Libertarian's Forum
Libertarian Forum to discuss politics and free market economics.
Libertarian's ForumLibertarian's ForumFreedom Forum › Libertarians and conspiracy theories
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5  Send TopicPrint
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) Libertarians and conspiracy theories (Read 7024 times)
Zaniard
Libertarian Full Member
***
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 91
Joined: Nov 19th, 2013
Re: Libertarians and conspiracy theories
Reply #20 - Nov 20th, 2013 at 4:53am
Print Post  
I think the goverment has proved itself unworth enough for me to believe that it does back door shady things that have in fact hurt real americans at one time or another. And with corprate greed out for the last buck, lobbying our politicans. I have no doubt that SOME of these conspiracies are true or at least part of them. Now there are some far fetched ones that make the rest of them lose merit. But as one stated about the flase flag getting us into Vietnam. It opens the door to other conspiracy theories. With that being said is it so outside the realm of reality that our BIG goverment we all dislike wouldn't blow up some buildings and kill some americans to get us into a war for profit.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Coopers
Libertarian Senior Member
****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 434
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Joined: Dec 22nd, 2010
Re: Libertarians and conspiracy theories
Reply #21 - Nov 20th, 2013 at 5:23am
Print Post  
Zaniard wrote on Nov 20th, 2013 at 4:53am:
With that being said is it so outside the realm of reality that our BIG goverment we all dislike wouldn't blow up some buildings and kill some americans to get us into a war for profit.


In this era of Wikileaks and Edward Snowden, I really don't see why any government in the West would take those kind of risks. They simply know that the information will get out. If they cannot conceal the fact that they have been monitoring Angela Merkel's phone, then there is no way they would be able to pull of a false flag operation.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Zaniard
Libertarian Full Member
***
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 91
Joined: Nov 19th, 2013
Re: Libertarians and conspiracy theories
Reply #22 - Nov 21st, 2013 at 12:27am
Print Post  
Coopers wrote on Nov 20th, 2013 at 5:23am:
In this era of Wikileaks and Edward Snowden, I really don't see why any government in the West would take those kind of risks. They simply know that the information will get out. If they cannot conceal the fact that they have been monitoring Angela Merkel's phone, then there is no way they would be able to pull of a false flag operation.


We clearly are not going to change each other's mind. And that's fine. We are just throwing opinions around. I think you bring up a decent point about the wiki leaks. But I dont think the internet was what it is now back in 9/11. I just think of it like this with the laws they pass everyday slowly chipping away at our rights. It makes you think why they are doing it. And what are they hiding.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jerry
Ex Member


Re: Libertarians and conspiracy theories
Reply #23 - Nov 21st, 2013 at 11:36am
Print Post  
There is no hope at this point. Once the Omega Conspiracy got access to the mind control technology from Area 51 the Earth was doomed.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Imaginarium
Libertarian Member
**
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 3
Joined: Dec 16th, 2013
Re: Libertarians and conspiracy theories
Reply #24 - Dec 17th, 2013 at 9:48am
Print Post  
Hi everyone - first post here.

Cooper - I'd like to talk to you about your contention that the "controlled demolition" idea is somehow far-fetched.

Can you name any other instance in human history where a building collapsed into its own footprint without the help of explosives ? You might want to say a 757 never smacked into one before, but then you have to address the physics: How does 1/3 of the building cause 2/3rds of it to collapse with such UNIFORMITY ?

Building 7? No plane. No serious fires. MUCH LESS DAMAGE than other buildings in the area. Larry Silverstein admits saying "pull it". Witnesses inside mentioned explosions, and that the fire department heard from SOME ANONYMOUS SOURCE that it was going to come down....

Do you seriously give a PASS to every single one of these "coincidences" ?

Further - are you aware that Danish Scientist and Professor Dr. Niels Harrit has published a scientific paper wherein he discloses his very fact-based EVIDENCE of the presence of thermitic materials from the debris on 9/11?

Any scientist can conduct their own study and publish an opposing finding... if they can prove it.

Also - have you seen even 1 image of an airplane striking the Pentagon? It has been 12 years. Are you just BLINDLY accepting what the government tells you, that it is somehow in the interest of "national security" to withhold the EVIDENCE of a plane striking the pentagon ? We can't even see 1 single clear frame 12 years later ? You give them a PASS on that too ? ?

I'm a bit confused because you sound rational.
But your conclusions certainly are NOT.

Do you know that the CIA invented the phrase "conspiracy theorist" as a way to discredit people who were ACTUALLY ONTO nefarious activities? And here you are throwing it around as though it is a logical, reasonable phrase to use. It's a pejorative phrase - you HAVE to know that, right ?

If you have a disagreement -- then show it with your own facts -- why are you resorting to such name-calling ?

Name calling is designed to SHUT DOWN CONVERSATION.

Also, your statement that: "In this era of Wikileaks...I don't see any government...tak[ing] those kind of risks." But that's just your pure opinion. PURE SPECULATION. That's not a sound argument at all.

Have you seen the old CNN FAKED NEWS REPORTS from the 90's about Saudi Arabia ? They're standing in front of a blue screen. Have you seen Anderson Cooper's nose disappear during his Sandy Hook interview? It's a blue screen.

Alex Jones is a disinformation agent. Google it. YouTube it. He crashed a legitimate rally and shut it down -- he's there to infiltrate, disinform, and discredit. That's pretty easy to see, right ? You can tell when someone is genuine and when they are faking, right ? He doesn't have any sincere anger when he yells on his radio show or on piers morgan. He's a faker.

And lastly, you have to admit that there is more evidence AGAINST the official story than there is FOR it, right ? You call it "simplicity" to believe the government was involved in any tragedy. But if you actually look at the depth and breadth of it -- there's nothing simplistic about it.

The truly simplistic route is to just ACCEPT what the media is SPOON FEEDING people. That's what happened to me in 2001. I saw the planes hit - and i thought: Holy shit, we're going to war. I listened to Sean Hannity and all the FOX people.

And then one day - i'm not sure how - i ran into a documentary called LOOSE CHANGE -- and once you see that EVIDENCE (circumstantial and EMPIRICAL) there's no REASONABLE WAY you can still support the GOVERNMENT'S CONSPIRACY THEORY.

All 9/11 accounts are Conspiracy Theories, you know that right ? So you ARE a conspiracy theorist by definition. The only question is:

Do you believe the Government's account?

Or do you believe your own EYES ?


I'm too well-educated and too principled to hear attempts at manipulation and not say something about it.
Bring your FACTS if you have them.
Leave the name-calling aside.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Norwegian Libertarian
Ex Member


Re: Libertarians and conspiracy theories
Reply #25 - Dec 17th, 2013 at 10:16am
Print Post  
^ this guy is coo-coo.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Coopers
Libertarian Senior Member
****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 434
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Joined: Dec 22nd, 2010
Re: Libertarians and conspiracy theories
Reply #26 - Dec 17th, 2013 at 10:34am
Print Post  
@Imaginarium

There is a lot to cover there, so I will try to give you an adequate response in the coming days when I have more time. But before I do that, would you care to tell me where I have resorted to name calling? And no, the term "conspiracy theorist" is not intended as a pejorative term. I mean it more or less in how the Internet's most trusted source (Wikipedia) defines it:

Quote:
A conspiracy theory is an explanatory proposition that accuses two or more people, a group, or an organization of having caused or covered up, through deliberate collusion, an event or phenomenon of great social, political, or economic impact.


As I pointed out in a previous post, some conspiracy theories turn out to be correct, such as Watergate. So I do not use the term in an entirely negative way. However, when it comes to such nutty ideas as controlled demolition, you are correct in assuming my cynicism. I have little patience for such nonsense, so I will not hesitate in applying such a label to those who have earned it. I try my best not to resort to childish taunts and mindless insults, but that has been entirely absent from myself in this thread.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Coopers
Libertarian Senior Member
****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 434
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Joined: Dec 22nd, 2010
Re: Libertarians and conspiracy theories
Reply #27 - Dec 17th, 2013 at 12:59pm
Print Post  
Well, lucky you; it turns out I can spare some time after all. If I do not respond to all your points then I shall do so in the coming days.

Imaginarium wrote on Dec 17th, 2013 at 9:48am:
Hi everyone - first post here.

Cooper - I'd like to talk to you about your contention that the "controlled demolition" idea is somehow far-fetched.

Can you name any other instance in human history where a building collapsed into its own footprint without the help of explosives ? You might want to say a 757 never smacked into one before, but then you have to address the physics: How does 1/3 of the building cause 2/3rds of it to collapse with such UNIFORMITY ?


The planes hitting the towers is not the only unique feature. Here are some other "firsts" for 9/11:

* Fire proofing removed from trusses

* Steel columns which held the lateral load sheared off

* Vertical load columns in core removed

Yes, the twin tower collapse was unique, not because of explosives, but because of the enormous structural damage caused by the impact of 767s travelling at 500 miles/hour.

Also, the structure of the buildings was very different to the examples of burning buildings which did not collapse. The examples given by 9/11 Truthers (I will use that term if it makes you feel better) are those of steel reinforced concrete buildings. The twin towers used what is called a "tube in a tube" design: perimeter steel walls were held in place by the trusses and those trusses were connected to the perimeter columns by small bolts. This might be hard to picture with a mere description, so I will provide some pictures.

Steel reinforced concrete:



Perimeter steel walls and trusses:



The structure of the twin towers allowed the impact of the planes to cause the structural damage that I described. If you can find me an example of a building with all of these unique features not collapsing then I would be very interested to hear.

As for the "uniformity" of the collapse, I must say I am not sure what you mean. If you provide more detail then I will respond.



Quote:
Building 7? No plane. No serious fires. MUCH LESS DAMAGE than other buildings in the area.


No plane, but...no serious fires? WTC7 was hit by the large perimeter columns of the tower collapse which caused enormous damage, and yes, fires. And these fires were unfought for over 6 hours.

While WTC7 was 400 feet away from the towers, the perimeter columns had 1300 feet to fall, not only giving ample room to reach the building, but also giving much greater force to the impact (ie more damage).

Further, most of the damage was caused to the base of the building, while there was 40 stories of weight from above to deal with. With this much damage, out of control fires, and the enormous pressure from the stories above, it no surprise at all that WTC7 collapsed in the way it did.



Quote:
Larry Silverstein admits saying "pull it".


Indeed he did, but "pull it" does not mean to execute a detonation. In demolition, this term is used to describe pulling away a building from another with cables:



Anyway, Silverstein was not using any demolition vernacular (and why on Earth would he confess to an insurance scam in a recorded interview?!). He was merely describing the decision by Chief Daniel Nigro of the New York Fire Department to "pull" the fire fighters away from the building. And why would be pull them back? Because WTC7 was going to collapse! Nigro determined that the fires were so out of control that the building would collapse and surely claim the lives of many. So thanks for mentioning this, as it simply means you are shooting yourself in the foot. Educate yourself:



Quote:
Witnesses inside mentioned explosions...


Have you ever heard a car backfire and thought it sounded like a gun shot? I know I have, plenty of times. There are many things that were going on in all of the buildings which sound very similar to explosions. Some are:

* Electrical equipment being destroyed

* Steel bolts snapping

* Pressure from above causing air to blow out windows

* Concrete floors and panels crashing into each other.

Taking the example of one fireman who said he thought he heard explosives, he also went on to say:

"I don't know if that means anything. I mean, I equate it to the building cowing down and pushing things down, it could have been electrical explosions, it could have been whatever."

Second thoughts certainly matter.

Quote:
...and that the fire department heard from SOME ANONYMOUS SOURCE that it was going to come down....


Anonymous source? Well, I just provided it for you (Chief Daniel Nigro), so...mystery solved!

OK, that's all I have time for right now, but I will leave you with my sources and some other material you might like to read (if you are open minded enough).

http://www.debunking911.com/firsttime.htm
http://www.debunking911.com/pull.htm
http://www.debunking911.com/explosions.htm
http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/11-09-07/#feature
http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/08-06-04/#feature
« Last Edit: Dec 17th, 2013 at 3:30pm by Coopers »  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Imaginarium
Libertarian Member
**
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 3
Joined: Dec 16th, 2013
Re: Libertarians and conspiracy theories
Reply #28 - Dec 17th, 2013 at 8:25pm
Print Post  
The Path of Truth:

1) Ridicule (coo-coo comment; conspiracy theorist; "truther" all KNOWN pejorative terms)
2) Violent Opposition - OR Manipulative Opposition (like Intellectual Dishonesty)
3) Acceptance


Ok - let me go through your confusion point by point:
Oh, but first can I ask you something:

Have you ever been in the military ?

A) I don't think it's fact that the planes were going 500mph so let's not insert opinion, right ? 734 ft per second - i think the video could be used to disprove that.

B) The tower collapse WAS INDEED UNIQUE BECAUSE OF THE PRESENCE OF THERMITE -- as you so conveniently skipped over. It's a published scientific FACT.

Watch this BBC Disinfo Turd try his best to Discredit the scientist in this extremely unprofessional interview - but we DO see the high-caliber character that the Professor has:

[url="http://youtube.com/watch?v=XF334x-xWz8"]Dr. Niels Harrit BBC Attempted Hit-Piece Interview[/url]


C) Did Rudy Giuliani know about all those firsts you mentioned ? Because apparently someone told him the buildings were going to collapse before they broke all known laws of physics by collapsing on their own footprints.





And here's what some NYPD firefighters had to say about Giuliani's behavior that day:





AND he committed a crime by removing ground zero evidence.

D) Even if I grant you that that 1/3 of a building can cause 2/3 of it to implode DOWNWARD THROUGH THE PATH OF MOST RESISTANCE (i mean how ridiculous that you're arguing that) - keep in mind that the steel was DESIGNED to carry 2 or 3 TIMES the weight ABOVE IT.


E) Are you pretending to not understand the phrase "uniform collapse"? You're either lying, or you haven't watched even 1 video of compiled evidence against the Official Government Conspiracy Theory which you are pushing here.

Uniform means SYMMETRICAL.

Every single critical support structure in Building 7 had to have failed at PRECISELY the SAME MOMENT for it to fall as it did. That defies physics. You HAVE to know that. Right ?

F) Since you don't know what "uniform" means, perhaps you should look at what EXPERT Architects & Engineers have to say about Building 7 and the apparently FRAUDULENT NIST REPORT -- the official story that you're pushing -- experts say it's a fraud -- check this out to see their evidence:

[url="http://www.ae911truth.org/en/news-section/41-articles/767-fraud-exposed-in-nist-...Fraud Exposed in NIST WTC 7 REPORTS[/url]

G) Silverstein had COINCIDENTALLY just finished insuring his buildings before 9/11 -- he made billions of dollars. And he told the fire commander: "Maybe the best thing to do is pull it. And they made the decision to pull." PULL IT, not THEM, but IT.

Pull OUT - means get out.
Pull IT - means demolish.


And a nearby EMT said in an interview (link below) that the FIRE DEPARTMENT SAID THEY WERE GOING TO HAVE TO BRING IT DOWN.

(The video You Linked to - is CENSORED in the comments... wonder why)

And the firefighters were NEVER IN BUILDING 7 - making assessments.

[url="http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/silverstein_pullit.html"]Larry Silverstein Made Billions on 9/11[/url]


I can't WAIT to see what the hell you come up with next.
Peace.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Imaginarium
Libertarian Member
**
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 3
Joined: Dec 16th, 2013
All Wars are Bankers Wars
Reply #29 - Dec 17th, 2013 at 8:45pm
Print Post  
Found some glitches in the site -- if you use 'LIVE preview' -- it showed my hyperlinks appearing correctly - but as you can see, text is NOT how it's done.

I know the help page explains that - but then the LIVE PREVIEW button is faulty.

NYPD Firefighters Testify to Giuliani deceptions, lies, and fronts:


All Wars are BANKERS' Wars -> Text Version, or....

It's a YT VIDEO but it's really only AUDIO from the guy's show:
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 
Send TopicPrint
 
Libertarian's ForumLibertarian's ForumFreedom Forum › Libertarians and conspiracy theories
Libertarian's Forum

Libertarian's Forum Information Rules, Agreement and Privacy Policy