MMA Forum - UFC Forums - UFC Results - MMA Videos - View Single Post - Sandy Hook conspiracy discussion

View Single Post

Old 01-17-2013, 11:04 AM   #90 (permalink)
PheelGoodInc
Heavyweight
 
PheelGoodInc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Eastvale, Ca
Posts: 3,947
PheelGoodInc Is Beyond A Rankings SystemPheelGoodInc Is Beyond A Rankings SystemPheelGoodInc Is Beyond A Rankings SystemPheelGoodInc Is Beyond A Rankings SystemPheelGoodInc Is Beyond A Rankings SystemPheelGoodInc Is Beyond A Rankings SystemPheelGoodInc Is Beyond A Rankings SystemPheelGoodInc Is Beyond A Rankings SystemPheelGoodInc Is Beyond A Rankings SystemPheelGoodInc Is Beyond A Rankings SystemPheelGoodInc Is Beyond A Rankings System
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soojooko View Post

But simply put, to suggest there is no footage of a large plane hitting the military hub of the most powerful nation on earth is not just "odd"... its a massive stretch. The footage exists, of that I have no doubt. Why will they not show it to us and put and end to this nonsense?
I will admit it is odd. It is not a massive stretch. The government in itself doesn't give a shit about these theories because they understand how ridiculous they are. They don't want to give it the time of day, because even the clearest video in the world will not stop the 9/11 deniers. They'll just claim there's irrefutable proof that the video was CG, green screen, or doctored. That is how these people think. The last 12 years has been crystal clear proof of that.

But okay, I'll bite. First prove the video exists. This was 2001. Camera's were not nearly as prevalent in 2001 as they are now. I was a sophomore in high school, and carried a pager at that time. Most security camera's were like the pentagons which captures frames at a time only upon movement in order to save on file space. The pentagon already released the video of the exact spot the plane hit. Of course that wasn't good enough though.

What is "odd" is to send a missile into one building if you already sent two actual planes into other buildings. What is the purpose behind that? What's reasoning? What about the tons of witnesses who saw the plane fly straight over the freeway before hitting the pentagon?

What is "odd" are the people still attempting to discredit this stuff.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Liddellianenko View Post
If the govt. is actually doing these things, you don't think they can pay some guys to pose as "truthers", spread ridiculous bs and discredit the entire movement?
And this is why I stopped arguing with 9/11 deniers years ago. You catch them in a lie or spreading false info, and then they claim the government planted that false info to make them look bad. Do you have any idea how ridiculous that is? You cannot argue logic with someone who is so paranoid that anytime they are proven wrong, it wasn't that they were wrong, it was a plant by the government to make them look bad.

I think it's hilarious these same people actually accuse the government of committing massive amount of lies and deceptions without proof, but then ignore it when people with their own shared beliefs commit lies and deceptions. I guess it's just government agents posing so it doesn't count

Several small inconsistencies on the official story, and it's proof of a cover up. Massive obvious inconsistencies on the 9/11 deniers parts, and just pretend like it never happened. Great logic...

Quote:
You take some of the ridiculous bs as representing all of them in one big stereotype, and that's all it takes to wipe out all the legit questions and inconsistencies from your mind? Like what soojoo raised?

Yes. Because 9/11 deniers do nothing but point out small coincidences or odd looking things and consider it proof of some massive conspiracy which resulted in the deaths of 3000 innocent people. In the big picture, this conspiracy makes no sense and doesn't have a shred of evidence to back it.

Why argue about no video of a plane when all the evidence and witnesses prove there was actually a plane? Then you think about what using a missile would have accomplished or why they would have done that instead of just using another plane. A missile make no sense. So how about you justify why a missile was better, how all those plane parts and charred bodies got there, how all those people were mistaken when they saw the plane, and then discuss how the lack of video evidence supports the use of a missile. It would make a MUCH stronger case rather than just "There's no video." That is such a narrow minded view it's not worth discussing in itself. I don't understand how you can't grasp that.
__________________


Team PheelGood Fantasy Fight League

Jon Jones / Mark Hunt / Cub Swanson / Dustin Poirier / Darrell Montague
PheelGoodInc is offline   Reply With Quote