Government is a conspiracy. watch 'State is not great' and 'The death of statism'. You think it's so hard to fool people when they won't see through that one?
btw your 9/11 link collection is pathetic.. except for wikipedia of course, because wikipedia always gives you the truth.
check out the last 2 paragraphs of this: tiny.cc /02li9
@MysticXtU Even if government is a "conspiracy", government *exists*, unlike many of the events or entities described by Crazy Conspiracy Theories.
My 9/11 link collection contains citations from Cambridge and Edinburgh Universities, and quotes many experts.
You criticize me for citing Wikipedia (in addition to the experts I cited), yet the *only* counter-evidence you offer is an opinion poll of non-experts. And even in that poll, a strong plurality agrees with me.
Crazy conspiracy theories are soooo crazy and they make me have a good laugh reading them. As if the Irish Holocaust never happened nor the moon landings....yeah right!
Great video.I believed the problem is that people get into one conspiracy & than everything becomes a conspiracy & the paranoid have gone far as being hospitalized,Not everything is a conspiracy.I have a friend who believes everything is a christian conspiracy & a friend of a friend who want crazy over conspiracies,so I hear yeah.
You do realize that even girl scouts are capable of forming a conspiracy right? lmao. A conspiracy is merely a group of people keeping a secret and we all keep secrets...so conspiracies, large and small, are more common than you may believe. Although, on a real note, some large conspiracies are true - most are false.
eh doesn't surprise me, Christians/Catholics claimed it.. Everything is the "Devil's" or "occults" fault to them lol. My Uncle claimed there was a connection, some people are saying they were into it. No solid evidence yet, just claims from some people.
hummm i see... you find hard to believe these theories to be true... so that means you believe in what government says to be real, or you dont believe in anyone... well i believe in many of those teories cause they are based in facts, then the theorie comes, btw conspiracy means when 2 or more people make a plan to acomplish something, sry for my bad english, and make more research before saying retard statements...
@lfgamer1 I've done a good deal of research, and I've found that the mainstream theory holds more facts than all the others. And yes I know what the definition of "conspiracy" is. So technically, yes, the mainstream theory is a "conspiracy theory", but it's a theory that actually makes sense.
Sonic, what if your wrong? Your vid misses a vital question, who gains from these 'conspiracies'? if the USA wanted to end the war on 'terror' would it not look to change it's foreign policy? as thats the sole cause? no, because its in Americas interest, they have to do it or your country would collaspe, dont forget the USA was built on the back of war and oil, its your lifeblood and therefore your government are oblieged to keep it going, there not really bothered if we believe them or not.
The very reason we had 9/11 is because the USA wanted an oil pipeline going through Afghanistan and Iraq. They had this planned for years. THe CEOs of Haliburton and other American corporations with contracts in military all end up as politicians and senators and vice-verser. If Saudis did do 9/11. Because that is who the USA blamed in the first place. THen why not go after Saudi Arabia? Instead they go after two countries who had NOTHING to do with it. Saudis have billions invested in USA.
You said: "THe CEOs of Haliburton and other American corporations with contracts in military all end up as politicians and senators and vice-verser."
I respond: It's true that military corporations exert excessive influence on our policy decisions. But that doesn't mean they conspired to kill 3000 americans.
You said: "If Saudis did do 9/11. Because that is who the USA blamed in the first place. THen why not go after Saudi Arabia? "
I respond: Most of the hijackers were of Saudi Arabian descent, but I have heard no evidence that the attacks were planned by the government of Saudi Arabia. They were planned by the Taliban, which held refuge in Afghanistan.
It is true that we have business interests in Saudia Arabia, and those interests probably influence our decisions. It is also true that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, and did not posses weapons of mass destruction. That war was (and is) basically a disaster. But that doesn't mean that we conspired to kill 3,000 of our own people.
Why are you so certain that "we" wouldn't kill our own people? Americans kill other Americans every day on a small scale, crimes of violence - drunk driving etc.,... Gang related murders, the sniper killing sprees up North, and the columbine as well as other shooting spree incidents. It has been proven that the kids that pulled off the columbine shooting were into the occult btw, look it up. Hell, people get attacked/mugged/killed all the time just for a buck or two.
@Arch0Angel0Seraphiel "Why are you so certain that "we" wouldn't kill our own people? Americans kill other Americans every day on a small scale"
Yes, but the government is not in the habit of deliberately murdering three thousand americans in a single day just to bring about policy changes. That's a whole different level of evil.
Also, there is no point in me posting if my comments are going to be deleted. Instead of me posting against refuting your ridiculous claims that building 7 collapsed due to fire (Again). (Going against basic science). Especially the fact that it fell in it's own footpring within free fall speed. Google ae911truth, nearly a thousand proffesional engineers and architects searching for basic answers to 9/11. Anyone who knows basic science knows buildings DO NOT collapse like Building 7.
You said: "Google ae911truth, nearly a thousand proffesional engineers and architects searching for basic answers to 9/11"
I respond: I have little reason to trust the accuracy of this list. If there really are a large number of properly-educated people who doubt the mainstream theory, why don't they produce some scientific studies to prove their claims? Instead, I've seen studies from Purdue, and Cambridge, and Edinburgh, that the mainstream account is accurate.
You said: "Anyone who knows basic science knows buildings DO NOT collapse like Building 7. "
I respond: Wouldn't you agree that scientists know basic science? Why then, do scientists like Thomas W. Eagar (an engineering professor at MIT) support the mainstream theory? Because the mainstream theory works just fine with basic science, that's why. The mainstream theory makes sense.
Note that the title of this video is "Crazy Conspiracy Theories", not simply "Conspiracy theories.". I have no problems whatsoever with conspiracy theories, provided that they aren't crazy; i.e. in serious disregard of the evidence.
So yes, the 19 committed a conspiracy, according to the mainstream account. Since I believe in this theory, I am technically a "conspiracy theorist". However, I am not "crazy"; I do not disregard the evidence at hand.
sonicsuns. Don't you think the 19 Saudis armed with boxcutters hijacking four planes, and hitting two towers (three of which fell). Since no one can explain why Building 7 fell. And the other target hit was the biggest defended building in the whole of the earth? Don't you think that's a CRAZY Conspiracy theory? There is NO evidence linking Osama Bin Laden to 9/11, that is why he is not wanted for that anymore OFFICIAL. Neither evidence linking the Taliban OR Iraq to 9/11 either.
You said: "Since no one can explain why Building 7 fell"
I respond: Plenty of people can explain it, including the NIST and Popular Mechanics Magazine. (See the link in the description for proof) As the North Tower collapsed on September 11th, debris struck the building known as WTC7, heavily damaging the southern face. Multiple fires ignited, eventually causing structural failure. And that's not just my speculation; it's confirmed by actual engineers.
You said: "And the other target hit was the biggest defended building in the whole of the earth? "
I respond: All previous hijackings if commercial airliners amounted to a form of kidnapping, with the hijackers demanding ransom of some kind. No one had ever previously used commercial airliners as ballistic missiles. Thus, the pentagon had no defenses against this sort of attack. Sometimes the mightiest defenses are breached by simple, unique and unexpected forms of attack.
You said: "There is NO evidence linking Osama Bin Laden to 9/11"
I respond: Actually, there is. Check the links on the side.
You also said there is no evidence linking Iraq to 9/11. This is true. Iraq was uninvolved in the 9/11 plot, and indeed it was completely unaware until after the attacks.
The Pentagon with it's billion dollar budgets had no defence against this sort of attack? Are you kidding me? Why then on September 9/11 they had training missions in JUST THAT. On the exact same day? When airlines go off course military jets are scrambled within seconds. The Pentagon is easily capable of this. There was confusion on that day because a lot of pilots thought it was a training mission.
You said: "The Pentagon with it's billion dollar budgets had no defence against this sort of attack?"
I respond: Even the mightiest military can be felled by unique tactics. See the Spanish Armada of 1588, for instance. And remember that the terrorists didn't wipe out the entire U.S. military or whatnot. Hitting the Pentagon was dramatic, but it didn't really stop the military from functioning. Thus, the terrorists' victory was smaller than it seemed.
You said: "Why then on September 9/11 they had training missions in JUST THAT."
I respond: No they didn't. Yes, there were training missions that day. (There are training missions all the time, in fact. It's a common activity.) But the training missions had nothing to do with "JUST THAT", i.e. responding to the hijacking of several airliners for the express purpose of suicide missions. No one was training for that scenario. (If I'm wrong, prove it.)
You said: "When airlines go off course military jets are scrambled within seconds. "
I respond: No, they aren't. First off, this isn't Star Wars, and it actually takes several minutes to scramble a jet. Secondly, jets are not scrambled every single time a plane goes off course, because 99% of the time it's off course due to weather or technical trouble, and the fighter jets can't really help with that.
what if the people conspiracy theorists are after, actually control the public AND the conspiracy theory part of every story? you got 'proof' of the landing on the moon and you have 'proof' of the landing in the studio, why couldn't it be that these yankees did land on the moon but the camera broke during the journey? sorry bout my english i'm still learning
Just because you can imagine something doesn't mean it's true. The mainstream theories (on 9/11 and moon landings) are supported by the most evidence.
lol you appear to be avoiding the debate, my friend.
As the North Towe collapsed on September 11th, debris struck the building known as WTC7, heavily damaging the southern face. Multiple fires ignited, eventually causing structural failure.
The building did not collapse due to controlled demolition. The conspiracy theorists are wrong.
you shouldn't be so sure about what you think, the key to intelligence is to put everything back in question. what if the government wants a part of the population to believe in the conspiracy? they could ridiculize these people and so making the story of the non-conspiracy stronger... think
You said that I was "(trying ti WIN some silly point)."
I respond: I don't think it's silly at all. Terrorism is a serious issue. It is important that we know the truth about who attacked us on 9/11. If people believe in various false conspiracy theories, it seems reasonable for me to point out the flaws in their arguments, and to explain my own arguments with factual citations.
You said: "Yes, the reaosn i am agressive toward you, is that i havent had to tollerate such childish rubbish for years."
I respond: I don't consider myself particularly childish, at least not where this debate is concerned. Just wondering, what was the specific childish rubbish that you had to tolerate several years ago?
Now, to your credit, you also said this: "If oyu had cut the last 2 lines off, i woudl have apologised for my part, too."
I thank for your offer of potentially apologizing. Which 2 lines are you referring to? Perhaps you refer to this: "In any case, I refuse to allow ad hominem attacks to upset me. Anger weakens the mind, and corrupts the heart. "
Hm. For one thing, I am referring to a general principle. I truly believe that anger (usually) weakens the mind, therefore I believe that people should avoid anger. (See my video "Rumera" for more details). Yes, I admit, this comment was crafted with you in mind; it is my humble belief that your beligerence is entirely unhelpful to anyone. It's fine to have your own opinion, it's fine to disagree with me (or with anyone), but I doubt that anger will really help you.
(As a sample, remember that you said that I was "like a gibbon in a tree.". You later said "And what do you know you listhping little attention seeker ?" and later still "You are like a jeuvenile monkey, which has learned to imitate those around it (then again, you are american).
You have across above your bed (scared of vampires, are we?), and yet you laugh at others for having weird beliefs !!!"
you continued, "Ha ha, little money. Why dont you go back to that bed, and do what you are good at ... shagging your pillow, you little pervert !!!" and later still you left a one-word comment, "monkey". So you see why I perceive you to be angry)
I'd like to revisit the two lines which (I'm pretty sure) you are referring to: "In any case, I refuse to allow ad hominem attacks to upset me. Anger weakens the mind, and corrupts the heart." Note that I specifically referenced ad hominem attacks, which you had used against me. As far as I am aware (and perhaps I am wrong), I never used ad hominem attacks against you.
I have attempted to be calm and logical. (If there is a specific attack I made that you took offense to, please show me the quote) Therefore, in a sense, the comment was not directed at you; it was more along the lines of general principle. So I do understand why you say that you would have apologized (again, thank you for the offer) if these lines had been absent. Would you care to explain?
A please remember that I don't hate you. You are my opponent in this debate, but you are not my enemy. You are human just as I am, and therefore you deserve some respect.
you have to face the truth, obama was elected because he is black and because the us citizens needed some recognition internationally, everybody hates bush everybody loves obama, now that obama is loved, no one will investigate on his dirt, like they did for bush, and obama has a free hand to do what he wants, what the people behind him want, wakes up a feeling of being screwed, luckely i live in the fortress eupope
having beliefs is stupid any way. i dont believe in anything. its not smart. i either know or dont know.
and whats wrong with americans huh???? of course there's stupid ones, most people in any country are stupid. amaricans are just open, and unserious. why dont you take the stick out of your ass and lighten up.
and dont believe in anything ridiculous. its not healthy. weird does not = ridiculous.
And you think that some guys in a cave can pull off 911, while the cia cant catch bin laden ?
Have you NO idea of history ?
Its not conspiracy, its actually a continuation of what you obviously DIDNT learn on school.
Look for documentaries and historical drams, instead of the simpsons and you may be able to help your species, instead of laughing, like a gibbon in a tree.
mikeybrumbrum. You have cited exactly zero sources to prove your case.
Yes, the CIA has been unable to catch Bin Laden so far. The CIA is flawed. For instance, it currently suffers from a shortage of arabic-speaking agents. Apparently your argument is that, if the CIA fails to catch Bin Laden, then clearly Bin Laden cannot be the culprit. This makes very little sense.
As for the rest of your argument, I suggest you research the phrase "Ad hominem"
I know a number of things, actually. I'm not perfect, and neither is my argument, but it does cite a number of reliable sources, and therefore I consider it to be trustworthy, at least in comparison with the arguments of my various opponents.
I wonder why you say these things. I wonder why you think the way you do.
In any case, I refuse to allow ad hominem attacks to upset me. Anger weakens the mind, and corrupts the heart.
Yes, Bishop Richard Williamson denies the holocaust, at least partially. But there are more than 4000 catholic bishops in the world, and the vast majority of them agree that the holocaust really did happen, that 6 million Jews were murdered, etc. The Pope himself has declared that the holocaust was real, and he has rebuked Bishop Williamson. (google "Pope insists Bishop Richard Williamson must renounce Holocaust denial').
So if you're trying to disprove the holocaust via catholic authority, you're way off base. Bishop Williamson is greatly outweighed by the opinions of his peers.
As for "some of the proffessors and engineers who say 911 was a "Demolition". ", the same principle applies. There are, I'm sure, a handful of educated people who believe that the twin towers were destroyed by preplanted explosive charges (as opposed to the planes and the fires that ensues.) However, the vast majority of educated people hold the opposite opinion. The NIST hs concluded that the planes alone brought down the buildings, as did the 9/11 commission.
Perhaps you will counter by saying that the aforementioned authorities are part of the government, and therefore suspect. In that case invite you view the independent study conducted by Purdue University, and another one by Cambridge University, and another by Edinburgh University. Not to mention the issue of Popular Mechanics which covered the "controlled demolition" theory, and consulted several engineers in debunking it.
Perhaps you plan to mention Steven Jones. Well, ok, that's one professor on your side. I have many more sources on my own side. And besides, Steven Jones has no training or experience in civil engineering or controlled demolition. (He studies nuclear physics and solar power.) In comparison, I have cited the conclusions of professors and engineers who actually work in relevant fields.
Perhaps that was a little harsh. But people who confess belief in a supernatural deity and a cosmic conspiracy should be able to apply the same rule to lesser situations accordingly. You can`t postulate conspiracy at the infinite level and deny the same for finite things.
Just because you`re unaware or have no experience of a condition in no way negates its existence.
911 planes travel through thin air at the exact speed as they pass through steel and concrete. The broadcasts were fake.
Third, as to your statement "You can`t postulate conspiracy at the infinite level and deny the same for finite things.". Ok...if a person believes in a "cosmic conspiracy" (and I'm still not sure what that is), what exactly does that conclude about the material world? Are you trying to say that everything in the history of mankind, is a conspiracy? Or that people who believe in God must also believe that everything ever in the history of mankind is a conspiracy? What?
And even if we granted that "everything is a conspiracy" somehow, what does that tell us about specific contradictory conspiracy theories? I don't get it.
You said: "Just because you`re unaware or have no experience of a condition in no way negates its existence."
I respond: What do you mean by that? I suppose that if some idea X is true, but a person is unaware of X or of the justifying evidence for X, then his ignorance in no way affects the abstract truth of X.
For instance, the Earth is round, regardless of what anyone may say or believe, and ignorance of Earth's shape in no way changes the actual shape of the Earth. Ok, great. What does this have to do with conspiracies?
Well apparently you believe in a 9/11 conspiracy of some sort. And apparently you're saying that ignorance of the conspiracy in no way negates the conspiracy itself. But this is clearly faulty logic, for if ignorance of the conspiracy does not prove it to be false, then neither does it prove it to be true! Ignorance proves nothing in any event! Lack-of-evidence simply does not function like real evidence.
To return to the previous example, I might say "Ignorance that the Earth is square does not change the shape of the Earth." True enough, the Earth's shape does not change due to ignorance, but then again it was never square to begin with! The Earth is round, is it not? We know this because of reliable evidence. And until you can present reliable evidence to support your 9/11 theory, all this other random musing will get you nowhere.
You said: "911 planes travel through thin air at the exact speed as they pass through steel and concrete."
I respond: um...what???? The....*sigh*...the planes were moving through "thin air" at approximately 466 miles per hour. Upon reaching the steel and concrete, they decelerated rather quickly, and within about 1 second they were moving at 0 miles per hour, except of course for the bits of debris which fell off to the side.
So...466 does not equal 0. The planes did not travel through the air at the "exact speed" that they traveled through the concrete.
You said: "The broadcasts were fake."
I respond: You mean...the footage of the planes striking the towers? That was fake? The footage from dozens of different sources, many of which were random people with no connection to the government or the media or anything of the kind?
The footage which was corraborated by the personal experiences of thousands or millions of New Yorkers who saw the collisions, real-time, with their own two eyes? You're saying that was fake? Um...no. Just no.
well this is falling on deaf ears seeing as youve admitted you are mentally damaged and brainwashed from soaking in all that nonsense you just listed below ie.CNN,msnbc,Al Jazeera etc
all of these sources cannot show me one video of a plane hitting the pentagon,
THEY WERE ALL CONFISCATED,and if you think there is a logical just reason for doing so you are a sheep who watches far too much television.wheres your debunking of that???youve been lied to but you shouldnt care you were what 8 on 911?
all of these sources cannot show me one video of a plane hitting the pentagon,'
I respond: Actually, they can. Google for "video of plane hitting pentagon" and you'll find that the very first result is msnbc with a few frames of video that show the impact. The fact that we don't have better-quality video is easy to explain: news crews don't typically sit around the pentagaon, pointing their cameras to the skies just in case an airplane decides to kamikazee.
The reason we have footage of the WTC planes is because there are millions of people in NYC (including reporters filming for whatever new story that may be occurring; something's always happening in NYC), and so there were plenty of cameras around, and some of them managed to record the planes. As I said, there weren't any reporters around the Pentagon at the time it was hit (though, of course, after the hit, reporters swarmed in like crazy)
You said: "[The video tapes] WERE ALL CONFISCATED"
I respond: No, the video tapes simply didn't exist, because almost no cameras were pointed in that direction at that time. Though there was one security camera that recorded the plane; try googling for it.
You said: "if you think there is a logical just reason for doing so you are a sheep"
I respond: No, I don't really think so. And you haven't done much to prove your point.
You said: "you are a sheep who watches far too much television.wheres your debunking of that???"
I respond: My debunking of what? The idea that I'm a sheep who watches too much tv? You haven't even proven that assertion yet, so I have very little need to debunk it. But in general, I'd say that my citing of various sources and my willingness to have long and logical debates (see the other comments for examples) is evidence of my ability to think rationally.
I think you will fin d it does matter. You may have read that they found a couple of terrorist passports in the street below the WTC that had been blown clear of the impact. I actually heard that as it was broadcast a day or so after 9/11.
lol this kid is retarded still lives with his mommy most likely what the fuck does he know about anything???his points of reference are usatoday the nytimes and friggin wikipedia lol i changed the 10 commandments on that site lol completely unreliable bullshit
i agree there is some wacko theories out there that are most likely brought on by a mental disorder so shouldnt even be considered legit theories just ramblings.
but there is things to do with 911 that i think takes it out of that list..
My sources include the National Institute of Standards and Technology, the 9/11 commission, CNN, ABC, MSNBC, the Purdue study, the Cambridge study, the Edinburgh study, the BBC, FEMA, Popular Mechanics, most of the scientific community, the National Transportation Safety Board, Thomas Eager (engineering professor at MIT)...
Leslie Robertson (designer of the twin towers), the USA Today, Snopes, the American Society of Civil Engineers, the New York Times, David Biggs (a structural engineer at Ryan-Biggs Associates and a member of the ASCE - he's mentioned in the Popular Mechanics article), Al-Jazeera, and more!
LOL he doesn't believe ANY conspiracy theories are legit. What a dumbass. his first sources are wikipedia. This kid deserves whatever ignorant punishment hits him and his family.
People who tend to believe in ONE conspiracy theory, tend to believe in MULTIPLE conspiracy theories. This is because they are disenfranchised, either due to a lack of education, or personal power. FOR INSTANCE, in any Middle Eastern country, no one believe anything in the local newspaper. After all, the paper is owned by the state. So, when you lack power, you tend to believe that it resides elsewhere, i.e. someone else must have power over you.
I still believe that there was some underhandedness involved in 9/11 but this video was well done so I had to give it 5*. ...but his logic is exactly what THEY want us to think BWAHAHAHAA!!!
I agree that alot of Conspiracies are stupid. There is a conspiracy that the sky is just wallpaper LOL. Remember not all conspiracy theories are lies. Hitler suspended the German constitution. The riechstag was burned and Hitler blamed it on Polish Communists. There was German Generals back then that Beleived Hitler did it. Which in fact is true.
Sorry, I had to post again. After reading the majority of the texts (and to my amusment), you sir ripped apart their arguments, so congrats on that. I also find it funny when people put in a movie or youtube video as solid evidence. The Alicia Key's conspiracy is funny too.
Right on, I'm glad there are more sensible people out in the world. I also believe that these conspiracy theorists desire attention, and the people that believe them want (and wish) to be apart of something bigger that they can fight, like something out of the movies. For some of them I also believe it shifts the blame to some other entity that they can attack especially one that won't fight back in full force.
Instead of presenting evidence of a conspiracy yourself, you try and direct someone to a book with 60 pages of sources, and they you insult their appearance. How stupid are you? Stupid enough to believe a theologian with no background in the social sciences nor in physics and engineering is holds the truth in books and articles that have not been through the peer review process. Moron.
EVIDENCE: Buzzy Krongard (CIA) Selling Airline stocks, Pakistani ISI money men funding the hijackers with money given to them by the CIA, FEMAs Tripod II drills, The CIA's mock hijacking drills & War Game Excercises the morning of 9/11, evidence of a "Stand Down" order given to NORAD, Controlled demolition of 3 steel framed highrises, missing gold, ENRON/WORLDCOM scandal investigations destroyed in WTC7, No plane at the Pentagon, evidence of thermite, Iron Microspheres found in dust, etc.
Wow. Clever response. Hey, how about you keep making these clever responses and then I will rank them from good to bad, 10 to 1. Let's see what you got.
All I got? Look at your comment dipshit! All you could say is "That's not Evidence"! When the dust samples taken from the WTC site IS CLEARLY EVIDENCE!
How about trying to ADDRESS the evidence instead of ignoring it like the scared little CHILD you are?
Let's talk about the Dust samples provided to Steven Jones by several different people! Let's talk about the Iron Rich Microspheres and HOW THEY GOT THERE!?!?
Why don't YOU TELL US what melted the steel and pulverized the concrete?
Wow, I have talked to 20 truthers in the last week who have said this exact same thing. You get a 1 for cleverness because you can't come up with your own ideas. Well maybe a 2, because you did remember most of the shit that you are told to regurgitate. Next time you might score extra points if you bring up the Illuminati and the annunaki. Try again.
Are you going to address the EVIDENCE and the Science behind this or are you just going to avoid the issue and make petty remarks to minimize the severity of what you are talking about (and try to seperate it from your perceived reality as much as possible)?
What do you think about the video evidence of Molten Iron (still sparkling from the thermite reaction) dripping from the SouthEast corner to Tower 2 shortly before it disintegrated straight into it's own footprint?
thermite?? ha. this guys crazy he knows nothing about science. crazy ass warcrime911. he even made his name about 9/11. i like how he says we beleive everything the government tells us yet he believes everything he reads on the internet.
Please noob! I'll refer you to my latest videos debunking NIST and pointing out lies and fraudulent analysis in their August '08 Report on the Collapse of WTC Building 7...
Try bringing your "scientific" argument there if you think you actually have one! HAH! Good luck!
I don't just read shit on the internet and believe it without checking the facts and doing research! I don't know who you have me confused with but...
What makes these theories so crazy? you should open your mind up abit you jumped up little prick! if they landed on the moon why havent they been back?
I respond: Because they contradict the evidence. For evidence of 9/11, please see the descriptions of both parts of this video.
You said: "if they landed on the moon why havent they been back?"
I respond: They did go back. They went back 5 separate times, for a total of 6 Apollo missions which landed on the moon. Then they ran out of funding and halted missions for awhile. They're planning to return again around 2020 or so. Simple as that.
My fav guy is David Icke. He think that's Lizard people are ruling our lives and our in all major political establishments. Aghh is great. Its true, a conspirist (a fantatic one) will always claim that the lack of evidense is the most evidense. I like the moon one though just been to the website.
Haha funny. About all that Sept 11th stuff: I recently watched a History Channel special on the conspiracy vs. fact aspects of the terrorist attacks - and those conspirators seem to deny any hard evidence/fact that they are given. I guess whatever the brain doesn't like, it doesn't take into consideration. I believe that "A mind is like a parachute, it only works when it is open." In other words, a closed mind doesn't do too much good.
Could you provide links? (Comments don't let you post links, but you can post the important part that comes at the end). I found 2 organizations that made the error - Fox News and the BBC. Not too surprising. As I said in our earlier comment exchange, the collapse of WTC 7 was predicted hours in advance, so on that chaotic day it was easy to confuse "will collapse" with "has collapsed already"
And what are you implying, anyway? Do you mean to say that somebody planned the attacks, planned to blow up WTC 7, and then told the media beforehand? Do you think that the BBC was consciously part of some conspiracy to attack america? Surely Occam's Razor tells us that these reports are simple cases of confusion.
You said:"search for tucker carlson interview with BYU prof"
I respond: I haven't found that video, but I assume you're talking about Steven Jones. Well, ok, that's one professor on your side. I have many more sources on my own side. And besides, Steven Jones has no training or experience in civil engineering or controlled demolition. (He studies nuclear physics and solar power.) In comparison, I have Leslie Robertson, who designed the twin towers.
Anyway...that's how I see it sonicsuns . I don't think it's rational or scientific to dismiss a theory of C.D given that steven jones and various (200 and more) credible scientists (and rapidly increasing) have put forward papers in it's defense (read the papers....and also the debunkings of the papers....and tell me if you find the debunkings adequate) . Science is about cause and effect....a rational person always allows the possibility that with smoke there is fire .
You said: "Let's face it...the idea that some agency connected to the government played a part in these attacks is so awful that the human mind rejects it ."
I respond: Just because a theory is frightening and horrible doesn't make it true.
Imagine if I told you that the Earth was going to explode in 68 minutes. And imagine then, when confronted with the implausibility of such an event, and the testimony of countless scientists to that effect, I then responded with "Well, obviously the idea that the Earth is going to explode is just so awful that the human mind rejects it. Ergo, the Earth is going to explode in precisely 68 minutes". Why, that would be ridiculous!
Lol. You failed, there are more dilikes, because you either are lying or are blind af. Sad, thats sad.
saramichealhpt 1 month ago
@saramichealhpt I find it more likely that many of my viewers were simply being unfair.
sonicsuns 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@sonicsuns
You are not sad, the way you don' t see thing is sad. Wake up, I am saying it for your future too.
saramichealhpt 1 month ago
@saramichealhpt
You are not sad, the way you don' t see thing is sad. Wake up, I am saying it for your future too.
saramichealhpt 1 month ago
Government is a conspiracy. watch 'State is not great' and 'The death of statism'. You think it's so hard to fool people when they won't see through that one?
btw your 9/11 link collection is pathetic.. except for wikipedia of course, because wikipedia always gives you the truth.
check out the last 2 paragraphs of this: tiny.cc /02li9
good luck
MysticXtU 2 months ago
@MysticXtU Even if government is a "conspiracy", government *exists*, unlike many of the events or entities described by Crazy Conspiracy Theories.
My 9/11 link collection contains citations from Cambridge and Edinburgh Universities, and quotes many experts.
You criticize me for citing Wikipedia (in addition to the experts I cited), yet the *only* counter-evidence you offer is an opinion poll of non-experts. And even in that poll, a strong plurality agrees with me.
sonicsuns 2 months ago
Get to the point. Get to the point. Get to the point. Get to the point. Get to the point. Get to the point. Get to the point. Get to the point.
TwentyThousandTwelve 3 months ago
@TwentyThousandTwelve yeah, I know. I should be more efficient when I speak.
sonicsuns 3 months ago
Crazy conspiracy theories are soooo crazy and they make me have a good laugh reading them. As if the Irish Holocaust never happened nor the moon landings....yeah right!
HumanSayNo 3 months ago
this is the stupidest fuxckin thing ive ever seen
bassistdakota 10 months ago
Great video.I believed the problem is that people get into one conspiracy & than everything becomes a conspiracy & the paranoid have gone far as being hospitalized,Not everything is a conspiracy.I have a friend who believes everything is a christian conspiracy & a friend of a friend who want crazy over conspiracies,so I hear yeah.
13Ooakspiritartist 1 year ago
You do realize that even girl scouts are capable of forming a conspiracy right? lmao. A conspiracy is merely a group of people keeping a secret and we all keep secrets...so conspiracies, large and small, are more common than you may believe. Although, on a real note, some large conspiracies are true - most are false.
Arch0Angel0Seraphiel 1 year ago
@Arch0Angel0Seraphiel "conspiracy is merely a group of people keeping a secret and we all keep secrets"
Yes, obviously. That's why I titled this video "crazy conspiracy theories", rather than simply "conspiracy theories". I object to irrationality.
"some large conspiracies are true - most are false."
I'm glad we agree.
sonicsuns 1 year ago
@sonicsuns
Well here's one source for the Columbine kids:
Google - "columbine kids into the occult".
Arch0Angel0Seraphiel 1 year ago
@Arch0Angel0Seraphiel I did that. I still found no reliable sources to support your claim.
sonicsuns 1 year ago
@sonicsuns
eh doesn't surprise me, Christians/Catholics claimed it.. Everything is the "Devil's" or "occults" fault to them lol. My Uncle claimed there was a connection, some people are saying they were into it. No solid evidence yet, just claims from some people.
Arch0Angel0Seraphiel 1 year ago
@Arch0Angel0Seraphiel Conspiracy is an illegal act. To conspire in defintion is "Make secret plans jointly to commit an unlawful or harmful act"
Not the withhold of of secrets. But the secret of illegal action
revron77 9 months ago
Comment removed
navh07 1 year ago
Comment removed
navh07 1 year ago
@navh07 thanks for watching. And wow, did you read all the comments? There's a lot of them. Thanks for reading, too. =)
sonicsuns 1 year ago
Comment removed
navh07 1 year ago
Comment removed
navh07 1 year ago
Good video
cog420 1 year ago
@cog420 thanks =)
sonicsuns 1 year ago
hummm i see... you find hard to believe these theories to be true... so that means you believe in what government says to be real, or you dont believe in anyone... well i believe in many of those teories cause they are based in facts, then the theorie comes, btw conspiracy means when 2 or more people make a plan to acomplish something, sry for my bad english, and make more research before saying retard statements...
lfgamer1 1 year ago
@lfgamer1 I've done a good deal of research, and I've found that the mainstream theory holds more facts than all the others. And yes I know what the definition of "conspiracy" is. So technically, yes, the mainstream theory is a "conspiracy theory", but it's a theory that actually makes sense.
sonicsuns 1 year ago
Sonic, what if your wrong? Your vid misses a vital question, who gains from these 'conspiracies'? if the USA wanted to end the war on 'terror' would it not look to change it's foreign policy? as thats the sole cause? no, because its in Americas interest, they have to do it or your country would collaspe, dont forget the USA was built on the back of war and oil, its your lifeblood and therefore your government are oblieged to keep it going, there not really bothered if we believe them or not.
MrJimiJK 2 years ago
Comment removed
Darkgravx12 2 years ago
Comment removed
Darkgravx12 2 years ago
Comment removed
Darkgravx12 2 years ago
The very reason we had 9/11 is because the USA wanted an oil pipeline going through Afghanistan and Iraq. They had this planned for years. THe CEOs of Haliburton and other American corporations with contracts in military all end up as politicians and senators and vice-verser. If Saudis did do 9/11. Because that is who the USA blamed in the first place. THen why not go after Saudi Arabia? Instead they go after two countries who had NOTHING to do with it. Saudis have billions invested in USA.
rdsnuke 2 years ago
You said: "They had this planned for years. "
I respond: Prove it.
You said: "THe CEOs of Haliburton and other American corporations with contracts in military all end up as politicians and senators and vice-verser."
I respond: It's true that military corporations exert excessive influence on our policy decisions. But that doesn't mean they conspired to kill 3000 americans.
sonicsuns 2 years ago
You said: "If Saudis did do 9/11. Because that is who the USA blamed in the first place. THen why not go after Saudi Arabia? "
I respond: Most of the hijackers were of Saudi Arabian descent, but I have heard no evidence that the attacks were planned by the government of Saudi Arabia. They were planned by the Taliban, which held refuge in Afghanistan.
sonicsuns 2 years ago
It is true that we have business interests in Saudia Arabia, and those interests probably influence our decisions. It is also true that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, and did not posses weapons of mass destruction. That war was (and is) basically a disaster. But that doesn't mean that we conspired to kill 3,000 of our own people.
sonicsuns 2 years ago
@sonicsuns
Why are you so certain that "we" wouldn't kill our own people? Americans kill other Americans every day on a small scale, crimes of violence - drunk driving etc.,... Gang related murders, the sniper killing sprees up North, and the columbine as well as other shooting spree incidents. It has been proven that the kids that pulled off the columbine shooting were into the occult btw, look it up. Hell, people get attacked/mugged/killed all the time just for a buck or two.
Arch0Angel0Seraphiel 1 year ago
@Arch0Angel0Seraphiel "Why are you so certain that "we" wouldn't kill our own people? Americans kill other Americans every day on a small scale"
Yes, but the government is not in the habit of deliberately murdering three thousand americans in a single day just to bring about policy changes. That's a whole different level of evil.
sonicsuns 1 year ago
@Arch0Angel0Seraphiel "It has been proven that the kids that pulled off the columbine shooting were into the occult btw, look it up."
I did look it up, but I found no evidence that they were seriously into the occult.
sonicsuns 1 year ago
Also, there is no point in me posting if my comments are going to be deleted. Instead of me posting against refuting your ridiculous claims that building 7 collapsed due to fire (Again). (Going against basic science). Especially the fact that it fell in it's own footpring within free fall speed. Google ae911truth, nearly a thousand proffesional engineers and architects searching for basic answers to 9/11. Anyone who knows basic science knows buildings DO NOT collapse like Building 7.
rdsnuke 2 years ago
i respect you :O
jaxumaa 2 years ago
@jaxumaa thanks =)
sonicsuns 1 year ago
@sonicsuns
Anywho, just saying such a conspiracy isn't impossible - far from impossible. Sadly unproven though, so it remains a theory, nothing more.
Arch0Angel0Seraphiel 1 year ago
You said: "there is no point in me posting if my comments are going to be deleted"
I respond: I hope you notice that, after 2 months, your comments are still here.
You said: "your ridiculous claims that building 7 collapsed due to fire"
I respond: It is not ridiculous. Many scientists have studied the evidence, and concluded that the mainstream account is accurate.
You said: "(Going against basic science)"
I respond: If it went against basic science, all the scientists would say so. They don't
sonicsuns 2 years ago
You said: "Google ae911truth, nearly a thousand proffesional engineers and architects searching for basic answers to 9/11"
I respond: I have little reason to trust the accuracy of this list. If there really are a large number of properly-educated people who doubt the mainstream theory, why don't they produce some scientific studies to prove their claims? Instead, I've seen studies from Purdue, and Cambridge, and Edinburgh, that the mainstream account is accurate.
sonicsuns 2 years ago
You said: "Anyone who knows basic science knows buildings DO NOT collapse like Building 7. "
I respond: Wouldn't you agree that scientists know basic science? Why then, do scientists like Thomas W. Eagar (an engineering professor at MIT) support the mainstream theory? Because the mainstream theory works just fine with basic science, that's why. The mainstream theory makes sense.
sonicsuns 2 years ago
19 Arabs with boxcutters is also a conspiracy theory as a "conspiracy" is by dictionary definition:
"An agreement between (two or more) persons to commit a crime, fraud or other wrongful act".
So the naive youngster who made this video can count himself amongst the
"9/11 conspiracy theorists", if he has the guts to admit he is a hypocrite.
PresidentsArePuppets 2 years ago
*Sigh*
I have heard this argument before.
Note that the title of this video is "Crazy Conspiracy Theories", not simply "Conspiracy theories.". I have no problems whatsoever with conspiracy theories, provided that they aren't crazy; i.e. in serious disregard of the evidence.
So yes, the 19 committed a conspiracy, according to the mainstream account. Since I believe in this theory, I am technically a "conspiracy theorist". However, I am not "crazy"; I do not disregard the evidence at hand.
sonicsuns 2 years ago
sonicsuns. Don't you think the 19 Saudis armed with boxcutters hijacking four planes, and hitting two towers (three of which fell). Since no one can explain why Building 7 fell. And the other target hit was the biggest defended building in the whole of the earth? Don't you think that's a CRAZY Conspiracy theory? There is NO evidence linking Osama Bin Laden to 9/11, that is why he is not wanted for that anymore OFFICIAL. Neither evidence linking the Taliban OR Iraq to 9/11 either.
rdsnuke 2 years ago
You said: "Since no one can explain why Building 7 fell"
I respond: Plenty of people can explain it, including the NIST and Popular Mechanics Magazine. (See the link in the description for proof) As the North Tower collapsed on September 11th, debris struck the building known as WTC7, heavily damaging the southern face. Multiple fires ignited, eventually causing structural failure. And that's not just my speculation; it's confirmed by actual engineers.
sonicsuns 2 years ago
You said: "And the other target hit was the biggest defended building in the whole of the earth? "
I respond: All previous hijackings if commercial airliners amounted to a form of kidnapping, with the hijackers demanding ransom of some kind. No one had ever previously used commercial airliners as ballistic missiles. Thus, the pentagon had no defenses against this sort of attack. Sometimes the mightiest defenses are breached by simple, unique and unexpected forms of attack.
sonicsuns 2 years ago
You said: "There is NO evidence linking Osama Bin Laden to 9/11"
I respond: Actually, there is. Check the links on the side.
You also said there is no evidence linking Iraq to 9/11. This is true. Iraq was uninvolved in the 9/11 plot, and indeed it was completely unaware until after the attacks.
sonicsuns 2 years ago
The Pentagon with it's billion dollar budgets had no defence against this sort of attack? Are you kidding me? Why then on September 9/11 they had training missions in JUST THAT. On the exact same day? When airlines go off course military jets are scrambled within seconds. The Pentagon is easily capable of this. There was confusion on that day because a lot of pilots thought it was a training mission.
rdsnuke 2 years ago
You said: "The Pentagon with it's billion dollar budgets had no defence against this sort of attack?"
I respond: Even the mightiest military can be felled by unique tactics. See the Spanish Armada of 1588, for instance. And remember that the terrorists didn't wipe out the entire U.S. military or whatnot. Hitting the Pentagon was dramatic, but it didn't really stop the military from functioning. Thus, the terrorists' victory was smaller than it seemed.
sonicsuns 2 years ago
You said: "Why then on September 9/11 they had training missions in JUST THAT."
I respond: No they didn't. Yes, there were training missions that day. (There are training missions all the time, in fact. It's a common activity.) But the training missions had nothing to do with "JUST THAT", i.e. responding to the hijacking of several airliners for the express purpose of suicide missions. No one was training for that scenario. (If I'm wrong, prove it.)
sonicsuns 2 years ago
You said: "When airlines go off course military jets are scrambled within seconds. "
I respond: No, they aren't. First off, this isn't Star Wars, and it actually takes several minutes to scramble a jet. Secondly, jets are not scrambled every single time a plane goes off course, because 99% of the time it's off course due to weather or technical trouble, and the fighter jets can't really help with that.
sonicsuns 2 years ago
You said: "The Pentagon is easily capable of this."
I respond: Not when they're caught off-guard.
You said: "There was confusion on that day because a lot of pilots thought it was a training mission. "
I respond: Yes, there was some confusion due to training missions that day. But the training missions were not part of a conspiracy.
sonicsuns 2 years ago
by the way i like your elephant story, i'll use it to debate for sure
momosteur 2 years ago
thank you.
sonicsuns 2 years ago
what if the people conspiracy theorists are after, actually control the public AND the conspiracy theory part of every story? you got 'proof' of the landing on the moon and you have 'proof' of the landing in the studio, why couldn't it be that these yankees did land on the moon but the camera broke during the journey? sorry bout my english i'm still learning
momosteur 2 years ago
Just because you can imagine something doesn't mean it's true. The mainstream theories (on 9/11 and moon landings) are supported by the most evidence.
sonicsuns 2 years ago
"Yes, I do know about WTC7. Would you like to discuss it?"
What's there to discuss? You're another American dumbass.
meyerphillip2008 2 years ago
lol you appear to be avoiding the debate, my friend.
As the North Towe collapsed on September 11th, debris struck the building known as WTC7, heavily damaging the southern face. Multiple fires ignited, eventually causing structural failure.
The building did not collapse due to controlled demolition. The conspiracy theorists are wrong.
So, yes, as I said, I know about WTC7.
I don't understand why you think I am an idiot.
sonicsuns 2 years ago
you shouldn't be so sure about what you think, the key to intelligence is to put everything back in question. what if the government wants a part of the population to believe in the conspiracy? they could ridiculize these people and so making the story of the non-conspiracy stronger... think
momosteur 2 years ago
Does this little fucker even know about wtc7? Get educated or you'll get schooled by your government.
meyerphillip2008 2 years ago
Yes, I do know about WTC7. Would you like to discuss it?
sonicsuns 2 years ago
This little boy is annoying - go take some fema shots or something.
meyerphillip2008 2 years ago
Yes, the reaosn i am agressive toward you, is that i havent had to tollerate such childish rubbish for years.
It pointless trying to discuss anything with soemoen who is unable to pass a message without attaching an isult (trying ti WIN some silly point).
If oyu had cut the last 2 lines off, i woudl have apologised for my part, too.
But u aint man enough + are still having to jack yourelf off, and cant stop "imagining" naked women.
But hey, Imagine what the football team did to your mom !
mikeybrumbrum 2 years ago
You said that I was "(trying ti WIN some silly point)."
I respond: I don't think it's silly at all. Terrorism is a serious issue. It is important that we know the truth about who attacked us on 9/11. If people believe in various false conspiracy theories, it seems reasonable for me to point out the flaws in their arguments, and to explain my own arguments with factual citations.
sonicsuns 2 years ago
Now, returning to your most recent comment:
You said: "Yes, the reaosn i am agressive toward you, is that i havent had to tollerate such childish rubbish for years."
I respond: I don't consider myself particularly childish, at least not where this debate is concerned. Just wondering, what was the specific childish rubbish that you had to tolerate several years ago?
sonicsuns 2 years ago
On to the subject of ad hominem:
First you said: "It pointless trying to discuss anything with soemoen who is unable to pass a message without attaching an isult"
Then you said: "But u aint man enough + are still having to jack yourelf off, and cant stop "imagining" naked women.
But hey, Imagine what the football team did to your mom ! "
And this is all in the same comment.
I don't quite understand you.
sonicsuns 2 years ago
Now, to your credit, you also said this: "If oyu had cut the last 2 lines off, i woudl have apologised for my part, too."
I thank for your offer of potentially apologizing. Which 2 lines are you referring to? Perhaps you refer to this: "In any case, I refuse to allow ad hominem attacks to upset me. Anger weakens the mind, and corrupts the heart. "
sonicsuns 2 years ago
Hm. For one thing, I am referring to a general principle. I truly believe that anger (usually) weakens the mind, therefore I believe that people should avoid anger. (See my video "Rumera" for more details). Yes, I admit, this comment was crafted with you in mind; it is my humble belief that your beligerence is entirely unhelpful to anyone. It's fine to have your own opinion, it's fine to disagree with me (or with anyone), but I doubt that anger will really help you.
sonicsuns 2 years ago
(As a sample, remember that you said that I was "like a gibbon in a tree.". You later said "And what do you know you listhping little attention seeker ?" and later still "You are like a jeuvenile monkey, which has learned to imitate those around it (then again, you are american).
You have across above your bed (scared of vampires, are we?), and yet you laugh at others for having weird beliefs !!!"
sonicsuns 2 years ago
you continued, "Ha ha, little money. Why dont you go back to that bed, and do what you are good at ... shagging your pillow, you little pervert !!!" and later still you left a one-word comment, "monkey". So you see why I perceive you to be angry)
sonicsuns 2 years ago
I'd like to revisit the two lines which (I'm pretty sure) you are referring to: "In any case, I refuse to allow ad hominem attacks to upset me. Anger weakens the mind, and corrupts the heart." Note that I specifically referenced ad hominem attacks, which you had used against me. As far as I am aware (and perhaps I am wrong), I never used ad hominem attacks against you.
sonicsuns 2 years ago
I have attempted to be calm and logical. (If there is a specific attack I made that you took offense to, please show me the quote) Therefore, in a sense, the comment was not directed at you; it was more along the lines of general principle. So I do understand why you say that you would have apologized (again, thank you for the offer) if these lines had been absent. Would you care to explain?
sonicsuns 2 years ago
A please remember that I don't hate you. You are my opponent in this debate, but you are not my enemy. You are human just as I am, and therefore you deserve some respect.
And, as always, I Admit I May Be Wrong.
sonicsuns 2 years ago
Great video. I realize how few anti-conspiracy theorists there are and what a shame that is.
Now that Obama is president, it seems like everyone is a conspiracy theorist.
PeoplesWar 2 years ago
you have to face the truth, obama was elected because he is black and because the us citizens needed some recognition internationally, everybody hates bush everybody loves obama, now that obama is loved, no one will investigate on his dirt, like they did for bush, and obama has a free hand to do what he wants, what the people behind him want, wakes up a feeling of being screwed, luckely i live in the fortress eupope
momosteur 2 years ago
monkey
mikeybrumbrum 3 years ago
You are like a jeuvenile monkey, which has learned to imitate those around it (then again, you are american).
You have across above your bed (scared of vampires, are we?), and yet you laugh at others for having weird beliefs !!!
Ha ha, little money. Why dont you go back to that bed, and do what you are good at ... shagging your pillow, you little pervert !!!
mikeybrumbrum 3 years ago
pervert? o.O how is that even relevant?
having beliefs is stupid any way. i dont believe in anything. its not smart. i either know or dont know.
and whats wrong with americans huh???? of course there's stupid ones, most people in any country are stupid. amaricans are just open, and unserious. why dont you take the stick out of your ass and lighten up.
and dont believe in anything ridiculous. its not healthy. weird does not = ridiculous.
grrfu 2 years ago
sod off u little nob !
mikeybrumbrum 2 years ago
mikeybrumbrum, I humbly suggest that this attitude is unhelpful.
sonicsuns 2 years ago
And you think that some guys in a cave can pull off 911, while the cia cant catch bin laden ?
Have you NO idea of history ?
Its not conspiracy, its actually a continuation of what you obviously DIDNT learn on school.
Look for documentaries and historical drams, instead of the simpsons and you may be able to help your species, instead of laughing, like a gibbon in a tree.
mikeybrumbrum 3 years ago
That's hardly a convincing counterargument,
mikeybrumbrum. You have cited exactly zero sources to prove your case.
Yes, the CIA has been unable to catch Bin Laden so far. The CIA is flawed. For instance, it currently suffers from a shortage of arabic-speaking agents. Apparently your argument is that, if the CIA fails to catch Bin Laden, then clearly Bin Laden cannot be the culprit. This makes very little sense.
As for the rest of your argument, I suggest you research the phrase "Ad hominem"
sonicsuns 3 years ago
And what do you know you listhping little attention seeker ?
mikeybrumbrum 2 years ago
I know a number of things, actually. I'm not perfect, and neither is my argument, but it does cite a number of reliable sources, and therefore I consider it to be trustworthy, at least in comparison with the arguments of my various opponents.
I wonder why you say these things. I wonder why you think the way you do.
In any case, I refuse to allow ad hominem attacks to upset me. Anger weakens the mind, and corrupts the heart.
sonicsuns 2 years ago
I would suggest googling (or u tubing) " Bishops says no holocaust ", to see what an english Bishop says about the holocaust.
Then you might listen to some of the proffessors and engineers who say 911 was a "Demolition".
NOT that G Bush did it, but that it was a DEMOLITION
mikeybrumbrum 3 years ago
Yes, Bishop Richard Williamson denies the holocaust, at least partially. But there are more than 4000 catholic bishops in the world, and the vast majority of them agree that the holocaust really did happen, that 6 million Jews were murdered, etc. The Pope himself has declared that the holocaust was real, and he has rebuked Bishop Williamson. (google "Pope insists Bishop Richard Williamson must renounce Holocaust denial').
sonicsuns 3 years ago
So if you're trying to disprove the holocaust via catholic authority, you're way off base. Bishop Williamson is greatly outweighed by the opinions of his peers.
sonicsuns 3 years ago
As for "some of the proffessors and engineers who say 911 was a "Demolition". ", the same principle applies. There are, I'm sure, a handful of educated people who believe that the twin towers were destroyed by preplanted explosive charges (as opposed to the planes and the fires that ensues.) However, the vast majority of educated people hold the opposite opinion. The NIST hs concluded that the planes alone brought down the buildings, as did the 9/11 commission.
sonicsuns 3 years ago
Perhaps you will counter by saying that the aforementioned authorities are part of the government, and therefore suspect. In that case invite you view the independent study conducted by Purdue University, and another one by Cambridge University, and another by Edinburgh University. Not to mention the issue of Popular Mechanics which covered the "controlled demolition" theory, and consulted several engineers in debunking it.
sonicsuns 3 years ago
Perhaps you plan to mention Steven Jones. Well, ok, that's one professor on your side. I have many more sources on my own side. And besides, Steven Jones has no training or experience in civil engineering or controlled demolition. (He studies nuclear physics and solar power.) In comparison, I have cited the conclusions of professors and engineers who actually work in relevant fields.
sonicsuns 3 years ago
omg I found his site
"The moon does not exist!" in bright red letters
everytime I think I've seen the wierdest...
anon3415 3 years ago
Very nice!
anon3415 3 years ago
you should be an actor
Trickme10 3 years ago
heres a funny Conspiracy Theories
this is a funny one too
get this
osama bin laden attacked the united states
LMFAO wow i though these Conspiracy Theories are just gettin crazyer and crazyer
cheedren 3 years ago
Get acquainted with Newtonian physics you flatlander.
Mocking fucking simpleton.
OzzybanOswald 3 years ago
Perhaps that was a little harsh. But people who confess belief in a supernatural deity and a cosmic conspiracy should be able to apply the same rule to lesser situations accordingly. You can`t postulate conspiracy at the infinite level and deny the same for finite things.
Just because you`re unaware or have no experience of a condition in no way negates its existence.
911 planes travel through thin air at the exact speed as they pass through steel and concrete. The broadcasts were fake.
OzzybanOswald 3 years ago
um...what?
First of all, my beliefs regarding supernatural deities are a little complicated. See my video "My Thoughts on Religion" for details.
Secondly, I'm not sure how belief in God constitutes a belief in a "cosmic conspiracy". That seems to stretch the definition of conspiracy.
sonicsuns 3 years ago
Third, as to your statement "You can`t postulate conspiracy at the infinite level and deny the same for finite things.". Ok...if a person believes in a "cosmic conspiracy" (and I'm still not sure what that is), what exactly does that conclude about the material world? Are you trying to say that everything in the history of mankind, is a conspiracy? Or that people who believe in God must also believe that everything ever in the history of mankind is a conspiracy? What?
sonicsuns 3 years ago
And even if we granted that "everything is a conspiracy" somehow, what does that tell us about specific contradictory conspiracy theories? I don't get it.
sonicsuns 3 years ago
You said: "Just because you`re unaware or have no experience of a condition in no way negates its existence."
I respond: What do you mean by that? I suppose that if some idea X is true, but a person is unaware of X or of the justifying evidence for X, then his ignorance in no way affects the abstract truth of X.
sonicsuns 3 years ago
For instance, the Earth is round, regardless of what anyone may say or believe, and ignorance of Earth's shape in no way changes the actual shape of the Earth. Ok, great. What does this have to do with conspiracies?
sonicsuns 3 years ago
Well apparently you believe in a 9/11 conspiracy of some sort. And apparently you're saying that ignorance of the conspiracy in no way negates the conspiracy itself. But this is clearly faulty logic, for if ignorance of the conspiracy does not prove it to be false, then neither does it prove it to be true! Ignorance proves nothing in any event! Lack-of-evidence simply does not function like real evidence.
sonicsuns 3 years ago
To return to the previous example, I might say "Ignorance that the Earth is square does not change the shape of the Earth." True enough, the Earth's shape does not change due to ignorance, but then again it was never square to begin with! The Earth is round, is it not? We know this because of reliable evidence. And until you can present reliable evidence to support your 9/11 theory, all this other random musing will get you nowhere.
sonicsuns 3 years ago
You said: "911 planes travel through thin air at the exact speed as they pass through steel and concrete."
I respond: um...what???? The....*sigh*...the planes were moving through "thin air" at approximately 466 miles per hour. Upon reaching the steel and concrete, they decelerated rather quickly, and within about 1 second they were moving at 0 miles per hour, except of course for the bits of debris which fell off to the side.
sonicsuns 3 years ago
So...466 does not equal 0. The planes did not travel through the air at the "exact speed" that they traveled through the concrete.
You said: "The broadcasts were fake."
I respond: You mean...the footage of the planes striking the towers? That was fake? The footage from dozens of different sources, many of which were random people with no connection to the government or the media or anything of the kind?
sonicsuns 3 years ago
The footage which was corraborated by the personal experiences of thousands or millions of New Yorkers who saw the collisions, real-time, with their own two eyes? You're saying that was fake? Um...no. Just no.
sonicsuns 3 years ago
well this is falling on deaf ears seeing as youve admitted you are mentally damaged and brainwashed from soaking in all that nonsense you just listed below ie.CNN,msnbc,Al Jazeera etc
all of these sources cannot show me one video of a plane hitting the pentagon,
THEY WERE ALL CONFISCATED,and if you think there is a logical just reason for doing so you are a sheep who watches far too much television.wheres your debunking of that???youve been lied to but you shouldnt care you were what 8 on 911?
EvHstyleTaPMaster 3 years ago
You said: "well this is falling on deaf ears seeing as youve admitted you are mentally damaged and brainwashed "
I respond: No, no I haven't.
sonicsuns 3 years ago
You said: "CNN,msnbc,Al Jazeera etc
all of these sources cannot show me one video of a plane hitting the pentagon,'
I respond: Actually, they can. Google for "video of plane hitting pentagon" and you'll find that the very first result is msnbc with a few frames of video that show the impact. The fact that we don't have better-quality video is easy to explain: news crews don't typically sit around the pentagaon, pointing their cameras to the skies just in case an airplane decides to kamikazee.
sonicsuns 3 years ago
The reason we have footage of the WTC planes is because there are millions of people in NYC (including reporters filming for whatever new story that may be occurring; something's always happening in NYC), and so there were plenty of cameras around, and some of them managed to record the planes. As I said, there weren't any reporters around the Pentagon at the time it was hit (though, of course, after the hit, reporters swarmed in like crazy)
sonicsuns 3 years ago
You said: "[The video tapes] WERE ALL CONFISCATED"
I respond: No, the video tapes simply didn't exist, because almost no cameras were pointed in that direction at that time. Though there was one security camera that recorded the plane; try googling for it.
You said: "if you think there is a logical just reason for doing so you are a sheep"
I respond: No, I don't really think so. And you haven't done much to prove your point.
sonicsuns 3 years ago
You said: "you are a sheep who watches far too much television.wheres your debunking of that???"
I respond: My debunking of what? The idea that I'm a sheep who watches too much tv? You haven't even proven that assertion yet, so I have very little need to debunk it. But in general, I'd say that my citing of various sources and my willingness to have long and logical debates (see the other comments for examples) is evidence of my ability to think rationally.
sonicsuns 3 years ago
You said: "you were what 8 on 911? "
I respond: No I wasn't, and in any case I don't see why it would matter.
sonicsuns 3 years ago
I think you will fin d it does matter. You may have read that they found a couple of terrorist passports in the street below the WTC that had been blown clear of the impact. I actually heard that as it was broadcast a day or so after 9/11.
RavenPrecept 3 years ago
lol this kid is retarded still lives with his mommy most likely what the fuck does he know about anything???his points of reference are usatoday the nytimes and friggin wikipedia lol i changed the 10 commandments on that site lol completely unreliable bullshit
i agree there is some wacko theories out there that are most likely brought on by a mental disorder so shouldnt even be considered legit theories just ramblings.
but there is things to do with 911 that i think takes it out of that list..
EvHstyleTaPMaster 3 years ago
My sources include the National Institute of Standards and Technology, the 9/11 commission, CNN, ABC, MSNBC, the Purdue study, the Cambridge study, the Edinburgh study, the BBC, FEMA, Popular Mechanics, most of the scientific community, the National Transportation Safety Board, Thomas Eager (engineering professor at MIT)...
sonicsuns 3 years ago
Leslie Robertson (designer of the twin towers), the USA Today, Snopes, the American Society of Civil Engineers, the New York Times, David Biggs (a structural engineer at Ryan-Biggs Associates and a member of the ASCE - he's mentioned in the Popular Mechanics article), Al-Jazeera, and more!
sonicsuns 3 years ago
If you've got a better theory supported by better sources, I'd love to hear it.
sonicsuns 3 years ago
LOL he doesn't believe ANY conspiracy theories are legit. What a dumbass. his first sources are wikipedia. This kid deserves whatever ignorant punishment hits him and his family.
Gangularis 3 years ago
People who tend to believe in ONE conspiracy theory, tend to believe in MULTIPLE conspiracy theories. This is because they are disenfranchised, either due to a lack of education, or personal power. FOR INSTANCE, in any Middle Eastern country, no one believe anything in the local newspaper. After all, the paper is owned by the state. So, when you lack power, you tend to believe that it resides elsewhere, i.e. someone else must have power over you.
PL8tektonix 3 years ago
lol your funny dude, but i got 1 task for you
go read a history book and see just how many conspiracies happened over those 3-4k years
now tell me why would something change now??
Michkuty 3 years ago
oh and 1 more thing, if US govt ever 'prevented' your attacks your nation wouldnt take in patriot act so mindlessly
oh and btw tell me, if you are a bad bad osama terrorist:O
you want to blow shit up, why wont you aim at like hoover dam or some nuclear plant???
but ooooh you go for some 2 buildings which some old rich guy bought not long ago and insured vs terrorist attacks:O
isnt terrorists objective to kill as many people as they can?
oh i guess they didnt figure it out lol
see now? use logic
Michkuty 3 years ago
the new world order conspiracy is a crock of shit. at the same time, you cannot always trust the media. it's good to see that you watch amy goodman.
mrtyles 3 years ago
Good video, good fun watching it and listening to all these idiots that search for 'crazy conspiracy' just so they can start arguments. XD
isafos 3 years ago
I like your video - even after watching it multiple times. I don't suggest wasting your time talking to unreasonable people about reason.
mytubecomment 3 years ago
A new 9/11 film exposing Israel's involvement in the terrorist attack on that day can be seen here called Missing Links.
911missinglinks. com
sega88 3 years ago
I still believe that there was some underhandedness involved in 9/11 but this video was well done so I had to give it 5*. ...but his logic is exactly what THEY want us to think BWAHAHAHAA!!!
zombiemouse 3 years ago
this guy is a servile dick sucker that wants to be dominated over. he has less pride than a 30 dollar crack whore.
x11115 3 years ago
I agree that alot of Conspiracies are stupid. There is a conspiracy that the sky is just wallpaper LOL. Remember not all conspiracy theories are lies. Hitler suspended the German constitution. The riechstag was burned and Hitler blamed it on Polish Communists. There was German Generals back then that Beleived Hitler did it. Which in fact is true.
dandaman2206 3 years ago
Yeah. You know, a lot of conspiracy theories are very funny, even when they're trying to be serious.
I believe the main reason people like to believe these conspiracy's is cos' fiction is often much more interesting that fact.
SquirrelArt 3 years ago
hey umm no offence but watching this makes me wanna take a shit lol
yako2c 3 years ago
Sorry, I had to post again. After reading the majority of the texts (and to my amusment), you sir ripped apart their arguments, so congrats on that. I also find it funny when people put in a movie or youtube video as solid evidence. The Alicia Key's conspiracy is funny too.
omegma123 3 years ago
Right on, I'm glad there are more sensible people out in the world. I also believe that these conspiracy theorists desire attention, and the people that believe them want (and wish) to be apart of something bigger that they can fight, like something out of the movies. For some of them I also believe it shifts the blame to some other entity that they can attack especially one that won't fight back in full force.
omegma123 3 years ago
Have you actually read any of David Ray Griffin's books?
I'll refer you to "Omissions & Distortions" and "Debunking 9/11 Debunking"
Please check all 60 pages of sources at the back of each book, and see how the links in your description stack up against them.
You act and talk like a complete lunatic, and your points make no sense in light of larger truths which you obviously fail to understand.
WarCrime911 3 years ago
Instead of presenting evidence of a conspiracy yourself, you try and direct someone to a book with 60 pages of sources, and they you insult their appearance. How stupid are you? Stupid enough to believe a theologian with no background in the social sciences nor in physics and engineering is holds the truth in books and articles that have not been through the peer review process. Moron.
danroduw06 3 years ago
EVIDENCE: Buzzy Krongard (CIA) Selling Airline stocks, Pakistani ISI money men funding the hijackers with money given to them by the CIA, FEMAs Tripod II drills, The CIA's mock hijacking drills & War Game Excercises the morning of 9/11, evidence of a "Stand Down" order given to NORAD, Controlled demolition of 3 steel framed highrises, missing gold, ENRON/WORLDCOM scandal investigations destroyed in WTC7, No plane at the Pentagon, evidence of thermite, Iron Microspheres found in dust, etc.
WarCrime911 3 years ago
Thats not evidence.
danroduw06 3 years ago
pfffft! HAHAHAHA! You're as retarded as the kid who made this video!
WarCrime911 3 years ago
Wow. Clever response. Hey, how about you keep making these clever responses and then I will rank them from good to bad, 10 to 1. Let's see what you got.
danroduw06 3 years ago
All I got? Look at your comment dipshit! All you could say is "That's not Evidence"! When the dust samples taken from the WTC site IS CLEARLY EVIDENCE!
How about trying to ADDRESS the evidence instead of ignoring it like the scared little CHILD you are?
Let's talk about the Dust samples provided to Steven Jones by several different people! Let's talk about the Iron Rich Microspheres and HOW THEY GOT THERE!?!?
Why don't YOU TELL US what melted the steel and pulverized the concrete?
WarCrime911 3 years ago
Wow, I have talked to 20 truthers in the last week who have said this exact same thing. You get a 1 for cleverness because you can't come up with your own ideas. Well maybe a 2, because you did remember most of the shit that you are told to regurgitate. Next time you might score extra points if you bring up the Illuminati and the annunaki. Try again.
danroduw06 3 years ago
Try Again.
Are you going to address the EVIDENCE and the Science behind this or are you just going to avoid the issue and make petty remarks to minimize the severity of what you are talking about (and try to seperate it from your perceived reality as much as possible)?
What do you think about the video evidence of Molten Iron (still sparkling from the thermite reaction) dripping from the SouthEast corner to Tower 2 shortly before it disintegrated straight into it's own footprint?
WarCrime911 3 years ago
Now youre repeating yourself. Not creative at all... a 1.
danroduw06 3 years ago
Hahaha.
isafos 3 years ago
thermite?? ha. this guys crazy he knows nothing about science. crazy ass warcrime911. he even made his name about 9/11. i like how he says we beleive everything the government tells us yet he believes everything he reads on the internet.
xsrxd3vlstheory 3 years ago
Please noob! I'll refer you to my latest videos debunking NIST and pointing out lies and fraudulent analysis in their August '08 Report on the Collapse of WTC Building 7...
Try bringing your "scientific" argument there if you think you actually have one! HAH! Good luck!
I don't just read shit on the internet and believe it without checking the facts and doing research! I don't know who you have me confused with but...
You need a serious Reality Check!
WarCrime911 3 years ago
watch Zeitgeist part 2 cause u have no idea what ur talking about 9/11.
matthew2180 3 years ago
lol, you guys are very ignorant....
usa91nick 3 years ago
What makes these theories so crazy? you should open your mind up abit you jumped up little prick! if they landed on the moon why havent they been back?
shanonf 3 years ago
You said: "What makes these theories so crazy?"
I respond: Because they contradict the evidence. For evidence of 9/11, please see the descriptions of both parts of this video.
You said: "if they landed on the moon why havent they been back?"
I respond: They did go back. They went back 5 separate times, for a total of 6 Apollo missions which landed on the moon. Then they ran out of funding and halted missions for awhile. They're planning to return again around 2020 or so. Simple as that.
sonicsuns 3 years ago
My fav guy is David Icke. He think that's Lizard people are ruling our lives and our in all major political establishments. Aghh is great. Its true, a conspirist (a fantatic one) will always claim that the lack of evidense is the most evidense. I like the moon one though just been to the website.
jamesthq 3 years ago
Plus we have gone beyond the moon with the shuttle missions. I think I found 911 CT really jumped the shark with the no planes theory
Obelisk2290 3 years ago
My dad often uses that elephant joke.
mytubecomment 4 years ago
hey, a positive comment! Thanks. Most of the comments here are from conspiracy theorists.
sonicsuns 4 years ago
Haha funny. About all that Sept 11th stuff: I recently watched a History Channel special on the conspiracy vs. fact aspects of the terrorist attacks - and those conspirators seem to deny any hard evidence/fact that they are given. I guess whatever the brain doesn't like, it doesn't take into consideration. I believe that "A mind is like a parachute, it only works when it is open." In other words, a closed mind doesn't do too much good.
mytubecomment 3 years ago
To ih8ronpaulh8ers:
Could you provide links? (Comments don't let you post links, but you can post the important part that comes at the end). I found 2 organizations that made the error - Fox News and the BBC. Not too surprising. As I said in our earlier comment exchange, the collapse of WTC 7 was predicted hours in advance, so on that chaotic day it was easy to confuse "will collapse" with "has collapsed already"
sonicsuns 4 years ago
And what are you implying, anyway? Do you mean to say that somebody planned the attacks, planned to blow up WTC 7, and then told the media beforehand? Do you think that the BBC was consciously part of some conspiracy to attack america? Surely Occam's Razor tells us that these reports are simple cases of confusion.
sonicsuns 4 years ago
You said: "aside from that, the smaller buildings that suffer way worse damage and never fell, that can easily be found on youtube also"
I respond: Links, please? You must provide some evidence.
sonicsuns 4 years ago
You said:"search for tucker carlson interview with BYU prof"
I respond: I haven't found that video, but I assume you're talking about Steven Jones. Well, ok, that's one professor on your side. I have many more sources on my own side. And besides, Steven Jones has no training or experience in civil engineering or controlled demolition. (He studies nuclear physics and solar power.) In comparison, I have Leslie Robertson, who designed the twin towers.
See the links for much more.
sonicsuns 4 years ago
Anyway...that's how I see it sonicsuns . I don't think it's rational or scientific to dismiss a theory of C.D given that steven jones and various (200 and more) credible scientists (and rapidly increasing) have put forward papers in it's defense (read the papers....and also the debunkings of the papers....and tell me if you find the debunkings adequate) . Science is about cause and effect....a rational person always allows the possibility that with smoke there is fire .
splutonium 4 years ago
Ok, splutonium. Here we go again.
sonicsuns 4 years ago
You said: "Let's face it...the idea that some agency connected to the government played a part in these attacks is so awful that the human mind rejects it ."
I respond: Just because a theory is frightening and horrible doesn't make it true.
sonicsuns 4 years ago
Imagine if I told you that the Earth was going to explode in 68 minutes. And imagine then, when confronted with the implausibility of such an event, and the testimony of countless scientists to that effect, I then responded with "Well, obviously the idea that the Earth is going to explode is just so awful that the human mind rejects it. Ergo, the Earth is going to explode in precisely 68 minutes". Why, that would be ridiculous!
sonicsuns 4 years ago