Hi Geggy

[Grislygus]

kahljorn wrote:
"many of these discrepencies rely on the assumption that the government is lying."

Isn't that what all "discrepencies" in conspiracy theories boils down to?


Okay, I'll stick with the one clear point of your argument. No.

Far too many conspiracy theories mention irregularities that are merely suspicious, and means that the government is lying... but only if you felt that way in the first place.

If you find a discrepency that is ironclad proof that something odd is going on, then this might make a previously neutral observer decide that the government is lying. Of course, the word "government" is taken in the broadest possible sense here.


kahljorn wrote:
I just don't see how him stating his opinion in his own words is going to make his accusation stronger.


It won't. It helps him make the accusation in the first place.

[kahljorn]

Okay I think we are having some linguistic difficulties here.

Accusations don't require a well written and well thought out plan behind them. All accusations require is that somebody is perceived of doing wrong and somebody publically announces it. That's an accusation. The well thought out and well written parts come 'after' that when people try to prove their accusation is correct.

Secondly let's get to what a Discrepancy actually is:
"an instance of difference or inconsistency" So if we had TWO DIFFERENT VERSIONS OF A STORY, like with your JFK story, then that's discrepancy.

Here's some examples of discrepancies in the 9/11 conspiracy theory case:
GOVERNMENT CLAIMS ONE THING EVERYBODY ELSE CLAIMS SOMETHING ELSE. DISCREPANCY.
WITNESSES CLAIM ONE THING GOVERNMENT CLAIMS ANOTHER.
EXPLOSIONS AND OTHER EVENTS SURROUNDING 9/11 MAKE IT SEEM LIKE A PLANNED OUT ATTACK ON OUR SIDE RATHER THAN A SLIP UP ON DEFENSE LIKE THE GOVERNMENT SAID.
OH LOOK GUYS THAT WASNT A PLANE THAT FLEW BY MY HEAD AND HIT THE BUILDING IT SOUNDED LIKE A MISSILE NOT LIKE WHAT THE GOVERNMENT SAID.
THERES EVIDENCE MISSING HERE THAT MAKES US THINK IT'S A CONSPIRACY

What are those all examples of?

HEY LOOK THE MOON LANDING GUYS THIS HAS TO BE FAKE BECAUSE THE SHADOW OF THE SPACECRAFT IS AT THE WRONG ANGLE FOR THEM TO BE IN SPACE AT THIS PLACE AND TIME.

DISCREPANCY.

"If you find a discrepency that is ironclad proof that something odd is going on, then this might make a previously neutral observer decide that the government is lying."

Okay.. but that doesn'tmean it's the only type of discrepancy in the world. It just means that it's the type of discrepancy powerful enough to change somebody's mind, and who knows if it's even "Valid" then, just because they are SUPPOSEDLY neutral and got outraged? That's not proof, nor does it do anyone any good unless you just like to lead people by their emotional nostrils.

I'm going to repost this from my last post:

Some people find bigger, more substantial discrepencies and people think they are smarter and closer to the truth, but really everybody is just trying to fill in the blanks, that, for some reason, the people whom are responsible won't fill in; that is the greatest DISCREPANCY of all conspiracies.[
IF the government filled in the "Blanks" there would be no "Discrepancies", instead they leave discrepancies behind, thus inciting people to point them out and wonder. That in itself isn't necessarily a sign of guilt, but moreover it isn't a sign of any type of proof or evidence to the truth of what happened. Regardless of what holes there are, except for a few smart people, most people are still shooting in the dark at what really happened.
The government not filling in the holes is a type of discrepancy.

[Grislygus]

Originally Posted by kahljorn

Okay I think we are having some linguistic difficulties here.

Accusations don't require a well written and well thought out plan behind them. All accusations require is that somebody is perceived of doing wrong and somebody publically announces it. That's an accusation. The well thought out and well written parts come 'after' that when people try to prove their accusation is correct.

And yet, things seemed a bit hazy when it came to the actual accusations, didn't it? I saw a lot of quoting, and a lot of citations, and a lot of THERE'S A CONSPIRACY HERE, and the actual accusations became muddled. Therefore, simply and concisely expressing what you think happened will help you make the accusation and get your point across. I requested that he do this, he did, and I fail to see the problem.

Originally Posted by kahljorn

Secondly let's get to what a Discrepancy actually is:
"an instance of difference or inconsistency" So if we had TWO DIFFERENT VERSIONS OF A STORY, like with your JFK story, then that's discrepancy.

Here's some examples of discrepancies in the 9/11 conspiracy theory case:
GOVERNMENT CLAIMS ONE THING EVERYBODY ELSE CLAIMS SOMETHING ELSE. DISCREPANCY.
WITNESSES CLAIM ONE THING GOVERNMENT CLAIMS ANOTHER.
EXPLOSIONS AND OTHER EVENTS SURROUNDING 9/11 MAKE IT SEEM LIKE A PLANNED OUT ATTACK ON OUR SIDE RATHER THAN A SLIP UP ON DEFENSE LIKE THE GOVERNMENT SAID.
OH LOOK GUYS THAT WASNT A PLANE THAT FLEW BY MY HEAD AND HIT THE BUILDING IT SOUNDED LIKE A MISSILE NOT LIKE WHAT THE GOVERNMENT SAID.
THERES EVIDENCE MISSING HERE THAT MAKES US THINK IT'S A CONSPIRACY

What are those all examples of?

And did they have any logical basis? I didn't know, all I saw was a bunch of quotes, and very little arguments previously made by the poster himself.

Hell, I can quote people who insist that Elvis is alive, and yet that contradicts what 'The Man' says.

I did not just merely ask for discrepencies. I asked for "patterns, things that I [could] pinpoint." You can dig up any amount of discrepencies that you want, but they have to be enough to stand on it's own. Which brings me to the next point..

Originally Posted by kahljorn

Okay.. but that doesn'tmean it's the only type of discrepancy in the world. It just means that it's the type of discrepancy powerful enough to change somebody's mind, and who knows if it's even "Valid" then, just because they are SUPPOSEDLY neutral and got outraged? That's not proof, nor does it do anyone any good unless you just like to lead people by their emotional nostrils.

HE was trying to convince OTHER PEOPLE. The discrepencies he brings up had damn well better be powerful enough to change people's minds, or else he doesn't have a strong argument, doesn't have enough back up, and is quite possibly wrong.

And who said anything about proof? Once again, my biggest problem was that he seemed to be parroting flimsy information, and I asked that he clarify and back up his position. And if you personally think that it's pointless to convince other people to see the 'truth', then I guess that's why Geggy was talking about the 9/11 conspiracy theory, and not you.

Originally Posted by kahljorn

I'm going to repost this from my last post:

Some people find bigger, more substantial discrepencies and people think they are smarter and closer to the truth, but really everybody is just trying to fill in the blanks, that, for some reason, the people whom are responsible won't fill in; that is the greatest DISCREPANCY of all conspiracies.[
IF the government filled in the "Blanks" there would be no "Discrepancies", instead they leave discrepancies behind, thus inciting people to point them out and wonder. That in itself isn't necessarily a sign of guilt, but moreover it isn't a sign of any type of proof or evidence to the truth of what happened. Regardless of what holes there are, except for a few smart people, most people are still shooting in the dark at what really happened.
The government not filling in the holes is a type of discrepancy.

Then I'll just repost this from MY last post:

"Far too many conspiracy theories mention irregularities that are merely suspicious, and means that the government is lying... but only if you felt that way in the first place."

[Geggy]

Blanco

Lookit...you had me there for a while cuz I swear that I remember mineta testimony had been edited out of the report.

The link you've provided leads to the hearings that took place on that date which included mineta testimony. This is the 9/11 report in which mineta testimony was completely omitted. In the report, it stated cheney arrived the PEOC at 9:58, the pentagon impact occured at 9:37.

Either you're attempting to falsely contradict my claim or you made a mistake...either way you shot yourself in the foot.

I'm think I'm done here...

[kahljorn]

I just think it's funny you guys play fringe cowboys with conspiracy theories like you're fighting some uphill battle.

"Far too many conspiracy theories mention irregularities that are merely suspicious, and means that the government is lying... but only if you felt that way in the first place"

But I don't feel that way at all and as a reasonable person I find the lack of information involved in something that started a war and is responsible for the current political atmosphere unreasonable. I also find all the recent news about how the administration has been lying and falsifying reports to us indicative of some type of "conspiracy" or a "pattern of discrepancy". Obviously the government was lying, about what I'm not making any real claims.

but you guys continue to argue vague notions of reality like "Opinion".


" The discrepencies he brings up had damn well better be powerful enough to change people's minds, or else he doesn't have a strong argument, doesn't have enough back up, and is quite possibly wrong. "

You can have a strong argument and people will still disagree with you if they are naturally predisposed to disagree with you, infact usually people will disagree MORE SO if they are naturally predisposed.
Why do you expect him to have a wealth of information on an issue that the fundamental issue is the lack of conclusive information.
None of that really would make it right or wrong anyway, just because people are convinced you're right doesn't make it right. Remember when bush won the election BUT LOOK WHERE WE ARE NOW in fact sometimes whats right might be the last thing people want.

You guys are crazy, first you ask for his opinion to verify what he's saying then you say the conspiracy theory might be wrong because he can't state his opinion about somebody else's conspiracy theory.

Great job discussing conspiracy theories guys or should I say inspecting geggy's scrotum for pubic hairs.

[El Blanco]

Originally Posted by Geggy

Blanco

Lookit...you had me there for a while cuz I swear that I remember mineta testimony had been edited out of the report.

Obviously its still there

The link you've provided leads to the hearings that took place on that date which included mineta testimony. This is the 9/11 report in which mineta testimony was completely omitted.

That very same website you link, the offical 9-11 comission investigation, has Mineta's testimony. what are you trying to prove? If the government was trying to hide it, why is it there?

A lot of people's testimony isn't in there, but the things they said and they themselves are refered to. Many times, it was because the testimony was reduntant or not all that relevent.

In the report, it stated cheney arrived the PEOC at 9:58, the pentagon impact occured at 9:37.

No, it says he arrived at the main conference room at 9:58. Read the reports, he was already communicating with the President, NORAD, Pentagon etc etc in the White House and then continued to do so in what seems to be a small anteroom outside the main part of the shelter on the phone. He had been in there since about 9:30 or so(all times estimated according to witnesses' best estimates).

Besides, Mineta testified that fighter jets had already been scrambled when he heard Cheney's associate counting down. So, this is moot since there obviously wasn't a stand down order.

Either you're attempting to falsely contradict my claim or you made a mistake

Option 3, you just refuse to read things fully

....either way you shot yourself in the foot.

By pointing out how completly wrong you are? What are you smoing and where can I get me some? Cuz that must be some good shit.

I'm think I'm done here...

You've been done a while.

[Grislygus]

Originally Posted by kahljorn

I just think it's funny you guys play fringe cowboys with conspiracy theories like you're fighting some uphill battle.

Uphill battle? The only thing I asked from Geggy was his own, solid opinion, he gave it, and the conversation between him and myself was closed. I was convinced that he was a capable individual who knew what he was talking about.

Since then, the only "battle" on my part involved you not liking requests to back up arguments. All of my subsequent comments have been directed at you, and it is your arguments that I currently have a problem with.

Originally Posted by kahljorn

"Far too many conspiracy theories mention irregularities that are merely suspicious, and means that the government is lying... but only if you felt that way in the first place"

But I don't feel that way at all

I noticed.

Originally Posted by kahljorn

and as a reasonable person I find the lack of information involved in something that started a war and is responsible for the current political atmosphere unreasonable. I also find all the recent news about how the administration has been lying and falsifying reports to us indicative of some type of "conspiracy" or a "pattern of discrepancy". Obviously the government was lying, about what I'm not making any real claims.

Exactly. You aren't making any real claims, you don't have any real idea of what's going on. You are merely suspicious of the government, and think the government is lying just because it's the government. Therefore, you rely on more intelligent 9/11 theorists like Geggy to provide real arguments, and rise to their defense if someone has the audacity to question them.

Originally Posted by kahljorn

but you guys continue to argue vague notions of reality like "Opinion".

No, YOU continue to argue about opinions, because YOUR opinion is vague at best. You will notice that Geggy had absolutely no problem posting his opinion. Because, unlike you, he has a solid, legitimate opinion.

And I've got news for you, my half-baked friend: If you're a conspiracy theorist on the internet, you have only two things; facts, and your opinion based on those facts.

" The discrepencies he brings up had damn well better be powerful enough to change people's minds, or else he doesn't have a strong argument, doesn't have enough back up, and is quite possibly wrong. "

You can have a strong argument and people will still disagree with you if they are naturally predisposed to disagree with you, infact usually people will disagree MORE SO if they are naturally predisposed.

So is that why you have a problem with opinions?

Why do you expect him to have a wealth of information on an issue that the fundamental issue is the lack of conclusive information.
None of that really would make it right or wrong anyway, just because people are convinced you're right doesn't make it right. Remember when bush won the election BUT LOOK WHERE WE ARE NOW in fact sometimes whats right might be the last thing people want.

One: I DON'T expect him to have a "wealth of information". Haven't you been paying any attention at all? ALL HE DID was offer a wealth of information from OTHER PEOPLE, and I asked that he give his own opinion. WHICH HE DID ADMIRABLY. You had a problem with it because you don't know what you're talking about.

And if you really feel that talking about your theories won't do any good, then feel free to keep quiet.

You guys are crazy, first you ask for his opinion to verify what he's saying then you say the conspiracy theory might be wrong because he can't state his opinion about somebody else's conspiracy theory.

Allright, let's go over this scenario. Again.

"You guys are crazy, first you ask for his opinion to verify what he's saying"
Point A: We ask him to provide his own opinion.

then you say the conspiracy theory might be wrong because he can't state his opinion about somebody else's conspiracy theory.
Point B: He provides other people's opinions. We once again ask him to provide his own

The request is clarified, he gives his own opinion on one aspect of the attacks.

Why do you have a problem with this?

[El Blanco]

Another problem is he obviously isn't reading what he posts. Either its not related to the cryptic message he types himself, contradicts wat he says, or contradicts a post he made very recently.

[kahljorn]

"The only thing I asked from Geggy was his own, solid opinion, he gave it, and the conversation between him and myself was closed."

Pretty gay conversation huh? Like i said, you guys argue in the land of opinions which don't really matter Besides I can't believe you guys have read through this forum for however long and you've never seen geggy make a "Solid opinion" or point out a single decent discrepancy.
You guys are sitting here acting like you're having a powow SMOKEM PEACE PIPE we're coming together and finding the truth about geggy's opinion! I just thought it was lame, like something little kids would do. I don't really give a damn about the conspiracy theories themselves.
I don't know I guess I just think you guys have the mental capacity of a four year old, in this instance. You guys can be pretty bright on other topics.

"back up arguments"

BACK UP YOUR ARGUMENT WITH A NICE OPINION NO BETTER WAY TO BE JUSTIFIED

"You aren't making any real claims, you don't have any real idea of what's going on. You are merely suspicious of the government, and think the government is lying just because it's the government. "

If I wanted to argue opinions and pretend to know things about things that nobody except the people there could possibly know(see conspiracy theory) I really could.
But that's not the case, I actually agree with you when you say that stuff like this is either a fuck up or..something. People can still create "Conspiracies" over "Fuck ups" though.
Moreover the entire issue of 9/11, regardless of if there was any actions on our government's part to actually destroy the world trade towers, is that the Government USED the emotional soft spot of Americans to take us into an unjust war, along with the creation of todays socio-political climate. As far as that war goes, and it's justification, THE GOVERNMENT HAS ALREADY ADMITTED TO LYING ABOUT IT.

"Therefore, you rely on more intelligent 9/11 theorists like Geggy to provide real arguments, and rise to their defense if someone has the audacity to question them. "

:LOL Great job bringing out the REAL ARGUMENTS from geggy by asking him for his PERSONAL OPINION. GREAT JOB.
I don't really care about 9/11, I haven't even once really talked about a single conspiracy theory I've been talking about the nature of a conspiracy theory and the logic of your gay "ARGUMENT' which in it's classic terms isn't even a real argument. You do get that that's my problem with your argument is that it's dumb and not really an argument, right? I guess not because you think I'm a conspiracy theororist.
Basically my problem is that your guy's idea of a good argument is when somebody states their personal opinion.
Great "Opinion" you forged there by the way about my being a conspiracy theororist did you develop that while I was talking about the great conspiracy theory of DISCREPANCIES or the great conspiracy of OPINIONS?

"So is that why you have a problem with opinions? "

lol. Is this even worth answering? I have a problem with opinions because they are OPINIONS.
Let's look at the definition of opinion:
a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty. personal view, attitude, or appraisal.
You asked for his "judgement that rests on insufficient grounds" to produce complete certainty that you know that he knows what he's talking about so he'll have the strength to convince neutral minds otherwise.

"you have only two things; facts, and your opinion based on those facts. "

You guys asked for his opinion on facts but his opinion didn't really matter at all. You see this is the catcher, it's not the damned opinion that matters. It's the "fact" that there was a "Discrepancy" that matters. Geggy didn't really "State his opinion' he stated a "Discrepancy", that's what you guys were convinced of. One that I'm sure he didn't discover through investigative journalism but by reading a bunch of different articles about 9/11.
So why ask for his own words and his own opinion when what mattered most was the discrepancy that was discovered by somebody else? If he stated his opinion without the discrepancy would it have been so valuable? no. it would've had no value, because it wouldn't have had a discrepancy behind it.

And if all you guys needed was a decent discrepancy to convince you that there's justification for considering what happened on 9/11.. i don't know. I give up on life if that's the case because there's plenty of decent discrepancies floating around to at least give you the inclination to be interested in what actually happened. I mean, discrepancy alone should be enough to make any normal, healthy person wonder. Especially when it comes down to something important.

"And if you really feel that talking about your theories won't do any good, then feel free to keep quiet."

SORRY ILL EVEN GO BACK AND EDIT MY CONSPIRACY THEORIES OUT OF MY OTHER POSTS

"Why do you have a problem with this?"

Because his opinion has nothing to do with what actually transpired on 9/11?
Because the inevitable pointlessness of asking for opinions has already occured because your conversation is CLOSED. So do you believe everything geggy says now? ARE YOU GOING TOLOOK AT WHAT HE SAYS A LITTLE MORE CLOSELY? NO IT WAS ALL POINTLESS DRAMA.

You guys are little cockteases.

Also I should add that discrepancies in and of themselves don't prove a damned thing.

Oh yea and didn't you guys want him to state his own opinion so he'd have a strong argument, so you guys wo uld know that he knows what he's talking about? So you guys could maybe continue the argument? Why is it that the conversation is now closed, instead of you guys continuing to bring up points?
See, I don't really need to do anything to make my point that your guys stance on this was ridiculous and pointless, the conclusion of this thread and "Argument" is enough. I don't need an "Opinion" to prove that, the discrepancy is clear.
I think it's pretty obvious you guys were just being bitter cunts.

The funniest thing is that I know for a fact if I visited a few other threads I'd find el blanco demanding that geggy stop stating his opinion and supply sources.

[Grislygus]

Ladies and Gentlemen, I present the first volley of the "condescending and rambling" responses, the last stages of an internet argument! Be sure to take notes, you'll be quizzed on this later.

Originally Posted by kahljorn

"The only thing I asked from Geggy was his own, solid opinion, he gave it, and the conversation between him and myself was closed."

Pretty gay conversation huh? Like i said, you guys argue in the land of opinions which don't really matter Besides I can't believe you guys have read through this forum for however long and you've never seen geggy make a "Solid opinion" or point out a single decent discrepancy.

If you may recall, this thread was awlays entirely about Geggy's opinion.

Originally Posted by Misdemonar

Could you tell me all about 9/11? Why did America and the Jews blow up the towers?

Ah, memories.

And since the responses were long, inconclusive, the discrepencies vague, with the accusations even more so, I asked for a simple and concise argument. Which seems to enrage you for some reason.

Originally Posted by kahljorn

You guys are sitting here acting like you're having a powow SMOKEM PEACE PIPE we're coming together and finding the truth about geggy's opinion! I just thought it was lame, like something little kids would do. I don't really give a damn about the conspiracy theories themselves.

I wasn't under the impression that having intellectual conversations was something that lame little kids do. Maybe we should have played tag instead.

Originally Posted by kahljorn

I don't know I guess I just think you guys have the mental capacity of a four year old, in this instance. You guys can be pretty bright on other topics.

Yep. Should have played tag.

Originally Posted by kahljorn

"back up arguments"

BACK UP YOUR ARGUMENT WITH A NICE OPINION NO BETTER WAY TO BE JUSTIFIED

If the argument is hazy and unclear, it's nice to be certain of what the person is getting at. Oh, whoops, should have put that in Caps Lock.

Originally Posted by kahljorn

"You aren't making any real claims, you don't have any real idea of what's going on. You are merely suspicious of the government, and think the government is lying just because it's the government. "

If I wanted to argue opinions and pretend to know things about things that nobody except the people there could possibly know(see conspiracy theory) I really could.

But if the facts are there, the opinion is sound, and obviously has sound backup, then the truth can be quite clear. However, it is up to the conspiracy theorist to provide this.

Originally Posted by kahljorn

But that's not the case, I actually agree with you when you say that stuff like this is either a fuck up or..something. People can still create "Conspiracies" over "Fuck ups" though.

WHICH IS WHY I ASKED HIM TO CLARIFY HIS POSITION. There we go. Nuthin' like caps lock to make an argument more sound.

Originally Posted by kahljorn

Moreover the entire issue of 9/11, regardless of if there was any actions on our government's part to actually destroy the world trade towers, is that the Government USED the emotional soft spot of Americans to take us into an unjust war, along with the creation of todays socio-political climate. As far as that war goes, and it's justification, THE GOVERNMENT HAS ALREADY ADMITTED TO LYING ABOUT IT.

Which is why many of these theories rely on people blindly assuming that the government lies about everything, as I have said umpteen billion times.

Originally Posted by kahljorn

"Therefore, you rely on more intelligent 9/11 theorists like Geggy to provide real arguments, and rise to their defense if someone has the audacity to question them. "

:LOL Great job bringing out the REAL ARGUMENTS from geggy by asking him for his PERSONAL OPINION. GREAT JOB.

Originally Posted by I

But if the facts are there, the opinion is sound, and obviously has sound backup, then the truth can be quite clear. However, it is up to the conspiracy theorist to provide this.

:LOL

Originally Posted by kahljorn

I don't really care about 9/11, I haven't even once really talked about a single conspiracy theory I've been talking about the nature of a conspiracy theory and the logic of your gay "ARGUMENT' which in it's classic terms isn't even a real argument. You do get that that's my problem with your argument is that it's dumb and not really an argument, right?

Do you even listen to yourself? The reason that you're angrily debating me is because my dumb gay little argument isn't really an argument?

How? So far I've refuted everything you've thrown at me. And how is it that I have remained on my one argument the whole time, yet yours jumps around more than Tom Cruise on a coke binge?

Originally Posted by kahljorn

"So is that why you have a problem with opinions? "

lol. Is this even worth answering? I have a problem with opinions because they are OPINIONS.
Let's look at the definition of opinion:
a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty. personal view, attitude, or appraisal.
You asked for his "judgement that rests on insufficient grounds" to produce complete certainty that you know that he knows what he's talking about so he'll have the strength to convince neutral minds otherwise.

Once more...

Originally Posted by I

But if the facts are there, the opinion is sound, and obviously has sound backup, then the truth can be quite clear. However, it is up to the conspiracy theorist to provide this.

:LOL (again)

Originally Posted by kahljorn

"you have only two things; facts, and your opinion based on those facts. "

You guys asked for his opinion on facts but his opinion didn't really matter at all. You see this is the catcher, it's not the damned opinion that matters. It's the "fact" that there was a "Discrepancy" that matters. Geggy didn't really "State his opinion' he stated a "Discrepancy", that's what you guys were convinced of. One that I'm sure he didn't discover through investigative journalism but by reading a bunch of different articles about 9/11.

He stated his opinion based on the discrepency he provided. Why the hell is this so hard to understand?

Originally Posted by kahljorn

So why ask for his own words and his own opinion when what mattered most was the discrepancy that was discovered by somebody else? If he stated his opinion without the discrepancy would it have been so valuable? no. it would've had no value, because it wouldn't have had a discrepancy behind it.

Of course not. If his opinion HADN'T HAD SOME SOUND BACKUP AND EVIDENCE, his opinion would have been worthless, and he would have been dismissed. You don't seem to realize that people are, by nature, curious.

Originally Posted by kahljorn

And if all you guys needed was a decent discrepancy to convince you that there's justification for considering what happened on 9/11.. i don't know. I give up on life if that's the case because there's plenty of decent discrepancies floating around to at least give you the inclination to be interested in what actually happened. I mean, discrepancy alone should be enough to make any normal, healthy person wonder. Especially when it comes down to something important.

We needed a discrepency, one that he proved that he understood, to prove that he wasn't just pulling things out of his ass, Mr. "I don't know anything about 9/11 conspiracies".

Originally Posted by kahljorn

"And if you really feel that talking about your theories won't do any good, then feel free to keep quiet."

SORRY ILL EVEN GO BACK AND EDIT MY CONSPIRACY THEORIES OUT OF MY OTHER POSTS

You've got me there. But my point still stands. If you really think that this is futile, then why are you talking about it?

Originally Posted by kahljorn

"Why do you have a problem with this?"

Because his opinion has nothing to do with what actually transpired on 9/11?
Because the inevitable pointlessness of asking for opinions has already occured because your conversation is CLOSED. So do you believe everything geggy says now? ARE YOU GOING TOLOOK AT WHAT HE SAYS A LITTLE MORE CLOSELY? NO IT WAS ALL POINTLESS DRAMA.

What, and what you're doing isn't pointless drama? As I have before stated, any moron can pull a conspiracy theory out of his ass, and if Geggy was to be taken seriously, he needed to prove that he understood the subject and wasn't some thirteen year old with a copy/paste button. It's still up to him to convince me, but at least now I know that he shouldn't be simply dismissed.

Originally Posted by kahljorn

You guys are little cockteases.

Totally not pointless drama.

Originally Posted by kahljorn

Also I should add that discrepancies in and of themselves don't prove a damned thing.

Oh yea and didn't you guys want him to state his own opinion so he'd have a strong argument, so you guys wo uld know that he knows what he's talking about? So you guys could maybe continue the argument? Why is it that the conversation is now closed, instead of you guys continuing to bring up points?

It's not closed between the people still engaged in the debate, idiot. I am not well-versed in the event, therefore am unable to refute arguments. However, as a theorist myself, I brought up my initial reaction to his theories, and his way of presenting information.

Originally Posted by kahljorn

See, I don't really need to do anything to make my point that your guys stance on this was ridiculous and pointless, the conclusion of this thread and "Argument" is enough. I don't need an "Opinion" to prove that, the discrepancy is clear.
I think it's pretty obvious you guys were just being bitter cunts.

In that case, feel free to stop arguing, if it's that obvious that my argument is ridiculous. Furthermore, YOU are the only one who's being bitter about anything. The fact remains that Geggy gladly complied with my request, and YOU just want something to yell about.

[El Blanco]

The funniest thing is that I know for a fact if I visited a few other threads I'd find el blanco demanding that geggy stop stating his opinion and supply sources.

How I spotted this amongst that mountain of rambling insanity, I'll never know.

Go right ahead. Geggy has yet to post an original thought. He always cut-n-pastes other people, so I never had to search for his "sources".

[Grislygus]

And, that wraps up all of your arguments, Kahljorn.

[kahljorn]

What I don't get is why you can't just take what he posts and develop your own opinions without asking him for his opinion(el blanco did that to the 9/11 commission report thing and look how much better the argument developed, there were actual responses :O). His opinion and the facts are seperate. Most of everything else was me just acting like you guys.
Instead you have him pull some "Opinion" out of his ass that you were satisfied with wherein which the "Opinion" was 1/32nd of the post he made, whereas the other part was what he has learned from news sources. Do you know how I know this? Because I know that he wasn't standing there with dick cheney. Did you read any of the reports he classified as relevant?

Did you read the opinion/discrepancy you stated as satisfying? Didn't el blanco tear it apart in something like five minutes? And that satisfied you that you knew that he knew what he was talking about? And somehow I'm the bad guy between you two. Hilarity.

So after he satisfied you with that did you go back and read everything he's posted? Or even read the post he made in this thread wherein "Officials" commented on the 9/11 incident? Just curious.

"How I spotted this amongst that mountain of rambling insanity, I'll never know."

PROBABLY BECAUSE IT WAS AT THE END OF IT, USUALLY YOU REMEMBER THE END OF THINGS BECAUSE THATS WHERE YOU STOP DOING THEM.

I have to admit el blanco has the most solid position between you two as a redundant asshole. I'm not even sure most of the time if el blanco is talking out of his ass, were there really 14 jets to defend the united states? Did he actually refute what geggy said? This mystery will always stand. However, most of it seemed to make sense to me.

And it's not necessarily in this instance that i belive there's some conspiracy theory. The conspiracy theory to me is the fact that something bad happened and information is withheld and distorted, causing a war and bad political atmosphere- right? that's bad. See, I agree entirely that it's a fuck up or something funny's going on with big discrepancies like this, except to me they serve the same purpose, because regardless of if you have a fuck up in office or someone fucking people over that person needs to be removed from office.
You see, regardless of what happened, to me, the situation needs to be accessed to see if that's deserving. That's how logical and reasonable people deal with things, because you don't want fuck ups and fuck overs in responsible positions, you don't want anything but the normal kind of fucks. Procreative fucks. It's natural and healthy.
I think in light of the evidences there is some room for feeling that way. We tried to impeach somebody for getting a blow job and then lying about it.

[KevinTheOmnivore]

Holy shit, this may be the dumbest discussion in this board's infamous history.

Kahl, Geggy DOES NOT read what he posts! He often provides links, intended to support his arguments, that have nothing at all to do with the discussion. As Blanco did on the 9/11 testimony, you can often refute Geggy's claims using the same links he has provided.

I don't care about anything else said here, but these things are frequent and undeniable, and it's the most obvious annoyance when it comes to Geggy, imo.

[kahljorn]

I know he does that ;/ I even mentioned that in a few of my posts.

I was mostly making fun of grislygus.

[Grislygus]

Dammit, I was hoping that you would ignore what Geggy wrote.

[kahljorn]

I'll pay less attention next time

[Grislygus]

Oh, well. It worked for a little while.

[kahljorn]

By the way I forgot to comment on the little kid thing you see the reason I mentioned that is because despite this little encounter you guys had: you apparantly still haven't read anything geggy posted or responded to any of the material, thus satisfying that there was no "argument" or debate; el blanco still isn't particularly satisfied by geggy and probably never will be.
Also the thing that bothers me the most is that the discrepancy you seemed most satisfied with is the most obvious one. Do you know what I'm referring to?

[Ant10708]

I think the government is behind kahljorn not having a hobby.

[kahljorn]

I've never even met the government, you liar.

[Grislygus]

Originally Posted by kahljorn

By the way I forgot to comment on the little kid thing you see the reason I mentioned that is because despite this little encounter you guys had: you apparantly still haven't read anything geggy posted or responded to any of the material, thus satisfying that there was no "argument" or debate; el blanco still isn't particularly satisfied by geggy and probably never will be.
Also the thing that bothers me the most is that the discrepancy you seemed most satisfied with is the most obvious one. Do you know what I'm referring to?

I didn't pay attention to Geggy's posts, I was too busy being pissy with you.

[kahljorn]

but you said you had resolved your quarrel with him, and you were satisfied of his opinion that cheney did it for money- the most obvious and convenient theory.

Geggy is obviously just compulsive by nature. he gets BRAINSTORMZ.

[Grislygus]

I knew his argument had something to do with Jets not being deployed. That's about it.

I like arguing.


Besides, my beef wasn't with the subject matter, just the way in which it was presented.

[kahljorn]

My guess would be that the jet deployment is one of millions of reasons for geggy's argument.