Mendenhall plans to sue endorser for dropping him

[SteelCityMom]

Originally Posted by thumper

That's the point, SC. He got in when they didn't expect it. That is
why they were freaked: They didn't realize he had a real shot of
winning and he did. That is why they came to his crib and grilled
him in the basement for all that time.



I tend to believe JV. I don't see why he would make this stuff up. He
is a man, an honest man, with honor.

I know, I was just making hypotheticals. I think he's a good guy too. I don't agree with him on some stuff, but that's ok.

Sure. But that doesn't mean the media isn't controlled at the highest
levels. Just look into who owns the only wire services used by all
our major media and let me know what you think about that.

Honestly, I barely even pay attention to main stream media. I got sick of the headaches and sensationalism years ago. If I want to know more about a specific story, it usually involves some searching on the internet. I can't say with any certainty who runs the mainstream networks...but I know they're only a step above retarded monkeys. So yeah, it probably is the government.

I've heard of it, and watched a few episodes. It was kind of disappointing
in that it appeared as sensationalism to a degree. I wasn't sure exactly
why it did not continue. I think I recall some episodes that were shot but
never allowed to be shown.

Felt the same way myself. It was a little interesting, but I don't much get into those over dramatized type shows (unless it's about guns, or warriors, or warriors with guns). So I don't know about unaired episodes, but it wouldn't surprise me.

That list was interesting, but huge. But a few things occurred to me.

1.) I didn't know 1/2 of them. Like I said earlier they go after those with
the largest audiences. They don't have the manpower to ruin every
single person who speaks against their story. If the person is pretty
obscure, I don't know. They may not make the cut as to who to bother
with.

No, I know it was huge...that's why I posted it lol. I don't know half of them either. But only a couple people jumped out at me as having been in some real hot water at one time or another.

2.) Many of them may have made a statement at one time, but have
discontinued since. I do believe you would likely get a warning call
before they actually have to put work in. Many on that list are not known
as truthers, because, for one reason of the other, have since decided
to shut their mouth about it. Ed Begley Jr. is one on that list who did
remain active in the movement. And, I can't say his career has taken off.
Has be been blackballed? No way to know for fact. I do remember James
Brolin bringing up "911weknow.com" or something along those lines. Can't
say he continues to try to bring it up any more. Who knows. You choose
to assume there are no forces at play to keep a lid on this; that's how
you see it. I find it obvious that there are definitely forces in play trying to
squelch the truther movement.

I wouldn't exactly say Ed Begley Jr.'s career was anything extremely notable to begin with...so no, I doubt he's been black balled lol. He's credited with 45 tv and film roles since 2001 though, so I really don't think so.

If they're truly are forces at work to squelch the truther movement...then they suck at it. I just don't see any real evidence that would come close to suggest that this is happening.

[cloppbeast]

Originally Posted by ricardisimo

I couldn't care less about 9/11, quite honestly. I think Mendenhall's real crime was attempting to humanize an official enemy. That will never be accepted, and everyone must immediately pounce upon and dismember anyone who tries to undermine state propaganda like that. We have to hate who we're told to hate, or the entire system falls apart immediately.

True Dat.

[cloppbeast]

I would like to start by saying I don't necessarilly disagree with Thumper, because I understand this is a more complicated issue than most people recognize. I don't think anybody really can attain enough information to know whether the U.S. Federal Government orchestrated the attack or terrorists. It's kind of like trying to prove God does or doesn't exist - it can't be done.

Originally Posted by thumper

No offense, but I can tell you have only done very superficial
research on this. There are clearly accounts of eye witnesses
that point to explosives going off in the basement right before
the planes hit. Account after account point to this. When the
firemen showed up, the lobby was completely destroyed, as
if bombs had already been set off. I could produce 100s of links -
not that that is proof by itself but why would these people experienced
these explosions if there weren't any? Why?

Were these eye witness testomonies from the day of the event, or years after - because if these stories came out well after the fact, then they mean little to nothing to me. For a conspiracy theorist, it would prove no difficulty to find a "witness" to make up a story who may or may not have been there. That doesn't mean necessarilly that it's not true; but for me, the liklihood of foul play is just too large for me to take such testomony seriously, unfortunately.

Then again, much of the non-conspiratory testomony I take with a grain of salt as well.

Originally Posted by thumper

And, yes, steel can fail without actually melting but those temps weren't hot enough to make that happen, either. ?

This is not true. There is no set temperature which is needed to make steel weaken to the point of failure. You would have to consider all the loads on the structure before making such a statement. Possibly, under normal conditions, a jet fuel fire may not cause a building to collapse. But lets say, for instance, you fly a ****ing plane into a building, then the combination of tempeture load could cause it to collapse.

Originally Posted by thumper

Also, there is not way, using the pancake theory, that those buildings could have fallen at free fall speeds. There would be resistance as each floor fell into the one below. It is physically impossible for them to fall as fast as they did. Where was the resistance? Why were there obvious visible plumes of smoke, usually associated with demolitions?

A well engineered building is designed to fail in such way - and sky scrapers are designed to fail exactly like the WTC. There is nothing suspicious about how the WTC fell - that was how it was meant to fall.

Originally Posted by thumper

Oh, and then we got building 7. It wasn't even hit with a plane but it completely imploded at free fall speed. Care to explain how that could happen if they didn't use explosives to bring it down?

A blind squirrel finds acorns once in a while.

You make an excellent point. I really can't argue with this.

Originally Posted by thumper

That's one of the weaker arguments to begin with so I don't even go there. But as far as pilot performance goes, I would reference how a flunkie pilot who couldn't even pilot a single-engine Cessna was able to fly a 757 like a fighter jet into the Pentagon at 500 MPH a few feet off the ground, with such precision that the lawn
of the Pentagon was untouched. None of the lawn was damaged at
all. So a flunkie could fly a jet that huge with such precision?

Unlikely, but not impossible.

Originally Posted by thumper

Believe whatever makes you feel safe. Our govt. has been hijacked. The very thing that our founding fathers feared has happened. But if you want to believe the fairy tales offered by the very people who are destroying our free country and sending us into perpetual war, knock yourself out.

We all believe what we want to believe - including yourself. A libertarian-minded person naturally distrusts government, making them the most likely to believe such conspiracy theories. You can pretend as if you're the model of objectivism, but your proving yourself a fraud. The fact you made such a bold declaritive statement using a bunch of non-related, not-well-thought-out, and shoddy facts shows you are as biased as they come.

But, the fact remains, none of us truly know the answer, yet we argue about it as if we do. On top of that, we criticize each other - one side is a bunch of wackos, the other side is a bunch of sheep who believe anything the government tells them. This whole 9/11 discussion has become as polarizing as any issue in this country. To be honest, it's almost like religion - because everyone thinks they know the answer when they don't.

Originally Posted by cloppbeast

I don't think anybody really can attain enough information to know whether the U.S. Federal Government orchestrated the attack or terrorists. It's kind of like trying to prove God does or doesn't exist - it can't be done.

Very well said, cloppbeast. I don't think we'll ever know for sure exactly what happened on 9/11.

The problem I have with thumper is not necessarily his arguments, but the way he presents them. Just because most of us don't buy into the conspiracy theories, thumper calls us uneducated, sheep, and gullible for believing everything the government tells us. That's not only incorrect, but it's a piss-poor way to debate. And that's why I get a bit testy with him.

Although I don't believe in the 9/11 conspiracy theories, I also don't believe entirely in the official government version of events. I'm still convinced that Flight 93 was shot down. The crash site isn't consistent with a normal plane crash. And there are eyewitnesses who saw military planes in the area.

But does this mean there's a government conspiracy? Yes and no. Just because the government may have lied about the plane being shot down doesn't mean it was part of some nefarious conspiracy such as thumper suggests. Lying about what happened would serve two points. On possibly the most tragic day in our country's history, it wouldn't have done our psyche any good to know that our own government shot down one of our own planes and killed innocent people. And American people rallied around the story of courageous passengers on Flight 93. On a day of great tragedy, it gave Americans something to be proud of.

I'm not saying I'm right about this, just that I find it plausible ... and that just because me and many others don't buy into the 9/11 conspiracies doesn't mean we're uneducated sheep who believe everything the government tells us.

[cloppbeast]

Originally Posted by Wallace108

Very well said, cloppbeast. I don't think we'll ever know for sure exactly what happened on 9/11.

Thank You!

Originally Posted by Wallace108

he problem I have with thumper is not necessarily his arguments, but the way he presents them. Just because most of us don't buy into the conspiracy theories, thumper calls us uneducated, sheep, and gullible for believing everything the government tells us. That's not only incorrect, but it's a piss-poor way to debate. And that's why I get a bit testy with him.

It's your typical conspiracy theorist argument. Thumper thinks he's unique with his opinion, but he's more oridnary than he understands.

I generally have a problem when people generalize their opponents, anyway - and this 9/11 debate epitimizes it. How can somebody seriously question another's open-mindedness solely based on their opinion on whether they believe 9/11 was a conspiracy? Isn't it possible a person could have objectively considered all the facts and still concluded terrorists blew up the WTC with a plane? Of course.

But, then again, most conspiracy theorists lack any logic in their thought process, otherwise they would have never convinced themselves their conspiracy is such certainty.

Originally Posted by Wallace108

But does this mean there's a government conspiracy? Yes and no. Just because the government may have lied about the plane being shot down doesn't mean it was part of some nefarious conspiracy such as thumper suggests. Lying about what happened would serve two points. On possibly the most tragic day in our country's history, it wouldn't have done our psyche any good to know that our own government shot down one of our own planes and killed innocent people. And American people rallied around the story of courageous passengers on Flight 93. On a day of great tragedy, it gave Americans something to be proud of.

Excellent point, dude.

Conspiracy theorists need to understand that, even if they've uncovered some enlightening facts, they still haven't proven a government consipiracy is the only explanation.

It's odd we don't hear much about the other building that fell down, I admit. I also admit that it was odd it fell down in the first place. Is a government conspiracy the only possible explanation as to why it fell? Quite obviously, no.

Originally Posted by Wallace108

I'm not saying I'm right about this, just that I find it plausible ... and that just because me and many others don't buy into the 9/11 conspiracies doesn't mean we're uneducated sheep who believe everything the government tells us.

Nobody is right, including yourself - which is why I listen to you more than others. In this debate, I do not trust a person who says he/she has the answer. In fact, in my daily life, I don't trust anybody in general who says they have the answers. Perhaps I've read too much Pyrrho and Sextus Empiricus.