9/11 conspiracy theorists multiply

[SP33Demon]

I don't believe any conspiracies but I DO KNOW that explosives were used to bring down the WTC Towers. My dad is a physics teacher and shows this to his class as well:
Text

How the explosives got there, I don't know nor care but if you think that "frame was melted by fire" or "collapsed on its own" then you're a moron. The laws of Physics clearly show that it was impossible for the WTC to collapse that fast without explosives.

 

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: acemcmac
There is a very very plausable case for thermite in WTC 1, 2 and 7 and there were dozens of security cameras aimed at the pentigon that would have shown the impact and ended all of the cruise missile talk that the fed's are refusing to release (hotels, gas stations, etc).

These concerns are not baseless and the feds refusing to do anything to quell them only makes them look like they're really hiding something.

I love how people think that the Pentagon is surrounded by gas stations and hotels and all of those cameras are pointing at the Pentagon. Sorry, but I am sure the closest hotel is in Crystal City and I am sure it's cameras are more worried about it's own security rather than the Pentagon's.

As far as gas stations, I am not even sure where the closest one is, but probably in Crystal City also, surrounded by tall buildings and *NOT* worried about the Pentagon.

There is no proof that Thermite was used on the WTC.

Furthermore, the whole theory of a cruise missile is just stupid. Have people even thought of the type of impact a cruise missile makes? Cruise missiles are omni-directional, they not only below a massive hole in buildings, but it's more circular in shape. Furthermore, since it's omnidirectional, it makes a fricking crater. Lastly, the explosion would create a definite circular (or semi-circular) pattern where it exploded. NONE of this happened.

People say why aren't there outlines for the wings? Well crap, this isn't a cartoon. Airplane wings are nothing more than aluminum smacking up against a concrete-rebar building intended to survive explosions and fire. The most dense parts are the landing gear and engines, both of which would continue forward, and did, through the building, as we see from the pictures (arrow instead of hemisphere).

I swear, conspiracy theorists are the biggest morons on the face of the planet.

 

[SarcasticDwarf]

Originally posted by: DonVito

Originally posted by: SarcasticDwarf

The right to freedom of speech also grants me the right to say STFU. Oh, and stop using your veteran status to put yourself on the moral high ground.

As I said, I don't support the conspiracy theories, but I think it's absolutely critical that people are free to discuss these issues without mockery. The only reason people are so afraid of these discussions, IMO, is that they the very idea they might be true makes people very very uncomfortable. This is the same reason people are so censorious of the idea of a conspiracy in the JFK assassination, in spite of the fact there is such persuasive evidence to support it. The voices shouting "STFU" are, IMO, cowardly and sad, and you fit squarely into that category, along with many others in this thread.

It's disappointing so many Americans are afraid to think for themselves, and are so insecure about even entertaining dissenting ideas. We have fallen very far in that respect, since the days of the founding fathers.

I do not deny people the right to say whatever the want. At the same time, I have the right to call these nutcases complete morons, and that is what I am doing. Heck, I admit there is a possiblity that they are right, but if that is the case, all the "evidence" being presented is still BS. I have looked at it, and the vast majority of it is either lies, misinterpretations, and misquotes. It is not the fact that it might be true that discomforts me, it is the fact that evidence that is clearly bullshit is being presented as fact. For that, I will say STFU.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: AMDZen

Actually, the whole JFK thing has finally been proven. The single bullet theory is 100% true. This was done by taking the square in which it happened, exactly as it was then, and recreating it EXACTLY as a computer model. Putting the loan gunman in the exact window he was in, having the bullet fired at the car exactly where it happened (using the video footage we do have) and proving once and for a all that it was ONE bullet and ONE person.

Regardless, as I said - I agree with you. But saying that people should be able to discuss anything without mockery is foolish. I can only imagine your age, and the wisdom that should of come with it - but frankly, your making an entirely illogical argument - for what seems to me any way, to be only for the sake of arguing or seeing yourself type. PEOPLE WILL HAVE OPINIONS ON BOTH SIDES OF EVERY ISSUE. And my right to call these people whateverthehell I want to call them is just as important as their right to show how utterly retarded they are

I stand by what I said before - I see you and others who marginalize others for their views on 9/11 as cowards. Many of my friends and I have served in combat zones since 9/11 (actually I was sent to a classified location in the Middle East on 9/28/01, on one day's notice, in support of OEF) to ensure that all Americans retain the rights granted them under the Constitution. That said, many, even most Americans are so afraid that they are happy to surrender these rights because true free speech makes them uncomfortable.

I understand your point that there's a difference between informally quashing free speech by saying "STFU," and enacting legislation prohibiting free speech, but the effect is essentially the same - you want to eliminate public dissent from the party line. As I said, I think your rhetoric along these lines is weak, as is the rationale behind it.

As long as we're going down the road of being personally insulting (something you elected to start), I take it from your childishly poor spelling that you are either very young or lack formal education or both. This may have something to do with your inability to tolerate and digest views different from your own. I think there is literally nothing more important to the preservation of American values than dissent, and in the immortal words of President Bush, I say "bring it on!"

 

[AMDZen]

Originally posted by: SP33Demon
I don't believe any conspiracies but I DO KNOW that explosives were used to bring down the WTC Towers. My dad is a physics teacher and shows this to his class as well:
Text

How the explosives got there, I don't know nor care but if you think that "frame was melted by fire" or "collapsed on its own" then you're a moron.

So we have fvcking retard #2 and #3 now. But I guess one was bred from the other, so we'll just count them as one.

The fact is, physics can only be applied to structural engineering. It doesn't make an expert of physics an expert of structural engineering. What grade, class, and school does your dad teach any way? There is a huge difference between say a 7th grade physics teacher and a theoretical Physics professor at MIT. Maybe you can provide your dad with more credibility - but I doubt it

 

[K1052]

Originally posted by: SP33Demon
I don't believe any conspiracies but I DO KNOW that explosives were used to bring down the WTC Towers. My dad is a physics teacher and shows this to his class as well:
Text

How the explosives got there, I don't know nor care but if you think that "frame was melted by fire" then you're a moron.

The structure wasn't really melted, just heated unevenly (causing tensions the members wern't designed for) and weakened by the heat. That combined with the damage done by the impacts overloaded the remaing structure. The building wasn't a traditional steel frame skyscraper.

The chief structural engineer for WTC1/WTC2 has been on the news, Nova, and the Discovery Channel to exlpain it. If he accepts that as enough than it is hard to argue with him IMO.

 

[Al Neri]

Originally posted by: lokiju
Polls are useless sources for factual data.

86% of people know that.

 

[mwtgg]

Originally posted by: SP33Demon
I don't believe any conspiracies but I DO KNOW that explosives were used to bring down the WTC Towers. My dad is a physics teacher and shows this to his class as well:
Text

How the explosives got there, I don't know nor care but if you think that "frame was melted by fire" or "collapsed on its own" then you're a moron. The laws of Physics clearly show that it was impossible for the WTC to collapse that fast without explosives.

First GM foods, now this? Wow. You really believe every conspiracy you read.

 

[SP33Demon]

Originally posted by: AMDZen

Originally posted by: SP33Demon
I don't believe any conspiracies but I DO KNOW that explosives were used to bring down the WTC Towers. My dad is a physics teacher and shows this to his class as well:
Text

How the explosives got there, I don't know nor care but if you think that "frame was melted by fire" or "collapsed on its own" then you're a moron.

So we have fvcking retard #2 and #3 now. But I guess one was bred from the other, so we'll just count them as one.

The fact is, physics can only be applied to structural engineering. It doesn't make an expert of physics an expert of structural engineering. What grade, class, and school does your dad teach any way? There is a huge difference between say a 7th grade physics teacher and a theoretical Physics professor at MIT. Maybe you can provide your dad with more credibility - but I doubt it

He teaches physics at a community college in the summer and 12th grade during the schoolyear, who really cares? The fact of the matter is that 94 floors fell as FAST AS A ROCK (8.4 seconds) would fall through thin air. The laws of Physics will not allow 94 floors of a building to fall on top of each other as fast a rock in thin air unless explosives were involved. If you believe anything otherwise then you are a naive moron and need to take a high school physics class.

 

[AMDZen]

Originally posted by: DonVito

Originally posted by: AMDZen

Actually, the whole JFK thing has finally been proven. The single bullet theory is 100% true. This was done by taking the square in which it happened, exactly as it was then, and recreating it EXACTLY as a computer model. Putting the loan gunman in the exact window he was in, having the bullet fired at the car exactly where it happened (using the video footage we do have) and proving once and for a all that it was ONE bullet and ONE person.

Regardless, as I said - I agree with you. But saying that people should be able to discuss anything without mockery is foolish. I can only imagine your age, and the wisdom that should of come with it - but frankly, your making an entirely illogical argument - for what seems to me any way, to be only for the sake of arguing or seeing yourself type. PEOPLE WILL HAVE OPINIONS ON BOTH SIDES OF EVERY ISSUE. And my right to call these people whateverthehell I want to call them is just as important as their right to show how utterly retarded they are

I stand by what I said before - I see you and others who marginalize others for their views on 9/11 as cowards. Many of my friends and I have served in combat zones since 9/11 (actually I was sent to a classified location in the Middle East on 9/28/01, on one day's notice, in support of OEF) to ensure that all Americans retain the rights granted them under the Constitution. That said, many, even most Americans are so afraid that they are happy to surrender these rights because true free speech makes them uncomfortable.

I understand your point that there's a difference between informally quashing free speech by saying "STFU," and enacting legislation prohibiting free speech, but the effect is essentially the same - you want to eliminate public dissent from the party line. As I said, I think your rhetoric along these lines is weak, as is the rationale behind it.

As long as we're going down the road of being personally insulting (something you elected to start), I take it from your childishly poor spelling that you are either very young or lack formal education or both. This may have something to do with your inability to tolerate and digest views different from your own. I think there is literally nothing more important to the preservation of American values than dissent, and in the immortal words of President Bush, I say "bring it on!"

I'd rather be young, poor at spelling (which I am) and even if I did lack formal education (which I don't) have a decent amount of time to make up for that - then be an old delusional douche bag that places himself and his opinin on moral high ground because he thinks he served his country. I don't care what you've done, or how you think that makes your opinion more viable then mine.

The fact that you honestly believe someone like me, telling others to STFU, is somehow essentially the same as me voting to eliminate rights for others to say what they like, shows your lack of wisdom. If you haven't gained such wisdom by now, then chances are you won't.

 

[SP33Demon]

Originally posted by: mwtgg

Originally posted by: SP33Demon
I don't believe any conspiracies but I DO KNOW that explosives were used to bring down the WTC Towers. My dad is a physics teacher and shows this to his class as well:
Text

How the explosives got there, I don't know nor care but if you think that "frame was melted by fire" or "collapsed on its own" then you're a moron. The laws of Physics clearly show that it was impossible for the WTC to collapse that fast without explosives.

First GM foods, now this? Wow. You really believe every conspiracy you read.

It seems that the RoundUp you ingested last night is affecting your cognitive ability. I suggest trying a meal from Whole Foods before you completely transform from 50-100% dumbass.

 

[SarcasticDwarf]

Originally posted by: DonVito

Originally posted by: AMDZen

Actually, the whole JFK thing has finally been proven. The single bullet theory is 100% true. This was done by taking the square in which it happened, exactly as it was then, and recreating it EXACTLY as a computer model. Putting the loan gunman in the exact window he was in, having the bullet fired at the car exactly where it happened (using the video footage we do have) and proving once and for a all that it was ONE bullet and ONE person.

Regardless, as I said - I agree with you. But saying that people should be able to discuss anything without mockery is foolish. I can only imagine your age, and the wisdom that should of come with it - but frankly, your making an entirely illogical argument - for what seems to me any way, to be only for the sake of arguing or seeing yourself type. PEOPLE WILL HAVE OPINIONS ON BOTH SIDES OF EVERY ISSUE. And my right to call these people whateverthehell I want to call them is just as important as their right to show how utterly retarded they are

I understand your point that there's a difference between informally quashing free speech by saying "STFU," and enacting legislation prohibiting free speech, but the effect is essentially the same - you want to eliminate public dissent from the party line. As I said, I think your rhetoric along these lines is weak, as is the rationale behind it.

No, you clearly do not. Your statements support restrictions on free speech. You are saying we should not publicly criticise those that voice their opinions on matters because it quashes free speech. At the same time, your statements do the exact same thing. In effect, you are encouraging the limiting of rights to free speech.

 

[mwtgg]

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: mwtgg

Originally posted by: SP33Demon
I don't believe any conspiracies but I DO KNOW that explosives were used to bring down the WTC Towers. My dad is a physics teacher and shows this to his class as well:
Text

How the explosives got there, I don't know nor care but if you think that "frame was melted by fire" or "collapsed on its own" then you're a moron. The laws of Physics clearly show that it was impossible for the WTC to collapse that fast without explosives.

First GM foods, now this? Wow. You really believe every conspiracy you read.

It seems that the RoundUp you ingested last night is affecting your cognitive ability. I suggest trying a meal from Whole Foods before you completely transform from 50-100% dumbass.

Yes, wasting money on FUD makes me feel good about myself, just as believing any counter-govt theory makes you feel good. Besides, I have eaten organic food before, and it's not all that, but that isn't for this thread.

 

[IceBergSLiM]

the extent at which 9/11 was previously known about to the govt and the extent of their involvement before and after is irrelevant.

what is relevant is that we are not being told the whole truth. conspiracies are as much half truths as the crap we are fed from fox news and company.

I think that is the message these polls are really showing. Skepticism of what the official story is. including root causes, how it was carried out and the aftermath.

 

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: SP33Demon
I don't believe any conspiracies but I DO KNOW that explosives were used to bring down the WTC Towers. My dad is a physics teacher and shows this to his class as well:
Text

How the explosives got there, I don't know nor care but if you think that "frame was melted by fire" or "collapsed on its own" then you're a moron. The laws of Physics clearly show that it was impossible for the WTC to collapse that fast without explosives.

Sigh, this is why I weep for our country's future, stupid teachers. If smarter people were incentivized to teach by higher wages, then we wouldn't have this problem.


1. The fire on the WTC was much different than a regular building fire. The jet fuel, which traveled through the core (which was hallow with elevator shafts and such) going to other floors, you didn't see the smoke because the windows were closed.

2. Impacts from the jet probably blew off weak fire resistant material from the structural beams.

3. The WTC wasn't designed like that Spain building. Why? Because they wanted to maximize the floorspace, so they removed almost all of the floor structures. Instead of building a floor-beam, verticle-beam type structure like a traditional building, the WTC was built using tubes on the exterior which were verticle members holding the vast majority of the weight of the building.

Furthermore, these tubes had smaller members connecting them to the core. The core did not bear most of the weight of the building, the steel tubes did. This is why the floors could pancake easily.

4. The weight of the floors above the building and the hallow core allowed high pressure air to travel down ward, exploding out the windows. Either that or the windows were already opened by people, whether they jumped (and many did) or not.

5. If there were explosions, why didn't we see a lot of dust jets? Why not more windows exploding outwards?

How is logic so hard for people to get?

 

[SP33Demon]

Originally posted by: K1052

Originally posted by: SP33Demon
I don't believe any conspiracies but I DO KNOW that explosives were used to bring down the WTC Towers. My dad is a physics teacher and shows this to his class as well:
Text

How the explosives got there, I don't know nor care but if you think that "frame was melted by fire" then you're a moron.

The structure wasn't really melted, just heated unevenly (causing tensions the members wern't designed for) and weakened by the heat. That combined with the damage done by the impacts overloaded the remaing structure. The building wasn't a traditional steel frame skyscraper.

The chief structural engineer for WTC1/WTC2 has been on the news, Nova, and the Discovery Channel to exlpain it. If he accepts that as enough than it is hard to argue with him IMO.

It's still impossible for a building that large to collapse in 8.4 seconds, the time it would take a free falling object to drop unless each and every floor had their joints simultaneously destroyed. Some energy is absorbed as each floor crashes into the next, it's literally impossible without explosives. But the structural engineer didn't have an explanation for that, did he?

 

[AMDZen]

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: AMDZen

Originally posted by: SP33Demon
I don't believe any conspiracies but I DO KNOW that explosives were used to bring down the WTC Towers. My dad is a physics teacher and shows this to his class as well:
Text

How the explosives got there, I don't know nor care but if you think that "frame was melted by fire" or "collapsed on its own" then you're a moron.

So we have fvcking retard #2 and #3 now. But I guess one was bred from the other, so we'll just count them as one.

The fact is, physics can only be applied to structural engineering. It doesn't make an expert of physics an expert of structural engineering. What grade, class, and school does your dad teach any way? There is a huge difference between say a 7th grade physics teacher and a theoretical Physics professor at MIT. Maybe you can provide your dad with more credibility - but I doubt it

He teaches physics at a community college in the summer and 12th grade during the schoolyear, who really cares? The fact of the matter is that 94 floors fell as FAST AS A ROCK (8.4 seconds) would fall through thin air. The laws of Physics will not allow 94 floors of a building to fall on top of each other as fast a rock in thin air unless explosives were involved. If you believe anything otherwise then you are a naive moron and need to take a high school physics class.

How about you post one qualified person who believes what you just said. I've already given a much more credible source, as the person who posted right above you did. I love how you believe your dad over the man who actually built the buildings. And somehow I'm a niave moron.

And as to why I asked what grade, class and school your dad teaches in/at is because thats relevant to my argument. If you can't figure that out, then once again I ask - who is the real moron here.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: AMDZen

I'd rather be young, poor at spelling (which I am) and even if I did lack formal education (which I don't) have a decent amount of time to make up for that - then be an old delusional douche bag that places himself and his opinin on moral high ground because he thinks he served his country. I don't care what you've done, or how you think that makes your opinion more viable then mine.

The fact that you honestly believe someone like me, telling others to STFU, is somehow essentially the same as me voting to eliminate rights for others to say what they like, shows your lack of wisdom. If you haven't gained such wisdom by now, then chances are you won't.

BWAHAHAHAHA!!! This "old delusional douche bag" (I guess 35 is ancient to some) never said your comments were the same as "voting to eliminate rights for others to say what they like" (not to mention that you wouldn't have any right to vote to enact federal legislation), just that I think it has the same chilling effect on free speech. You can impugn me all you want - from what I've seen you're nothing more than a moral coward. I only wish this country were not so full of people like you.

 

[SP33Demon]

Originally posted by: mwtgg

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: mwtgg

Originally posted by: SP33Demon
I don't believe any conspiracies but I DO KNOW that explosives were used to bring down the WTC Towers. My dad is a physics teacher and shows this to his class as well:
Text

How the explosives got there, I don't know nor care but if you think that "frame was melted by fire" or "collapsed on its own" then you're a moron. The laws of Physics clearly show that it was impossible for the WTC to collapse that fast without explosives.

First GM foods, now this? Wow. You really believe every conspiracy you read.

It seems that the RoundUp you ingested last night is affecting your cognitive ability. I suggest trying a meal from Whole Foods before you completely transform from 50-100% dumbass.

Yes, wasting money on FUD makes me feel good about myself, just as believing any counter-govt theory makes you feel good. Besides, I have eaten organic food before, and it's not all that, but that isn't for this thread.

I never said the government was behind the explosives, but someone was. I could give two shts about who put them there, the fact of the matter is that it was a tragedy and all of the victims will be remembered for their courage.

 

[BrokenVisage]

Originally posted by: DonVito

Originally posted by: AMDZen

Actually, the whole JFK thing has finally been proven. The single bullet theory is 100% true. This was done by taking the square in which it happened, exactly as it was then, and recreating it EXACTLY as a computer model. Putting the loan gunman in the exact window he was in, having the bullet fired at the car exactly where it happened (using the video footage we do have) and proving once and for a all that it was ONE bullet and ONE person.

Regardless, as I said - I agree with you. But saying that people should be able to discuss anything without mockery is foolish. I can only imagine your age, and the wisdom that should of come with it - but frankly, your making an entirely illogical argument - for what seems to me any way, to be only for the sake of arguing or seeing yourself type. PEOPLE WILL HAVE OPINIONS ON BOTH SIDES OF EVERY ISSUE. And my right to call these people whateverthehell I want to call them is just as important as their right to show how utterly retarded they are

I stand by what I said before - I see you and others who marginalize others for their views on 9/11 as cowards. Many of my friends and I have served in combat zones since 9/11 (actually I was sent to a classified location in the Middle East on 9/28/01, on one day's notice, in support of OEF) to ensure that all Americans retain the rights granted them under the Constitution. That said, many, even most Americans are so afraid that they are happy to surrender these rights because true free speech makes them uncomfortable.

I understand your point that there's a difference between informally quashing free speech by saying "STFU," and enacting legislation prohibiting free speech, but the effect is essentially the same - you want to eliminate public dissent from the party line. As I said, I think your rhetoric along these lines is weak, as is the rationale behind it.

As long as we're going down the road of being personally insulting (something you elected to start), I take it from your childishly poor spelling that you are either very young or lack formal education or both. This may have something to do with your inability to tolerate and digest views different from your own. I think there is literally nothing more important to the preservation of American values than dissent, and in the immortal words of President Bush, I say "bring it on!"

Well said, this guy definately needs to remove whatever foreign object is lodged up his ass and listen to the other side for once, not to mention other members who have their hands over their eyes whenever they're not using them to type. I gave up trying to explain the possibility of a 9/11 conspiracy to the computer nerd populace on this forum a long time ago, it's counterproductive as most are set in their ways no matter what and think disproving the conspiracy is best done by flaming and providing no evidence to their claim, just stating what they believe in their own little minds. How about some of you start defending the 9/11 Commission if you don't think there's a conspiracy, some of you think debunking the conspiracies will prove there was no government complicity, but that book doesn't come close to proving it was solely Al-Qaeda either.

And ROFL at a computer simulation proving the magic bullet theory, if you honestly believe Lee Harvey was the only one involved then you are beyond helping, keep watching History channel and believing what you will though, 2/3rd's of the country isn't with you on that issue.

Well that's it for me, time for Number1 and 91TTZ to debunk every conspiracy there is with their tinfoil posts! Troll away gentalmen!

 

[SP33Demon]

Originally posted by: AMDZen

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: AMDZen

Originally posted by: SP33Demon
I don't believe any conspiracies but I DO KNOW that explosives were used to bring down the WTC Towers. My dad is a physics teacher and shows this to his class as well:
Text

How the explosives got there, I don't know nor care but if you think that "frame was melted by fire" or "collapsed on its own" then you're a moron.

So we have fvcking retard #2 and #3 now. But I guess one was bred from the other, so we'll just count them as one.

The fact is, physics can only be applied to structural engineering. It doesn't make an expert of physics an expert of structural engineering. What grade, class, and school does your dad teach any way? There is a huge difference between say a 7th grade physics teacher and a theoretical Physics professor at MIT. Maybe you can provide your dad with more credibility - but I doubt it

He teaches physics at a community college in the summer and 12th grade during the schoolyear, who really cares? The fact of the matter is that 94 floors fell as FAST AS A ROCK (8.4 seconds) would fall through thin air. The laws of Physics will not allow 94 floors of a building to fall on top of each other as fast a rock in thin air unless explosives were involved. If you believe anything otherwise then you are a naive moron and need to take a high school physics class.

How about you post one qualified person who believes what you just said. I've already given a much more credible source, as the person who posted right above you did. I love how you believe your dad over the man who actually built the buildings. And someone I'm a niave moron.

And as to why I asked what grade, class and school your dad teaches in/at is because thats relevant to my argument. If you can't figure that out, then once again I ask - who is the real moron here.

You still never addressed the original argument: How is it possible for 94 floors to fall into each other as fast as a free falling object without explosives? Take a physics class please, then post again.

 

[SarcasticDwarf]

Originally posted by: BrokenVisage

Originally posted by: DonVito

Originally posted by: AMDZen

Actually, the whole JFK thing has finally been proven. The single bullet theory is 100% true. This was done by taking the square in which it happened, exactly as it was then, and recreating it EXACTLY as a computer model. Putting the loan gunman in the exact window he was in, having the bullet fired at the car exactly where it happened (using the video footage we do have) and proving once and for a all that it was ONE bullet and ONE person.

Regardless, as I said - I agree with you. But saying that people should be able to discuss anything without mockery is foolish. I can only imagine your age, and the wisdom that should of come with it - but frankly, your making an entirely illogical argument - for what seems to me any way, to be only for the sake of arguing or seeing yourself type. PEOPLE WILL HAVE OPINIONS ON BOTH SIDES OF EVERY ISSUE. And my right to call these people whateverthehell I want to call them is just as important as their right to show how utterly retarded they are

I stand by what I said before - I see you and others who marginalize others for their views on 9/11 as cowards. Many of my friends and I have served in combat zones since 9/11 (actually I was sent to a classified location in the Middle East on 9/28/01, on one day's notice, in support of OEF) to ensure that all Americans retain the rights granted them under the Constitution. That said, many, even most Americans are so afraid that they are happy to surrender these rights because true free speech makes them uncomfortable.

I understand your point that there's a difference between informally quashing free speech by saying "STFU," and enacting legislation prohibiting free speech, but the effect is essentially the same - you want to eliminate public dissent from the party line. As I said, I think your rhetoric along these lines is weak, as is the rationale behind it.

As long as we're going down the road of being personally insulting (something you elected to start), I take it from your childishly poor spelling that you are either very young or lack formal education or both. This may have something to do with your inability to tolerate and digest views different from your own. I think there is literally nothing more important to the preservation of American values than dissent, and in the immortal words of President Bush, I say "bring it on!"

How about some of you start defending the 9/11 Commission if you don't think there's a conspiracy, some of you think debunking the conspiracies will prove there was no government complicity, but that book doesn't come close to proving it was solely Al-Qaeda either.

Um, you do realize that it is much harder to prove a truth (technically impossible).

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: SarcasticDwarf

No, you clearly do not. Your statements support restrictions on free speech. You are saying we should not publicly criticise those that voice their opinions on matters because it quashes free speech. At the same time, your statements do the exact same thing. In effect, you are encouraging the limiting of rights to free speech.

As I think anyone with a brain can see, there's a difference between speech that advocates a particular position (whether that position is something laudable, like suffrage, or something contemptible, like white supremacy), and speech that is intended only to limit it by saying "STFU." Obviously I'm not saying you shouldn't be allowed to say "STFU," just that I think it's antithetical to the notion of free speech.

 

[Platypus]

P&N is that way..

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: Platypus
P&N is that way..

You make a legitimate point.