i_love_som_tam Posted September 11, 2007 Report Share Posted September 11, 2007 why should anyone post their 9/11 memories when u have certain assholes shouting out conspiracy theories and taking out of context the tragedy america and numerous other countries suffered on this day? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeusbheld Posted September 11, 2007 Report Share Posted September 11, 2007 why should anyone post their 9/11 memories when u have certain assholes shouting out conspiracy theories and taking out of context the tragedy america and numerous other countries suffered on this day? why not? the assholes aren't limited to this site, otherwise there woudln't be any cheesy documentaries with bad music to link to. easy enough to let 'em have their own thread, especially now that they can use youtube again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paulgh3rd Posted September 11, 2007 Report Share Posted September 11, 2007 why should anyone post their 9/11 memories when u have certain assholes shouting out conspiracy theories and taking out of context the tragedy america and numerous other countries suffered on this day? when you are silent you give those people more power like muslims who say nothing when extremeists clerics take over their mosques and begin to influence people into an extremeists belief.... like if we said nothing against the klan or skin heads. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
i_love_som_tam Posted September 11, 2007 Author Report Share Posted September 11, 2007 why should anyone post their 9/11 memories when u have certain assholes shouting out conspiracy theories and taking out of context the tragedy america and numerous other countries suffered on this day? why not? the assholes aren't limited to this site, otherwise there woudln't be any cheesy documentaries with bad music to link to. easy enough to let 'em have their own thread, especially now that they can use youtube again. i kind of dig the music... kind of like 70's porn movies Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeusbheld Posted September 11, 2007 Report Share Posted September 11, 2007 why not? the assholes aren't limited to this site, otherwise there woudln't be any cheesy documentaries with bad music to link to. easy enough to let 'em have their own thread, especially now that they can use youtube again. Mate if a prominent and influential, well known figure in the international community came on here and posted a thread saying similar things to what have already been postulated, you'd give it more thought before dismissing it so quickly. Or I'd certainly hope so. However, it's GG, TK and Slurms who are arguing the point, so obviously, there is no point. well the key is not WHO presents but HOW. incoherent polemics don't interest me. and i'm not interested in 'debating' someone who twists my words around and attempts to tell me i said things i didnt. had enough fun with that on various 'evolution is a hoax' debates. bored with that approach these days. again: it ain't what they say, or who says it, it's HOW. i do tend to not bother with certain posters as their tactics are predictable. also, aside from beej, i doubt we have any prominent and influential well known figures of the international community on here. i don't generally look to TF for information about the world, any more than i look to the jerry springer show. Though as I'm sure you know, just because the purporters aren't wholly credible in themselves, doesn't mean there is no point to be made. and as you no doubt have noticed, if there's a point to be made, one can safely dismiss the cranks because someone else will make it better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeusbheld Posted September 11, 2007 Report Share Posted September 11, 2007 why not? the assholes aren't limited to this site, otherwise there woudln't be any cheesy documentaries with bad music to link to. easy enough to let 'em have their own thread, especially now that they can use youtube again. Mate if a prominent and influential, well known figure in the international community came on here and posted a thread saying similar things to what have already been postulated, you'd give it more thought before dismissing it so quickly. Or I'd certainly hope so. However, it's GG, TK and Slurms who are arguing the point, so obviously, there is no point. well the key is not WHO presents but HOW. incoherent polemics don't interest me. and i'm not interested in 'debating' someone who twists my words around and attempts to tell me i said things i didnt. had enough fun with that on various 'evolution is a hoax' debates. bored with that approach these days. again: it ain't what they say, or who says it, it's HOW. i do tend to not bother with certain posters as their tactics are predictable. also, aside from beej, i doubt we have any prominent and influential well known figures of the international community on here. i don't generally look to TF for information about the world, any more than i look to the jerry springer show. Though as I'm sure you know, just because the purporters aren't wholly credible in themselves, doesn't mean there is no point to be made. and as you no doubt have noticed, if there's a point to be made, one can safely dismiss the cranks because someone else will make it better. Hmm i'm not entirely sure this particular thread is one on which we should be arguing this particular point. Yes, notwithstanding the WHO, the HOW is definitely a point. As I'm sure you have noticed I have argued this aspect a little myself. Though I'm sure that you, in search of the truth, are more than capable of overlooking not only the how, but even the who. (Let's argue this somewhere else.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeusbheld Posted September 11, 2007 Report Share Posted September 11, 2007 *****Moderator note ******* i split this off from another thread. note that the last couple of posts are out of order. i suck at splitting threads. ****end mod note ******** Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeusbheld Posted September 11, 2007 Report Share Posted September 11, 2007 *****Moderator note *******i split this off from another thread. note that the last couple of posts are out of order. i suck at splitting threads. ****end mod note ******** And this is the best retort you could come up with? Mate. You just suck. i don't JUST suck. you pay the full amount you get the full service.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trocks69 Posted September 12, 2007 Report Share Posted September 12, 2007 their one and the same Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frankenburner2 Posted September 12, 2007 Report Share Posted September 12, 2007 ***********public service grammar note************* it's "They're" not "Their" for those Non-native English speakers **********end public service grammar note************ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eagle Posted September 12, 2007 Report Share Posted September 12, 2007 ***********public service grammar note*************it's "They're" not "Their" for those Non-native English speakers **********end public service grammar note************ Its their choice Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slurms Posted September 12, 2007 Report Share Posted September 12, 2007 why should anyone post their 9/11 memories when u have certain assholes shouting out conspiracy theories and taking out of context the tragedy america and numerous other countries suffered on this day? I think you'll find by logic if you got your way , none of us would be "assholes" but we'd all run around with our heads in the sand , worshipping animistic gods .Because for every new form of discourse that comes to be , there are conservative people insisting "these assholes are crazy " . That's why it's a fact that generally discourses don't change so much as "die away" . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slurms Posted September 12, 2007 Report Share Posted September 12, 2007 However, it's GG, TK and Slurms who are arguing the point, so obviously, there is no point. Oh **** off ! How dare you lump me and what I've argued with that lot ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frankenburner2 Posted September 12, 2007 Report Share Posted September 12, 2007 However, it's GG, TK and Slurms who are arguing the point, so obviously, there is no point. Oh f*ck off ! How dare you lump me and what I've argued with that lot ? agreed..."slurms" is definitely in a category all by himself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeusbheld Posted September 12, 2007 Report Share Posted September 12, 2007 However, it's GG, TK and Slurms who are arguing the point, so obviously, there is no point. Oh f*ck off ! How dare you lump me and what I've argued with that lot ? right, you're far less coherent and more manipulative and occasionally outright deceitful. <<music cue: world's smallest violin>> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeusbheld Posted September 12, 2007 Report Share Posted September 12, 2007 why should anyone post their 9/11 memories when u have certain assholes shouting out conspiracy theories and taking out of context the tragedy america and numerous other countries suffered on this day? I think you'll find by logic if you got your way , none of us would be "assholes" but we'd all run around with our heads in the sand , worshipping animistic gods .Because for every new form of discourse that comes to be , there are conservative people insisting "these assholes are crazy " . That's why it's a fact that generally discourses don't change so much as "die away" . are you giving yourself credit for a "new form of discourse"? marginally coherent mush has been around as long as language. you're hardly an innovator. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slurms Posted September 12, 2007 Report Share Posted September 12, 2007 are you giving yourself credit for a "new form of discourse"? marginally coherent mush has been around as long as language. you're hardly an innovator Yeah..exactly ! What is so revolutionary about the idea that killing innocent people is equally wrong , no matter where they come from ? Christ...but you'd think I've made the most controversial statement by the way this lot will go on . right, you're far less coherent and more manipulative and occasionally outright deceitful. That very statement is the height of Manipulative drivel . It's also deceitful as it does not provide any of the context within which you make it . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeusbheld Posted September 12, 2007 Report Share Posted September 12, 2007 are you giving yourself credit for a "new form of discourse"? marginally coherent mush has been around as long as language. you're hardly an innovator Yeah..exactly ! What is so revolutionary about the idea that killing innocent people is equally wrong , no matter where they come from ? Christ...but you'd think I've made the most controversial statement by the way this lot will go on . i dont have a problem with it, except that it was on *another* thread you said so... people might get confused. maybe that is the new discourse? right, you're far less coherent and more manipulative and occasionally outright deceitful. That very statement is the height of Manipulative drivel . It's also deceitful as it does not provide any of the context within which you make it . you want links? fine. middle of the page. where you inform the world what i said... What gives you the right to call me stupid and insane for believing bombs/thermite were used in the world trade center , an argument that offers in every way an equally valid , if not superior a hypothesis to "pancake" theory yet the fact is, i NEVER SAID ANY OF THE THINGS YOU ACCUSE ME OF SAYING. just one example, anyone who has any questions can find other examples and make up their own mind. feel free to spit the dummy again, although i'd imagine it must be pretty filthy with all the time it spends on the floor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slurms Posted September 12, 2007 Report Share Posted September 12, 2007 yet the fact is, i NEVER SAID ANY OF THE THINGS YOU ACCUSE ME OF SAYING. just one example, anyone who has any questions can find other examples and make up their own mind. Only if we selectively forget laassst time me argued about the world trade centre . The time I got banned . Then (and I admit your views might have changed) the pancake theory was freshly published by popular mechaics as "proof" that bombs weren't used and you offered up that as your versions of events . Now at that time i was more trying to wind people up than make a serious argument , but it did accor to me that the types of arguments that were being put up against my wind up arguments were in no way scientific or had been exposed to the type of critique and scrutiny that you normally find within the scientifc discourse . That added to the flow of insults by you and people who obviously didn't even have their own versions of events (you might , but some people jumping on the banwagon like tat etc obviously had no clue of ANY VERSION ..they were just sure they would diagree with anyone saying anything controversial m without knowing the official version is highly controverial), an had obviously not read into the matter , to think then they could insult me , who actually had done so for being "stupid and a crack pot" was very flimsy reasoning and in fact ...plain ******* ignorant . I felt entirely entitled to call these people out , who had no evidence or a slight clue on the important issues on the matter , for taking the "scientific" high ground .And I'm sure in your own way you too must have reservations in this matter . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeusbheld Posted September 12, 2007 Report Share Posted September 12, 2007 yet the fact is, i NEVER SAID ANY OF THE THINGS YOU ACCUSE ME OF SAYING. just one example, anyone who has any questions can find other examples and make up their own mind. Only if we selectively forget laassst time me argued about the world trade centre . a conversation which you meticulously *avoided* mentioning in your post, let alone linking to anything i might *actually* have said, didn't you? and you're aware that particular thread was a long time ago, and that you make it look like i had said what you accuse me as saying as part of the thread where you post it? thanks for proving my point rather conclusively. The time I got banned . Then (and I admit your views might have changed) yet, you are saying so in the context of justifying having effectively put words in my mouth. point stands: YOU ARE A LIAR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slurms Posted September 12, 2007 Report Share Posted September 12, 2007 point stands: YOU ARE A LIAR. Come now . Liar? Making an assumption that you still hold the same views is not the same as a lie ! If you had brought up points I made last time about cellphones and I called you a liar , that would be much too strong . Don't use the term "liar" so loosely . I'll never lie about something i believe , or i'm only lying to myself...who the hell would defend a position they thought to be a lie? Oh right ! Me , in the odd "wind up" thread......but this time....?? With what agenda ?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frankenburner2 Posted September 12, 2007 Report Share Posted September 12, 2007 point stands: YOU ARE A LIAR. Come now . Liar? Making an assumption that you still hold the same views is not the same as a lie ! If you had brought up points I made last time about cellphones and I called you a liar , that would be much too strong . Don't use the term "liar" so loosely . I'll never lie about something i believe , or i'm only lying to myself...who the hell would defend a position they thought to be a lie? Oh right ! Me , in the odd "wind up" thread......but this time....?? With what agenda ?? ahhh...I get it...you only lie when it's a wind up....well that's different then...Zeus, I think you him an apology! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeusbheld Posted September 12, 2007 Report Share Posted September 12, 2007 point stands: YOU ARE A LIAR. Come now . Liar? Making an assumption that you still hold the same views is not the same as a lie ! i am making the assumption that you deliberately misrepresented what i had said. If you had brought up points I made last time about cellphones and I called you a liar , that would be much too strong . Don't use the term "liar" so loosely . I'll never lie about something i believe , or i'm only lying to myself...who the hell would defend a position they thought to be a lie? Oh right ! Me , in the odd "wind up" thread......but this time....?? With what agenda ?? it is not the first time you delberately misquoted me. or am i supposed to believe you make up things and believe i said 'em? if so thorazine might help. enjoy your latest tantrum though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slurms Posted September 12, 2007 Report Share Posted September 12, 2007 i am making the assumption that you deliberately misrepresented what i had said. No . On all the evidence I have for your views on the matter I must conclude you think pancake theory is scientificaly valid . That is the last position you took on the matter than I have seen . If you have no position on the matter , what qualifies you to insult other people that do ? Surely some opinion and thoery is better than none . Calling it a "lie" to assume someone has not changed their views is a huuuuuge stretch of the imagination . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeusbheld Posted September 12, 2007 Report Share Posted September 12, 2007 i am making the assumption that you deliberately misrepresented what i had said. No . On all the evidence I have for your views on the matter I must conclude you think pancake theory is scientificaly valid . That is the last position you took on the matter than I have seen . If you have no position on the matter , what qualifies you to insult other people that do ? Surely some opinion and thoery is better than none . Calling it a "lie" to assume someone has not changed their views is a huuuuuge stretch of the imagination . well making up words i didnt say as if you are merely paraphrasing? that's a lie. so can i just assume you're not bright enough to figure out what i actually was saying on the other thread either, and thereby absolve you of lying? does that work for you? and if your holy assumptions are so valid, then you still believe loose change is the vehicle of truth, apparently? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now