meazza Posted April 22, 2013 Posted April 22, 2013 I don't have to tell myself anything. ANYONE with a functioning brain can plainly see that HIS OWN two statements, shown below, are very contradictory. Apparently, YOU do NOT have a functioning brain. DC Tom said: "Why the hell should anyone even discuss it with you?" Then just a little while later, he said: "Why on earth would I ignore this thread?", as he promptly engaged in discussion with me. Cool story bro.
Just Jack Posted April 22, 2013 Posted April 22, 2013 The brothers are double agents!!!!! (according to this article) http://www.debka.com/article/22914/The-Tsarnaev-brothers-were-double-agents-who-decoyed-US-into-terror-trap
John in Jax Posted April 22, 2013 Posted April 22, 2013 John - Rather than ridicule the investigation and question the timeline or possible motives - tell us, in a clearly worded statement, who you think caused this bombing, why they did it, the actors/ groups involved, and who these two pieces of s&%t really worked for (CIA, ICE, ATF...AT&T?) You're proffering a straw man argument, but WTH, I'm not too busy, so I'll play anyway. Obviously, at this point, I don't have the answers to the many, many questions of things that don't "add up." And other than "the authorities word", no one has seen any real evidence. And as I said in my second post in this thread, just about everyone is speculating that they're 100% guilty, even though virtually NO hard evidence has been presented. I stopped taking the "word of the authorities" long ago. They've lied to us so many times, I don't know how anyone age 40 & up could possibly trust them.
B-Man Posted April 22, 2013 Posted April 22, 2013 Cognitive Dissonance Strikes Deep But of course: “#FreeJahar Hashtag Hits Twitter as People Sympathize With Boston Terror Suspect Who Allegedly Placed Bomb That Killed 8-Year-Old.” Despite the mounting evidence against him, there are actually people who believe that Boston bombing suspect Dzhokhar “Jahar” Tsarnaev is an innocent patsy being framed by the government. Sure, the FBI reportedly has photo evidence of 19-year-old Jahar placing what is thought to be one of the bombs next to an 8-year-old boy who was later killed. And of course there’s the whole alleged killing of an MIT campus officer and leading police on a 24-hour manhunt during which he and his brother Tamerlan Tsarnaev reportedly threw explosives and fired multiple rounds at police officers — but that’s not enough to convince some people that he could even possibly be guilty. Seemingly spitting in the face of the victims of the Boston bombings and everyone else affected by the senseless attack, several people began using the hashtag #FreeJahar on Twitter. Why? Because he’s all innocent and stuff. {snip} Good thing the New York Times learned its lesson and wouldn’t seek the same rush to judgement today. Seven years ago, Karl Rove caused the entire professional left to soil their drawers when he said: Conservatives saw the savagery of 9/11 in the attacks and prepared for war; liberals saw the savagery of the 9/11 attacks and wanted to prepare indictments and offer therapy and understanding for our attackers. The rush to therapy — and to trutherism — begins anew.
BringBackFergy Posted April 22, 2013 Posted April 22, 2013 The brothers are double agents!!!!! (according to this article) http://www.debka.com/article/22914/The-Tsarnaev-brothers-were-double-agents-who-decoyed-US-into-terror-trap Here you go John. [/size] You're proffering a straw man argument, but WTH, I'm not too busy, so I'll play anyway. Obviously, at this point, I don't have the answers to the many, many questions of things that don't "add up." And other than "the authorities word", no one has seen any real evidence. And as I said in my second post in this thread, just about everyone is speculating that they're 100% guilty, even though virtually NO hard evidence has been presented. I stopped taking the "word of the authorities" long ago. They've lied to us so many times, I don't know how anyone age 40 & up could possibly trust them. Since most of us (as you say) are in the business of speculating, I was inviting you to speculate as well and give us an alternative theory as to who and what caused the bombing. You didn't play along at all...you screwed the pooch. Give me something I can consider a plausible theory.
John in Jax Posted April 22, 2013 Posted April 22, 2013 The brothers are double agents!!!!! (according to this article) http://www.debka.com...nto-terror-trap Actually, for those who read the whole article, the folks at the Blaze conclude this: So just to review, this particular story comes from a site that has a history of accepting conjecture, that often posts stories that it later updates when they turn out to be false, whose founders admit that a non-trivial portion of what it posts later turns out to be false. and that has drawn criticism for its alleged agenda-driven reporting. The story itself includes at least one detail that is a misinterpretation of events at best, and an outright falsehood at worst, and relies on sources that cannot be verified.Is it possible that it’s still true? Yes. Without any further information, should you assume that it’s true? No. Like many rumors, this one is built on questionable facts. Readers should take it, and rumors like it, with a grain of salt.
3rdnlng Posted April 22, 2013 Posted April 22, 2013 Why on earth would I ignore this thread? I love stomping idiots. Especially the nutty conspiracy theorist kind. And I note that you ignored the salient point I posted - that you've constructed a set of arguments that lets you dismiss every proof the authorities give as proof the authorities are lying, then demand proof from the authorities - in favor of responding to the observation that you're an idiot. Probably because, you being an idiot and such, it's the only point you can coherently respond to... As evidenced by the first half of your post I quoted. You're quoting discrepancies in completely different reports from completely different news organizations as evidence of a coverup that's somehow so inept that they' can't even cover anything up, judging by the fact that a dolt like you's uncovered it. And you completely ignoring the very possibility that two different stories from two different organizations providing two different sets of quotes from two different authorities (one not even sourced, aside from "someone says") might simply conflict. So what's more likely? Official sources are so inept that they can't even orchestrate a coverup, and you're the only genius smart enough to figure it out? Or two completely separate media reports on two different sources conflict, and you're blowing it WAY out of proportion because you're an idiot? (Here's a hint: Occam's razor says the second. And Occam's sledgehammer says you're an idiot.) Don't tell him that. Fresh meat. I can only abuse you so much, since you're too !@#$ing dense to take it personally. I actually clicked on page 4 of this thread before forcing myself to read anything I might have missed on page 3. I thought of the "fresh meat" angle because of this thread before seeing your comment. It's brought some fresh meat down here, maybe past it's "best buy" date so maybe it should be referred to as "different meat". I presume this started in OTW? Cutting to the chase, done right, we have new sources for "fresh meat"--start threads up there that are sure to become PPP worthy and the unknowing will fall down the rabbit hole.
meazza Posted April 22, 2013 Posted April 22, 2013 (edited) I actually clicked on page 4 of this thread before forcing myself to read anything I might have missed on page 3. I thought of the "fresh meat" angle because of this thread before seeing your comment. It's brought some fresh meat down here, maybe past it's "best buy" date so maybe it should be referred to as "different meat". I presume this started in OTW? Cutting to the chase, done right, we have new sources for "fresh meat"--start threads up there that are sure to become PPP worthy and the unknowing will fall down the rabbit hole. Actually this is a spin off from the original OTW thread. When it got into conspiracy theories, Just Jack decided to feed him to the wolves . Eventually it will turn into comments about the # of posts Tom has and then something about being an internet tough guy if the script goes as per God's will. Edited April 22, 2013 by meazza
3rdnlng Posted April 22, 2013 Posted April 22, 2013 Actually this is a spin off from the original OTW thread. When it got into conspiracy theories, Just Jack decided to feed him to the wolves . Eventually it will turn into comments about the # of posts Tom has and then something about being an internet tough guy if the script goes as per God's will. Well, Tom does have an inordinate amount of posts and maybe should share that post count with the likes of John in Jax. It's just so unfair in this day and age to have such a disparity.
meazza Posted April 22, 2013 Posted April 22, 2013 Well, Tom does have an inordinate amount of posts and maybe should share that post count with the likes of John in Jax. It's just so unfair in this day and age to have such a disparity. I'm actually upset that I'm only on page 3 of the top posters. Maybe if i learned how to conduct a mock draft???
Jim in Anchorage Posted April 22, 2013 Posted April 22, 2013 I'm actually upset that I'm only on page 3 of the top posters. Maybe if i learned how to conduct a mock draft??? Last post wins, it's free money. "Looks like rain" "well maybe not" "warmer, up to 50 from 48" "did you ever get you're rain?" "no. pancakes this morning." "with eggs?" " no bacon." And on and on.
DC Tom Posted April 22, 2013 Posted April 22, 2013 I don't have to tell myself anything. ANYONE with a functioning brain can plainly see that HIS OWN two statements, shown below, are very contradictory. Apparently, YOU do NOT have a functioning brain. DC Tom said: "Why the hell should anyone even discuss it with you?" Then just a little while later, he said: "Why on earth would I ignore this thread?", as he promptly engaged in discussion with me. I'm not engaging you in discussion. A discussion wouldn't be so one-sided. I'm beating the living **** out of you with your own stupidity.
Captain Hindsight Posted April 22, 2013 Posted April 22, 2013 I'm not engaging you in discussion. A discussion wouldn't be so one-sided. I'm beating the living **** out of you with your own stupidity.
bowery4 Posted April 22, 2013 Author Posted April 22, 2013 Oy! You made my silly post a thread? I didn't intend to provoke with my links and questioning of the recent events in Boston. I just thought it was fishy and worth discussion. I don't think many people here are really about a meaningful discourse, in a friendly way. I am not about to take part in it as I should have expected as much from the fact that I already do read the board. I mostly stay out of the political threads for this very reason. I don't know what I was thinking there. Funny thing, is I suspect that they (the 2 brothers) did do it and that most of the 99% being discussed will be proven to be in the right in the end, as well. It doesn't mean we shouldn't question the news though (I watched a lot of it as this was going on and they just do a horrible job!). I doubt it was a grand conspiracy but something seems amiss. And yes, the Navy seal "contractors" who haven't been identified along with the possibility that there was a drill (eye witness accounts about announcements being made etc..), seems fishy. That was why I posted the link with pictures and the opinion piece about the FBI's recent history with terrorist suspects. If you're cool with it, and ready to take the governments word for things with out doubt, well cool for you. It makes my critical facilities go off a bit when I think about it, sorry and thank you for your indulgence. BTW to DC Tom, his right to remain silent is basically what I was talking about. I knew it is a warning. He probably knows about it already too, so I would imagine he could try to invoke it anyway. There are several parts to the Miranda warning though. His right to an attorney, seems like a bigger deal to me, I wonder if they have the right to deny one if he asks for it. Finally, there are doubts that the governments ploy here will stand up in court (it will certainly make it challenge-able and this guy if he is guilty, he won't fry for it for many years). I wouldn't want him to go free on a technicality if he is proven guilty. In a case this high profile, I doubt it will happen but you never know do ya? And the person who asked about WTC, I saw people helping a lot of people and many people who didn't belong there, there doing stuff that just seemed odd. I really don't doubt that those airplanes brought down the towers though. Okay, I am finished. I wasn't going to post in the thread anymore but felt that I should since my part got splintered off like this. Cheers all.
3rdnlng Posted April 22, 2013 Posted April 22, 2013 Do you want his address? Call first, he has what he calls a weapon.
DC Tom Posted April 22, 2013 Posted April 22, 2013 Oy! You made my silly post a thread? I didn't intend to provoke with my links and questioning of the recent events in Boston. I just thought it was fishy and worth discussion. I don't think many people here are really about a meaningful discourse, in a friendly way. I am not about to take part in it as I should have expected as much from the fact that I already do read the board. I mostly stay out of the political threads for this very reason. I don't know what I was thinking there. Funny thing, is I suspect that they (the 2 brothers) did do it and that most of the 99% being discussed will be proven to be in the right in the end, as well. It doesn't mean we shouldn't question the news though (I watched a lot of it as this was going on and they just do a horrible job!). I doubt it was a grand conspiracy but something seems amiss. And yes, the Navy seal "contractors" who haven't been identified along with the possibility that there was a drill (eye witness accounts about announcements being made etc..), seems fishy. That was why I posted the link with pictures and the opinion piece about the FBI's recent history with terrorist suspects. If you're cool with it, and ready to take the governments word for things with out doubt, well cool for you. It makes my critical facilities go off a bit when I think about it, sorry and thank you for your indulgence. BTW to DC Tom, his right to remain silent is basically what I was talking about. I knew it is a warning. He probably knows about it already too, so I would imagine he could try to invoke it anyway. There are several parts to the Miranda warning though. His right to an attorney, seems like a bigger deal to me, I wonder if they have the right to deny one if he asks for it. Finally, there are doubts that the governments ploy here will stand up in court (it will certainly make it challenge-able and this guy if he is guilty, he won't fry for it for many years). I wouldn't want him to go free on a technicality if he is proven guilty. In a case this high profile, I doubt it will happen but you never know do ya? And the person who asked about WTC, I saw people helping a lot of people and many people who didn't belong there, there doing stuff that just seemed odd. I really don't doubt that those airplanes brought down the towers though. Okay, I am finished. I wasn't going to post in the thread anymore but felt that I should since my part got splintered off like this. Cheers all. He's already got an appointed attorney, as I said. They're not denying him anything. Odds are they're being very conscientious about his rights, as they wouldn't want the case to get tossed on a technicality.
John in Jax Posted April 22, 2013 Posted April 22, 2013 I'm not engaging you in discussion. A discussion wouldn't be so one-sided. I'm beating the living **** out of you with your own stupidity. You quote a post of mine and reply directly to it, but you're "not engaging" me in discussion? That's comedy gold. I guess maybe YOU and your lapdog, Captain Hindsight, believe that, but sorry DCT, anyone with a functioning brain knows otherwise. Better stick to your original game plan and just go away before you get pwnd even more, although I don't see how that's possible. Bye Loser.
meazza Posted April 22, 2013 Posted April 22, 2013 (edited) You quote a post of mine and reply directly to it, but you're "not engaging" me in discussion? That's comedy gold. I guess maybe YOU and your lapdog, Captain Hindsight, believe that, but sorry DCT, anyone with a functioning brain knows otherwise. Better stick to your original game plan and just go away before you get pwnd even more, although I don't see how that's possible. Bye Loser. :lol: What !@#$ing planet are you from? Edited April 22, 2013 by meazza
bowery4 Posted April 22, 2013 Author Posted April 22, 2013 (edited) I hadn't read about the attorney, thanks. BTW what is PPP anyway, been wondering about that for a long time. Edited April 22, 2013 by bowery4
3rdnlng Posted April 22, 2013 Posted April 22, 2013 I hadn't read about the attorney, thanks. BTW what is PPP anyway, been wondering about that for a long time. Follow the light.
Recommended Posts