Robert Forte, The Softer Side of CIA Psychedelic Mind Control |407|

Again I pretty much agree with that, except that, as I was trying to point out before, that leaves the need for some other word (quasi-conspiracy?) to cover a related phenomenon.

A quasi-conspiracy is something where large numbers of people know the truth, but somehow act as if it were not true, and genuinely deceive many others:

1) The concept of CO2-induced climate change.

2) The fact that those gas attacks were not perpetrated by the Syrian state, and may not have been real at all.

3) Assorted other scientific supposed facts that people in the know realise are just for public consumption.

4) Even benign quasi-conspiracies, like Father Christmas!

David

David,
Well, apropos to this site, what you're suggesting really leads to questions like "What is reality and how do we know?". People obviously have different standards and different levels of caring.

Some people here seem happy to conclude that 911 was a criminal act by the US govt against it's own people and/or that "the Jews" did it. Many people are convinced that the world is heating up and that we're all going to die if we don't do something and many think the whole thing is a hoax or delusion. Pick a topic, any topic, and there are large numbers of people who have radically different perspectives as to what the correct narrative is.

One man's "evidence" and "reason" is another's "Lies", "junk science" and "Faulty logic".

To make matters more complicated, with social media, there is no end to the number of outlets serving as propaganda, for right or wrong/better or worse for a myriad of positions on any topic. This is also true of more official media outlets.

What you decide is real all comes down to personal psychology, prior experience/conditioning, what people similar to you and with whom you are in contact are saying (peer pressure/social modeling) and how intelligent you are.

So I think there is no need for a new word like "quasi-conspiracy" because I don't think you could get enough people to agree that are large numbers of people who know the truth, but somehow act as if it were not true, and genuinely deceive many others.

There are many people who have never been to Syria, never studied the history of the region, know nothing about chemical weapons and their deployment, etc, etc who, if you ask them, will tell you, with certainty, that Assad is the butcher of Damascus of course he kills his own people - just as others in this same group will tell you, with certainty, that Assad is hero who loves his people and would never kill them, let alone use gas on them to do so.

Both camps will argue their position tooth and claw.

People love to talk out of their asses.

I only made a big deal over the conspiracy theory thing because it seems like a lot of people here are into to those and I think it is unfortunate because it detracts from and undermines some of the important discussions around "paranormal". Coupling studying the reality of the afterlife and psi with "THE CIA IS TURNING US INTO ZOMBIES AND KILLING US LIKE CATTLE WHENEVER NEEDED TO FURTHER PLANS OF WORLD DOMINATION" doesn't paint a good picture of the type of people interested in paranormal topics - "THE JEWS DID IT" even less so.

Of course if you are convinced that the CIA and the Jews really are up to all of this horribleness, then you think I'm the idiot dupe in the room (or maybe the CIA sent me to try to turn minds away from The Truth). But more people see things the way I do, which, of course, by itself, doesn't mean that I'm right about 911 or anything else. It does however mean that I have a point with regards to undermining promotion of psi, afterlife studies, etc
 
Last edited:
David,
Well, apropos to this site, what you're suggesting really leads to questions like "What is reality and how do we know?". People obviously have different standards and different levels of caring.

Some people here seem happy to conclude that 911 was a criminal act by the US govt against it's own people and/or that "the Jews" did it. Many people are convinced that the world is heating up and that we're all going to die if we don't do something and many think the whole thing is a hoax or delusion. Pick a topic, any topic, and there are large numbers of people who have radically different perspectives as to what the correct narrative is.

One man's "evidence" and "reason" is another's "Lies", "junk science" and "Faulty logic".

To make matters more complicated, with social media, there is no end to the number of outlets serving as propaganda, for right or wrong/better or worse for a myriad of positions on any topic. This is also true of more official media outlets.

What you decide is real all comes down to personal psychology, prior experience/conditioning, what people similar to you and with whom you are in contact are saying (peer pressure/social modeling) and how intelligent you are.

So I think there is no need for a new word like "quasi-conspiracy" because I don't think you could get enough people to agree that are large numbers of people who know the truth, but somehow act as if it were not true, and genuinely deceive many others.

There are many people who have never been to Syria, never studied the history of the region, know nothing about chemical weapons and their deployment, etc, etc who, if you ask them, will tell you, with certainty, that Assad is the butcher of Damascus of course he kills his own people - just as others in this same group will tell you, with certainty, that Assad is hero who loves his people and would never kill them, let alone use gas on them to do so.

Both camps will argue their position tooth and claw.

People love to talk out of their asses.

I only made a big deal over the conspiracy theory thing because it seems like a lot of people here are into to those and I think it is unfortunate because it detracts from and undermines some of the important discussions around "paranormal". Coupling studying the reality of the afterlife and psi with "THE CIA IS TURNING US INTO ZOMBIES AND KILLING US LIKE CATTLE WHENEVER NEEDED TO FURTHER PLANS OF WORLD DOMINATION" doesn't paint a good picture of the type of people interested in paranormal topics - "THE JEWS DID IT" even less so.

Of course if you are convinced that the CIA and the Jews really are up to all of this horribleness, then you think I'm the idiot dupe in the room (or maybe the CIA sent me to try to turn minds away from The Truth). But more people see things the way I do, which, of course, by itself, doesn't mean that I'm right about 911 or anything else. It does however mean that I have a point with regards to undermining promotion of psi, afterlife studies, etc
Well I suppose I am asking for your take on what happened in those Syrian gas attacks? I thought you dismissed the idea that they came from the Syrian government - so who do you think was involved?

Davis
 
Well I suppose I am asking for your take on what happened in those Syrian gas attacks? I thought you dismissed the idea that they came from the Syrian government - so who do you think was involved?

Davis

I think, in one instance, the Jihadis killed some people they consider to be infidels or apostates by various means, including suffocation and they spread some chlorine or similar chemical around. In the other instance they made a crude chemical weapon and fired it at some civilians and killed a few of them. Then their buddies, the White Helmets, came in and made a propaganda video. Or something along those lines. I have been consistent about this.

McCain, Clinton and their allies were the ones promoting the "Butcher of Damascus" line.

My point was that there are many people parroting that with certainty, even though they know nothing beyond what people like McCain and Clinton and their media allies are saying. How did the parrots get to be so certain?

I have alluded to how I might be more certain of an alternative. Also, if someone posts a video here promoting a pov, I'm not taking it seriously because it's going to be junk for mass consumption. Beyond personal contacts, I read reporting from other countries ( I speak/read a couple different languages), I read and participate in forums consisting of former IC members and special forces types who were actually in places like Syria. Contrary to what some here seem to believe, such people often counter the official narrative. They have little respect for lying politicians, etc. Putting your life on the line tends to engender that kind of attitude. I don't get info from some jackass spouting off on youtube. Information sources come in varying degrees of quality, IMO conspiracy theorists have a hard time separating the wheat from the chaff.
 
I think, in one instance, the Jihadis killed some people they consider to be infidels or apostates by various means, including suffocation and they spread some chlorine or similar chemical around. In the other instance they made a crude chemical weapon and fired it at some civilians and killed a few of them. Then their buddies, the White Helmets, came in and made a propaganda video. Or something along those lines. I have been consistent about this.
OK - I just wanted to get clear what it was you were saying - that is a reasonable explanation!

I am guessing that you are retired from the CIA or related organisation. Obviously, don't answer if you will get prosecuted or whatever.

The DOJ and FBI certainly seem to have had bad apples near the top, and I assume Brennan was of the same type - I wonder if Trump has removed enough people to make things run in a better way?

David
 
OK - I just wanted to get clear what it was you were saying - that is a reasonable explanation!

I am guessing that you are retired from the CIA or related organisation. Obviously, don't answer if you will get prosecuted or whatever.

The DOJ and FBI certainly seem to have had bad apples near the top, and I assume Brennan was of the same type - I wonder if Trump has removed enough people to make things run in a better way?

David

David,
I'm just a jerk on the internet.

I do recommend this blog - https://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/ for starters. Anyone who headlines there is experienced in the field. Read the credentials of the owner. Lots of regular people comment and discuss (within boundaries). Headliners are all retired IC and/or military. Not everyone there agrees all of the time, but the points of contention are informative.
 
Last edited:
Wow,

Such an insightful and deep discussion. One of the best show dialogues I have read. Forgive me for not being here the last couple weeks. I went to work with my mother through her flu and almost death from pneumonia, and then traveled straight through to conduct the infrastructure strategy (while sick from the flu I got at the elder care center). National infrastructure strategies tend to drain every ounce of (Kundalini?) energy from my body/mind, while I conduct them. They are high energy, relentlessly probative and rigorous sessions, long days and weeks - where I do not let anyone slip by an assumption, without challenge (even and especially the ones I favor - because I can sway a group influence too easily). This tends to suck the very life out of me; and by the time I travel back home, I am in a flat out depression from the loss in energy. It takes me time to recharge.

I have never had a hallucinatory, psychedelic nor mind altering experience (other than crazy events in life itself). I kept drug free when younger so that I could pass the NSA Polygraph during my Special Background Investigations without question or issue - and then just stuck with those cleaner habits even after I left Intelligence Services. I don't drink nor smoke nor take anything. The closest thing I come to any form of mind alteration are my dreams, my prayers for my kids, & meditations - and taking CBD Oil. So pretty tame.

I cringe at the word 'conspiracy theory/theorist'. Man is a conspiratorial animal - there is nothing of a more lofty and heady nature than to control what large masses of people think and believe - so we should all be conspiracy theorists. It simply means we understand ourselves. To make such declaration in moniker a priori, is tantamount to stamping upon one's own head, 'NPC'. The most mind clearing/rebalancing discipline one can undertake is to prosecute a conspiracy theory - and find one's self to be wrong in the end. Such is not a useless undertaking. We however, should conduct specific habits/disciplines which allow us to discern when our ideas, or the ideas of others are beginning to range from theory and into agency. Agency is what we are to avoid and oppose - espeically in ourselves, and not theory (even if that theory involves a conspiracy).

One crazy thing happened this week however - a psychic-medium in New York, passed a message to pass to me through a third party from a second party, the first two of whom had no idea who I was or even what I was working on (no one really does)... neither did the psychic medium even know who I was... she was just willing to pass along the un-altered message... to the right person, whom was told to pass that on to another right person, who then knew me... and called Wednesday night... they all did as they were asked.

I don't hang out with, nor use psychic-mediums, so I guess they had to use the grapevine. They did not ask for, nor want any money nor follow-on patronage. :D

"I know this might seem a bit crazy TES, but here is what has transpired... I got this phone call last night from a lady in Los Angeles and .... "

"Your work, your plan involving (some undeniable specifics known by only 3 people were given), this work has found favor. The projects will be successful. The resources are being moved into place, and you will receive a call from ______________ this week confirming changes in circumstances."

Now that is mind altering. :)
 
I went to work with my mother through her flu and almost death from pneumonia

That is tough. My sympathy. Both of my parents have passed and I know how it feels. I hope her recovery continues smoothly

The most mind clearing/rebalancing discipline one can undertake is to prosecute a conspiracy theory - and find one's self to be wrong in the end. Such is not a useless undertaking. We however, should conduct specific habits/disciplines which allow us to discern when our ideas, or the ideas of others are beginning to range from theory and into agency. Agency is what we are to avoid and oppose - espeically in ourselves, and not theory (even if that theory involves a conspiracy).
:)

The process of prosecuting begins with a grand jury. The GJ decides whether or not there is enough evidence to go ahead with an actual trial. Lots of shaky cases never make it past the GJ.

I'm pretty sure that standing before the GJ and declaring, "Buildings can't fall from fire! And the only way a building can fall straight down is when there have been controlled explosions!", isn't going to convince the GJ to submit a true bill (decide to move the case to trial). Especially when there are precisely constructed computer models that show exactly how the buildings fell due to the impacts and resulting fires - and they make perfect sense.

Then the promoters of the conspiracy theory will just concoct more conspiracies about the GJ to explain how it could have dismissed their most awesome argument.

Look at what is happening in the US right now. A collection of devious psychopaths, drooling idiots and ass kissing parrots accused lawfully elected President Trump of conspiring with Russians to do all manner of naughty things. They even stated that his crimes rose to the level of treason. They didn't just want him out of office, they wanted him executed. For two years this crowd has been stating that "Any day now Mueller is going to conclude his investigation and Trump will be destroyed!"......Mueller was their hero. The knight who would slay the dreaded dragon.....except then it didn't happen. Mueller could not find an iota of evidence to support that claim of Trump conspiring with Russia. Did the conspiracy theorists admit they were mistaken? Hell no. They are doubling down on crazy. They want to interrogate Mueller. AG Barr is corrupt!

And so it is the mentally incompetent and emotionally disturbed who lack internal checks and balances as much as they lack the ability to exercise intellectual discernment. In a way I'm embarrassed for these people. Their public displays are so pathetic. It's how I feel about friends who are mostly competent people in their fields, but then venture off into other areas and fall to pieces with conspiracy theories about all manner of events.


I like the Venn diagram in the link to your article on your other comment.

Another problem w/ conspiracy theories is that their proponents tend forget it is just a theory.

Theories have varying levels of merit.

Theories must be tested by the scientific process. If they fail, they fail. Just because someone elects to disregard the fail, doesn't revive the theory. I'm sure no one here takes flat earthers seriously. Why not? IMO, the 911 controlled demolition and missile "theories" are debunked and are in the same class a flat earth nonsense.

The lawyers trying to bring the case to court are relying on "evidence" that was proven to be nothing years ago (one example -
)..and on and on it goes because people are not rational.....rather they want to believe
 
Last edited:
It is healthy to pursue a conspiracy theory, and then admit when you are wrong. But that does not invalidate the process of pursuing conspiracy theories. (By 'prosecution' I mean in the context of an intelligence case process). Such is an important process.

Yes, I pursued the 9/11 hoax theory. I could not find enough heteroduction to satisfy my threshold on that - so I dismissed it.

Yes, I considered the Trump-Russia collusion theory. Same thing - there was no evidence whatsoever, found by an impartial and highly scientifically minded investigator.

Yes, I pursued the Trump Obstruction of the Trump-Russia investigation. Same thing - no evidence. Ethically as well, how does one convict a person for obstruction in an investigation which was based upon fraud to begin with? - that is called entrapment. It is an old Inquisition trick; to wit:

In the process of investigating claims that you are a witch, the Church Jesuit Guard began to see hints that you were not gladly cooperating with the Church in execution of its duty, in a manner befitting a Christian. We did not find evidence that you were a witch, however we did find evidence of some contempt for the Church's Authority... therefore, we will burn you at the stake for THAT CRIME instead.

But that does not mean that I give up on identifying conspiracy. One MUST be a conspiracy theorist. For the very reason cited in the above paragraph. The investigation of the Trump-Russia collusion was itself - a conspiracy.

Most people are dishonest at their core. We must use ethical standards to winnow this out.
 
That is tough. My sympathy. Both of my parents have passed and I know how it feels. I hope her recovery continues smoothly



The process of prosecuting begins with a grand jury. The GJ decides whether or not there is enough evidence to go ahead with an actual trial. Lots of shaky cases never make it past the GJ.

I'm pretty sure that standing before the GJ and declaring, "Buildings can't fall from fire! And the only way a building can fall straight down is when there have been controlled explosions!", isn't going to convince the GJ to submit a true bill (decide to move the case to trial). Especially when there are precisely constructed computer models that show exactly how the buildings fell due to the impacts and resulting fires - and they make perfect sense.

Then the promoters of the conspiracy theory will just concoct more conspiracies about the GJ to explain how it could have dismissed their most awesome argument.

Look at what is happening in the US right now. A collection of devious psychopaths, drooling idiots and ass kissing parrots accused lawfully elected President Trump of conspiring with Russians to do all manner of naughty things. They even stated that his crimes rose to the level of treason. They didn't just want him out of office, they wanted him executed. For two years this crowd has been stating that "Any day now Mueller is going to conclude his investigation and Trump will be destroyed!"......Mueller was their hero. The knight who would slay the dreaded dragon.....except then it didn't happen. Mueller could not find an iota of evidence to support that claim of Trump conspiring with Russia. Did the conspiracy theorists admit they were mistaken? Hell no. They are doubling down on crazy. They want to interrogate Mueller. AG Barr is corrupt!

And so it is the mentally incompetent and emotionally disturbed who lack internal checks and balances as much as they lack the ability to exercise intellectual discernment. In a way I'm embarrassed for these people. Their public displays are so pathetic. It's how I feel about friends who are mostly competent people in their fields, but then venture off into other areas and fall to pieces with conspiracy theories about all manner of events.


I like the Venn diagram in the link to your article on your other comment.

Another problem w/ conspiracy theories is that their proponents tend forget it is just a theory.

Theories have varying levels of merit.

Theories must be tested by the scientific process. If they fail, they fail. Just because someone elects to disregard the fail, doesn't revive the theory. I'm sure no one here takes flat earthers seriously. Why not? IMO, the 911 controlled demolition and missile "theories" are debunked and are in the same class a flat earth nonsense.

The lawyers trying to bring the case to court are relying on "evidence" that was proven to be nothing years ago (one example -
)..and on and on it goes because people are not rational.....rather they want to believe

Look. The fact that a person takes one conspiracy theory as possibly having some merit doesn't say that s/he takes all conspiracy theories seriously. One can't tar every person taking a particular conspiracy theory with the same brush. I think there might be something to the 9/11 building collapse theories, but there are plenty other conspiracies I'm more sceptical about.

To think that there's never any conspiracy theories is probably just as naive as to think of everything as a conspiracy theory. Please stop denigrating people who simply hold to different views from yours by attempting to characterise them all as irrational nutjobs. If you believe there's no such things as conspiracies, then who knows, maybe you're the nutcase; there are in fact some well-known, proven conspiracies at all sorts of levels from a few people in a specific business to ones affecting whole nations. And there are many other conspiracy theories which, whilst not proven, are worthwhile investigating.
 
It is healthy to pursue a conspiracy theory, and then admit when you are wrong. But that does not invalidate the process of pursuing conspiracy theories. (By 'prosecution' I mean in the context of an intelligence case process). Such is an important process.

Yes, I pursued the 9/11 hoax theory. I could not find enough heteroduction to satisfy my threshold on that - so I dismissed it.

Yes, I considered the Trump-Russia collusion theory. Same thing - there was no evidence whatsoever, found by an impartial and highly scientifically minded investigator.

Yes, I pursued the Trump Obstruction of the Trump-Russia investigation. Same thing - no evidence. Ethically as well, how does one convict a person for obstruction in an investigation which was based upon fraud to begin with? - that is called entrapment. It is an old Inquisition trick; to wit:

In the process of investigating claims that you are a witch, the Church Jesuit Guard began to see hints that you were not gladly cooperating with the Church in execution of its duty, in a manner befitting a Christian. We did not find evidence that you were a witch, however we did find evidence of some contempt for the Church's Authority... therefore, we will burn you at the stake for THAT CRIME instead.

But that does not mean that I give up on identifying conspiracy. One MUST be a conspiracy theorist. For the very reason cited in the above paragraph. The investigation of the Trump-Russia collusion was itself - a conspiracy.

Most people are dishonest at their core. We must use ethical standards to winnow this out.

Totally agree. As I have said elsewhere on this thread, all human interaction is a conspiracy. Some of those conspiracies are criminal.

Yes, the conspiracy theory angle must be prosecuted as an intelligence case. As you know, conclusions are framed in terms of assessed degree of certainty, not absolutes.

I have looked at these proposed conspiracies and arrived at the same conclusions that you did.

I misinterpreted your use of "prosecute", but really, if people believe there has been a criminal conspiracy, beyond jihadist terrorists, to murder thousands of Americans and cause billions in economic damage, then that does belong in the judicial process. That no one has been able to get a case past a grand jury should kind of indicate the level of truth involved in the conspiracy theories.
 
Last edited:
Look. The fact that a person takes one conspiracy theory as possibly having some merit doesn't say that s/he takes all conspiracy theories seriously. One can't tar every person taking a particular conspiracy theory with the same brush. I think there might be something to the 9/11 building collapse theories, but there are plenty other conspiracies I'm more sceptical about.

To think that there's never any conspiracy theories is probably just as naive as to think of everything as a conspiracy theory. Please stop denigrating people who simply hold to different views from yours by attempting to characterise them all as irrational nutjobs. If you believe there's no such things as conspiracies, then who knows, maybe you're the nutcase; there are in fact some well-known, proven conspiracies at all sorts of levels from a few people in a specific business to ones affecting whole nations. And there are many other conspiracy theories which, whilst not proven, are worthwhile investigating.

I have stated several times that there are conspiracies. All human interaction is a conspiracy.

That said, extraordinary claims of criminal conspiracies are going to have to be supported by some very strong evidence. Yes. I am denigrating people that believe extraordinary claims with no real evidence and then who cling to their theory - religiously - even after their hypotheses are proven false. This is a totally different class of conspiracy theory. 911 is one such. The CIA wanting to use LSD to turn America into a zombie nation is another.
 
I have stated several times that there are conspiracies. All human interaction is a conspiracy.

That said, extraordinary claims of criminal conspiracies are going to have to be supported by some very strong evidence. Yes. I am denigrating people that believe extraordinary claims with no real evidence and then who cling to their theory - religiously - even after their hypotheses are proven false. This is a totally different class of conspiracy theory. 911 is one such. The CIA wanting to use LSD to turn America into a zombie nation is another.

I'm still waiting for evidence of buildings falling in a similar way due solely to fire. The Plasco fall wasn't a clear-cut example because explosions do seem to have been involved. Can you give other examples? If not, if all you're relying on is the Plasco fire, I don't think it's good enough.
 
I'm still waiting for evidence of buildings falling in a similar way due solely to fire. The Plasco fall wasn't a clear-cut example because explosions do seem to have been involved. Can you give other examples? If not, if all you're relying on is the Plasco fire, I don't think it's good enough.

Any example I give you, you will cite some conspiracy theorist that states the building didn't do what it did. I see how this game works.

Someone says the Plasco building was bombed? And you like what that does for you. So, voila, it's true? Prove that the Plasco building was bombed.

A building like the World Trade Tower falls straight down when the upper floors collapse due to weakened supports and pancake into the floors below. This isn't rocket science. Painstaking efforts were exerted to build computer models of the WTT using its actual building plans. The models show the building coming straight down - and coming down from the top (just like it did) and not from the bottom as in controlled demo.

But, yeah, of course the people who built the models were threatened by the "CIA" and faked the models.

Forget it.

The onus is on you to show evidence that there was a months long process of wiring the WTT with explosives. And you must explain how no one on that team has ever talked. How there is no explosive trace (which there would a lot of from a demo job that big). How the wiring was never discovered before 911. .....and think about this; these evil CIA guys wire the building - no small feat and a precision job at that, and then they risk having their extensive precision demo job totally ruined by having airplanes crash into the buildings. Ever heard of Murphy's law? The airplanes could have hit anywhere and could have - most likely would have - damaged the demo plan.

You must explain how the alleged missile used on the Pentagon took out light poles on the way in, light poles on either side of the driveway. Was the missile wildly jerking left to right? Did it have wings?

This is stupid in the extreme.

BTW - the WTT buildings didn't exactly fall straight down. They leaned in the direction of the most damage.
 
Last edited:
You must explain how the alleged missile used on the Pentagon took out light poles on the way in, light poles on either side of the driveway. Was the missile wildly jerking left to right? Did it have wings?

This is stupid in the extreme.

The Pentagon hit was in no way shape or form even remotely possible as a missile impact. I have studied every single Soviet, Russian, Chinese and US Missile in detail, and was a trained missile expert in my days therein. In addition I had several friends who were there at the impact.

The only way one can regard the Pentagon hit to be a missile is to be totally ignorant of what a missile is, and what it does. The kinetic footprint was too large, on the order of 100 times too large to be a missile. This has nothing to do with the warhead nor its ordinance brisance.
 
Last edited:
The problem with the Center for Inquiry is that, they are using a stooge posed and easy 'debunking of the 9/11 conspiracy' to validate themselves as 'scientific entities'. Their goal is self-aggrandizement, and they could really care less about finding any truth. Never trust someone who does this. Part of the reason I remain anonymous. I am not here to build my scientific empire nor extract lots of cash.

They will use this 'debunking-skill established scientific reputation' and flawed set of methods, to then debunk something else which is not so easy. NDE's, afterlife, your right to self determination, block your right to access your own elected officials, your right to medicine or treatments, your case study that your children were neurologically harmed and to be able to petition redress to your government. They do this even now. They use their reputation, and fake forms and uses of skepticism, to enact evil in the name of and in lieu of, science. Your best acumen, should be used in spotting such fakers. Remain neutral on the conspiracy - but watch the people surrounding it like a hawk.

They do not debunk for the truth of the matter, they debunk to establish their power. It is no different than a person who deceives in order to derive the 'lofty and heady nature of controlling what large masses of people think and believe'.

James Randi turned out to not be a very good nor trustworthy person at all, once all was exposed and he was forced to retire with the lottery money, which should have been regulated under state lottery laws and given to the people, but was not.

In the end, a person's true colors eventually come through in their actions and in who got the cash.

Ignore what they say, pay attention to what they do...
 
Last edited:
In the process of investigating claims that you are a witch, the Church Jesuit Guard began to see hints that you were not gladly cooperating with the Church in execution of its duty, in a manner befitting a Christian. We did not find evidence that you were a witch, however we did find evidence of some contempt for the Church's Authority... therefore, we will burn you at the stake for THAT CRIME instead.
I think the Democrats are saying something like that about President Trump!

David
 
The Pentagon hit was in no way shape or form even remotely possible as a missile impact. I have studied every single Soviet, Russian, Chinese and US Missile in detail, and was a trained missile expert in my days therein. In addition I had several friends who were there at the impact.

The only way one can regard the Pentagon hit to be a missile is to be totally ignorant of what a missile is, and what it does. The kinetic footprint was too large, on the order of 100 times too large to be a missile. This has nothing to do with the warhead nor its ordinance brisance.

Yes. I agree with you once again.

There seems to be a complete lack of knowledge about military ops, ordnance, etc - which is to be expected, but one would think that the conspiracy theorist would admit his lack of knowledge and not assert his theory with such certainty. Humbleness is a virtue in short supply.

A couple more points;

I know that the dud + off target rate for "smart" bombs/missiles in the Gulf War was approaching 30%. I suppose that the sources of failure were addressed and ameliorated to some extent by 2001, but not 100%. I have it on good info that nothing like 100%.

So you're planning to attack your own HQ (the Pentagon) with a missile ((why not just use another airplane? - you've already destroyed three of them on 911 - escapes me). What if the missile is a damned dud or goes off target as these things are wont to do? You are SCREWED - you and the whole conspiracy. Anyone clever enough to pull off 911 as an inside job would have made that risk/benefit assessment and decided against using a missile.

The Pentagon happens to be full of people that would know the difference between a missile and an airplane. No one had anything to say about a missile being the source of destruction? You choose to use a missile to attack the very building that is full of people who would recognize a missile strike?

Where are the missile parts at the scene? There are always remnants. There were airplane remnants and DNA evidence of the airline passengers, crew and terrorists was collected at the scene. More CIA monkey business I suppose.

WTT - Basically the same risk/benefit analysis fail. You get caught wiring the building. The airplanes don't hit where you want to them to and that causes your controlled demo to fail. The explosives are found. Or the airplane hits where you wanted it to and things basically go according to plan, but the hundreds of people sifting through the wreckage after 911 find some unexploded explosives, detonators or simply explosive residues in the ruins. I mean there were hundreds of experts combing through all the remains looking for evidence. They couldn't all be in on the conspiracy, right?

That is why this is stupid - one reason, at least.

Resting on "name another building that fell straight down that wasn't controlled demo" is so ignorant of logic and scientific principles that it really doesn't merit response.

There are so many variables involved in construction materials and design, not to mention jet fuel and a collision by a 100 ton object going 500 mph that only a computer simulation makes sense. Unless someone want to invest the money to build a copy of the WTT and then hit it with the same model of airplane with the same amount of fuel in the same location.

Agree with your assessment of motives on the part of the debunkers in your other comment.
 
Last edited:
Any example I give you, you will cite some conspiracy theorist that states the building didn't do what it did. I see how this game works.

Just give me other examples. You have no idea what I'll think about them until you give them to me; for all you know, I might find them persuasive.

Someone says the Plasco building was bombed? And you like what that does for you. So, voila, it's true? Prove that the Plasco building was bombed.

I didn't say "bombed". I said there is evidence that explosions occurred, and hence it's not a good counter example.

A building like the World Trade Tower falls straight down when the upper floors collapse due to weakened supports and pancake into the floors below. This isn't rocket science. Painstaking efforts were exerted to build computer models of the WTT using its actual building plans. The models show the building coming straight down - and coming down from the top (just like it did) and not from the bottom as in controlled demo.

But, yeah, of course the people who built the models were threatened by the "CIA" and faked the models.

Don't put words in my mouth. You seem so incredibly wired up that trying to have a conversation with you is very difficult.

Forget it.

Is that your way of avoiding having to provide examples other than the Plasco one? Are you just hoping I'll go away so you can say to yourself that I'm wrong? What the heck, you can say that to yourself whatever I say.

Calm down, present your evidence, and listen to my responses in a reasoned manner. Don't resort to invective merely because you are so angry you can't articulate well enough to argue cogently.

The onus is on you to show evidence that there was a months long process of wiring the WTT with explosives. And you must explain how no one on that team has ever talked. How there is no explosive trace (which there would a lot of from a demo job that big). How the wiring was never discovered before 911. .....and think about this; these evil CIA guys wire the building - no small feat and a precision job at that, and then they risk having their extensive precision demo job totally ruined by having airplanes crash into the buildings. Ever heard of Murphy's law? The airplanes could have hit anywhere and could have - most likely would have - damaged the demo plan.

You must explain how the alleged missile used on the Pentagon took out light poles on the way in, light poles on either side of the driveway. Was the missile wildly jerking left to right? Did it have wings?

This is stupid in the extreme.

Onus schmonus. Again, you're putting words in my mouth and then trying to shoot them down when I haven't said them: it's a classic straw man approach. You need to listen to what I actually say and address any points I might raise. Otherwise, no point trying to have a conversation. You can carry on having an argument with your own straw man (who exists only in your own mind), and convince yourself you've won. If that's what you want to do, nothing I can do to stop your mental masturbation.

Alternatively, like I said, calm down and try to have a reasoned conversation. That starts with you providing me with examples other than the Plasco building. My response will be to look at and evaluate that evidence. And your response to that will hopefully be to listen carefully rather than going off on another rant.
 
Last edited:
There seems to be a complete lack of knowledge about military ops, ordnance, etc - which is to be expected, but one would think that the conspiracy theorist would admit his lack of knowledge and not assert his theory with such certainty. Humbleness is a virtue in short supply.

One of my comments about 9/11 theories, is that the physics of these extreme situations is probably hard to predict - for example, a candle fired from a gun can penetrate a wooden door.

Therefore I maintain few people - maybe nobody - can predict exactly how a building will fall in situations like 9/11 or what will happen if a civilian plane impacts a large building like the Pentagon.

For that reason I have always felt suspicious of arguments based on the way these things happened.

Incidentally, I have heard it said that these tall buildings are wired with explosives as they are built, so that they can be demolished cleanly should that be necessary. It sounds a bit unlikely to me, but can anyone add anything?

David
 
Back
Top