propaganda techniques of the twoof movement

[NWO Sentryman]

inspired by a Twoofer's story on bush's "Big lie", i began to think of propaganda.

They argue that Bush uses the Big Lie technique. What is it? Basically Goebbels, Hitler's Minister for Propaganda and enlightenment, said that small lies get you nowhere, but if you tell a big lie, people will belive you. Obviously, this is a comparison to Nazi Germany. But indeed it is used before, by many other people, including Alex Jones.

His "Big Lie" is this. An ancient cult thathas been around since the Romans is planning to take over the world by subterfuge, kill 80% of us and put the rest in Logan's run-esque cities. Thus, the Big lie is not exclusive to The Nazis. Gobbels was making a point about propaganda techniques. But that does not make the user a Nazi.

But what other techniques are they using?

The most obvious tactic of truthers is chanting "9/11 was an inside job" over and over again in various places, such as Ground Zero. As we all know, this is a lie. But, in lenin's terms, "a lie often told becomes truth". Thus, the truth movement have been using Leninist tactics since Loose change.

Thus, they tell big lies, such as Laser beams brought down the Towers or Therite/thermate being explosives, and repeat them over and over again until people "wake up" and agree with them.

Agitprop is also used. Agitprop was used during the Russian civil war to stir support among the peasants. The name comes from the Russian Department of AGITation and PROPaganda Basically, this appeals to emotions, such as anger and hatred. An example of agitprop is "Bush caused 9/11 so he could murder iraqi babies for oil".

Analogies to totalitarian regimes are also used. Bush is compared to Adolf Hitler many a time, with the "Big lie", and Gitmo (or the FEMA camps) to Nazi KZs, and the CIA/FBI to the Gestapo. But this just cheapens the horrific systematic slaughter of 22 million men, women and children because of their Nationality, race, creed, Political ideology and ethnicity. Yet, are we to compare them to the communists because of their propaganda (repeating a lie).

Newspeak is also used. But i will refer you to my essay on 9/11 truth's hypocrisy.
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=146217

And that is my essay on Truther propaganda

[~enigma~]

inspired by a Twoofer's story on bush's "Big lie", i began to think of propaganda.

They argue that Bush uses the Big Lie technique. What is it? Basically Goebbels, Hitler's Minister for Propaganda and enlightenment, said that small lies get you nowhere, but if you tell a big lie, people will belive you. Obviously, this is a comparison to Nazi Germany. But indeed it is used before, by many other people, including Alex Jones.

His "Big Lie" is this. An ancient cult thathas been around since the Romans is planning to take over the world by subterfuge, kill 80% of us and put the rest in Logan's run-esque cities. Thus, the Big lie is not exclusive to The Nazis. Gobbels was making a point about propaganda techniques. But that does not make the user a Nazi.

But what other techniques are they using?

The most obvious tactic of truthers is chanting "9/11 was an inside job" over and over again in various places, such as Ground Zero. As we all know, this is a lie. But, in lenin's terms, "a lie often told becomes truth". Thus, the truth movement have been using Leninist tactics since Loose change.

Thus, they tell big lies, such as Laser beams brought down the Towers or Therite/thermate being explosives, and repeat them over and over again until people "wake up" and agree with them.

Agitprop is also used. Agitprop was used during the Russian civil war to stir support among the peasants. The name comes from the Russian Department of AGITation and PROPaganda Basically, this appeals to emotions, such as anger and hatred. An example of agitprop is "Bush caused 9/11 so he could murder iraqi babies for oil".

Analogies to totalitarian regimes are also used. Bush is compared to Adolf Hitler many a time, with the "Big lie", and Gitmo (or the FEMA camps) to Nazi KZs, and the CIA/FBI to the Gestapo. But this just cheapens the horrific systematic slaughter of 22 million men, women and children because of their Nationality, race, creed, Political ideology and ethnicity. Yet, are we to compare them to the communists because of their propaganda (repeating a lie).

Newspeak is also used. But i will refer you to my essay on 9/11 truth's hypocrisy.
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=146217

And that is my essay on Truther propaganda
Aren't these common to all CTs?

[NWO Sentryman]

Aren't these common to all CTs?

Nazi Analogies weren't used in the JFK assassination, nor with the moon landing, Iran Contra, CIA cocaine, MKULTRA (Soviet analogies instead).

CIA drugs have some truth, yet it is IMPOSSIBLE to differentiate truth from lies. Ditto Operation Gladio.

The Big lie analogy is not used in Gladio, nor JFK.

[~enigma~]

Nazi Analogies weren't used in the JFK assassination, nor with the moon landing, Iran Contra, CIA cocaine, MKULTRA (Soviet analogies instead).

CIA drugs have some truth, yet it is IMPOSSIBLE to differentiate truth from lies. Ditto Operation Gladio.

The Big lie analogy is not used in Gladio, nor JFK.
Seems to me you haven't been reading much about CTs. BTW if you really want Nazi analogies about all the CTs you mention, just check out ATS, infowars (rather infoidiots), websites belonging to Apollo hoax believers and flat earthers...or just the youtube comments from them.

[metamars]

inspired by a Twoofer's story on bush's "Big lie", i began to think of propaganda.

They argue that Bush uses the Big Lie technique. What is it? Basically Goebbels, Hitler's Minister for Propaganda and enlightenment, said that small

I can see that you have a bright future, here at JREF. A first class intellect, coupled with a stunning ability to capture your great thoughts in the most concise of prose, reveals you to be an up-and-coming colossus, who will stand astride the truth, as revealed to us by that that most honest of institutions, the US government.

Those damn 911 twoofers better give up now, while they still have a chance to escape the prime of your debunking career!

[funk de fino]

I can see that you have a bright future, here at JREF. A first class intellect, coupled with a stunning ability to capture your great thoughts in the most concise of prose, reveals you to be an up-and-coming colossus, who will stand astride the truth, as revealed to us by that that most honest of institutions, the US government.

Those damn 911 twoofers better give up now, while they still have a chance to escape the prime of your debunking career!

Says the man who thinks the world media outside the US is controlled by someone using a few thousand dollars.

[Justin39640]

its funny the only 'big lie' that anyone actually bought was the "truth?" movements
it grabbed every lunatic in this country hook line and sinker
AJ and the others know it and bottom feed off those poor saps to make careers for themselves

i find it funny also when "truth?"ers ask "whos paying you?" to gravy or other debunkers
when AJ makes millions peddling his lies

[Justin39640]

Says the man who thinks the world media outside the US is controlled by someone using a few thousand dollars.

lol link? lol

[JihadJane]

What's a "twoof movement"?

[Justin39640]

What's a "twoof movement"?

a nickname for a movement that doesn't deserve its self appointed name
cause they are liars
;)

[JihadJane]

a nickname for a movement that doesn't deserve its self appointed name
cause they are liars
;)

I see. So saying "twoof movement" is an example of the name-calling propaganda technique, then.

[Squidgy]

I see. So saying "twoof movement" is a propaganda technique, then.
Interesting question ;)

[NWO Sentryman]

I see. So saying "twoof movement" is an example of the name-calling propaganda technique, then.

no, Twoof movement is mockery. Not propaganda.

[bill smith]

I would point out that the propaganda terms '19 Muslims' 'War on Terror' and even 'Osama bin Laden' came long before the expression '9/11 was an inside job'.

[JihadJane]

Mockery is a propaganda technique.

[Justin39640]

I see. So saying "twoof movement" is an example of the name-calling propaganda technique, then.

no most people dont think they deserve to be linked with the word and make up alternatives
i also think youve been around long enough to know exactly why people say that
youre nitpicking for the sake of starting an argument
nothin else

[Justin39640]

I would point out that the propaganda terms '19 Muslims' 'War on Terror' and even 'Osama bin Laden' came long before the expression '9/11 was an inside job'.

hmm i wonder why :rolleyes:

[Squidgy]

no, Twoof movement is mockery. Not propaganda.
I see JihadJanes point. A generalisation like 'twoofer' implies that truthers are stupid. This isn't the case.
Truthers are mislead by dot connectors who are in fact extremely intelligent people and put together a very convincing story. I was mislead by a lot of this stuff and in hindsite can see the flaws but at the time it all seemed very plausible.
I do still think though in the back of my mind... what if they're right :eek:

[bill smith]

no, Twoof movement is mockery. Not propaganda.
Extremely poor mockery at that.Fairly idiotic even. I am perfectly happy with it though.

[metamars]

Says the man who thinks the world media outside the US is controlled by someone using a few thousand dollars.

Certainly, you deserve something for your lie.

Anybody who is interested in what I really think about media control, can start by searching this forum on author:metamars & search string:Noam Chomsky.

Also, search on author:metamars & search string:Barrie Zwicker
(or author:metamars & search string:abstraction ladder).


Funk de Fino's lie involves traveling up the abstraction ladder, in the most self-serving and twisted of ways.... It is symptomatic of the debunker species that they endlessly need to conflate nuanced arguments with their simplistic, idiotic facades.

(Yet another reason for not barking simplistic slogans like "911 was an insider job". No reason for over-zealous 911 truthers to make the lying propagandists' jobs any easier.)

[funk de fino]

Certainly, you deserve something for your lie.

Anybody who is interested in what I really think about media control, can start by searching this forum on author:metamars & search string:Noam Chomsky.

Also, search on author:metamars & search string:Barrie Zwicker
(or author:metamars & search string:abstraction ladder).


Funk de Fino's lie involves traveling up the abstraction ladder, in the most self-serving and twisted of ways.... It is symptomatic of the debunker species that they endlessly need to conflate nuanced arguments with their simplistic, idiotic facades.

(Yet another reason for not barking simplistic slogans like "911 was an insider job". No reason for over-zealous 911 truthers to make the lying propagandists' jobs any easier.)

You posted a picture which showed exactly that and you supported the picture.

And you got ripped for it.

Some posters here are scared of what they see in the mirror when they shave. They think someone is watching them.

[JihadJane]

"Name Calling:

Name calling occurs often in politics and wartime scenarios, but very seldom in advertising. It is another of the seven main techniques designated by the Institute for Propaganda Analysis. It is the use of derogatory language or words that carry a negative connotation when describing an enemy. The propaganda attempts to arouse prejudice among the public by labelling the target something that the public dislikes. Often, name calling is employed using sarcasm and ridicule, and shows up often in political cartoons or writings. When examining name calling propaganda, we should attempt to separate our feelings about the name and our feelings about the actual idea or proposal."

'Propaganda Techniques'

http://library.thinkquest.org/C0111500/proptech.htm

[bill smith]

hmm i wonder why :rolleyes:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zW8Bj1upbJQ&feature=PlayList&p=83E9B9DB3213E940&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=18

[Justin39640]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zW8Bj1upbJQ&feature=PlayList&p=83E9B9DB3213E940&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=18

wow a video of quick edits
all of which out of context (and from 2004 not really proving you point)

you got me where do i sign up? :rolleyes:

seriously though
it must be nice living in a fantasy world where extremists arent dangerous

[Squidgy]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zW8Bj1upbJQ&feature=PlayList&p=83E9B9DB3213E940&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=18
Thats a great vid :)
Evil tourists ;)

[funk de fino]

"Name Calling:

Name calling occurs often in politics and wartime scenarios, but very seldom in advertising. It is another of the seven main techniques designated by the Institute for Propaganda Analysis. It is the use of derogatory language or words that carry a negative connotation when describing an enemy. The propaganda attempts to arouse prejudice among the public by labelling the target something that the public dislikes. Often, name calling is employed using sarcasm and ridicule, and shows up often in political cartoons or writings. When examining name calling propaganda, we should attempt to separate our feelings about the name and our feelings about the actual idea or proposal."

'Propaganda Techniques'

http://library.thinkquest.org/C0111500/proptech.htm

bushtards, mind readers, gov loyalists, shills, bushie lovers, sheeple, traitors, etc etc

[bill smith]

bushtards, mind readers, gov loyalists, shills, bushie lovers, sheeple, traitors, etc etc

Shills 'n Saps. Shills are professional debunkers and Saps are those who are led by the nose. Those last include the ones Mike rivero described here- the moral cowards :-

"Most people prefer to believe their leaders are just and fair even in the face of evidence to the contrary, because once a citizen acknowledges that the government under which they live is lying and corrupt, the citizen has to choose what he or she will do about it. To take action in the face of a corrupt government entails risks of harm to life and loved ones. To choose to do nothing is to surrender one's self-image of standing for principles. Most people do not have the courage to face that choice. Hence, most propaganda is not designed to fool the critical thinker but only to give moral cowards an excuse not to think at all."

[johnny karate]

"Name Calling:

Name calling occurs often in politics and wartime scenarios, but very seldom in advertising. It is another of the seven main techniques designated by the Institute for Propaganda Analysis. It is the use of derogatory language or words that carry a negative connotation when describing an enemy. The propaganda attempts to arouse prejudice among the public by labelling the target something that the public dislikes. Often, name calling is employed using sarcasm and ridicule, and shows up often in political cartoons or writings. When examining name calling propaganda, we should attempt to separate our feelings about the name and our feelings about the actual idea or proposal."

'Propaganda Techniques'

http://library.thinkquest.org/C0111500/proptech.htm

Not all mockery is propaganda. In fact, I would be willing to bet that most mockery has nothing to do with propaganda at all. For instance, if I were to mock you for making such a ridiculous assertion, that would have nothing to do with propaganda, but merely my desire to laugh at the idiocy you spew. Sometimes mockery is just mockery.

The propaganda attempts to arouse prejudice among the public by labelling the target something that the public dislikes.

Case in point. To what degree do you actually think the public is aware of the Truth Movement that a supposed effort to discredit them by name-calling on some obscure Internet forum would be even remotely effective?

I laugh at the idiocy you spew.

[Dave Rogers]

I would point out that the propaganda terms '19 Muslims' 'War on Terror' and even 'Osama bin Laden' came long before the expression '9/11 was an inside job'.

Do you have any evidence for any of this, or are you simply making things up and presenting them as fact as usual? We know that the first 9/11 conspiracy theories were posted on the WWW on or about September 12th 2001, whereas GWB didn't start referring to the War on Terror until the 20th. Osama bin Laden had a name, of course, prior to 9/11, but when by your definition of the term (assuming that you subscribe to definitions, rather than adjusting the meaning of words to suit whatever argument you're trying to justify at the time) was it first used as a propaganda term?

"19 Muslims" is an interesting one, as it's frequently used by 9/11 conspiracy theorists as an argument against the possibility of the hijackers having carried out the attacks. If you want to complain about that one, you're welcome to it; it's on your side of the fence, not ours.

Dave

[Dave Rogers]

Shills 'n Saps. Shills are professional debunkers and Saps are those who are led by the nose. Those last include the ones Mike rivero described here- the moral cowards :-

Argument from authority or appeal to authority is a logical fallacy (http://forums.randi.org/wiki/Logical_fallacy), where it is argued that a statement is correct because the statement is made by a person or source that is commonly regarded as authoritative.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority

(Mike Rivero, as a conspiracy theorist radio show host, might of course be considered a legitimate authority on moral cowardice.)

Dave

[johnny karate]

bill smith also believes that the FDNY not conspiring to murder their own is propaganda. Let's not give his odious thought processes any more credence than they deserve.

[Quad4_72]

I see JihadJanes point. A generalisation like 'twoofer' implies that truthers are stupid.

This is correct.

This isn't the case.


This is not correct. Provide proof that twoofers are not stupid. Here is my proof that they are:

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=144632 (Stundies)
For further proof, simply click on the user profiles of Heiwa, bill smith, Red Ibis, Christopher7, Galileo, etc. Then hit the statistics tab, and click on "Find all posts by..."

[funk de fino]

Shills 'n Saps. Shills are professional debunkers and Saps are those who are led by the nose. Those last include the ones Mike rivero described here- the moral cowards :-

"Most people prefer to believe their leaders are just and fair even in the face of evidence to the contrary, because once a citizen acknowledges that the government under which they live is lying and corrupt, the citizen has to choose what he or she will do about it. To take action in the face of a corrupt government entails risks of harm to life and loved ones. To choose to do nothing is to surrender one's self-image of standing for principles. Most people do not have the courage to face that choice. Hence, most propaganda is not designed to fool the critical thinker but only to give moral cowards an excuse not to think at all."

911 TM are the biggest cowards of all time.

[Dumb All Over]

Truthers are mislead by dot connectors who are in fact extremely intelligent people and put together a very convincing story.
Ha! I had to laugh when I read this. "A very convincing story", eh? I beg to differ. And "extremely intelligent"? Hmmm...I think I have to differ with that one, too.

Truthers are the dot connectors and vice versa.

[J. Wellington Wimpy]

Originally Posted by JihadJane
What's a "twoof movement"?

a nickname for a movement that doesn't deserve its self appointed name
cause they are liars
;)

"Twoof Movement":


What most normal individuals experience several hours after completion of a substantial breakfast.

RE: 9/11 conspiracy theorists, the intellectual equivalent of #1, above.


:D

[MikeW]

We know that the first 9/11 conspiracy theories were posted on the WWW on or about September 12th 2001, whereas GWB didn't start referring to the War on Terror until the 20th.
The term "inside job" popped up on USENET here @ 10.15pm on September 11:

Buildings brought down...

... by shape charges wrapped around steel. This is an inside job bought
to you by your friendly CIA/MOSSAD/FBI connection.
Source (http://groups.google.com/group/alt.revisionism/browse_thread/thread/774f5def41766373/b88305f356c1f14e?q=%22inside+job%22)

10:36PM, early use of the Reichstag comparison:

Indeed, as so many commentators and analysts have already noted, there is literally no way that what took place today in New York and
Washington D.C. was NOT an inside job.

This is directly analogous to the burning of the Reichstag in Germany by
Hitler: an event perpetrated by the Nazis yet blamed upon "Communists",
"Jews" and so on, and used to terrorize the German people into acceding
to the Nazi takeover of their nation. The BushMob, whose ties to the
Nazis are vast, extensive and firmly rooted in time, is undoubtedly
playing the same kind of card with today's "terrorist" attacks upon New
York City and Washington
Source (http://groups.google.com/group/alt.satanism/browse_thread/thread/80c03cf45fcbd3f1/ecd00e6375aa3b0c?q=%22inside+job%22)

Early CD arguments on September 13:

It is such an OBVIOUS "no brainer" "inside" job.!!
...
- A plane hits tower #1, blowing a hole in it high up. The expected
things then happen:

- The building stays up. A reinforced concrete building is *extremely*
strong. Terrorists set off a large bomb *inside* that building without
significant damage. Notice that neither plane impact does anything
like break off a big hunk of building floors and send it crashing into
the street. The WTC towers were specifically designed to survive a
direct impact from a jumbo jet - which *both do*.
...
The second plane hits the second tower, lower and moving faster. It
blows a bigger hole through it, showering debris on the street, but
the building is clearly still standing and still looks quite solid.
...
- Perhaps a half hour later, the fire in the first building *goes
out*. It is still smouldering and letting off black smoke, but there
is no flame. Anyone who saw the documentary on that horrid skyscraper
fire in Philadelphia that led to the codes requiring sprinklers on
every floor knows why. There's no way to get fire apparatus into a
skyscraper effectively, so it needs to be designed into the structure
- which it is.
The water flows from the roof reservoirs down. Sprinklers can kill
incredible infernos, and that's what these do.


- The fire in the second building goes out.


- Then, later, the second building suddenly crumbles into dust, in a
smooth wave running from the top of the building (above the burned
part) down through all the stories at an equal speed. The debris falls
primarily inward. The tower does not break off intact and collapse
into other buildings. The bottom does not crumble before the top. The
burned out section crumbles also. The crumbling comes from the top
(above the damage). It moves at a uniform rate. All of the structural
members are destroyed in a smooth pattern, so there is no remaining
skeleton. The damage is uniform, symmetric, and total.


In summary, it looks exactly like a demolition - because that's what
it is.

Source (http://groups.google.com/group/bigpond.broadband.users/browse_thread/thread/8978fce658a214ae/6c2a83d28b09b961?q=%22inside+job%22)

John Judge on September 14:

The non-response (ground to air missiles -ed) as the Dulles plane flew over the White House and turned to go into the Pentagon is inexplicable that late in the scenario unless this was in inside job. I am sure there is a false sponsor ready to be handed to us.
Source (http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.malaysia/browse_thread/thread/f3085ce60a64eb7b/9cad62c4a7c0287b?q=%22inside+job%22)

[bill smith]

The term "inside job" popped up on USENET here @ 10.15pm on September 11:



10:36PM, early use of the Reichstag comparison:



Early CD arguments on September 13:



John Judge on September 14:

Wow I never knew about any of these. Very interesting.

[Dave Rogers]

Wow I never knew about any of these. Very interesting.

So you admit that you make stuff up on subjects you don't know anything about. Also very interesting.

Dave

[TruthersLie]

in general I think the twoof movement is filled with people who are JUST smart enough to start doing some research, but are either too intellecutally lazy, uninformed, or uneducated enough to fall for the first shiny thing to fit their preconceived notions of how "evil da guvmint is."

Too often they use the argument from authority, argument from ignorance, and arguments from incredulity in any discussions of 9/11.

we have 700 architects and engineers (even if it is only 300 licensed and degreed ones). 29 experts say blah blah blah

Or it is the NIST is full of crap. Freefall. Freefall. thermite blah blah blah. group 7 couldn't have fallen first

or you get the "we are talking about the pentagon, and there is 5 freaking frames? The pentagon has the best stuff in the world." blah blah blah.

I also think the biggest difference is their inability to admit that they are wrong when shown facts which show they are wrong. They just shift shift shift to another topic and do not admit one of their house of cards fantasies is gone.

[PugsOnAPlane]

metamars, you're aware that Chomsky has said that 9/11 conspiracy theories are bunk on multiple occasions, right?

One thing that truthers do which sticks out to me is how truthers use phrases like "official conspiracy theory" to try to define things by their terms. Hell, I read Debunking 9/11 Debunking for a paper I wrote in college and I didn't even notice how Griffin used the phrase "Bush-Cheney administration" until I was halfway through it. Then again, truthers are hardly unique in that regard.

[JihadJane]

metamars, you're aware that Chomsky has said that 9/11 conspiracy theories are bunk on multiple occasions, right?

One thing that truthers do which sticks out to me is how truthers use phrases like "official conspiracy theory" to try to define things by their terms.

I prefer "Crock of *****" myself.


Hell, I read Debunking 9/11 Debunking for a paper I wrote in college and I didn't even notice how Griffin used the phrase "Bush-Cheney administration" until I was halfway through it. Then again, truthers are hardly unique in that regard.

Can you explain what's wrong with the phrase "Bush-Cheney administration".

Was he wrong to include Bush?

[parky76]

I can see that you have a bright future, here at JREF. A first class intellect, coupled with a stunning ability to capture your great thoughts in the most concise of prose, reveals you to be an up-and-coming colossus, who will stand astride the truth, as revealed to us by that that most honest of institutions, the US government.

Those damn 911 twoofers better give up now, while they still have a chance to escape the prime of your debunking career!

thanks for trolling.

[parky76]

Shills are professional debunkers

do you have evidence that any debunkers get some sort of financial or other gain from their research and advocacy?

don't answer...we know you don't.

but since when did truthers EVER care about evidence?

[Squidgy]

This is correct.



This is not correct. Provide proof that twoofers are not stupid. Here is my proof that they are:

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=144632 (Stundies)
For further proof, simply click on the user profiles of Heiwa, bill smith, Red Ibis, Christopher7, Galileo, etc. Then hit the statistics tab, and click on "Find all posts by..."



Where is the video of a plane hitting the pentagon?

[bill smith]

Where is the video of a plane hitting the pentagon?

If you watch carefully you may see the plane. The commentators seem to have few doubts. Maybe they are right. Wait for the frame they keep talking about.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tL8yc0gwAyI Pentagon video analysis

[Cl1mh4224rd]

Where is the video of a plane hitting the pentagon?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vwzT0QnwtTE

[Squidgy]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vwzT0QnwtTE
I see no plane...

[parky76]

Where is the video of a plane hitting the pentagon?

God help us.

[Cl1mh4224rd]

I see no plane...


That's too bad...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVDdjLQkUV8

[J. Wellington Wimpy]

I see no plane...

http://www.pearlevision.com/

[parky76]

http://www.pearlevision.com/

lololol!!!!!

:):D:p;):p:D:o:)

the whole gang likes it!!

[Squidgy]

That's too bad...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVDdjLQkUV8
Ah, theres the plane. Shame the best footage available is CGA.

[Squidgy]

http://www.pearlevision.com/
I still see no plane :confused:

[Squidgy]

http://www.pearlevision.com/
btw I did get the joke. Funny but didn't answer my question.

[BigAl]

I see no plane...

The people that assert that a missile hit the Pentagon don't have a video for that, either.

[parky76]

btw I did get the joke. Funny but didn't answer my question.

If you do not want to see a plane, you will convince yourself that there is no plane there. Its that simple. I see a plane. Its a bad image..but the best logical and rational interpretation of that image is a commercial airliner.

Some people see Mickey Mouse in the smoke coming from the WTC towers. Again, its their own mind in control.

[Arus808]

and why do you need to SEE a plane to know that plane hit the pentagon? We have tons of evidence (http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/911pentagonflight77evidencesummary)
and numerous eyewinesses (http://www.geocities.com/someguyyoudontknow33/witnesses.htm) who were there. (http://web.archive.org/web/20070923181310/http://eric.bart.free.fr/iwpb/witness.html) that described a plane (http://web.archive.org/web/20070114083601/http://www.thenewamerican.com/tna/2004/08-23-2004/facts.htm) and smelt jet fuel (http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/F77penta04.html)

Squidgy, why must there be video images of a plane hitting the pentagon, for you to believe that one did? while ignoring the eyewitnesses and physical evidence?

[Squidgy]

Has anybody taken the time to watch this? If so please de-bunk, I am only asking for answers.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j5FhQc-LJ-o

[johnny karate]

To prevent another thread from going wildly off the rails, can we all agree to not engage the no-planer any further on this issue?

[parky76]

Squidgy, why must there be video images of a plane hitting the pentagon, for you to believe that one did? while ignoring the eyewitnesses and physical evidence?

because Truthers believe that all military and media employees are NWO agents and shills.

[Squidgy]

and why do you need to SEE a plane to know that plane hit the pentagon? We have tons of evidence (http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/911pentagonflight77evidencesummary)
and numerous eyewinesses (http://www.geocities.com/someguyyoudontknow33/witnesses.htm) who were there. (http://web.archive.org/web/20070923181310/http://eric.bart.free.fr/iwpb/witness.html) that described a plane (http://web.archive.org/web/20070114083601/http://www.thenewamerican.com/tna/2004/08-23-2004/facts.htm) and smelt jet fuel (http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/F77penta04.html)

Squidgy, why must there be video images of a plane hitting the pentagon, for you to believe that one did? while ignoring the eyewitnesses and physical evidence?
Because of the fact that there was only one tape released. Surely there were more camera's in the vicinity.

[parky76]

Has anybody taken the time to watch this? If so please de-bunk, I am only asking for answers.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j5FhQc-LJ-o

i am sick and tired of truther videos. are they utterly and completely unable to speak their own ideas and beliefs? must they ALWAYS link to the BS video of some other truther who has more initiative, imagination, and time?

you guys need to learn to express your OWN ideas and theories...by yourself!!

[Squidgy]

For the record, I never said a plane didn't hit the pentagon. I just wanted to know why the only footage released didn't show a plane.

[parky76]

For the record, I never said a plane didn't hit the pentagon. I just wanted to know why the only footage released didn't show a plane.

it does show a plane. its a fisheye lense. its a ****** angle. its far away. but there is a plane there.

what do you see....a blue whale? a terradactyl?

[stateofgrace]

Because of the fact that there was only one tape released. Surely there were more camera's in the vicinity.

Let me sum this up for you then maybe you can stop derailing this thread.

No video of plane hitting Pentagon, therefore no plane hit the Pentagon, all the physical evidence is planted and all the eye witnesses are lying. This all took place in broad day light and nobody noticing anybody planting all the physical evidence or something other than a massive passenger plane hitting a land mark building. All the cameras were pointing at the exact spot where something dodgy took place and had to be confiscated immediately. This was done for reasons only known to the nasty evil masterminds who control everybody and everything, Ok?

Can we move on now, please?

[bill smith]

i am sick and tired of truther videos. are they utterly and completely unable to speak their own ideas and beliefs? must they ALWAYS link to the BS video of some other truther who has more initiative, imagination, and time?

you guys need to learn to express your OWN ideas and theories...by yourself!!

But THIS is the CIT 81-minute video and it is decisive.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j5FhQc-LJ-o repost

[Squidgy]

i am sick and tired of truther videos. are they utterly and completely unable to speak their own ideas and beliefs? must they ALWAYS link to the BS video of some other truther who has more initiative, imagination, and time?

you guys need to learn to express your OWN ideas and theories...by yourself!!
I do not have the means to go to Washington and speak to these witnesses myself. If you look at my previous posts you will see that I am a former truther trying to clear up loose ends. Any hostility towards me is unwarranted as I am not here to bicker about what you or I should or should not be doing. I hoped the skeptics here would be able to give me a mature answer to my questions.
If you don't have an answer why post just to critisize me?

[T.A.M.]

For the record, I never said a plane didn't hit the pentagon. I just wanted to know why the only footage released didn't show a plane.

Because of the 85 videos that the FBI confiscated, it was the only video that showed the area of impact AT the time of impact (it was taking pictures at about 1 per second...you do the math), and it missed the instant the plane hit.

Unless you are calling agent MACGUIRE of the FBI a liar. You're not doing that are you?

TAM:)

Edit: All of us get a bit testy about the entire subject these days. So many people come here claiming to be "just asking questions" when in truth they are simply trolling for an argument over one of their "smoking guns".

[parky76]

I If you look at my previous posts you will see that I am a former truther trying to clear up loose ends. Any hostility towards me is unwarranted

I'm sorry. Its been hot in NYC. Its rained every day for the last 30 days. Our state Senate is disfunctional. I haven't had a slice in 2 months.

And I thought you were a truther. I sincerely apologize.

:(

[parky76]

Because of the 85 videos that the FBI confiscated, it was the only video that showed the area of impact AT the time of impact

what about the DOT camera looking at the highway? didn't that video at least show the plane coming in for a "landing"?

[Squidgy]

To prevent another thread from going wildly off the rails, can we all agree to not engage the no-planer any further on this issue?
I do apologise, I have gone off topic. Sorry, my point was twoofers have questions. Not because they are stupid but cos of unanswered questions.

[Mr. Skinny]

Squidgy's post in the Welcome thread. Background on how he went from truther to ??

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=4859608#post4859608

[T.A.M.]

what about the DOT camera looking at the highway? didn't that video at least show the plane coming in for a "landing"?

Are you talking about the hotel video? I know that video showed what many have said might have been the tail of the plane clipping along the top of the elevated highway just prior to impact.

TAM:)

[parky76]

I do apologise, I have gone off topic. Sorry, my point was twoofers have questions. Not because they are stupid but cos of unanswered questions.

i believe that many if not most of their questions are not really legitimate.

they have been shown logical, scientifically sound, and rational answers...and they do not accept them for political, ideological, and often emotional reasons.

and not all questions deserve to be answered. some are just nit-picking and splitting hairs...to waste time and create false impressions of legitimate doubt.

we can not help them in such cases.

[Squidgy]

Squidgy's post in the Welcome thread. Background on how he went from truther to ??

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=4859608#post4859608
From truther to guy who wants to return to a normal life without all the horror of the last 8 years.

[~enigma~]

From truther to guy who wants to return to a normal life without all the horror of the last 8 years.
You were a truther for 8 years!!!!!!!!!!


Somebody break out the industrial strength cleanser.

[Squidgy]

You were a truther for 8 years!!!!!!!!!!


Somebody break out the industrial strength cleanser.
Rofl, no I meant the last 8 years have been pretty horrific. I have only been seriously twoofing for about 2 years.

[Mr. Skinny]

From truther to guy who wants to return to a normal life without all the horror of the last 8 years.
Squidgy, not sure of what horror you speak.

However, we certainly are getting to know you quickly. Seventy-nine posts in two days will get one noticed.

I hope you are getting your questions answered.

[Squidgy]

Squidgy's post in the Welcome thread. Background on how he went from truther to ??

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=4859608#post4859608
I love you skinny, will you marry me?

[~enigma~]

Rofl, no I meant the last 8 years have been pretty horrific. I have only been seriously twoofing for about 2 years.
Oxyclean will take care of that

[Squidgy]

Squidgy, not sure of what horror you speak.

However, we certainly are getting to know you quickly. Seventy-nine posts in two days will get one noticed.

I hope you are getting your questions answered.
I clearly have way way way way way too much time on my hands. I haven't posted that much on other forums in 5 years. Must be because it's just so god dam good here.

[Mr. Skinny]

I love you skinny, will you marry me?
Do you have enough money to support me in a lifestyle to which I've become accustomed?

[T.A.M.]

Oxyclean will take care of that

Billy is looking down on you and smiling!!!

TAM:D

[Arus808]

Because of the fact that there was only one tape released. Surely there were more camera's in the vicinity.


what makes you think there were?

please the take the geography of the area into consideration. Tell me how populated that side of the pentagon is normally? Are there thousands of peoples crowding the sidewalks nearby? Or is it a huge freeway with people driving everyday, who normally wouldn't be carrying a camera?

You've been provided with evidence that a plane struck the pentagon and numerous eyewitnesses where physical evidence corroborates their claims.

You're bordering on the no-planer side of things if you ignore them

[Squidgy]

Do you have enough money to support me in a lifestyle to which I've become accustomed?
That depends whether your lifestyle consists of smuggling cheep vodka into nightclubs and eating from german supermarkets with a name that makes no sense. Well?

[Mr. Skinny]

That depends whether your lifestyle consists of smuggling cheep vodka into nightclubs and eating from german supermarkets with a name that makes no sense. Well?
German on both sides of the family, so the diet will suit me.

No cheap booze though. I'm old. I'm forum god. Show some respect. Offer up the top shelf vodka at least.

[Squidgy]

German on both sides of the family, so the diet will suit me.

No cheap booze though. I'm old. I'm forum god. Show some respect. Offer up the top shelf vodka at least.
You will never tear me away from my cheap alcohol addiction. I can't bare to say this :covereyes but I just don't think it's meant to be :(

[parky76]

Because of the fact that there was only one tape released. Surely there were more camera's in the vicinity.

i assume the assertion of the authorities will be that there was nothing on the videos worth showing.

unless u think the FBI is "in on it"...i think we should for the most part, accept their reasoning.

though i would like to see that DOT camera images. someone should file a FOIA request.

[GwionX]

Are you talking about the hotel video? I know that video showed what many have said might have been the tail of the plane clipping along the top of the elevated highway just prior to impact.

TAM:)


My contention has always been it was the banking wing that was seen in the Doubletree video.. If you look closely you will see the tail follow.

It was moving at a very high rate of speed. And was very large if you consider the distance the camera was shooting from.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QNfkej6YyeY

This video loops the sighting 3 times.

Please tell me if you can see what I am talking about.


Here is my attempt to show what I see in still frames with descriptions:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v226/gwion/Pent1.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v226/gwion/Pent2.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v226/gwion/Pent3.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v226/gwion/Pent4.jpg


Now I have seen where people say this is a flatbed truck, but I disagree due to the size of the mass BEHIND the highway.

in the descriptions I am not trying to imply the tail section is dark, rather the sun did not reflect off of it like the banking wing did.

Sorry for the derail..

Here is a good video about propaganda: See how many tactic the Twoofers employ:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hJtpOqn6rfE

[Squidgy]

My contention has always been it was the banking wing that was seen in the Doubletree video.. If you look closely you will see the tail follow.

It was moving at a very high rate of speed. And was very large if you consider the distance the camera was shooting from.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QNfkej6YyeY

This video loops the sighting 3 times.

Please tell me if you can see what I am talking about.


Here is my attempt to show what I see in still frames with descriptions:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v226/gwion/Pent1.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v226/gwion/Pent2.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v226/gwion/Pent3.jpg
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v226/gwion/Pent4.jpg


Now I have seen where people say this is a flatbed truck, but I disagree due to the size of the mass BEHIND the highway.

in the descriptions I am not trying to imply the tail section is dark, rather the sun did not reflect off of it like the banking wing did.

Sorry for the derail..

Here is a good video about propaganda: See how many tactic the Twoofers employ:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hJtpOqn6rfE
I can see what you mean. Had to stare at it closely but it does look like a wing tip and tale.

[TruthersLie]

I still see no plane :confused:

I'm sorry that you don't see the plane. I"m sorry that you will ignore ALL the rest of the evidence.

I'm sure that next time, UBL and the terrorists will set up high speed IMAX quality cameras to make sure you can "see the plane."

Why is it that twoofs will do handstands about the eyewitnesses at the towers and their "explosions" without ANY other proof of explosives. (completely ignoring the fact that there are 15 to 20 things which when on fire explode in office buildings), while at the same time completely ignoring the eyewitnesses at the pentagon. Cognative dissonance much?

let see.
the towers eyewitnesses say "explosions." And after the fact we can hear explosions in the rubble. Any other evidence to support that? Det cord? No. Video showing a series of explosions right before the collapse of the towers or wtc7? no. That thermal camera twoofs love to point out doesn't show any hot spots which would be thermite/thermate/super duper nanothermite. so none of that either.

pentagon. we have a blury low quality video. over 130 eyewitnesses who saw a silver jet hit the pentagon. We have flight path damage. Debris and wreckage from a silver jet (flight 77) DNA of almost all the passengers and DNA of the hijackers, radar tracks, ATC, FDR.

But the common twoof reply, "there is not video showing it" so it must not have happened. the other literal mountain of evidence? just hand wave it away...

[Brainster]

Because of the fact that there was only one tape released. Surely there were more camera's in the vicinity.

For amusement purposes, would anybody like to point out how many tapes were released? Anybody? Anybody? Bueller?

Starts with f, ends with r, anybody?

[Dave Rogers]

Because of the fact that there was only one tape released. Surely there were more camera's in the vicinity.

Security cameras don't come free, and nor does the time required of security guards to monitor their output. As a result, security cameras tend to be sited so as to cover areas where there is a security risk; public areas, entrances and exits, and places where valuable objects are stored. They tend not to be sited so as to cover: areas of empty lawn; long wall sections with sealed windows, no doors, and no likely points of entry; and stacking areas for a pile of empty cable drums. As a result, the only cameras viewing the point of impact did so coincidentally, and were actually aligned and focused to concentrate on the entrance to a car park, so the images they captured were out of focus and poorly composed.

Dave

[bill smith]

Security cameras don't come free, and nor does the time required of security guards to monitor their output. As a result, security cameras tend to be sited so as to cover areas where there is a security risk; public areas, entrances and exits, and places where valuable objects are stored. They tend not to be sited so as to cover: areas of empty lawn; long wall sections with sealed windows, no doors, and no likely points of entry; and stacking areas for a pile of empty cable drums. As a result, the only cameras viewing the point of impact did so coincidentally, and were actually aligned and focused to concentrate on the entrance to a car park, so the images they captured were out of focus and poorly composed.

Dave

You don't think the helicopter landing pad would justify two or three camera's on iit's own ? Two or three of the 85-87 known cameras? And of course the landing pad is right next to the entry hole at the Pentagon.

[Dave Rogers]

You don't think the helicopter landing pad would justify two or three camera's on iit's own ?

No. Security cameras are there to pick up things that might not be noticed without them. Helicopters tend to be fairly obvious.

Dave

[Quad4_72]

Strange. Yesterday I posted a question to Squidgy asking for evidence that twoofers are not stupid. I posted my evidence showing that they are. What do I get in return? A completely unrelated question from him asking where the video is showing that a plane hit the Pentagon. Strange...

[bill smith]

No. Security cameras are there to pick up things that might not be noticed without them. Helicopters tend to be fairly obvious.

Dave

What if a chopper crashed on the pad and they had neglected to have cameras to film it for later forensic examination ?
Jeez Dave what with 100,000 dollar toilet seats and 10 dollar ranches I think the Pentagon can afford a few measly cameras. Didn't they they LOSE 2.3 TRILLION dollars te day BEFORE 9/11.

[TruthersLie]

it should be obvious... if it is such a bother (and again proof of an inside job) have you (bill smith, or any other truther) filed a FOIA request for more information on those cameras and any video they may have taken on 9/11?

Personally, those cameras would be at a low angle pointed at the lawn and most likely unmanned.

but again, if it was something that made me think INSIDE JOB, I'd have FOIAed them LONG ago.

Oh wait... I forgot, even though the US government murdered 3000 civilians it is not enough to make truthers actually try to PROVE it, except on internet forums and youtube.

[TruthersLie]

What if a chopper crashed on the pad and they had neglected to have cameras to film it for later forensic examination ?
Jeez Dave what with 100,000 dollar toilet seats and 10 dollar ranches I think the Pentagon can afford a few measly cameras. Didn't they they LOSE 2.3 TRILLION dollars te day BEFORE 9/11.

I love truther lies.
1. they were $1000 toilet seats, and $500 wrenches.
2. the LOST 2.3 trillion? Really Bill? REally? http://www.911myths.com/html/rumsfeld__9_11_and__2_3_trilli.html
Wow... I'm sure this has already been explained to you ad nausium (sp), it is rather amazing that you don't seem to understand that they are talking about how they needed to revamp their inventory tracking, accounting and accounts recievable services (actually read the speach http://www.defenselink.mil/speeches/speech.aspx?speechid=430) and (http://www.defenselink.mil/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=44199) and http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/military/jan-june01/dollars_2-12.html and http://www.defenselink.mil/Transcripts/Transcript.aspx?TranscriptID=1198. So yes, they flew a jet into the pentagon because it was announced MONTHS before about needing to revamp their inventory tracking and accounts recievable. Why didn't I think of that at my last job?

Or how in MARCH of 2000 they announced this "missing 2.3 trillion" ) http://hv.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=002hxm ) and by MARCH of 2002 over 75% had been "found" (http://www.defenselink.mil/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=43927)and by 2004-5 that number was over 90%. (I can't seem to find that citation... anyone know of it? I thought I had it bookmarked)

really bill?:boggled:

ETA citaitons coming

[bill smith]

it should be obvious... if it is such a bother (and again proof of an inside job) have you (bill smith, or any other truther) filed a FOIA request for more information on those cameras and any video they may have taken on 9/11?

Personally, those cameras would be at a low angle pointed at the lawn and most likely unmanned.

but again, if it was something that made me think INSIDE JOB, I'd have FOIAed them LONG ago.

Oh wait... I forgot, even though the US government murdered 3000 civilians it is not enough to make truthers actually try to PROVE it, except on internet forums and youtube.

Personally I have little faith in FOIA requests. If a government could carry out 9/11 controlling what one of it's own agencies releases to the public would be as nothing. This is self evident surely ?

[bill smith]

I love truther lies.
1. they were $1000 toilet seats, and $500 wrenches.
2. the LOST 2.3 trillion? Really Bill? REally?
Wow... I'm sure this has already been explained to you ad nausium (sp), it is rather amazing that you don't seem to understand that they are talking about how they needed to revamp their inventory tracking, accounting and accounts recievable services.

Or how in MARCH of 2000 they announced this "missing 2.3 trillion" and by MARCH of 2002 over 75% had been "found" and by 2004 that number was over 90%.

really bill?:boggled:

ETA citaitons coming

Do you have some links ?

[BigAl]

Personally I have little faith in FOIA requests. If a government could carry ot 9/11 controlling what one of it's own agencies releases to the public would be as nothing. This is self evident surely ?

Yes. Circular logic and paranoia are in evidence.

[BigAl]

What if a chopper crashed on the pad and they had neglected to have cameras to film it for later forensic examination ?
Jeez Dave what with 100,000 dollar toilet seats and 10 dollar ranches I think the Pentagon can afford a few measly cameras. Didn't they they LOSE 2.3 TRILLION dollars te day BEFORE 9/11.

So Bill has revealed one more area of expertise he is ignorant of; accounting and finance.

[JoeyDonuts]

Any cameras in operation at the helicopter pad would have been focused on the pad, if they were there at all.

[TruthersLie]

Bill I edited it to have 5 or 6 links.

feel free.

oh wait, they are from government sources... so they must be lying. I love this. The government is part of the inside job, therefore any sources from the government are lies. Rather amazing those mental backflips....

[bill smith]

Bill I edited it to have 5 or 6 links.

feel free.

oh wait, they are from government sources... so they must be lying. I love this. The government is part of the inside job, therefore any sources from the government are lies. Rather amazing those mental backflips....

Not every source from the government is unreliable but so many are tainted that it's hard to have confidece in any of them.

[Squidgy]

Strange. Yesterday I posted a question to Squidgy asking for evidence that twoofers are not stupid. I posted my evidence showing that they are. What do I get in return? A completely unrelated question from him asking where the video is showing that a plane hit the Pentagon. Strange...
I have already explained that earlier in the thread

[T.A.M.]

Personally I have little faith in FOIA requests. If a government could carry out 9/11 controlling what one of it's own agencies releases to the public would be as nothing. This is self evident surely ?

So lets see....

1. Physical evidence found at crash site - planted
2. DNA evidence found for hijackers - planted
3. Cell Phone calls from passengers - fabricated
4. FOIA requests - unreliable, untrusted.

So apart from the meandering screeches of Alex Jones, and playkit chemistry reports from Steven Jones, what do you consider to be valid evidence, bill?

TAM:)

[funk de fino]

Not every source from the government is unreliable but so many are tainted that it's hard to have confidece in any of them.

oh dear.

The Govt admits they have "lost" 2.3 trillion and this is true and unequivocal.

Someone proves this was not the case but that the 911TM misinterpreted this statement. Now the govt is no longer a good source.

Can the lies or dishonesty get any worse?

[funk de fino]

What if a chopper crashed on the pad and they had neglected to have cameras to film it for later forensic examination ?.


Thats a classic Stundie right there.

I refuse to nominate it though as you seem to be trying to win it.

[Quad4_72]

I have already explained that earlier in the thread

Where? I don't see it. Show me where you explained that twoofers are not stupid.

[bill smith]

Thats a classic Stundie right there.

I refuse to nominate it though as you seem to be trying to win it.

I look forward to a studie if I have not already won one. To me it has the same cachet as winning an Oscar does to an actress.

[FineWine]

What if a chopper crashed on the pad and they had neglected to have cameras to film it for later forensic examination ?
Jeez Dave what with 100,000 dollar toilet seats and 10 dollar ranches I think the Pentagon can afford a few measly cameras. Didn't they they LOSE 2.3 TRILLION dollars te day BEFORE 9/11.


Wow! Congratulations on being the last "truther" to cling to the "missing" $2.3 trillion hoax.

[parky76]

Personally I have little faith in FOIA requests. If a government could carry out 9/11 controlling what one of it's own agencies releases to the public would be as nothing. This is self evident surely ?

Right. Cause EVERYONE is in on it!!!

Except you, of course. Must be a lonely world.

[FineWine]

Personally I have little faith in FOIA requests. If a government could carry out 9/11 controlling what one of it's own agencies releases to the public would be as nothing. This is self evident surely ?



Just as a blind squirrel occasionally finds an acorn, you have managed to produce a correct statement. If a government could orchestrate the attacks of 9/11, there is nothing it could not do.

[Squidgy]

Where? I don't see it. Show me where you explained that twoofers are not stupid.
Truthers are just mislead, that was my point. I have no way of proving they are not stupid.
I guess it was a pointless argument to begin with lol I'm just gonna tuck into my humble pie now.

[psikeyhackr]

Post removed for rule 11 violation.

[FineWine]

removed response to modded post.

[Dave Rogers]

removed response to modded post.

[T.A.M.]

removed response to modded post.

[Tricky]

Let's not be distracted folks. If a derail is attempted, do not respond to it.

[Squidgy]

Post removed for rule 11 violation.
Dammit I missed it...can mods please notify me before deleting posts please? I hate missing out on stuff :p

[Quad4_72]

Truthers are just mislead, that was my point. I have no way of proving they are not stupid.
I guess it was a pointless argument to begin with lol I'm just gonna tuck into my humble pie now.

I see....
Well just do me a favor and keep in mind the proof that posted. Deal?

[Cl1mh4224rd]

No. Security cameras are there to pick up things that might not be noticed without them. Helicopters tend to be fairly obvious.


Especially to the people in the control tower overlooking the pad.

[Squidgy]

I see....
Well just do me a favor and keep in mind the proof that posted. Deal?
Deal.