Quote:
|
Originally Posted by OkhamsRazor
I don't as a rule go into personal information here. I've been on the web since the days of Archie's and gofers. I have learned that unless I know you well, most can't be trusted to be responsible with such information. But that is beside the point and I don't appreciate the attempt to sidetrack this issue. .
|
WHOA!! Hold on a second pal. It is not beside the point, nor is a sidetrack. Your credentials is very much important being you are trying to convince people of your theory. You don't walk into a job interview without a resume do you and tell them to take your word for it?
Credentials are everything when you are trying to prove a piont, otherwise everything you say (post) is bunk.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by OkhamsRazor
Once again you have not adhered to the guidelines of the thread, as you did not on another. Have a little respect new guy. You can start all the threads you want, there is not limit on space here. The entire reason I posted the guidelines is because of people like you. .
|
YOU have not adhered to the rules of debate when presenting an argument that involves facts. One can not say they have a background in X,Y and Z and claim they use the scientific method without saying where their background is from.
Certainly you wouldnt take the word of a man who has a GED when he talks about the artificial heart would you? I would hope you took the word of a man like Jarvis who obviously has CREDENTIALS.
So do you have a degree?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by OkhamsRazor
What IS important is the qualifications of the folks that are bringing forth the evidence. Take a look at those. Furthermore, you did not look at the evidence provided by the links nor did you check into their qualifications. So in short... piss off, your posts on this thread will be ignored. .
|
Wrong, if one does not have a strong background in the field, one can not decifer truth from fiction. Otherwise you are appealing to authority. Physics and engineering is not childsplay where it is common sense to follow, so how can you say with 100% certainty that what they say is true?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by OkhamsRazor
BTW... there have been a number of cover-ups in the past that have taken decades to unravel, that have also involved large numbers of participants. So no, it's not that unreasonable. .
|
Ones as big as 9.11? Please enlighten me - what where they?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by OkhamsRazor
Also, you seem to completely underestimate the effect that power, money and threat of life family and career can have on people. It really doesn't take much to shut people up that are with you to begin with. Add to that the ability of the government to comartmetalize things... hell, as a matter of regular business one part of the government rarely knows what the another is up to, or why.
|
So plese tell me who exactly is being made to keep silent?
And you do know that if the Bush admin was behind the attacks (a riduculous notion) that the CIA would of had to of been involved...which means Tenet would of known the plot. And since Tenet and Clinton are best pals he would know.....now are you telling me that Clinton (Hillary or Bill) knows of this murdering of 3000 innocent American civilians by George Bush and dont say anything? LOL
Oh and why we are at can you tell me the reason the Bush admin would commit such an act?