simba_
sucking a lemon
you didn't "debunk" anything you pasted definitions describing fat white men
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
LIVE: St Kilda v Western Bulldogs - 7:30PM Thu
Squiggle tips Saints at 51% chance -- What's your tip? -- Team line-ups »
this thread is just people arguing for the official story - "how could u fly a missile thru a public street?!?! wouldn't cameras pick it up?!?!" - like i said 10 pages ago you will all just go round in circles arguing about s**t you really have absolutely no idea about, pasting jpegs, citing fake reports until you stop being selfish and ignorant and realise what you think about a hole in a wall is nonsense and a waste of time and energy. you're defending false flag attacks for no reason other than you don't agree with how some poster is trying to talk to you about it. being selfish and ignorant will just keep a dumb discussion about hole sizes going. who gives a s**t what they used to destroy their buildings and people? the real question is why did they carry out this attack? and with everything going on in 2016 i can't see how you can't see who the big fat white problem is??
For the billionth time, I don't know 'who did it.' All considering, it doesn't matter which person gave the order. All that matters is why it happened and what's happened as a result.
It was needed to create a false fear that would justify war on 'terrorists' whereby any country could be invaded under the guise of 'a war on terror'.
I replied with this.../snip - the real question is why did they carry out this attack? and with everything going on in 2016 i can't see how you can't see who the big fat white problem is??
Then teach us.
I've said all along, when it comes to science, I'll stand by it. So the planes did hit the towers, and cause the collapse.
I don't know who was behind it all, because I cannot factually work it out.
So if you have some deep and solid understanding, share it with us.
Don't do what the bad conspiracy theorists always do, and say "dig deeper" or "look for yourself".
If you've got some kind of knowledge bomb, then drop that sucka.
there is no "knowledge bomb" that snaps you wide awake you have to find your own way. you just have to acknowledge that you know nothing in the grand scheme of things so you are open to new, previously considered ridiculous ideas. this mentality of "i need evidence" "show me the facts" "give me the documents" is mental, you will never ever get them, if you're wired that way you will never find the answer you want because you are looking for the answer that fits what you think. does that make sense? i don't know how not to sound like the idiot that's telling you you're wrong but can't tell you what's right. you cannot just be given documentation which disproves what you think because of other documentation you read which gave you the initial thought. i would just be open to the most whacky of theories and try and understand how someone could possibly get to those conclusions. it usually isn't as ridiculous as you first think.
Wait... what did you piece together if you didn't have isolated events?Thing which always bothers me about the debunkers is how they isolate events. This is the problem right here. I didn't want to believe 9/11 was an inside job, but researched it as there was too much speculation out there.
I didn't stop there though. I went on to research about
- the Fed Reserve (privately owned)
- the banking system including fractional reserve lending, IMF, ECB and a host of other World Banjs
- controllers of Media, who are they really?
- big Pharma.. Massive monopoly
- GM0's
- education system
- arms controllers (eg. IG Farben)
- researched history and war.
15 years of it post 9/11. I slowly started to piece the puzzles together. Does that make me a conspiracy theorist? I took the time to read and watch and join the dots. My collaboration of info over the years has come from many sources, yes You tube as well. It doesn't necessarily mean I believe everything I see.
Follow the money and you will get your answers. Don't isolate, as the elitist agendas are deep and detailed..
-
Follow the money and you will get your answers.
-
Thanks for sharing.i realised the things i liked as a kid were full of bs - music icons (nirvana, the rap game, MJ, elvis), sports icons (WWF, skateboarding, football), actors (everyone from jim carrey to the jackass crew), the video game industry. journalism, i used to want to be a writer but i realised quite young that was messy. these are all parts of the world stage, i began to think/see the things i directly cared about were full of s**t so i naturally explored outside that. i grew up in a religious family and always had the "obvious" questions with no answer. i never saw anything in politics, i've never been one of those people that just got behind a side in the spirit of competitiveness or something, i want to put myself not just vote behind it. that's basically what i hate most, politics, everything has the divide and conquer method attached to it and that's the pinnacle (or is that religion).
Thanks for sharing.
Sorry I wasn't clear, I meant more in terms of 911.
I think most people are disenfranchised with the world, and some from a young age.
It's completely understandable to have serious distrust for what is considered mainline thinking, if/when you go through a breakthrough of your beliefs.
But, that doesn't mean you should just latch on to and believe someone who you think is the same as you. You should always strive to continue to question everything.
After a while, you realise there is even more bullshit out there.
It's hard, because when you think you've finally caught onto something real and solid, you really don't want to let it go. So people questioning it, or providing evidence against it will feel like a personal attack.
You can become angry, because while you 'know' they're wrong, you can't verbalise how/why or explain how/why.
The more you invest into something, the deeper it becomes a core belief.
We are all guilty of it.
The trick is to just question everything, and do as much as you can to find the truth.
Like me, I'm asking everyone who says the answers are obvious, if they can show me... So then I can question it, and look into it for myself. I will either find they are correct or incorrect.
If it finally turns out they're correct, I'm sure it will frustrate me and cause denial for a while. But, I will come to accept it. Because I am seeking objective truths. Regardless of my beliefs.
Wow, you conspiracy theorists are a condescending bunch aren't you. Just because I don't buy into your views on 9/11 suddenly I'm living in a bubble without a clue, as opposed to yourselves who have "worked it all out".wow ok lol
you two st. kilda fans and others need to stop thinking within your little bubble, trying to match things with what you deem feasible, honestly that's the only way you're going to ever see beyond your limited imagination right now. hope you don't just think i'm some elitist shithole because i don't think i'm right i just know nobody gets anywhere by staying in their comfort zone (mentally). that's why there are hundreds of pages of bullshit in all these 'conspiracy' threads where people think the purpose is to 'debunk' stuff when it's actually to find the truth
Awesome ... The cycle continues.2.29sec of freefall...... building 7. thats all the evidence I need. The rest is just distractions.
Cool, also, can you tell me what the definition for apophenia is?a classic line was telling people to look up the definition of terrorism because it just screams at you right in the face: "the act of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims". always remembered it word for word.
now, when you google the meaning, it gives you something slightly different, to give the sheep some rubber bullets no doubt: "the unofficial or unauthorized use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims." if you look at the dictionary definition websites it doesn't feature those bullshit political words i bolded but the quick google answer does.
this is how the UN updated their definition of "terrorism" in 2004: "intended to cause death or serious bodily harm to civilians or non-combatants with the purpose of intimidating a population or compelling a government or an international organization to do or abstain from doing any act"
are you asleep or does that sound like the fat white man??
Nothing of the sort. He just used standard Conspiracy Tactics 101. Focus on a single controversial point and ignore everything else.nut just destroyed the thread/debate in 4 posts
Haha ... Yes I know. First time I'd even heard of those points.nut just destroyed the thread/debate in 4 posts
Haha ... Yes I know. First time I'd even heard of those points.
Wow, maybe there is something more to this conspiracy.
If only there was a massive thread that would address all of these claims...every two pages or so.