep, perchance to experience amygdalocortical activation and prefrontal deactivation.
And I've just dismissed you dismissing them. If you want to troll the thread, knock yourself out AG, but don't try and pretend you are treating the topic seriously.
If you want to try and have a bit of a nobble at my expense, you are welcome, but it'll only end up in tears for someone, and it won't be me.
Last edited by ivan astikov; 11 Aug 2010 at 05:23 AM.
To sleep, perchance to experience amygdalocortical activation and prefrontal deactivation.
They are two discreet questions. Motive and purpose are two different things.
The first one is asking why you start a debate without having an opinion yourself. The point of a debate is you argue your point of view, either one you truly believe or a mantle you have taken on for the sake of the debate, and let others then argue for or against that. What motivates you to create a thread to debate a topic you are unwilling to give your opinion on?
The second one relates to what purpose you think the thread has. For example are you seeking the truth about the events? Are you just asking us our opinion on the linked youtube video?
See they are different questions.
Well when I post answers such as this you seem to ignore them so why should I even bother posting in your thread? If you want to argue for, or advocate for someone who holds, an extremely unorthodox opinion you need to do so in a clear, concise, coherent manner and one which doesn't force those you are trying to persuade to spend their time trying to divine a discussion from proceedings nor to do much leg work. This has nothing to do with the topic you claim you want to discuss and more to do with your own style of posting.
I don't know what a bit of a nobble is, anything to do with hobnobs?
Well, you too could have done better then, or you wouldn't need to be adding all that.
So, for the sake of clarity, I'll revise my OP to add - The topic of debate is NOT my opinions on the events surrounding 9/11, but whose opinions can we actually trust on a matter like this? I have presented one person in my OP who seems to be a worthwhile candidate for presenting "the alternative viewpoint", and I would like to know on what grounds rational folks like yourselves decide to accept or dismiss a person?
Is that debatable without people resorting to getting off topic?
To sleep, perchance to experience amygdalocortical activation and prefrontal deactivation.
Awwww...was you feeling left out? I thought it was a pretty lame explanation that someone in such a high position on the political stage, would be unaware of a third fucking whopping building collapsing on 9/11. I was in the UK and I knew all about it on the day. I'm not sure when Bowman had this meeting, but I'm fairly sure it wasn't during the immediate aftermath, when people might be expected to be that ignorant.
If you don't like my style of posting, you know the way out --->
A "nobble" is poking mischievious, bordering on malevolent fun at another's expense. As you've seen, I can handle people taking the piss, and I can give just as good back if the going gets rough.
To sleep, perchance to experience amygdalocortical activation and prefrontal deactivation.
If you can't handle constructive criticism then I pity you. If you really want to have meaningful discussions on here you should heed my advice.
I can have meaningful discussions, can handle constructive criticism, and find your "advice" insultingly condescending. But do carry on...
To sleep, perchance to experience amygdalocortical activation and prefrontal deactivation.
Let's discuss these "extremely unorthodox opinions" you think R.Bowman has, which according to Zuul's linked "poll" up thread, are shared by a third of American's. That's probably about as unorthodox as being an atheist. Which thoughts of Bowman's do you find particularly objectionable, and why?
Oh, I forgot. You want to be spoon-fed this dialogue, and also have my laser-like mind analyse it as well? Well, it's not gonna happen unless you provide excerpts you disagree with - because it seems fairly certain there'll be little you do agree with - and we'll go from there.
Last edited by ivan astikov; 11 Aug 2010 at 06:18 AM.
To sleep, perchance to experience amygdalocortical activation and prefrontal deactivation.
On reflection, I think I may have treated AG a little brusquely regarding his "constructive criticism", and realise I should probably give him the benefit of doubt about wanting to help me, and him not trying to make me look like a babbling idiot.
So, with that in mind, maybe we should pause at this point and anyone who has criticisms of the way I have conducted this thread thus far, can chirp in and say what I've done wrong, and I'll try not to get all butthurt and stuff.
Let's make it fair tho' and treat the subject matter and thread as tho' it was made by a noob, and not someone with my considerable baggage to throw into the mix, shall we?
To sleep, perchance to experience amygdalocortical activation and prefrontal deactivation.
Nope.
Reporting screw up on behalf of the BBC. It's a big screw up as you can see it over her shoulder. But then again, how many times has Bill Cosby died.
Of course the alternative is that the the left-wing BBC was part of the right-wing conspiracy to bomb America to allow it to invade Iraq.
Wow!! I think we cracked it.
In the land of the blind, the one-arm man is king.
Way to jump on one aspect, totally misinterpret it, and throw in a Bill Cosby strawman too.
To sleep, perchance to experience amygdalocortical activation and prefrontal deactivation.
You have failed completely in this attempt.
Saying it doesn't make it so. Point out all my errors in logical consistency for starters, and we'll go from there. While you are at it, would you like to cast a close eye over the responses of others, and see how their posts are making out?
Your wisdom on these matters will be greatly appreciated by everyone who comes into this thread.
Last edited by ivan astikov; 11 Aug 2010 at 09:56 AM.
To sleep, perchance to experience amygdalocortical activation and prefrontal deactivation.
In other words, there is no substance at all in this thread -- it is just another Ivan thread.
You literally said that evidence doesn't matter.
The entire basis of this thread is "someone important believes something", which is such a complete error in logic that there is a name for it -- Argument from authority.
This thread is nothing BUT pure illogic.
No. The substance is in the thoughts of Dr Robert Bowman regarding 9/11, and why an avowed patriot and someone who has fought with honour for his country, would be trying to make trouble for it in such a way; got any opinions on that?
To sleep, perchance to experience amygdalocortical activation and prefrontal deactivation.
So, when your side points to NIST, Professor Bazant and the other scientific luminaries tasked to explain the events of 9/11, that isn't an argument from authority? Have you seen any of this "evidence" yourself? Do you know who handed "the indestructible passport" in to the FBI? Would you trust any of the people in the top 20 positions of power on that day, with your life?
To sleep, perchance to experience amygdalocortical activation and prefrontal deactivation.
Since that's nothing but an appeal to authority, it doesn't constitute "substance". That's why no one cares about it.
And I never said that evidence doesn't matter. I said you can't expect to find evidence of wrong-doings, if you don't even accept it might be there to be found.
To sleep, perchance to experience amygdalocortical activation and prefrontal deactivation.
The real conspiracy is that there never was any attack, and the buildings did not collapse. They are still standing there, filled with corporate and gub'mint people who are controlling the world from behind the curtain.
So, how familiar are you with his thoughts anyway? Has he ever crossed your discerning radar before this thread?
To sleep, perchance to experience amygdalocortical activation and prefrontal deactivation.
Muffin, these contributions are so sad, I can't even bring myself to flame you.
Why don't you toddle over to the JREF and see if you can find some witty remarks to pass off as your own?
To sleep, perchance to experience amygdalocortical activation and prefrontal deactivation.
Never heard of him. Not going to bother now since, as you yourself have said, the only point you wish to take away is "some guy who is supposedly important in some way believes this", which isn't really compelling at all.
Actually, it was pretty funny. Your perceptions of what is "sad" don't really match most people's, as far as I can tell.
"As far as you can tell." Exactly. What the fuck do you know?
Oops, sorry, I thought I was in GD then.
Last edited by ivan astikov; 11 Aug 2010 at 10:34 AM.
To sleep, perchance to experience amygdalocortical activation and prefrontal deactivation.
I have to say, in a weird way I almost admire your ability to believe, despite the unanimity of the responses you receive, that there's some huge crowd of people that somehow are impressed by your "arguments". A crowd of people that is hanging on your every word, but just never, ever posts.
You are hanging on my every word, by the looks of it. I'll settle for just the one besotted follower, thanking you muchly.
To sleep, perchance to experience amygdalocortical activation and prefrontal deactivation.
You know what? Probably not. Which is equally true today, in fact. However, in order to accuse them of terrorism and murder, I have to have a reason to believe that they had a goal in mind, and a reason to believe that whatever their goal was, there wasn't a far easier way to accomplish it.
See, one of the things that the truthers don't seem to get is that the "official" explanation is simple and elegant, and their explanation is complicated and fraught with places where it could have completely broken down. Given a situation where I can't see the advantage to an extremely complicated plan, I have to go with the simple one.
Okay. I'll speculate on "the goal". Organised chaos. The perpetrators? Members of the political elite on both sides of the political divide, combined with the wealth and influences of the military industrial complex. Look for those who are making a profit no matter which side has the upper hand. These will be people who, if they get brought down, they'll bring every one down with them, and the cracks in the foundations are already appearing.
Thr "official" explanation is not "simple and elegant" by any stretch of the imagination. It relies on incompetence of the highest order, fairy tales like "indestructible passports", terrorists who carry their will and other incriminating paraphernalia onto the planes with them, and a myriad of other inconsistencies to be overlooked, before it becomes even barely feasible.
If it was just me and a few other disaffected malcontents who thought the entire thing sounds like a "Plausible Denial" set up, you'd have good reason to dismiss such suggestions, but like the JFK conspiracy, this isn't going away, and unless this break in your collective psyche is set straight soon, it is going to turn your country into a twisted spined ogre, angry with the whole world, and out for divine retribution.
Just my opinion, like.
Now you've got something to get your teeth into, so have at it.
Last edited by ivan astikov; 11 Aug 2010 at 11:25 AM.
To sleep, perchance to experience amygdalocortical activation and prefrontal deactivation.
I don't know, almost all of the conspiracy theories have been explained in regards to 9/11. There is a slight mystery as why World Trade Center Building 7 collapsed like it did. There isn't much proof of a major fire in the building and it had seemingly suffered little damage in the attack, but it collapsed suddenly and completely. So for what it's worth I don't think I've ever heard a great explanation from either side on why building 7 went down.
Nah, not worth the bother. Since you have not got your head on straight after all these years, I doubt if you ever will, so trying to have a rational conversation with you is a waste of time.
See you in another month then, shall we, or are you gonna stick around for a bit and inflict more of your rather repetitive and highly unimaginative criticisms on the board?
To sleep, perchance to experience amygdalocortical activation and prefrontal deactivation.
I don't think anyone who subjects the board to repetitive and highly unimaginative criticisms on the board should be encouraged to increase their activity.
comcast guy - m4m - 18 (nb)
seem like we had that connection when we looked at each other
you had a blue shirt on nice asss,dought you will see this but dosnt hurt to try, but id love to play with you. tell me what you where fixing, or the street name,or describe me.
Meaning? Spit it out. I can't bite you.
I know there's snark in there, but it's the sort of a stealth snark that'll go right past me unless you spell it out.
Last edited by ivan astikov; 11 Aug 2010 at 12:20 PM.
To sleep, perchance to experience amygdalocortical activation and prefrontal deactivation.
To sleep, perchance to experience amygdalocortical activation and prefrontal deactivation.
Thank you for reminding me of "The Shadow". I was hoping to forget it existed.
In the land of the blind, the one-arm man is king.
Ok, Ivan, let's try this the other way around. Part of the argument is that the BBC knew in advance of it occuring that WTC7 would collapse. However, in getting the timing wrong on a broadcast, they gave away that they knew this fact.
If this is the case, who would be required for this to be set up?
Who would be in the know and who would have to be part of the conspiracy across the countries in order for the assumption to hold true?
In the land of the blind, the one-arm man is king.
You're missing the point. Those pulling the strings don't care about it being exposed, because they are cut off from all fall-out anyway --- even if the public accepted there was a conspiracy. The idea was to create hate and distrust among the public, maybe start that 3rd world war to get the population figures down again, and still make a few dollars at the same time.
Imho.
Last edited by ivan astikov; 12 Aug 2010 at 09:42 AM.
To sleep, perchance to experience amygdalocortical activation and prefrontal deactivation.
Why?
You're asking why war-mongerers heavily invested in the arms industry and the mayhem that follows where ever it goes, do what they do?
To sleep, perchance to experience amygdalocortical activation and prefrontal deactivation.
Well if that's your goal, why bother with a ridiculously complicated plot when you can far more easily start wars by giving money and weapons to terrorists? No need to blow up buildings or create a conspiracy: just fund the bad guys, sit back, and wait. I imagine that'd be a hell of a lot cheaper than having to pay off or kill so many people to keep your conspiracy hidden.
They were doing that already and the tills weren't ringing fast enough. It's no good just having unrest in the poor countries, when there's a whole civilised world to divide and conquer.
And to say it was too complicated is an argument from your ignorance of what special ops teams are capable of. Remember, these are the guys who take orders best in all the military. What they are capable of "in the name of our countries" would no doubt make your toe-nails curl, if you were aware.
Last edited by ivan astikov; 12 Aug 2010 at 10:36 AM.
To sleep, perchance to experience amygdalocortical activation and prefrontal deactivation.
Exactly...do it the old fashioned way. Why fix something that ain't broke?
Who among us could really know what the motivations might be for such an endeavor? I'd guess the reasoning was way beyond the imaginings of Mr and Mrs Joe Public, tho'.
To sleep, perchance to experience amygdalocortical activation and prefrontal deactivation.
And I doubt if that would be "the goal"; more like a side-line to the main event.
To sleep, perchance to experience amygdalocortical activation and prefrontal deactivation.
Posting rules
Reply with quote
