most people that say things like that are religious, and want to defend their religion against criticism. are you one of them? does it freak you out that she criticized your religion?
ExploringUranus: I agree with you here. She was a huge bitch and she abused the DMCA and really didn't agree with freedom of speech unless it agreed with her. :)
Supporting an atheist just because they are an atheist and hating a theist just because they are a theist is very very very wrong.
kurtilein3, the Mineta testimony is REAL evidence that the final report (official story) is false. Please read it and at least be informed before you start making threats and calling me names. Now, in regards to what you say is "solid data. real evidence" , the identity of the hijackers is not solid at all. There is no evidence of the presence of these hijackers on the planes. Have you seen a video or anything? You believe in the official story for some reason , but not evidence based.
This is how Scientology intelligence works; never defend, always attack! Yes, this "church" has its very own intelligence agency! In case of bad media coverage ("black propaganda"), Scientologists should contact the press and others pretending they are someone else to leave the impression that others than Scientology are also concerned about the attacks on Scientology. Scientologists are trained, and even ordered, to lie to the you and the media!
Mineta =>" I was made aware of it during the time that the airplane coming into the Pentagon. There was a young man who had come in and said to the vice president, "The plane is 50 miles out. The plane is 30 miles out." And when it got down to, "The plane is 10 miles out," the young man also said to the vice president, "Do the orders still stand?" And the vice president turned and whipped his neck around and said, "Of course the orders still stand. Have you heard anything to the contrary?"
charlesfloyb: so now you say that its a false flag operation, all done by the government.
this doesnt explain anything. we know too much about the identities of the hijackers, and about what happened in the airplanes. solid data. real evidence.
you just ignore it, fail to come up with a story, and because you are a moron ill just block you. i gave you more than enough opportunity to come up with a theory and to spam this comment-section with offtopic comments. bye
False flag operations are a fact in history and even the so called "all benevolent" nations use them to get people like you to follow them like sheeple. Don't question, don't be a sceptic, just accept what they tell you as it happened. The motivation for the false flag operation is pretty obvious. It allowed international wars to be supported by the sheeple(that's you) so the criminals can profit from war & oil. They shoved the patriot act, military commission act, etc down our throats...
1st off, kurtilein3 never refuted Mineta's testimony that clearly shoots down the official theory that Dick Cheney never allowed any orders prior to the Pentagon being hit. So, I'm supposed to overlook this right? I mean what you believe in is nothing more than theory and I poked a hole in it. What don't you understand about government intervention? The United Stated government implemented the attacks using a common modern day warfar tactic called a false flag operation. limited space ...
I've stated my theory in the beginning. I've said there was government intervention in the attacks of 9/11. You're too obtuse to recognize that I already explained that to you? Now you ask what happened inside those 4 airplanes which is another aspect of 9/11. Why should we change subjects when you haven't even started to answer the problem of Cheney advancing military orders prior to the Pentagon being hit? So you think we should just accept the final result without answering this???
"I've stated my theory in the beginning. I've said there was government intervention in the attacks of 9/11. You're too obtuse to recognize that I already explained that to you?"
this does not explain anything, you moron. what kind of government intervention? you mean, that the kidnappers had to use knifes because guns arent allowed on airplanes? this event was influenced by all kinds of government intervention: firefighters tried to intervene by evacuating the buildings, for example.
Without you defending the official position concerning Mineta's testimony which you can't, you divert the attention to another aspect of 9/11. I've answered everyone of your questions by the way, and you have not defended the one question I put to you. How can the 9/11 report be correct on Dick Cheney when it's clear from Mineta and other sources that Cheney engaged in orders with a young man PRIOR to the Pentagon being hit? Before you claim conspiracy, try debunking the question.
so, you dont even know what a theory is. you really thing that the sentence "there was government intervention" can be considered a theory?
a theory needs to explain something. like, for example, in DETAIL what happened on september 11. the fact is you just dont know it, your brain is empty, you only know: there was intervention. someone intervened. maybe the government. maybe muslim terrorists. maybe my penis.
So, I'm a moron because you don't know how to read Mineta's testimony and the 9/11 commission report. I'm an idiot because I exposed a huge contradiction in given testimonies and the final report. What logic has kurtilein3 used? I mean besides for adhominem attacks which you don't realize weaken your position of the official conspiracy theory. Look at evidence then make a conclusion, kurtilein3. Do your homework for once.
I'm not sure you're a rational person kurtilein3. You refuse to read Mineta's testimony which is required reading. Mineta clearly states that Cheney is approving orders before the aircraft smashes into the Pentagon. Mineta's testimony IS evdidence that the official story of Cheney not approving orders is FALSE. You choose not to read Mineta's testimony or pages 40 and 41 of the 9/11 report. I don't think you have a clue and refuse to read the necessary documents.
kurtilein3, please familiarize yourself with subject matter before making hasty generalizations of "quote mining" or " misinterpreted" evidence. I will join your side, if you can shoot down the argument. The problem is, well, I won't say what you said because I believe in being rational and looking at all the evidence even if the majority of the public believe in something else. If you show evidence that disproves my postion, I listen and adjust. I'm rational.
you didnt present anything impressive so far, you only play some intellectually dishonest games, try to switch the burden of proof, and use the same tactics that muslims use to prove that islam is true.
you are just an idiot. you fail when it comes to explaining what your nonsense about cheney is supposed to prove.
It proves that Dick Cheney allowed a stand down of the United States military. That is wrong because it means he took no action to stop the incoming aircraft about to crash into the Pentagon. The official story is that Dick Cheney never allowed a stand down because Dick Cheney never was involved in any orders. The presidential shoot down orders were only received AFTER all the planes were already crashed. That means after 10:03 in the morning. Read Minetta's testimony. Read 9/11 final report.
what is your theory? what happened inside those 4 airplanes? how often shoul i repeat this question?
give me something that is worth debunking. so far you didnt present anything that we could talk about. what is your evidence that the airplanes were not hijacked by muslim suicide terrorists? and who hijacked them, then? what do you want to prove?
you are, really, just the typical conspiracy theory moron.
Kurtilein3, you need to stop being so gullible and believing everything your main media sources tell you. If you would please read over Mineta testimonies in the 9/11 hearings, you'll see that he testifies to Cheney giving orders at 9:20 when the official time of any order is 10:05. Very important, because 9:20 means the orders had to be of a stand down nature. Please read and get yourself informed instead of just giving uneducated kneejerk reactions.
what exactly happened on that day? and what are the differences to "the official stories"?
and why cant you see that 911 truthers constantly use quote-mined and manufactured evidence, and that their many different stories are often contradicting? there isnt one main theory, there are dozens, so why should any one of them be right? this only proves that any conspiracy theory can be backed up using quote-mined and misinterpreted "evidence".
Kurtilein3, you don't even know what your postition is. Get a grip! You seem to think ad hominem attacks makes you some kind of an expert. Well, it doesn't. I was in the middle of giving you a coherent explanation, which you couldn't understand. So sorry, you lack an ability to follow a conversation.
people use the same tactics that you are falling for to support that aliens landed in roswell new mexico. or that their permanent magnet free energy motor works, and that government tries to supress this knowledge.
you need to come up with something better. like, for example, one story on what happened on that day, precise, consistent, and point out the differences to the official story, and then give GOOD REASONS why i should believe you. the problem is: you will fail.
The Freedom of Information Act was used to get transparency of the evidence the secret service had used in their footnotes in the 9/11 commission document, but nothing of record has been saved or collected. That means, there are no recording of the phone calls, no testimony, nothing, to support that Dick Cheney entered the PEOC at 9:58. So, why is this important? Because, evidence, reasoning and logic show that Cheney Was in the PEOC BEFORE 9:37, when the Pentagon was struck.
i dont see how this proves anything. just the typical incoherent ramblings you get from an uneducated conspiracy theory-moron.
i dont need to take this serious unless you can come up with something that makes sense. a coherent theory of about what exactly happened on that day, and what happened in all of the 4 planes involved, and what happened to the passengers and the hijackers. but you morons never accomplished this.
Ok, I posted the official position, that's the position that everyone in the world believes if they don't believe in an alternative position. This official position, is written in the 9/11 commission report and is really only supported by nontransparent footnotes by the secret service. That's right, the position that the world, and you presumably believe in, is supported by non existent evidence that the secret service says existed at some point. Freedom of Information Act ...
so many comments,. nothing sayd. now what hit the pentagon? an airplane full of passengers kidnapped by some muslims with knifes? a rocket?
you need to explain what happened, and not some random irrelevant nonsense about dick cheney, we know that he is an asshole, but the fact that he has been walking around here or there doesnt explain anything.
So according to the 9/11 commission report, Cheney enters underground tunnel at 9:37, then , paraphasing page 40, he learns of the Pentagon being hit inside the tunnel, calls the President after some disconnects and is still in the tunnel on the phone with the president when his wife meets him at 9:55. So Cheney arrives in the PEOC, "shortly before 10:00, perhaps 9:58" page 40 again from the 9/11 commission report. This is a critical time to note, the 9:58 PEOC time.
So, what is the official position surrounding Dick Cheney and any orders given prior to the Pentagon. Well, the official position is that Dick Cheney gave neither a stand down nor a shoot down order prior to the Pentagon being hit. The 911 Commission Report (This report represents the official position), says on the top of page 40 that "The Vice President entered the underground tunnel leading to the shelter at 9:37." 9:37 is the time when the Pentagon was struck.
how do your ramblings present a problem to the official story?
the pentagon was hit by an airplane. it hit them by surprise. so what?
just because janitor X had to go to the bathroom 5 minutes before that suddenly proves... what? that the plane was exchanged with a rocket and the passengers were buried somewhere and a hole was digged overnight or what?
So let's analyze my thesis first and see why it means 9/11 had to have government intervention. My thesis is that Dick Cheney, vice president of the United States, either ordered a stand down of the military defenses or allowed a stand down policy to remain in effect prior to the Pentagon getting hit. See, to order or allow a stand down means you're allowing the enemy to hit it's intended target, the Pentagon, and kill the innocent people in the Pentagon. That's complicity.
I see the facts supporting government intervention and the propaganda supporting the official conspiracy theory.
I'm focusing on one element that puts a hole in the official conspiracy theory(you know, the one most of you believe in.)
My position, is that Dick Cheney, vice president of the United States either ordered a stand down of the military defenses or adhered to a stand down policy already in place prior to the Pentagon getting hit. You need to think about that first.
Your videos are always fantastic. I fear greatly that yourself and others will not be around on YouTube much longer :( I fear that it won't be too long before you're all shut down because of your views. Are the religious hard liners on course to victory ? Because it seems so :(
I just learned a little more about Peter Joseph, maker of Zeitgeist and Zeitgeist Addendum. He promotes a resource based society. That means no monetary system is involved and it's called the Venus Project. It appears to be a bit too ideological for me, though interesting. One point to help others understand what his scarcity versus abundance is all about is if someone owns a castle it comes at the expense of others who must live in basically a straw hut to compensate for that. Idea is paraphr
if you believe in God or Allah or Buddha or Odin or whatever, the true nature of freedom is to have the right to believe what you want. but for any group to be censored solely for expressing their faith (or for speaking out against a faith) is idiotic and foolish... just because we don't share the same faith doesn't mean we have to always fight with one another.
but unfortunately, it happens. christians do it, muslims do it, jews do it, hinduists do it, scientologists do it, and political religions like neo-nazism, communism, and even neo-conservativism also do it.
maybe less religion is the only way to more freedom of speech and less censorship. anyway, religion causes nothing positive, so what harm can it be to just try to get rid of it, it wont harm anyone, and we can use churches for something else.
the only way to true freedom is for everyone to come to a common understanding, for example, if i see something i disagree with on tv or hear it on the radio, i do not become enraged and demand censorship, i simply change the channel. if more people would use their brains and their remotes instead of their mouths, everyone would be better off, religious and non-religious alike.
people, let me start by saying i'm a Bible-believeing Christian, but i'm not an extremist, and judging every member of any religion by the actions of some is both ignorant and foolish. i believe what i believe for my reasons, and will listen to any sensible and logical attempt to persuade me othewise. but i don't like people that beat people over their heads with faith and religion: religion is personal, not political.
IF religion would actually BE personal and NOT political, i might agree.
but you are WRONG. christianity, islam, and other religions constantly get into politics and then cause real damage, real death, real suffering.
STOP IT. or we will not stop to speak out against those religions, to destroy them before their faith-based politics destroy our planet. you are just wrong, there are REAL problems with faith-based politics, how can you just DENY THIS?
and yet again someone judges all by the actions of some, and doing so is nothing more than exemplifying the same bigotry you accuse religious-types of... religion itself is no more dangerous than a gun, the danger lies only in who uses it and how it's used. people have the inalienable right to worship as they see fit, and no, religion is NOT political, it is people that use it as such that make it so. and simply saying "you are just wrong" merely proves you are guilty of the same bigotry.
On 9/11 one item that people can logically follow without being a scientist or professional in the field is the timeline on Cheney and logic that shows that Cheney had to approve a stand down order by either verbally ordering it or by adhering to a stand down policy already in place. I can reveal specific page numbers, quotes, and sources for both the official version and the stand down version. Some message boards, most in my experience, ban this disscussion.
lol ^^ i might block you if would start bombarding the comment-section with page-numbers and quote-mined quotations from conspiracy theorysts... but the comments definitively wouldnt get deleted. for me, it would be like a christian bombarding the comments with bible-quotes.
Continued... Pandaguy666, yes, I think he put the theries out there but many sources were weak or debunked that he used. I think Peter Joseph, has some good ideas, doesn't mean we have to blindly follow everything he says. And, by the looks of the debunkers' videos any of his ideas will never get into the mainstream without complete scrutiny. I heard he has an addendum now. It talks about how we are trapped in scarcity! The idea has captivated my attention. Let's all keep open minds.
thats my veiw as well.. like i said the movie is more to open peoples eyes to things like that, kind of like an initiation video into the world of conspiracy. They dont explicitly say in the movie that this is exactly how it happened theyre just theories to how they may have happened. and Kurtilein3 its comparable to your statement on science. In the scientific community they state theories that change as new information is found, its the same as the theories shown in zeitgeist
I'll admit I'm just learning more about where Peter Joseph is coming from. I just watched an 11 part you tube video where Peter Joseph exchanges ideas with Alex Jones. It sounds like Peter Joseph puts the weight of his trust into human conditioning and not genetics. And honestly, I'm not sure what percentage is correct. My brother works with genetics biology at a university so maybe I can get some questions ready. Peter Joseph, maker of Zeitgeist, correctly says there is no god.
the facts are that every part of zeitgeist promotes theories that have already been completely debunked, every part spreads misconceptions and presents misrepresentations.
so this peter joseph-guy is just a liar, like a cult-leader. he makes money with this, and he doesnt care about all the bullshit that gullible people believe in because of him.
peter joseph is like this bucaille-person: watch?v=y8A9DEeglXI its in the second half
Well, I haven't heard anything specific that debunks the 3 theories put forth by Zeitgeist. Let's see if we can agree on their major themes before we delve into the pros and cons of the alternative theries versus debunkers' theories. Part 1 = The history of Jesus was written as a sun god. (Is that fair? What is the thesis if it's not?) 2= Some elements of government intervention in the 9/11 attacks. ( That's the thesis right?) Give me a specific reason to discount these, be specific.
charlesfloyb: number 1 is interesting, has some facts supporting it, but the ocean of mythology that the monotheistic religions crept out of is so vast, and its not really that new and fancy when you know about this.
part 2: much of the supposed facts and quotes are quote-mined or simply wrong, misinterpretations, so the whole concept is in violation of occams razor because there just isnt any acceptable evidence. take the manufactured and faked evidence away, and there wont be much left.
somehow, the religion of islam and freedom of speech just dont go along.
so i guess we need to get rid of islam. we need to continue to speak out. and, do you know if muslims have been responsible for her illegitimate suspensions? you know, morons like you, that dont value freedom of speech and that think that their won bullshit belief-system is the only true one?
Ok, the way I see it on part one of Zietgeist, is it's an interesting theory. I'm not willing to do the necessary work in order to validate the claims or invalidate it. The way I see it, there are 3 choices to pick from for the story of Christianity. 1. Chrisitianity happened the way the Christians interpret the story. 2. The zeitgiest version or 3. Neither............ I'll admit, choice 3 might be the strongest, but I'll give zeitgeist credit for at least trying to explain the big myth.
the fact that zeitgeist more or less got something right there doesnt mean that the whole movie has any value. its a very, very bad movie because it causes PEOPLE LIKE YOU to belioeve in ridiculous nonsense, and it causes you to look stupid and be exposed and humiliated whenever you meet someone that didnt watch zeitgeist, but maybe something better instead.
I can say, that part 2 isn't defended really well in the video, but I do believe in the premise. That an element or elements of the United States government and possibly other governments had to aid the attacks on 9/11. I think the 9/11 commission report puts Cheney in the PEOC well after he actually was there. This is key because Cheney , being in the PEOC earlier was able to either adhere to a stand down protocol in place or order it himself. I'd be happy to present evidence of the time.
charlesfloyb: i think you are not a skeptical person, and you also dont seem to really understand the scientific method. in ordwer to believe in this conspiracy nonsense, you need to toss out some of the most important principles of the scientific method: the search for internal and external contradictions, you ignore the external contradictions, and occams razor. so you can believe in crop circles and chemtrails and religion as well, if you accept zeitgeist.
kurtilein3, I will submit I only watched zeitgeist once or twice, so I have not checked the sources on part one. I'm merely commenting on a "glanceover" of the video that it sounds somewhat plausible. Now, maybe it's because I'm an atheist and will accept something easier if it fits my belief system, but I don't think so. I might delve into it a it, part one, if I wish to defend it. Right now, I see it as likely as a theory as the one the Christians are preaching. But, 2 wrongs don't make ..
if course it seems plausible. all conspiracy theories and religions seem plausible if you are too uneducated to actually check beneath the surface. its the EXTERNAL contradictions and the violation of occams razor that expose conspiracy theories. internal contradictions are of course well-hidden. otherwise semi-rational people with only slightly diminished reasoning abilities but some common sense (= most people) would not accept zeitgeist, and it wouldnt have been a success.
Part 2 is correct by Zeitgiest mainly because the official narrative can't prove itself. Part 3, I have no idea. Some interesting points were made, but I still have to be convinced that world bankers are running the world. I can be gullible, but someone has to tell me why.
charlesfloyb: i watched the beginning of part one, i watched until it all went crazy, and until ratiuonality went out of the window. this was, i dont remember it very precisely, but i think this was 25 minutes into part one.
this is enough. they spread lies and disinformation. they are not skeptical. they do not attempt to question their own claims, to check if they even make sense.
those people are completely discredited. they exposed themselves in the first half hour of part one, as FRAUDS.
charles: the thing is.. okay, normal people might say: fool me once, shame on you. fool me twice, shame on me.
i say: they discredited themselves in part one. i dont care about people that dont care about intellectual honesty, i call people like this: LIARS. i dont care about part 2 or 3, because i know that they are liars from looking at part one. for me, those people are garbage, they are scum, they do not tell the truth. this opinion is based on part 1, and i see no reason to change it.
and people that believe this nonsense: i call them gullible. i make fun of them. this includes you. im sorry. you are gullible for believing this obvious nonsense.
google: zeitgeist debunked. search youtube for videos about this. you will see that part 1 got debunked a lot, but only the believers actually watched part 3, so this goes more or less unchallenged. and most people got the message when part 1 got debunked anyway.
hjeremy2222: some copyright nonsense. probarbly a false DMCA. but she apparently, if voicesinthehead is correct, already decided not to fight back. not everyone is willing to go through this process of trying to get your account back after an illegitimate suspension.
variablast: i dont know, vloggerheads seems to be far from perfect. if you do v-logs, you probarbly wont be censored over there. i guess we need to keep our eyes open :)
try looking up zeitgeist the movie if you haven't seen it. its about the lies of religion and a few other conspiracy theories...theres 2 movies for it each 2 hours long but totally worth watching. just google zeitgeist, its the first thing that comes up
pandaguy: why do people always recommend this zeitgeist-BULLSHIT?
please answer the following question honestly: did you NOT notice that zeitgeist is full of manufactured and quote-mined disinformation and lies? the first 10 minutes of the movie were more or less okay, and then wave after wave of stupidity keeps rolling in.
really, if you like the zeitgeist-movie, then i know that you are not a very skeptical person, you might believe that you are, but you are gullible if you fall for this.
Actually, I liked Zeitgeist. I think it has to be a good movie, especially since all the "debunkers" of zeitgeist felt necessary to post their counter point videos. What zeitgeist did, is they presented an idea that Christianity could have arrived from pagon sun gods. I never knew this before. They kept on saying that the bible referred to more astrology than what is now the belief in Jesus. I know the sourcing is weak and minor points disproved, but who has a better explanation?
carlesfloyb: i said that the first few minutes are okay. with the whole pagan sungod-stuff they are scientifically walking on thin ice, but that seems to be more or less okay. its as soon as they start talking about september 11 that they start to completely get lost in delusions and irrationality.
the problem is that this amount of bullshit in just one documentary cannot be tolerated. its not a documentary anymore. it smells like bullshit, so it IS bullshit.
same. im not the most critical person when it comes to minute details anyway. But the whole point of the movie was to open up people eyes to the idea of where religions stem from, and also theories tio how different events throughout history have occurred. Parts of it are probably wrong, i dont know im not the smartest person either, but i found it enjoyable to at least learn about things that where in zeitgeist
but the lies cause you to maybe develop misconceptions which are very difficult to sort out later on. the only way to be on the safe side is to discard the whole thing. if you are unable to reject zeitgeist, then you will probarbly agree with christians when they say that the bible is a very good book. after all, its not all nonsense, some things are interesting. but i guess you already concluded that the bible is nonsense. why do you apply different standarts to zeitgeist, then?
i dont really see whats so much wring with it ...there are error in everything. i see your point that it can develop misconceptions among the viewers but thatss only if the viewers take everything in as fact. the point of the video isnt so much to educate every person to the key but more to open people's eyes to the lies around them
there are many books and documentaries that are almost free of any mistakes. you CAN expose, debunk, discard, and forget about anything that has any major mistakes: there still will be enough left. like for example: science. in science, everything that is wrong gets discarded. why do you want to keep stuff like zeitgeist, even if you know that its nonsense? why defend it instead of throwing the whole thing away?
its naomi94s own fault. She knew that Zeus demanded a sacrifice in blood. But this didnt happen. So Zeus, master of the universe punished her by suspending her. Its justice
Yes, censorship of course is a problem. And I'm afraid it will get worse on YouTube, but though I'm looking for alternatives, right now there seems to be no other video site with this amount of viewers.
Recently I opened an account on Vloggerheads, but was disappointed, because you can't subsribe to a channel (works only with RSS) and the upload limit for a video is 100 MB.
ffreethinker: yes, vloggerheads is not really good enough to be an alternative for youtube. but i like the rss-system. its much more open, the only thing that you wont have are the useless statistics. but even on vloggerheads, too few people seem to really use the system. a feedreader is for the internet, the youtube-subscriptions are only for youtube, so actually youtube managed to replace the internet with youtube for its users ;)
Naomi was awesome. She introduced me to pineapple pizza. I'm going to miss her. :'(
4u57inc0v3110 2 years ago
Comment removed
ExploringUranus 2 years ago
most people that say things like that are religious, and want to defend their religion against criticism. are you one of them? does it freak you out that she criticized your religion?
kurtilein3 2 years ago
Comment removed
ExploringUranus 2 years ago
ExploringUranus: I agree with you here. She was a huge bitch and she abused the DMCA and really didn't agree with freedom of speech unless it agreed with her. :)
Supporting an atheist just because they are an atheist and hating a theist just because they are a theist is very very very wrong.
All the best.
AnnCunter 2 years ago
Comment removed
ExploringUranus 2 years ago
Hello u german twat
josevanreyes 2 years ago
Holy shit, I just realized she was suspended.
xoxgodofgodsgodxx 3 years ago
and i just realized that i forgot to update this video, she has a new channel: naomiknight is the new channel.
kurtilein3 3 years ago
Not any more LOL!
zablodowski 2 years ago
Keep fighting the good fight.
GuyInvincible111 3 years ago
kurtilein3, the Mineta testimony is REAL evidence that the final report (official story) is false. Please read it and at least be informed before you start making threats and calling me names. Now, in regards to what you say is "solid data. real evidence" , the identity of the hijackers is not solid at all. There is no evidence of the presence of these hijackers on the planes. Have you seen a video or anything? You believe in the official story for some reason , but not evidence based.
charlesfloybb 3 years ago
This is how Scientology intelligence works; never defend, always attack! Yes, this "church" has its very own intelligence agency! In case of bad media coverage ("black propaganda"), Scientologists should contact the press and others pretending they are someone else to leave the impression that others than Scientology are also concerned about the attacks on Scientology. Scientologists are trained, and even ordered, to lie to the you and the media!
jnycnuk 3 years ago
Mineta =>" I was made aware of it during the time that the airplane coming into the Pentagon. There was a young man who had come in and said to the vice president, "The plane is 50 miles out. The plane is 30 miles out." And when it got down to, "The plane is 10 miles out," the young man also said to the vice president, "Do the orders still stand?" And the vice president turned and whipped his neck around and said, "Of course the orders still stand. Have you heard anything to the contrary?"
charlesfloyb 3 years ago
charlesfloyb: so now you say that its a false flag operation, all done by the government.
this doesnt explain anything. we know too much about the identities of the hijackers, and about what happened in the airplanes. solid data. real evidence.
you just ignore it, fail to come up with a story, and because you are a moron ill just block you. i gave you more than enough opportunity to come up with a theory and to spam this comment-section with offtopic comments. bye
kurtilein3 3 years ago
Come on kurtelein3, I'm waiting to hear why Mineta's testimony is invalid as evidence to counter the official story. Please be specific.
charlesfloyb 3 years ago
False flag operations are a fact in history and even the so called "all benevolent" nations use them to get people like you to follow them like sheeple. Don't question, don't be a sceptic, just accept what they tell you as it happened. The motivation for the false flag operation is pretty obvious. It allowed international wars to be supported by the sheeple(that's you) so the criminals can profit from war & oil. They shoved the patriot act, military commission act, etc down our throats...
charlesfloyb 3 years ago
1st off, kurtilein3 never refuted Mineta's testimony that clearly shoots down the official theory that Dick Cheney never allowed any orders prior to the Pentagon being hit. So, I'm supposed to overlook this right? I mean what you believe in is nothing more than theory and I poked a hole in it. What don't you understand about government intervention? The United Stated government implemented the attacks using a common modern day warfar tactic called a false flag operation. limited space ...
charlesfloyb 3 years ago
I've stated my theory in the beginning. I've said there was government intervention in the attacks of 9/11. You're too obtuse to recognize that I already explained that to you? Now you ask what happened inside those 4 airplanes which is another aspect of 9/11. Why should we change subjects when you haven't even started to answer the problem of Cheney advancing military orders prior to the Pentagon being hit? So you think we should just accept the final result without answering this???
charlesfloyb 3 years ago
"I've stated my theory in the beginning. I've said there was government intervention in the attacks of 9/11. You're too obtuse to recognize that I already explained that to you?"
this does not explain anything, you moron. what kind of government intervention? you mean, that the kidnappers had to use knifes because guns arent allowed on airplanes? this event was influenced by all kinds of government intervention: firefighters tried to intervene by evacuating the buildings, for example.
kurtilein3 3 years ago
Without you defending the official position concerning Mineta's testimony which you can't, you divert the attention to another aspect of 9/11. I've answered everyone of your questions by the way, and you have not defended the one question I put to you. How can the 9/11 report be correct on Dick Cheney when it's clear from Mineta and other sources that Cheney engaged in orders with a young man PRIOR to the Pentagon being hit? Before you claim conspiracy, try debunking the question.
charlesfloyb 3 years ago
charlesfloyb:
so, you dont even know what a theory is. you really thing that the sentence "there was government intervention" can be considered a theory?
a theory needs to explain something. like, for example, in DETAIL what happened on september 11. the fact is you just dont know it, your brain is empty, you only know: there was intervention. someone intervened. maybe the government. maybe muslim terrorists. maybe my penis.
kurtilein3 3 years ago
So, I'm a moron because you don't know how to read Mineta's testimony and the 9/11 commission report. I'm an idiot because I exposed a huge contradiction in given testimonies and the final report. What logic has kurtilein3 used? I mean besides for adhominem attacks which you don't realize weaken your position of the official conspiracy theory. Look at evidence then make a conclusion, kurtilein3. Do your homework for once.
charlesfloyb 3 years ago
I'm not sure you're a rational person kurtilein3. You refuse to read Mineta's testimony which is required reading. Mineta clearly states that Cheney is approving orders before the aircraft smashes into the Pentagon. Mineta's testimony IS evdidence that the official story of Cheney not approving orders is FALSE. You choose not to read Mineta's testimony or pages 40 and 41 of the 9/11 report. I don't think you have a clue and refuse to read the necessary documents.
charlesfloyb 3 years ago
kurtilein3, please familiarize yourself with subject matter before making hasty generalizations of "quote mining" or " misinterpreted" evidence. I will join your side, if you can shoot down the argument. The problem is, well, I won't say what you said because I believe in being rational and looking at all the evidence even if the majority of the public believe in something else. If you show evidence that disproves my postion, I listen and adjust. I'm rational.
charlesfloyb 3 years ago
charlesfloyb: the burden of proof is with you.
you are the one that needs to present evidence.
you didnt present anything impressive so far, you only play some intellectually dishonest games, try to switch the burden of proof, and use the same tactics that muslims use to prove that islam is true.
you are just an idiot. you fail when it comes to explaining what your nonsense about cheney is supposed to prove.
kurtilein3 3 years ago
It proves that Dick Cheney allowed a stand down of the United States military. That is wrong because it means he took no action to stop the incoming aircraft about to crash into the Pentagon. The official story is that Dick Cheney never allowed a stand down because Dick Cheney never was involved in any orders. The presidential shoot down orders were only received AFTER all the planes were already crashed. That means after 10:03 in the morning. Read Minetta's testimony. Read 9/11 final report.
charlesfloyb 3 years ago
charles:
what is your theory? what happened inside those 4 airplanes? how often shoul i repeat this question?
give me something that is worth debunking. so far you didnt present anything that we could talk about. what is your evidence that the airplanes were not hijacked by muslim suicide terrorists? and who hijacked them, then? what do you want to prove?
you are, really, just the typical conspiracy theory moron.
kurtilein3 3 years ago
Kurtilein3, you need to stop being so gullible and believing everything your main media sources tell you. If you would please read over Mineta testimonies in the 9/11 hearings, you'll see that he testifies to Cheney giving orders at 9:20 when the official time of any order is 10:05. Very important, because 9:20 means the orders had to be of a stand down nature. Please read and get yourself informed instead of just giving uneducated kneejerk reactions.
charlesfloyb 3 years ago
okay, and that proves... what?
what exactly happened on that day? and what are the differences to "the official stories"?
and why cant you see that 911 truthers constantly use quote-mined and manufactured evidence, and that their many different stories are often contradicting? there isnt one main theory, there are dozens, so why should any one of them be right? this only proves that any conspiracy theory can be backed up using quote-mined and misinterpreted "evidence".
kurtilein3 3 years ago
Kurtilein3, you don't even know what your postition is. Get a grip! You seem to think ad hominem attacks makes you some kind of an expert. Well, it doesn't. I was in the middle of giving you a coherent explanation, which you couldn't understand. So sorry, you lack an ability to follow a conversation.
charlesfloyb 3 years ago
charles:
people use the same tactics that you are falling for to support that aliens landed in roswell new mexico. or that their permanent magnet free energy motor works, and that government tries to supress this knowledge.
you need to come up with something better. like, for example, one story on what happened on that day, precise, consistent, and point out the differences to the official story, and then give GOOD REASONS why i should believe you. the problem is: you will fail.
kurtilein3 3 years ago
The Freedom of Information Act was used to get transparency of the evidence the secret service had used in their footnotes in the 9/11 commission document, but nothing of record has been saved or collected. That means, there are no recording of the phone calls, no testimony, nothing, to support that Dick Cheney entered the PEOC at 9:58. So, why is this important? Because, evidence, reasoning and logic show that Cheney Was in the PEOC BEFORE 9:37, when the Pentagon was struck.
charlesfloyb 3 years ago
this is ridiculous.
i dont see how this proves anything. just the typical incoherent ramblings you get from an uneducated conspiracy theory-moron.
i dont need to take this serious unless you can come up with something that makes sense. a coherent theory of about what exactly happened on that day, and what happened in all of the 4 planes involved, and what happened to the passengers and the hijackers. but you morons never accomplished this.
kurtilein3 3 years ago
Ok, I posted the official position, that's the position that everyone in the world believes if they don't believe in an alternative position. This official position, is written in the 9/11 commission report and is really only supported by nontransparent footnotes by the secret service. That's right, the position that the world, and you presumably believe in, is supported by non existent evidence that the secret service says existed at some point. Freedom of Information Act ...
charlesfloyb 3 years ago
i also consider this spam.
so many comments,. nothing sayd. now what hit the pentagon? an airplane full of passengers kidnapped by some muslims with knifes? a rocket?
you need to explain what happened, and not some random irrelevant nonsense about dick cheney, we know that he is an asshole, but the fact that he has been walking around here or there doesnt explain anything.
kurtilein3 3 years ago
So according to the 9/11 commission report, Cheney enters underground tunnel at 9:37, then , paraphasing page 40, he learns of the Pentagon being hit inside the tunnel, calls the President after some disconnects and is still in the tunnel on the phone with the president when his wife meets him at 9:55. So Cheney arrives in the PEOC, "shortly before 10:00, perhaps 9:58" page 40 again from the 9/11 commission report. This is a critical time to note, the 9:58 PEOC time.
charlesfloyb 3 years ago
So, what is the official position surrounding Dick Cheney and any orders given prior to the Pentagon. Well, the official position is that Dick Cheney gave neither a stand down nor a shoot down order prior to the Pentagon being hit. The 911 Commission Report (This report represents the official position), says on the top of page 40 that "The Vice President entered the underground tunnel leading to the shelter at 9:37." 9:37 is the time when the Pentagon was struck.
charlesfloyb 3 years ago
how do your ramblings present a problem to the official story?
the pentagon was hit by an airplane. it hit them by surprise. so what?
just because janitor X had to go to the bathroom 5 minutes before that suddenly proves... what? that the plane was exchanged with a rocket and the passengers were buried somewhere and a hole was digged overnight or what?
kurtilein3 3 years ago
So let's analyze my thesis first and see why it means 9/11 had to have government intervention. My thesis is that Dick Cheney, vice president of the United States, either ordered a stand down of the military defenses or allowed a stand down policy to remain in effect prior to the Pentagon getting hit. See, to order or allow a stand down means you're allowing the enemy to hit it's intended target, the Pentagon, and kill the innocent people in the Pentagon. That's complicity.
charlesfloyb 3 years ago
I see the facts supporting government intervention and the propaganda supporting the official conspiracy theory.
I'm focusing on one element that puts a hole in the official conspiracy theory(you know, the one most of you believe in.)
My position, is that Dick Cheney, vice president of the United States either ordered a stand down of the military defenses or adhered to a stand down policy already in place prior to the Pentagon getting hit. You need to think about that first.
charlesfloyb 3 years ago
Your videos are always fantastic. I fear greatly that yourself and others will not be around on YouTube much longer :( I fear that it won't be too long before you're all shut down because of your views. Are the religious hard liners on course to victory ? Because it seems so :(
dimebolt1976 3 years ago
I just learned a little more about Peter Joseph, maker of Zeitgeist and Zeitgeist Addendum. He promotes a resource based society. That means no monetary system is involved and it's called the Venus Project. It appears to be a bit too ideological for me, though interesting. One point to help others understand what his scarcity versus abundance is all about is if someone owns a castle it comes at the expense of others who must live in basically a straw hut to compensate for that. Idea is paraphr
charlesfloyb 3 years ago
if you believe in God or Allah or Buddha or Odin or whatever, the true nature of freedom is to have the right to believe what you want. but for any group to be censored solely for expressing their faith (or for speaking out against a faith) is idiotic and foolish... just because we don't share the same faith doesn't mean we have to always fight with one another.
gaburearu 3 years ago
gaburearu:
but unfortunately, it happens. christians do it, muslims do it, jews do it, hinduists do it, scientologists do it, and political religions like neo-nazism, communism, and even neo-conservativism also do it.
maybe less religion is the only way to more freedom of speech and less censorship. anyway, religion causes nothing positive, so what harm can it be to just try to get rid of it, it wont harm anyone, and we can use churches for something else.
kurtilein3 3 years ago
the only way to true freedom is for everyone to come to a common understanding, for example, if i see something i disagree with on tv or hear it on the radio, i do not become enraged and demand censorship, i simply change the channel. if more people would use their brains and their remotes instead of their mouths, everyone would be better off, religious and non-religious alike.
gaburearu 3 years ago
people, let me start by saying i'm a Bible-believeing Christian, but i'm not an extremist, and judging every member of any religion by the actions of some is both ignorant and foolish. i believe what i believe for my reasons, and will listen to any sensible and logical attempt to persuade me othewise. but i don't like people that beat people over their heads with faith and religion: religion is personal, not political.
gaburearu 3 years ago
gaburearu:
IF religion would actually BE personal and NOT political, i might agree.
but you are WRONG. christianity, islam, and other religions constantly get into politics and then cause real damage, real death, real suffering.
STOP IT. or we will not stop to speak out against those religions, to destroy them before their faith-based politics destroy our planet. you are just wrong, there are REAL problems with faith-based politics, how can you just DENY THIS?
kurtilein3 3 years ago
and yet again someone judges all by the actions of some, and doing so is nothing more than exemplifying the same bigotry you accuse religious-types of... religion itself is no more dangerous than a gun, the danger lies only in who uses it and how it's used. people have the inalienable right to worship as they see fit, and no, religion is NOT political, it is people that use it as such that make it so. and simply saying "you are just wrong" merely proves you are guilty of the same bigotry.
gaburearu 3 years ago
On 9/11 one item that people can logically follow without being a scientist or professional in the field is the timeline on Cheney and logic that shows that Cheney had to approve a stand down order by either verbally ordering it or by adhering to a stand down policy already in place. I can reveal specific page numbers, quotes, and sources for both the official version and the stand down version. Some message boards, most in my experience, ban this disscussion.
charlesfloyb 3 years ago
charlesfloyb:
lol ^^ i might block you if would start bombarding the comment-section with page-numbers and quote-mined quotations from conspiracy theorysts... but the comments definitively wouldnt get deleted. for me, it would be like a christian bombarding the comments with bible-quotes.
kurtilein3 3 years ago
Continued... Pandaguy666, yes, I think he put the theries out there but many sources were weak or debunked that he used. I think Peter Joseph, has some good ideas, doesn't mean we have to blindly follow everything he says. And, by the looks of the debunkers' videos any of his ideas will never get into the mainstream without complete scrutiny. I heard he has an addendum now. It talks about how we are trapped in scarcity! The idea has captivated my attention. Let's all keep open minds.
charlesfloyb 3 years ago
charlesfloyb:
thats my veiw as well.. like i said the movie is more to open peoples eyes to things like that, kind of like an initiation video into the world of conspiracy. They dont explicitly say in the movie that this is exactly how it happened theyre just theories to how they may have happened. and Kurtilein3 its comparable to your statement on science. In the scientific community they state theories that change as new information is found, its the same as the theories shown in zeitgeist
pandaguy666 3 years ago
I'll admit I'm just learning more about where Peter Joseph is coming from. I just watched an 11 part you tube video where Peter Joseph exchanges ideas with Alex Jones. It sounds like Peter Joseph puts the weight of his trust into human conditioning and not genetics. And honestly, I'm not sure what percentage is correct. My brother works with genetics biology at a university so maybe I can get some questions ready. Peter Joseph, maker of Zeitgeist, correctly says there is no god.
charlesfloyb 3 years ago
pandaguy:
dont forget about the facts.
the facts are that every part of zeitgeist promotes theories that have already been completely debunked, every part spreads misconceptions and presents misrepresentations.
so this peter joseph-guy is just a liar, like a cult-leader. he makes money with this, and he doesnt care about all the bullshit that gullible people believe in because of him.
peter joseph is like this bucaille-person: watch?v=y8A9DEeglXI its in the second half
kurtilein3 3 years ago
Well, I haven't heard anything specific that debunks the 3 theories put forth by Zeitgeist. Let's see if we can agree on their major themes before we delve into the pros and cons of the alternative theries versus debunkers' theories. Part 1 = The history of Jesus was written as a sun god. (Is that fair? What is the thesis if it's not?) 2= Some elements of government intervention in the 9/11 attacks. ( That's the thesis right?) Give me a specific reason to discount these, be specific.
charlesfloyb 3 years ago
charlesfloyb: number 1 is interesting, has some facts supporting it, but the ocean of mythology that the monotheistic religions crept out of is so vast, and its not really that new and fancy when you know about this.
part 2: much of the supposed facts and quotes are quote-mined or simply wrong, misinterpretations, so the whole concept is in violation of occams razor because there just isnt any acceptable evidence. take the manufactured and faked evidence away, and there wont be much left.
kurtilein3 3 years ago
IS NOT amazing!!!! she suspended herself by herself she is a thief also
thanks god
breadcrumpsman 3 years ago
i hope her to be suspend in hell
w w w sultan org
she is dangerous element she has no logic she dedicated her life to fight the truth by insane reasons
breadcrumpsman 3 years ago
muslims just hate freedom of speech.....
somehow, the religion of islam and freedom of speech just dont go along.
so i guess we need to get rid of islam. we need to continue to speak out. and, do you know if muslims have been responsible for her illegitimate suspensions? you know, morons like you, that dont value freedom of speech and that think that their won bullshit belief-system is the only true one?
kurtilein3 3 years ago
Ok, the way I see it on part one of Zietgeist, is it's an interesting theory. I'm not willing to do the necessary work in order to validate the claims or invalidate it. The way I see it, there are 3 choices to pick from for the story of Christianity. 1. Chrisitianity happened the way the Christians interpret the story. 2. The zeitgiest version or 3. Neither............ I'll admit, choice 3 might be the strongest, but I'll give zeitgeist credit for at least trying to explain the big myth.
charlesfloyb 3 years ago
charlesfloyb:
the fact that zeitgeist more or less got something right there doesnt mean that the whole movie has any value. its a very, very bad movie because it causes PEOPLE LIKE YOU to belioeve in ridiculous nonsense, and it causes you to look stupid and be exposed and humiliated whenever you meet someone that didnt watch zeitgeist, but maybe something better instead.
kurtilein3 3 years ago
I can say, that part 2 isn't defended really well in the video, but I do believe in the premise. That an element or elements of the United States government and possibly other governments had to aid the attacks on 9/11. I think the 9/11 commission report puts Cheney in the PEOC well after he actually was there. This is key because Cheney , being in the PEOC earlier was able to either adhere to a stand down protocol in place or order it himself. I'd be happy to present evidence of the time.
charlesfloyb 3 years ago
charlesfloyb: i think you are not a skeptical person, and you also dont seem to really understand the scientific method. in ordwer to believe in this conspiracy nonsense, you need to toss out some of the most important principles of the scientific method: the search for internal and external contradictions, you ignore the external contradictions, and occams razor. so you can believe in crop circles and chemtrails and religion as well, if you accept zeitgeist.
kurtilein3 3 years ago
kurtilein3, I will submit I only watched zeitgeist once or twice, so I have not checked the sources on part one. I'm merely commenting on a "glanceover" of the video that it sounds somewhat plausible. Now, maybe it's because I'm an atheist and will accept something easier if it fits my belief system, but I don't think so. I might delve into it a it, part one, if I wish to defend it. Right now, I see it as likely as a theory as the one the Christians are preaching. But, 2 wrongs don't make ..
charlesfloyb 3 years ago
charlesfloyb:
if course it seems plausible. all conspiracy theories and religions seem plausible if you are too uneducated to actually check beneath the surface. its the EXTERNAL contradictions and the violation of occams razor that expose conspiracy theories. internal contradictions are of course well-hidden. otherwise semi-rational people with only slightly diminished reasoning abilities but some common sense (= most people) would not accept zeitgeist, and it wouldnt have been a success.
kurtilein3 3 years ago
Part 2 is correct by Zeitgiest mainly because the official narrative can't prove itself. Part 3, I have no idea. Some interesting points were made, but I still have to be convinced that world bankers are running the world. I can be gullible, but someone has to tell me why.
charlesfloyb 3 years ago
charlesfloyb: i watched the beginning of part one, i watched until it all went crazy, and until ratiuonality went out of the window. this was, i dont remember it very precisely, but i think this was 25 minutes into part one.
this is enough. they spread lies and disinformation. they are not skeptical. they do not attempt to question their own claims, to check if they even make sense.
those people are completely discredited. they exposed themselves in the first half hour of part one, as FRAUDS.
kurtilein3 3 years ago
charles: the thing is.. okay, normal people might say: fool me once, shame on you. fool me twice, shame on me.
i say: they discredited themselves in part one. i dont care about people that dont care about intellectual honesty, i call people like this: LIARS. i dont care about part 2 or 3, because i know that they are liars from looking at part one. for me, those people are garbage, they are scum, they do not tell the truth. this opinion is based on part 1, and i see no reason to change it.
kurtilein3 3 years ago
charles:
one last comment...
and people that believe this nonsense: i call them gullible. i make fun of them. this includes you. im sorry. you are gullible for believing this obvious nonsense.
google: zeitgeist debunked. search youtube for videos about this. you will see that part 1 got debunked a lot, but only the believers actually watched part 3, so this goes more or less unchallenged. and most people got the message when part 1 got debunked anyway.
kurtilein3 3 years ago
What was she suspended for?
hjeremy2222 3 years ago
hjeremy2222: some copyright nonsense. probarbly a false DMCA. but she apparently, if voicesinthehead is correct, already decided not to fight back. not everyone is willing to go through this process of trying to get your account back after an illegitimate suspension.
kurtilein3 3 years ago
variablast: i dont know, vloggerheads seems to be far from perfect. if you do v-logs, you probarbly wont be censored over there. i guess we need to keep our eyes open :)
kurtilein3 3 years ago
Cool, cool
good luck fighting Scientology
Anon smiles upon thee
SuperAtheistBrothers 3 years ago
try looking up zeitgeist the movie if you haven't seen it. its about the lies of religion and a few other conspiracy theories...theres 2 movies for it each 2 hours long but totally worth watching. just google zeitgeist, its the first thing that comes up
pandaguy666 3 years ago
pandaguy: why do people always recommend this zeitgeist-BULLSHIT?
please answer the following question honestly: did you NOT notice that zeitgeist is full of manufactured and quote-mined disinformation and lies? the first 10 minutes of the movie were more or less okay, and then wave after wave of stupidity keeps rolling in.
really, if you like the zeitgeist-movie, then i know that you are not a very skeptical person, you might believe that you are, but you are gullible if you fall for this.
kurtilein3 3 years ago
Actually, I liked Zeitgeist. I think it has to be a good movie, especially since all the "debunkers" of zeitgeist felt necessary to post their counter point videos. What zeitgeist did, is they presented an idea that Christianity could have arrived from pagon sun gods. I never knew this before. They kept on saying that the bible referred to more astrology than what is now the belief in Jesus. I know the sourcing is weak and minor points disproved, but who has a better explanation?
charlesfloyb 3 years ago
carlesfloyb: i said that the first few minutes are okay. with the whole pagan sungod-stuff they are scientifically walking on thin ice, but that seems to be more or less okay. its as soon as they start talking about september 11 that they start to completely get lost in delusions and irrationality.
the problem is that this amount of bullshit in just one documentary cannot be tolerated. its not a documentary anymore. it smells like bullshit, so it IS bullshit.
kurtilein3 3 years ago
same. im not the most critical person when it comes to minute details anyway. But the whole point of the movie was to open up people eyes to the idea of where religions stem from, and also theories tio how different events throughout history have occurred. Parts of it are probably wrong, i dont know im not the smartest person either, but i found it enjoyable to at least learn about things that where in zeitgeist
pandaguy666 3 years ago
pandaguy666:
but the lies cause you to maybe develop misconceptions which are very difficult to sort out later on. the only way to be on the safe side is to discard the whole thing. if you are unable to reject zeitgeist, then you will probarbly agree with christians when they say that the bible is a very good book. after all, its not all nonsense, some things are interesting. but i guess you already concluded that the bible is nonsense. why do you apply different standarts to zeitgeist, then?
kurtilein3 3 years ago
i dont really see whats so much wring with it ...there are error in everything. i see your point that it can develop misconceptions among the viewers but thatss only if the viewers take everything in as fact. the point of the video isnt so much to educate every person to the key but more to open people's eyes to the lies around them
pandaguy666 3 years ago
pandaguy: you are wrong,
there are many books and documentaries that are almost free of any mistakes. you CAN expose, debunk, discard, and forget about anything that has any major mistakes: there still will be enough left. like for example: science. in science, everything that is wrong gets discarded. why do you want to keep stuff like zeitgeist, even if you know that its nonsense? why defend it instead of throwing the whole thing away?
kurtilein3 3 years ago
its naomi94s own fault. She knew that Zeus demanded a sacrifice in blood. But this didnt happen. So Zeus, master of the universe punished her by suspending her. Its justice
ludersatan 3 years ago
ok, i just went and signed up on vloggerhead. maybe i will increase your views by 1 :)
cozmikzen 3 years ago
Thank you for keeping everyone posted.
VoicesintheHead 3 years ago
Shame on youtube! :( 5* for you
kurti hast du mal die deutschen islamistischen/creationistischen Channels ausgecheckt? DIE werden natürlich toleriert...*kopfschüttel*
xBuscopanx 3 years ago
oO deutsche Kanäle von Kreationisten? Sowas gibts? Ich dachte das wäre immernoch nur ne Plage im angloamerikanischen Sprachraum...
XwendigoX 3 years ago
Ne, ne, das hab ich auch gedacht. Den meisten Einfluss hat Kreationismus ja auch in den USA.
Ist inzwischen aber auch bei uns immer mehr im Kommen, unglaublich aber war.
xBuscopanx 3 years ago
5* (as usual).
Yes, censorship of course is a problem. And I'm afraid it will get worse on YouTube, but though I'm looking for alternatives, right now there seems to be no other video site with this amount of viewers.
Recently I opened an account on Vloggerheads, but was disappointed, because you can't subsribe to a channel (works only with RSS) and the upload limit for a video is 100 MB.
FFreeThinker 3 years ago
ffreethinker: yes, vloggerheads is not really good enough to be an alternative for youtube. but i like the rss-system. its much more open, the only thing that you wont have are the useless statistics. but even on vloggerheads, too few people seem to really use the system. a feedreader is for the internet, the youtube-subscriptions are only for youtube, so actually youtube managed to replace the internet with youtube for its users ;)
kurtilein3 3 years ago
Yokeups gone, some kind of martyr bullshit, Im sure he'll be back.
Venomfangx is selling t-shirts and cards.
So I guess there is some justice in the world.
I wont go near vloggerheads because of renetto's black face escapade.
Good to see you back on Youtube.
AMVtheburning 3 years ago
Yokeup is back on his old channel yokedtojesus. Let's keep an eye on him. ;)
FFreeThinker 3 years ago 2
Think he dropped Tommyfromthebronx's doc's the other day or gave them to some hater of tommyfromthebronx, how unchristian lol.
AMVtheburning 3 years ago