Originally posted by Major Tarantino > Originally posted by Clockwork C> > Just for the record: > > Moore is a charlatan
No wonder their latest album is crap 
Dates
· UTC
Christopher Hitchens kicks Jabba The Movie Maker right square in the balls :rofl:
Archived49 replies · 920 views
This is an archived legacy thread. Replies are closed, but the discussion is preserved.
← Back to Behind Closed Doors
Showing posts 31–50 of 50
↑ First post
Latest post ↓
Originally posted by Major Tarantino > Originally posted by Clockwork C> > Just for the record: > > Moore is a charlatan
No wonder their latest album is crap
Originally posted by Major Tarantino > Originally posted by Clockwork C> > Just for the record: > > Moore is a charlatan
No wonder their latest album is crap
It's the joke that's crap, not the Charlies.
No, all of you are right.
I apologize.
110 floors within 10 seconds. I was so dumb to believe otherwise. Without help from any kind of explosives they fell.
They fell harder and faster than gravity. I'm the crazy one.
Who's the demolition expert?
Also, if you ever talk to an actual airlines pilot, ask them if they think they can guide massive airplanes into buildings without a vector, without a beacon.
From 30,000 feet that's hard enough...
yeah...you are correct....Dubya put the planes in the buildings, via remote control...I stand corrected...
and the CIA and FBI and ATF placed explosives throughout the building...
Osama is just a patsy...
forgive me?!?!?!
Originally posted by Milb Stiktengorbsmantennderwer No, all of you are right.I apologize.110 floors within 10 seconds. I was so dumb to believe otherwise. Without help from any kind of explosives they fell.They fell harder and faster than gravity. I'm the crazy one. Who's the demolition expert?Also, if you ever talk to an actual airlines pilot, ask them if they think they can guide massive airplanes into buildings without a vector, without a beacon. From 30,000 feet that's hard enough...
as far as falling 'faster than gravity': are you saying that with explosives they would have fallen 'harder and faster' than gravity? isn't that a physical impossibility? how does that happen at all, with or without explosives? they collapsed from the weight of what was falling from above. no real surprise there.
and as for guiding massive airplanes into buildings: even the cockpits of the single-engine cessnas i've ridden in, which don't even have advanced navigational systems, have enough to keep a plane on course and straight. if you can put one of those (with very basic navigational systems) into a building (which has happened numerous times), you can certainly crash an airliner equipped with advanced navigational equipment into a skyscraper!
How does anything fall faster than gravity?
As I said, talk to any PILOT of a large aircraft and ask them what the difference is between flying a twin engine cessna and a large passenger aircraft.
List for me the times that a large aircraft has flown into a steel structure and brought it down.
You know what? I love John Kerry! He is really going to make a difference! He's in the same Skull and Bones group that Bush is in, so I believe in him wholeheartedly! You guys are so right!
Do you really think that Bush vs. Kerry is going to make a difference? Can't you see that as Shakespeare said "All the world's a stage?" LOOK! They are GLOBALISTS! They want to control the entire WORLD! Did you not see that Edwards was chosen at a BILDERBERG meeting by Kerry? Wake up! Don't you know that after Iraq, Iran is on the list. Then Syria. Then a list of dozens of countries!
You are just not aware. I can confidentally stand by myself and tell you true things that are stranger than fiction on an hourly basis.
Break your conditioning. Just because you studied terrorism at a Military-Industrial-Complex school doesn't mean that you can't realize the truth.
If you go to the websites I provided, you'll see that Alex Jones was saying on his show months before 9/11 that the government was going to bomb NYC and blame it on Bin-Laden. How else are you going to explain the "put options" placed on September 10th that track back to the CIA? How are you to explain that Willie Brown, Rushdie, etc. were forewarned not to travel on September 11th? How are you going to say that the reports weren't feeding the Military-Industrial-Complex? Brown and Root, Wackenhut, Dyncorps, HALLIBURTON?
Someone like Michael Moore gets a forum to talk about the tragedy on 9/11 because he blames the "right" and provides an answer on the left. He makes the right look like idiots and tries to say that they're just stupid, which feigns any responsibility from them. They knew what was going on and should be held accountable.
It's about drug trafficking and elite narcotics, weapons sales, and oil. That fuels the war machine. Meanwhile, our sons and daughters are dying for a common cause. While your Patriot Act harnesses all the political dissidents and rounds them up to put them in jail.
We are being enslaved-systematically. Join the cause. It's 1776 all over again.
Originally posted by Milb Stiktengorbsmantennderwer How does anything fall faster than gravity?As I said, talk to any PILOT of a large aircraft and ask them what the difference is between flying a twin engine cessna and a large passenger aircraft.List for me the times that a large aircraft has flown into a steel structure and brought it down. You know what? I love John Kerry! He is really going to make a difference! He's in the same Skull and Bones group that Bush is in, so I believe in him wholeheartedly! You guys are so right!Do you really think that Bush vs. Kerry is going to make a difference? Can't you see that as Shakespeare said "All the world's a stage?" LOOK! They are GLOBALISTS! They want to control the entire WORLD! Did you not see that Edwards was chosen at a BILDERBERG meeting by Kerry? Wake up! Don't you know that after Iraq, Iran is on the list. Then Syria. Then a list of dozens of countries!You are just not aware. I can confidentally stand by myself and tell you true things that are stranger than fiction on an hourly basis. Break your conditioning. Just because you studied terrorism at a Military-Industrial-Complex school doesn't mean that you can't realize the truth.If you go to the websites I provided, you'll see that Alex Jones was saying on his show months before 9/11 that the government was going to bomb NYC and blame it on Bin-Laden. How else are you going to explain the "put options" placed on September 10th that track back to the CIA? How are you to explain that Willie Brown, Rushdie, etc. were forewarned not to travel on September 11th? How are you going to say that the reports weren't feeding the Military-Industrial-Complex? Brown and Root, Wackenhut, Dyncorps, HALLIBURTON?Someone like Michael Moore gets a forum to talk about the tragedy on 9/11 because he blames the "right" and provides an answer on the left. He makes the right look like idiots and tries to say that they're just stupid, which feigns any responsibility from them. They knew what was going on and should be held accountable. It's about drug trafficking and elite narcotics, weapons sales, and oil. That fuels the war machine. Meanwhile, our sons and daughters are dying for a common cause. While your Patriot Act harnesses all the political dissidents and rounds them up to put them in jail. We are being enslaved-systematically. Join the cause. It's 1776 all over again.
i wrote this long response and lost it, and i don't feel like re-typing it but here's the jist of what i was saying.
about gravity: that was my point.... you were the one who said they were falling 'faster than gravity.' which is impossible.
about me going to a 'military-industrial complex school': using cliches like these is getting rather dull and boring. you sound like a mouthpiece for someone else. it seems like you're reading from a script when you throw out phrases like this ad nauseam. it's like when you disagree with a person about race relations and they resort to calling you a racist because it's easier to attack you than to come up with a valid argument for their point of view; or without even knowing what your views are in the first place. it makes them sound dull and trite, not to mention a bit closed-minded. you're so beholden to these websites of yours that you've shut yourself off from looking elsewhere, from looking at the facts, considering alternate viewpoints, and then making decisions for yourself. you can't seem to realize that i do think for myself, even though i might think differently from you. it's called free will. perhaps you'll discover it sometime and break away from the party line (in your case those sites you're so addicted to). you don't know where i get my information from--you assume i watch CNN or read the new york times. i don't. you sound like something out of 1984 with this talk of 'conditioning' and such....scary stuff.
as for talk of the government bombing NYC before 9/11--my terrorism class was wondering (in 1998) why no one had put a plane into the twin towers as they were such a perfect target. 9/11 was no surprise; if this alex jones guy had said that martians were going to bomb NYC and blame it on bin laden, he would've been right about the bombing part, regardless. he simply chose a different attacker, that's all.
p.s. if you feel so strongly about this topic, step up to the plate and tell us about yourself. come clean and come out of hiding!
You know, as a Canadian outsider, I've always shown great interest for american politics (mainly because of my background in political science), and this is why I've listened to the entire Bill Clinton and John Kerry speeches last week.
There are a few questions that I would like my friends from the South to answer because I just don't understand these following things, coming from the country who built itself on liberty, freedom, human rights, etc. :
- Why does the military imagery, now in 2004, is still so important to Americans? Why do we have a person who wants to be president who starts his speech with "My name is John Kerry and I am reporting for duty" ??? I know this was to give the tone of the speech considering the need for Kerry to raise his credibility regarding his ability to manage the country when it comes to military action, but how can you conciliate this with the need to improve the United States image as a peaceful country? Why referring to the "Commander in Chief" (even if the President is, by default), and not just to the President?
Do you ever see Queen Elizabeth referring to herself as Commander in Chief? Does Jacques Chirac ever says something like that? Or any other peaceful country in the world? No, because this is MILITARY vocabulary, and it refers to military action.
So please explain that to me.
- Why is it so wrong for an American to be labelled a "Liberal" ??? As far as I know, the 18th century theorists such as Locke, Montesquieu and later Rousseau, who basically wrote what later became the basic philosphy behind the the idea of the French Republic AND the United States of America (Liberty, Equality, Fraternity, etc.) were all part of a liberal movement. The word itself comes from the french word "libre" or "liberté" which, of course, means "liberty" or "freedom" and is the essence of the Constitution of the United States.
SO WHAT IS WRONG WITH BEING A LIBERAL THESE DAYS IN AMERICA ?
Please explain that to me.
These are the only two things that I don't like about the Democrats right now because, of course, if I were American, I'd be voting for Kerry right away if I could, just like basically anyone else in the rest of the free World.
:\ohwell:
seb:
i think the democrats have gone overboard in their military imagery, as well, but my take on it is that he was poking fun at the fact that george bush didn't go to vietnam and didn't complete his reserve training in the states either while he, john kerry, served his tour of duty. in other words: the republicans gave bill clinton such a hard time for not serving in vietnam while their own boy, bush, got out of serving in his own way himself.
second: lord if i know what's wrong with being called a liberal--i consider it a compliment! you're spot on about locke, montesquieu and rousseau, and concepts such as social security and integration are liberal ideas; we live in a liberal democracy. conservatives are always confusing the terms 'liberal' and 'left-wing,' even going as far as labeling people 'liberal left-wingers,' (as one conservative columnist did) which doesn't make any semantic or historical sense, but there you go.
You are still very much in the left/right paradigm when the debate team is controlling both. Why don't you contact me at my e-mail address that I gave you and I'll start giving you video evidence about the New World Order. You can start downloading from me immediately. I don't have anything against you personally. You think that I am being McDermott-ish on you, but I just want you to see the truth. Contact me on my e-mail. I have all of this video footage for you, dahling.
Give me the AgentWood sass down and I'll give you all of the files. I'm sorry if I seem blunt, but c'mon!
I've been reading up on this stuff for more than five years.
That's before 9/11. That's the evidence that the FEDS and FEMA and stormtrooper control teams are coming forth to control you and your friends. That's when they plant the boots on your face and you'll accept it.
I want to give you all of these films to download. I have been giving them to people across the world. I know that you are conditioned to make all of that "the news".
I think you are very intelligent. I always read your posts and I always like them. But, I think that you should contact me so I can give you files so that you can download them.
Start downloading these files from me. These videos are going to change your mind, no doubt.
Bye.
®?é]Originally posted by Milb Stiktengorbsmantennderwer You are still very much in the left/right paradigm when the debate team is controlling both. Why don't you contact me at my e-mail address that I gave you and I'll start giving you video evidence about the New World Order. You can start downloading from me immediately. I don't have anything against you personally. You think that I am being McDermott-ish on you, but I just want you to see the truth. Contact me on my e-mail. I have all of this video footage for you, dahling.Give me the AgentWood sass down and I'll give you all of the files. I'm sorry if I seem blunt, but c'mon!I've been reading up on this stuff for more than five years. That's before 9/11. That's the evidence that the FEDS and FEMA and stormtrooper control teams are coming forth to control you and your friends. That's when they plant the boots on your face and you'll accept it. I want to give you all of these films to download. I have been giving them to people across the world. I know that you are conditioned to make all of that "the news".I think you are very intelligent. I always read your posts and I always like them. But, I think that you should contact me so I can give you files so that you can download them.Start downloading these files from me. These videos are going to change your mind, no doubt.Bye.
McDermott-ish???? I would find a brief explanation of what being "McDermott-ish" is very enlightening.
Just who are all the protesters and dissenters that have tossed in the slam via the Patriot Act?
Originally posted by AgentWood seb:i think the democrats have gone overboard in their military imagery, as well, but my take on it is that he was poking fun at the fact that george bush didn't go to vietnam and didn't complete his reserve training in the states either while he, john kerry, served his tour of duty. in other words: the republicans gave bill clinton such a hard time for not serving in vietnam while their own boy, bush, got out of serving in his own way himself.second: lord if i know what's wrong with being called a liberal--i consider it a compliment! you're spot on about locke, montesquieu and rousseau, and concepts such as social security and integration are liberal ideas; we live in a liberal democracy. conservatives are always confusing the terms 'liberal' and 'left-wing,' even going as far as labeling people 'liberal left-wingers,' (as one conservative columnist did) which doesn't make any semantic or historical sense, but there you go.
In my day 'liberal' just meant someone who didn't want to have to choose sides between socialist and conservative. Which is why I find it so disconcerting to hear Americans fling around expressions like 'ultra-liberal'. How can one be 'ultra-in-the-middle'?
In a wider sense, a liberal is someone who believes in the individual pursuit of the good, as opposed to socialists or conservatives who both believe in common values and that we are born with social obligations. Under which definition it makes sense that Continental European liberal parties are actually right wing (in oppositon to social democrats), while British liberals are middle of the road (between socialist and conservative), and in the US liberals are considered 'left' (as opposed to the conservative right, there being no socialists). (It also explains why a conservative like Roger Scruton once expressed a preference for socialists over liberals.)
In any case almost all politics in the US is liberal, apart from the Christian right - its just divided into 'welfare liberal', and 'classical liberal'. I believe this is because liberalism originally arose in opposition to monarchist conservativism and so had no defined stance on 'positive rights', thus allowing the split that is visible in US politics. But its weird the way so many right wing Americans use 'liberal' as a dirty word when they are themselves liberals.
