Announcing the formation of Scholars for 5/06 Truth!

[SDuderstadt]

In case you didn't know, 5/06/37 was the day the Hindenburg mysteriously exploded upon trying to land at Lakehurst Naval Station. I have various questions, many of which have never been asked, let alone answered:

1) How do we know this was not a false flag operation?
2) Why do all the photos of that event look like they have been doctored?
3) Why were people threatened with the loss of their job for questioning what happened that day?
4) Why did the Roosevelt Adminstration resist calls for a 5/06 Commission?
5) Where exactly was Roosevelt when this "accident" happened?
6) Why were dirigible experts banned from the "accident scene"?
7) What was the role of the CIA in all this? Now, I know that many "debunkers" will attempt to point out that the CIA didn't even exist until years later, but this is simply nuisance/distraction/spam intended to keep the truth from coming out.
8) Why did YouTube choose to surpress the videos of that day? For those who point out that YouTube did not exist then, please see #7. More nuisance/spam/distraction from debunkers. For those of you who point out videotape did not exist yet, same thing.
9) Why the discrepancy in times that day? The Official Story claims it happened at 8:41 PM, when many witnesses testified it happened at 8:42 PM? What is the government hiding?
10)What about all the mysterious deaths of the passengers? Why did the Hindenburg explode in a fiery ball? Why had this never happened to a dirigible before? Why didn't it just deflate and fall safely to the ground?

And so on. The fact is we STILL don't know the truth 71 years later! Shouldn't we find out? Who else is with me? If you're at all concerned with this, you can buy my blockbuster DVD, "Loose Blimps". Anyone who tries to debunk our theories is obviously a shill for the Bush administration. Again, if a "debunker" attempts to point out that W wasn't even born then, this is just more nuisance/distraction/spam.

[petgoat]

1. Here's the story I heard:

I think it was in William Least Heat Moon's "Blue Highways" and I've surely
embellished it.

Most of that part of New Jersey is pine barrens--sand flats and little sand dunes with
stunted pine trees growing in it and a lot of very shallow lakes. It's pretty country,
but it's pretty useless (except for airfields and cranberry bogs) and in the thirties
there were a lot of people living out there in cars and tents because they didn't have
to pay rent, and venison was available for the shooting.

Supposedly the Hindenberg's landing was delayed, they had to wait for the winds to die
down or something, and they flew around in circles over the pine barrens. The "Pinies"
on the ground had never seen a Zeppelin before and they thought it was spying on them,
so they started shooting at it. By the time they reached the landing pylon the hydrogen
was leaking all over the place.

[SDuderstadt]

3. William Least Heat Moon's book....

"Blue Highways" was simply amazing. "Prairie Earth" (sp) not so much.

[jberryhill]

10. You know why Orson Welles was blacklisted, yes?

A year later, Orson Welles broadcast War of the Worlds in which there was an alien invasion starting at Grover's Mill, New Jersey, not far from Lakehurst.

It was a thinly veiled expose' of the agents that carried out the Hindenburg op, and was the reason why he was subsequently blacklisted.

[Mist]

23. I thought Welles was blacklisted, ie, couldn't get studios to finance his pics, because

a number of his pics had cost over-runs and didn't make back what they cost, PLUS "Citizen
Kane" really pissed off WR Hearst, who threw his weight around and kept a number of theaters
from showing the pic, plus that movie also didn't make enough money. Audiences didn't like it,
though critics did.

[SDuderstadt]

25. Well, that's what the "official story" claims...

it was obviously a blackop and designed to eventually make W president. Were are all the "deep politics" scholars on this?

[JackRiddler]

37. Poor lulu...

What are you doing, trying to talk actual facts in a crude attack thread? The people who started this thread aren't interested in anything other than a circle jerk they confuse for daring humor.

[SDuderstadt]

38. "crude attack thread"

I thought you were ignoring us, Jack. Hardly sounds that way to me. The real irony is that you think satire is a circle jerk, but you think the "truth movement" isn't.

[LARED]

40. Trust me on this no one thinks this is daring humor. - nt

[SDuderstadt]

105. Well, it might be 'daring humor"...

from a "truther" standpoint.

[SDuderstadt]

42. I heard they were shooting from...

a "grassy knoll".

[jberryhill]

2. There have been quite a number of interesting theories about the Hindenburg

Some new information about the Titanic turned up recently, in regard to whether the rivets were within spec.

But I'm not sure there is a strong conclusion about the Hindenberg. It boggles my mind that anyone onboard survived though.

[SDuderstadt]

7. Theories, Schmeories...

Why is the government surpressing 5/06 Truth???

[jberryhill]

8. Actually....

While hydrogen is more buoyant, the Germans used it because we were denying them helium under a trade embargo.

[SDuderstadt]

9. More nuisance/distraction/spam from the "denunkers"....

Shhhh.....don't tell anyone but, in case you hadn't noticed, I am doing my impersonation of a "truther".

[jberryhill]

11. Practicing your disinfo skills is not encouraged

AZCat, dock this man a week's pay.

[AZCat]

13. I'll file the paperwork.

Although he may fill out a HBR-270 form (available for download from our servers) and request an alternative punishment. If he still has at least one of his pinky fingers, I recommend it.

[SDuderstadt]

106. How do we know you're not a clone or...

COINTELPRO?

[Flatulo]

4. Ironically, all but one of the deaths were from jumping. The passengers

who rode it down survived. The hydrogen fire simply burned upwards.

[truedelphi]

5. That is very interesting, and of course very pertinent

For any of us that ever gets to go up in a Zeppelin!

[SDuderstadt]

6. How do we know they jumped?

How do know they weren't pushed by agents of the NWO?

[LARED]

12. You might be on to something

Surely those clever German scientists would have throughly considered the problems a hydrogen filled vessel, covered with a flammable skin may have had with static electricity. The German are just not that dumb and many safety systems would have surely been installed to prevent such a disaster.

This clearly points to a false flag operation by FDR in a misguided attempt to draw Hitler into attacking the US in order to create a never ending state of war for profits.

I've heard that many of the lesson learned from this failed operation were useful for the successful Pearl Harbor false flag operation years later. Also consider the Hindenburg "crashed" very close to a government military site that had some of the most elite Zeppelin experts in the world.

Coincidence? I think not!!!

How do I sign up? I WANT the Truth!!!!



_________________Remove Tin foil beenie___________________________________________________

I visited this hanger at Lakehurst many years ago. To say it's huge just does not do it justice.

[SDuderstadt]

14. To sign up....

Send me $100. I promise that money raised goes to find the "truth". You trust me, don't you?

[jberryhill]

15. Same pattern

....and just like Bush forgot to have any Iraqi "hi-jackers", FDR was furious that the Germans who attacked Pearl Harbor used Japanese Planes.

This is why National Lampoon went out of business shortly after they spilled the beans in Animal House.

[SDuderstadt]

16. I'd like to know exactly where....

W was on 5/06/37.

[JackRiddler]

17. Congratulations, you will be entering fourth grade in the fall. nt

[seemslikeadream]

18. ......

[SDuderstadt]

54. And another totally incoherent post from SLAD...

quelle surpris!

[Andre II]

58. I don't think I can take anybody seriously who writes "quelle surpris"

Can you come up with any language where
the equivilant for "the surprise" is "surpris"?
See, how much fun it is is to mock another poster on this low level as you did?

[SDuderstadt]

60. At least I spelled "quelle surpris" correctly which is...

more than I can say for your spelling of "equivilant" (equivalent). You should probably go after anyone who uses the expression "ne plus ultra" next. I plead quilty to one count of employing a French phrase for effect.

[SDuderstadt]

19. Personal attack, JR?

Are you afraid of 5/06 truth?

[JackRiddler]

26. Not at all.

Response on a marginally higher level of discourse than you have chosen to engage.

[SDuderstadt]

27. It's called "satire", JR....

perhaps you've heard of it.

[JackRiddler]

29. And when satire sucks, it's called "stupid."

You've probably heard of that.

[SDuderstadt]

30. Sounds like it struck a nerve with you...

seems pretty successful to me...

[JackRiddler]

31. Really now?

In this case, you're the one who spent whatever amount of time it took you to write that extremely lame, unfunny and fallacious comparison. If your depiction really accurately describes how stupid it is to question the official conspiracy theory of Sept. 11th (as most of the relatives of the victims have done, among so many others)... wouldn't you have found another playground by now?

[SDuderstadt]

32. Tell me something, JR...

what exactly IS the "official conspiracy theory"? If you'd bother to think about this, I'm hardly saying it's stupid to question it (whatever it is). I'm lampooning the goofier aspects of "9/11 Truth". I'm sorry it causes you such pain. No, really, I am.

[JackRiddler]

35. Stupidity always causes me pain...

But generally I ignore it. See ya!

[SDuderstadt]

36. If stupidity causes you pain...

hanging around the 9/11 "truth movement" must be a source of constant agony for you. Maybe some heavey-duty painkillers would help. Judging from the state of the "truth movement", you might want to stock up. Just sayin'.

[vincent_vega_lives]

55. What do you call

serious arguments that are stupid? Unintended Satire?

[SDuderstadt]

56. Serious arguments that are stupid....

are presented as "9/11 Truth". That's why the "movement" is such a laughingstock and embarrassment to us liberals everywhere.

[SDuderstadt]

100. Well, at least I am three grades....

ahead of you then.

[seemslikeadream]

20. .........

[SDuderstadt]

48. Okay...I'll bite...

is there some significance to posting a series of ellipses (sp?)? If there is, it escapes me.

[LARED]

21. This just gets deeper and deeper, where are the "Deep Politics" DU'er

on this important issue?

Hindenburg became President of the Weimar Republic in 1925, replacing Friedrich Ebert upon the latter's death, achieving re-election in 1932. Hindenburg, by then virtually senile, was responsible for appointing Adolf Hitler Chancellor in 1933, fearing civil war otherwise.

http://www.firstworldwar.com/bio/hindenburg.htm

[SDuderstadt]

43. I am disappointed that none of the 9/11 "truthers" are flocking to join...

surely they don't think this theory about the Hindenburg is any goofier than any of their claims.

[LARED]

45. Lets give them so time to come around

Many of those we are trying to reach took a long time to see the 9/11 truther light. It's hard to accept such a monstrous truth as the 5/6 CT.

[SDuderstadt]

47. You're right....it's only been 71 years.

Whatever was I thinking?

[LARED]

22. Massive squib seen in crash of Hindenburg

Look at the nose of the Hindenburg. How can that be explained? The other end is the only thing on fire.

[SDuderstadt]

24. This is all explained in my DVD....

it's only $100. If you don't buy one, you are supporting the "official story" and you have bllod on your hands.

[SDuderstadt]

49. I'm sorry....

are you saying "squib" or "squid"?

[LARED]

50. Hummmm?? I had not considered the possibility

of a giant lighter than air squid secretly placed inside the Zeppelin. Those German were very inventive folks, so lets not discount the possibility until the reinvestigation is complete.

[SDuderstadt]

51. Being of German ancestry (big surprise, huh..)...

I can confirm that German scientists had already made great strides in "squibs disguised as squid" technology. I also suspect early prototypes were used in WWI.

[SDuderstadt]

28. I'm curious as to where the "debunkers" of 5/06 Truth are...

I'm also curious as to where the 9/11 "Truthers" are on this matter. Are they going to join us or just shill for the Bush administration?

[SDuderstadt]

77. Still NO debunkers of 5/06 Truth???

C'mon, CT's! Cowboy up!

[LARED]

33. Smoking gun - Hindenburg was nuked

Very distinct mushroom cloud seen that fateful day.

[SDuderstadt]

34. Omigod! You're right!

No doubt the "debunkers" will claim this is impossible as nukes had not yet been invented. How do we know they hadn't been invented yet? Just because it's the "official story"? We need to be prepared to confront the coming onslaught of nuisance/distraction/spam designed to suppress 8/06 Truth! Why does the truth scare them so much?

[LARED]

39. I think we should solicit Dr. Judy Wood to investigate this

phenomenon.

I mean just because we think atomic bombs had not be invented yet, there is no reason to believe the government did not have them for many years prior to the 1940's. The investigation of unknown weapons is one of her specialties, and as should every effort should be made to get her in the truth loop.

[SDuderstadt]

41. I keep trying to reach her...

but her line is always busy. Damn.

[LARED]

57. Calling on Spooked

Will you join this effort to get the truth. The Hindenburg was nuked.

[SDuderstadt]

107. Spooked is too busy promoting....

an equally silly theory. The difference is mine is satire, however, no less believable than Spooked's claim the WTC was nuked.

[WoodrowFan]

44. Clear video fakery

HAH! If you beleive there really was a so-called "lighter than air" craft there that day, then you are clearly govt disinfo! It was video fakery by Disney! NO ZEPS!

[SDuderstadt]

46. I know for a fact that the picture was...

generated with a miniature dirigible and the "explosion" is actually someone torching it just out of camera range with a Bic lighter. What...do they think we just fell off a turnip truck, for God's sake? Do they expect us to fall for this crap?

BTW, does anyone know the exact date the Titanic sunk? I think that needs a "truth movement" to. For one thing, it's clear that the Titanic never actually existed and all the passengers are living on a desert island and are really, really old.

[jberryhill]

52. One Eyewitness Described Exactly What He Saw...

[SDuderstadt]

53. If you don't quit spamming my OP....

it proves you are a shill for the Bush administration and part of the distraction/spam nuisance brigade!


P.S. Guess which "truther" I am channeling.

[Bassman66]

59. I'm puzzled.

Why do you need to post flamebait?

[SDuderstadt]

61. Why does the "truth movement"....

countenance such goofy theories and theorists? My OP is "satire". Perhaos you've heard of it.

[Bassman66]

62. Flamebait

There is no all encompassing "truth movement" although you would like to pretend there is so you can point at "all" those nutty conspiracy theorists.

There is a wide spectrum of questions about 9/11 and not everyone signs up to them all. Hell, some of the goofier 9/11 questions may even come from a COINTELPRO op, the Goverment certainly has a history of such things.

But that's no fun for you, the "truth movement", "they're all goofy".

Like I said, flamebait.

Why do you do it?

[petgoat]

63. The debunkers are motivated by their need to feel superior nt

[SDuderstadt]

65. No, we're motivated by the need to counter...

silliness and illogic.

[petgoat]

66. They don't counter silliness and illogic. They sow FUD, make snide remarks and juvenile jokes. nt

[SDuderstadt]

67. I'll point to your post as an example of....

the silliness I'm talking about. As far as the "snide remarks", perhaps if you'd engage in serious debate instead of accusing us of "sowing FUD" (whatever FUD is and whatever your comment means), perhaps you wouldn't trigger said "snide remarks". Accusing us os "sowing FUD" isn't engaging in real debate and repeating it over and over like a mantra doesn't make it convincing, nor does it make your case.

[salvorhardin]

69. FUD = Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt

It was originated by Gene Amdahl, an ex-IBM computer architect who left to found his own company. He coined the acronym to refer to the tactics used by IBM salespeople when considering Amdahl's product. Later on the acronym was more often used to describe Microsoft's sales tactics.
http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/F/FUD.html

More unintentional ironic humor from the truthiness brigade.

[SDuderstadt]

71. Calling it "unintentional irony" is....

being kind to the "truthiness brigade".

[SDuderstadt]

64. Gee, I don't know.....

why do you think the goofiest pronouncements of the 9/11 "truth movement" draws the most fire? The "truthers" have had nearly 7 years to pull together a coherent, convincing alternative hypothesis. Don't blame us debubkers if you've failed miserably. Be honest with yourself and admit that the "movement" is primarily dominated by goofy theorists propounding absurd notions. Even the more serious questions/theories proceed from a lack of information or seriously flawed analysis.

Why do I bother with it? Because it damages the liberal "brand". I think we should be proponents of science and reason, not bizarre speculation and conjecture.

[Bassman66]

79. Why do you persist with this "truth movement" nonsense?

That is not a single body.
There are a wide spectrum of 9/11 questions, some are goofy and might even be COINTELPRO.

Actually it's obvious what you're doing.

Classic use of COINTELPRO.

[Bolo Boffin]

86. Why do you persist in this "official story" nonsense?

There is not a single body that dispenses this.

So you see COINTELPRO asking the questions and answering the questions, too. Boo!

[Bassman66]

87. Which part of the "official story" do you have questions

about?

[SDuderstadt]

90. My question is...

why don't you debate on the merits, rather than try to trvialize our position by referring to it as "the Official Story"? Turnabout is, of course, fair play.

[Bassman66]

88. Actually that's not true.

"There is not a single body that dispenses this."

Of course there is! There was an official commission set up to do that very thing.

[SDuderstadt]

91. I see...

so, you're now claomomg NIST is not part of the "official story"?

[Bassman66]

118. Pedantic.

Nice touch.
That wins arguments.

[SDuderstadt]

124. Why are you trying to suppress the truth about 5/06?

You're transparent.

[HannibalCards]

132. No Blimper

There was no blimp. It was a hologram and mini nukes were used to create a fireball.

Name one living witness to an actual 'blimp'. I'll wait.

[SDuderstadt]

134. Mere technicalities...n/t

[SDuderstadt]

102. Are you claiming that the 9/11 Commission...

controlled the ASCE/BPAT? Do you even know what that is?

[Grateful for Hope]

112. I wasn't going to do this

but, why are you kicking this ridiculous thread so much? Why are you trying so hard to stereotype and label those who pose 9/11 questions? In other words, why are you so invested in characterizing serious posters here that do not buy the "official story" as crackpots and worse?

I did read an explanation of your's. It had to do with wanting progessives to be associated with science and reason (paraphrasing wildly here, and, sorry, am too tired tonight to search out that post). My thought at the time I read that post was that this was not a particularly "progressive" thing to do. In my mind, "progressive" means, among many other things, to "live and let live".

If anything, attempting to stifle conversation concerning "controversial" topics is anything but progressive.

I know you will try to counter by some type of denial, but, I am tired from a hard day's work, and, I won't counter-counter.

Have a good evening.

[SDuderstadt]

113. Ummm, Hope

In other words, why are you so invested in characterizing serious posters here that do not buy the "official story" as crackpots and worse?

It should be obvious that I am lampooning the the more absurd theories precisely because they deserve to be lampooned. Every post I make is so ovver-the-top absurd, it should be clear precisely who I'm aiming at. If you can point to a post that lampoons a serious 9/11 concern, I'd love to see it.

[Grateful for Hope]

114. It really isn't quite so obvious

particularly since you keep kicking your own thread.

[SDuderstadt]

116. Well, thanks for giving me the opportunity again....

anyhow.

[SDuderstadt]

89. Now we'e being accused of being Cointelpro?

Hey, dude....how about just having a debate on the merits, rather than imply we're part of some insidious government disinfo effort? This is as stupid as the GOP die-hards' position that, if you oppose the Iraq war, you don't support the troops. Or, "we're fighting them 'over there' so we don't have to fight them here!". Pathetic.

[SDuderstadt]

121. Show me where I ever said the "truth movement" amounts to...

"they're all goofy". I said no such thing and I explicitly pointed out I am lampooning the goofier parts of the "truth movement". But, of course, you can't be bothered to read all I've written, can you...

[LARED]

68. Perhaps you're puzzled because you don't know flamebait

when you see it. This is really a distraction for amusement purposes only. Of course the OP's author is free to disagree.

[SDuderstadt]

70. How do I know you're....

not a clone?

[LARED]

72. I shall invoke the CT'ist Creed

"We can't be certain of anything" - Bassman66

Words to live by my friend.

[SDuderstadt]

73. Doesn't that just sum it up?

Like I said before, this os something that could be cured by teaching them criticval thinking. They fall for anything.

[salvorhardin]

74. No, I don't think that will work with the majority who believe in the various incarnations of Troof

I don't think someone is teachable once they've reached true believer status. Their beliefs have long since passed from the realm where they're penetrable to logic and reason. The true believer's beliefs have become morality and so they react with great emotion whenever any evidence or reasoning to the contrary is presented. Logic and reason only benefit those who haven't made up their mind yet or are still receptive to the idea that their beliefs might be wrong.

[SDuderstadt]

75. Unfortunately....

I think you're right.

[SDuderstadt]

76. I would actually add to that as....

I think what they actually believe is something along the lines of "We can't be certain of anything, except poorly sourced conjecture that conforms with our biases".

I am thinking of adopting Bassman's initial quote as my signature line.

[Bassman66]

81. Hey look

a strawman.

I must be doing something right, the personal attacks have started.

[SDuderstadt]

92. An opinion isn't a strawman, dude...

Your first clue was the lead-off, "U think..."

[SDuderstadt]

78. That's not as good as this guy I know who clings to the belief...

"there is no such thing as objective truth". I tried to point out to him that, without "objective truth", it would be impossible to claim "there is no such thing as objective truth". Of course, he couldn't see it.

[Bassman66]

82. Perhaps he was talking about Heisenberg.

And he'd be right.

[SDuderstadt]

93. And he wasn't....

and you'd be wrong.

[Bassman66]

83. Objective truth

Human perception vs objective truth.

Don't pretend this isn't an old philosopical debate. It's not "wacko" to argue there is no such thing as objective truth - it's a long-standing philosopical position, but hey, why waste another opportunity to slap down someone else who disagrees with you.

[SDuderstadt]

94. Ummm, Bassman...

if there is "nu such thing as objective truth", then how can one even make that declaration?

[Bassman66]

80. "Confess"

A word people have died by.

Such are certainties.

[LARED]

84. I'm sure there is some connection between my post

and your comment. I wish I knew what it was.

[Bassman66]

85. "Words to live by"

Word(s) to die by.
History shows how people die because they didn't accept "certainties".
Todays certainties are tomorrows absurdities.
Go back to your world of certainties.

E pur si muove.

[SDuderstadt]

95. I'd say your post is an adsurdity....

no matter which day you read it.

[LARED]

101. Hummm, a persecution complex as well.

Quoting Galileo is kinda scary. Do you feel persecuted because you are not certain of anything, and people whisper that it's a strange concept to accept.

Do you think when I said "worlds to live by" I was implying that life itself is sprung forth from uttering the creed of CT'ism? Or perhaps I was being a tad be sarcastic?

Or are you just clueless?

[SDuderstadt]

123. Are you certain about that?

After all, according to Bassman, we can't be certain of anything...unless it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck.

[SDuderstadt]

96. I'm not even sure that....

Bassman knows what it is.

[Bassman66]

98. Oh I'm sure alright. n/t.

[SDuderstadt]

122. Time to invoke the now infamous Bassman....

"we can't be absolutely certain of anything" unless, of course, "if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, then it's a duck".

Apparently the truth lies somewhere between total uncertainty or a duck. I wish I knew which one.

[SidDithers]

97. Announcing the formation of Scholars for 5/06 Truth & Justice...

Your feeble attempts at explaining the details of the Hindenburg explosion don't live up to my standards of evidence. You don't even consider thermate as a possible incendiary source.

Scholars for 5/06 Truth and Justice will do all of the things your organization will do, plus, we'll publish our research online, in open source journals that really, really sound peer-reviewed.

You may call us splitters, but we're the true People's Front of Judea errr...STJ506!

Sid

[SDuderstadt]

99. Scholars for 5/06 Truth has been INFILTRATED by COINTELPRO!

Take a look at "SidDithers" posts and ask yourself. Does this sound like a man you can trust? Why does he continue to dodge requests to disprove rumors that he and Alex Jones used to date? How do you know SidDithers is not a clone? Is SidDithers any relation to Mr. Dithers in "Blondie"?

For my part, I say fight fire with fire (no pun intended) and I also predict that SidDithers' faux organization will never "get off the ground" (pun intended). For the record, I have never once stated that SidDithers looks like the Hindenburg, although I do applaud his recent weight-loss efforts (for the record, Sid, I think losing that first 600 pounds is the hardest part and I hope you make your target of getting down to 800 pounds).

P.S. My niece is convinced she saw you hovering over Santa Fe, NM the other night. Can you prove it wasn't you? If you can't, that means it WAS you! BTW, your silly thermite/thermate claims can be debunked by pointing out that gypsumboard is used heavily in dirigibles. I'm sure you got this silly notion from the night you floated over SLC and conferred with Steven Jones.

[Bassman66]

103. COINTELPRO

Truth or fiction?

Why should we believe the Government abandoned such tactics back in the 1970's?

Is COINTELPRO just another CT?

[SDuderstadt]

104. No, but just because something exists or existed....

doesn't mean it accounts for something in a particular situation. One of my frustrations with many CT's is that they do not understand the difference between correlation and causality. Their arguments often go something like (paraphrasing):

The Bush administration is evil.
Something evil happened on 9/11.
Therefore, the Bush administration must have planned 9/11.

What's worse is, if I try to point out the flaws in their logic or errors in their fact, some immediately start trying to psychoanalyze me, claiming that I'm actually "reactionary" who cannot accept that our government lies to us. What I find hysterical is that many of them embrace other lies simply because it comports with their view of the administration. All I ask is that CT's apply the same rigorous standards of proof to their own claims that they demand of the "official story".

[Bassman66]

109. For the record

you're saying "no", there is no COINTELPRO being used against people seeking answers over 9/11.

You know this?

[SDuderstadt]

110. Show me where I even remotely said that...

what I'm getting at is you have no evidence for it. Therefore, in the absence of evidence that it is happening, it is more likely that it isn't. However, if you come up with concrete evidence of it, I'm all ears. But, I doubt seriously that the FBI/Federal government is all that interested on DU. And, if you suggest one more time that I am part of Cointelpro, I'm pretty sure that is a violation of the rules. It's really getting anoying.

[Bassman66]

119. You saying there is no COINTELPRO?

because it's unlikely?
Really?
So when there was "no evidence" during the 1960's and 1970's it didn't exist then either?

No conspiracies exist until they are proven? Really?

In my opinion it's a 100% certainty that Governments have set up bodies to control public opinion in some form on the interent, it's so much easier these days, you don't even have to leave your keyboard.

For the record I have never suggested you are part of COINTELPRO, you are however happy (very) to use it's fruits as are many others on this board.

[SDuderstadt]

120. Jesus, Bassman...

I take issue with you and others on the facts. You need to drop these silly implications that I am using COINTELPRO's "fruits". It's called debate.


And to the extent that the government has "set up bodies to control public opinion in some form on the Internet", I'm pretty sure they have bigger fish to fry than DU (my apologies to Skinner, et al...no criticism intended).

By the way, if you'd bother to read, COINTELPRO was exposed in 1971, so it's kinda silly to claim there was "no evidence" of it in the 70's.

[SDuderstadt]

108. For the record...

I re-enacted the Hindenburg disaster by filling a condow with hydrogen and running it into a pylon I made with an old erector set. I got the idea for this from the "bunny cage" experiments I have seen from "truthers".

Well, guess what? The condow did NOT explode nor burst into flames! I think this pretty much proves my theory. 5/06 was an inside job! Truth is bubbling up all over....whatcha gonna do?

[SDuderstadt]

111. Does anyone know whether COINTELPRO existed in 1937?

That would explain a lot.

[jberryhill]

115. You know... now that you mention it....

There was that helium embargo.

What was Prescott Bush's interest in helium?

It is a by-product of natural gas production, you know.

[SDuderstadt]

117. The funny thing is....

I always thought of Prescott Bush as a "lightweight" so it would make sense that he's mixed up in this somehow.

[SDuderstadt]

125. Our questions about that day are still unanswered...

[LARED]

126. Thank you for kicking this important issue - nt

[SDuderstadt]

127. We need to get to the bottom of this and quit accepting the lies of....

er, whatever administration was in office then.

[spooked911]

128. how many wars did this incident start again?

how dramatically did it alter our public life and politics?

Even if something was covered up, is it at all relevant to our current national situation?

I know you think you are being very clever with this at all, but it is just silly to compare a possible Hindenberg conspiracy to 9/11.

[SDuderstadt]

129. Dude...

I'm not "comparing" the Hindenburg crash to 9/11. I'm satirizing the "truth movement". 9/11 could have (and, in fact, did) happen the way we're saying and Bush could just have easily leveraged it to invade Iraq. You and I are allies on the issue of how Bush abused the situation...but I don't see 9/11 as an inside job and your "no-planes" and "mini-nukes" bullshit is offensive.

[spooked911]

130. I know what you are doing but this is just silly at best.

If you are offended by "no-planes" and "mini-nukes", I'm sorry. But I pursue those explanations in complete sincerity, and not as a way to shock people. The fact is, I believe the evidence best fits "no-planes" and "mini-nukes".

[HannibalCards]

131. No Planes and Mini Nukes

When did zero evidence become best evidence?

[SDuderstadt]

133. Only if you ignore the testimony of the witnesses who saw...

the fucking planes hit the buildings. Your goofy claims are just that...goofy bordering on delusional. That's why no one here takes you seriously, dude.