100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: The Charade of Israeli-Palestinian Talks | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
Hotrod, what you wrote is there for all to see.
Incorrect, it [the burdon of proof] lies with you and your ilk if you dispute the OS.
and now you deny that you said it here: No, obviously your comprehension skills are lacking, or you're being deliberately obtuse. Re-read the sections where I mention 'those who posit alternative theories.'
See how you don't even know what you have posted? Try rereading your own post. You said, (and I can hardly believe what I am reading) You either missed my point, or you are creating just another diversion. Please focus on my point and not what you believe it to be. You do not understand the concept of 'burden of proof' and this meandering persiflage proves it.
It is YOU who misses the point. I am a private investigator and I certainly do understand "burdon of proof." You keep referring back to some "theory" I may have discussed in the distant past on some other thread and that is not what this is about. So forget what you think you know and focus on this single point. They made the claim that 16 hijackers flew planes into government buildings. I did not make that claim. The burdon of proof is ON THEM because they made the claim. They have no proof. That is so glaringly simple that anyone can understand it. They HAVE NO PROOF OF THEIR CLAIMS. The burden of proof is not mine to prove that their claims are absurd or false UNTIL they actualy prove their first claim. Simple. Can't you comprehend that? |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
HotRodDeluxe
on
Mon 08/20/12 03:33 PM
|
|
Hotrod, what you wrote is there for all to see. Incorrect, it [the burdon of proof] lies with you and your ilk if you dispute the OS.
and now you deny that you said it here: No, obviously your comprehension skills are lacking, or you're being deliberately obtuse. Re-read the sections where I mention 'those who posit alternative theories.'
See how you don't even know what you have posted? Try rereading your own post. You said, (and I can hardly believe what I am reading) You either missed my point, or you are creating just another diversion. Please focus on my point and not what you believe it to be. You do not understand the concept of 'burden of proof' and this meandering persiflage proves it.
It is YOU who misses the point. I am a private investigator and I certainly do understand "burdon of proof." You keep referring back to some "theory" I may have discussed in the distant past on some other thread and that is not what this is about. So forget what you think you know and focus on this single point. They made the claim that 16 hijackers flew planes into government buildings. I did not make that claim. The burdon of proof is ON THEM because they made the claim. They have no proof. That is so glaringly simple that anyone can understand it. They HAVE NO PROOF OF THEIR CLAIMS. The burden of proof is not mine to prove that their claims are absurd or false UNTIL they actualy prove their first claim. Simple. Can't you comprehend that? What a pathetic attempt at diversion. Can't you see the relationship between the posts you seem to think are at odds? Btw, burden is spelt with an 'e'. I comprehend what you're saying, but it is irrelevant to the concept. I have explained myself repeatedly and it is glaringly obvious you cannot grasp the concept. Your persiflage is tedious and irrational. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I hear ya, bro'! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hotrod: 1. Your "examples" were not "hypothetical" they were assumptions. 2.T he burden of proof is theirs, not mine because they have made the claims. I did not say "its a conspiracy" I said that their official report of the events of 9-11 is a conspiracy THEORY. (OR else it is just a lie.) 3. You said: "It lies with my ilk." Seriously? Is that how you want to debate this subject with remarks like that? Why can't you discuss this subject in a respectful manner? You claim that the "burden of proof lies with me if I "dispute" the official Story." Correct? My only "dispute" at this point is a request to see the proof of their claims. I don't believe they have proof. Therefore, I am calling them out. I am asking them and anyone else who accepts the official story to show the proof. As I have stated from the outset (please pay attention), the argument(s) against the OS are either logically or scientifically specious.
Nice word, but you are wrong. spe·cious//Adjective: Superficially plausible, but actually wrong: "a specious argument". Misleading in appearance, esp. misleadingly attractive: "a specious appearance of novelty". Okay please PAY ATTENTION. My so-called "argument" AT THIS POINT is simply that I want them to prove their claims. It cannot be "actually wrong." Or "misleading." It is VERY SPECIFIC AND SIMPLE. Your responses (rhetoric) do not mean anything. It is meaningless gobbldeegook. 4.QUESTION: Hotrod: Do you trust the government to tell you the truth? Do you believe the official report? You have avoided that question with your gibberish. And this has been explained on numerous occasions, yet you choose to dismiss it.
um... no it hasn't. I already KNOW WHY the official report was changed anyway. Do you? I doubt it. My point is not that it was changed, but that people believed the first one without questions, and then they believed the second one without questions.... People place their faith in the government to handle everything and they don't want to question the official report. They don't care, and they don't really pay attention. They think a person like me who questions the almighty government report are heretics, even blasphemous. "OMG she doesn't believe the official 9-11 report! She must be one of those wacked out conspiracy theory nut cases they are always talking about. " I want to make this very simple for you since you don't comprehend what I am saying. They have no proof of their claims. you keep saying that over and over and over, but yet you have a closed mind on this... if you really cared enough to read anything other than your CT sites, you would see that there is plenty of evidence, but people like you skewer it to make it seem like there is no evidence. anyway, what does it matter now? is there not enough conspiracies out there now to peak your interest? bringing up 11 year old conspiracies is getting old, and it would seem to me that there is anough going on out there now for you to make stuff up about... why live in the past? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i thought this post was about palestine-Israel talks anyway?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There is no valid evidence that 16 hijackers EVER boarded any of those planes. That is a fact. There are no videos, there are no proper passenger lists. There is no evidence. Simple as that. What is wrong with you people? Seriously!
They made the claims. They have no valid proof or evidence for THEIR CLAIMS. SIMPLE FACT. The FBI admitted that DID NOT HAVE ENOUGH EVIDENCE to connect Osama Bin Laden to the 9-11 attack. They admitted that. This concept is so very glaringly simple if blows my mind that you people just accept the word of your political establishment for no valid reason. Can't you wrap your head around the fact that your government lies to you? Is that so hard for you to grasp that you live in some fantasy world? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i thought this post was about palestine-Israel talks anyway? Hijacked, as usual.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There is no valid evidence that 16 hijackers EVER boarded any of those planes. That is a fact. There are no videos, there are no proper passenger lists. There is no evidence. Simple as that. What is wrong with you people? Seriously! They made the claims. They have no valid proof or evidence for THEIR CLAIMS. SIMPLE FACT. The FBI admitted that DID NOT HAVE ENOUGH EVIDENCE to connect Osama Bin Laden to the 9-11 attack. They admitted that. This concept is so very glaringly simple if blows my mind that you people just accept the word of your political establishment for no valid reason. Can't you wrap your head around the fact that your government lies to you? Is that so hard for you to grasp that you live in some fantasy world?
Rant over? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hotrod what I cannot "grasp" is the idea that you actually believe what you are saying.
I said that they made the claims and they have not proven their claims. They have no evidence. You say that the burden of proof is "mine" to prove that their claims are not true. That makes NO Sense at all because they have not proven their claims. But you can't grasp that concept.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There is no valid evidence that 16 hijackers EVER boarded any of those planes. That is a fact. There are no videos, there are no proper passenger lists. There is no evidence. Simple as that. What is wrong with you people? Seriously! They made the claims. They have no valid proof or evidence for THEIR CLAIMS. SIMPLE FACT. The FBI admitted that DID NOT HAVE ENOUGH EVIDENCE to connect Osama Bin Laden to the 9-11 attack. They admitted that. This concept is so very glaringly simple if blows my mind that you people just accept the word of your political establishment for no valid reason. Can't you wrap your head around the fact that your government lies to you? Is that so hard for you to grasp that you live in some fantasy world?
19 hijackers. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Jeanniebean
on
Mon 08/20/12 04:20 PM
|
|
There is no valid evidence that 16 hijackers EVER boarded any of those planes. That is a fact. There are no videos, there are no proper passenger lists. There is no evidence. Simple as that. What is wrong with you people? Seriously! They made the claims. They have no valid proof or evidence for THEIR CLAIMS. SIMPLE FACT. The FBI admitted that DID NOT HAVE ENOUGH EVIDENCE to connect Osama Bin Laden to the 9-11 attack. They admitted that. This concept is so very glaringly simple if blows my mind that you people just accept the word of your political establishment for no valid reason. Can't you wrap your head around the fact that your government lies to you? Is that so hard for you to grasp that you live in some fantasy world?
19 hijackers. what ever....
They can't prove that ANYONE AT ALL BOARDED THOSE PLANES. Including the passengers that were killed. There are no valid credible passenger lists, and no videos of any of the planes being boarded. This is just a tiny simple sliver of fact that people can't comprehend. Forget about any other wild "theories." They could not prove the official story if their lives depended on it. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Jeanniebean
on
Mon 08/20/12 04:21 PM
|
|
i thought this post was about palestine-Israel talks anyway? We all agreed that the palestine-Israel talks are a pointless charad. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yes even the American 77 hijackers airport video look nothing like the men on the Passports. The picture of Atta was taken at an Airport at Maine and not at Boston Logan where American 11 took off.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yes even the American 77 hijackers airport video look nothing like the men on the Passports. The picture of Atta was taken at an Airport at Maine and not at Boston Logan where American 11 took off. That's what I'm talking about. None of their "SO-CALLED EVIDENCE" would ever hold up under any scrutiny and certainly not in any court room. The have no proof of their official "conspiracy theory" of 9-11. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
They could not prove the official story if their lives depended on it.
And you know what? They (The Cabal) don't care. They will say: "So what is anyone going to do about it?" They are ABOVE THE LAW because they own the lawmakers and the corporation that they work for. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
James Eagan Holmes. Don't you find it weird a man as smart as him would suddenly drop out of college? It is already proven that he was in some of neuroscience program where a bunch of experiments where done to him. It is obvious to me he was brainwashed to kill those people.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hotrod what I cannot "grasp" is the idea that you actually believe what you are saying. I said that they made the claims and they have not proven their claims. They have no evidence. You say that the burden of proof is "mine" to prove that their claims are not true. That makes NO Sense at all because they have not proven their claims. But you can't grasp that concept.
Whatever. Clearly any further attempt to explain this concept to you is an exercise in futility. If you don't understand what I am saying, how can you then find it difficult to grasp that I believe it? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Jeanniebean
on
Mon 08/20/12 04:51 PM
|
|
Hotrod what I cannot "grasp" is the idea that you actually believe what you are saying. I said that they made the claims and they have not proven their claims. They have no evidence. You say that the burden of proof is "mine" to prove that their claims are not true. That makes NO Sense at all because they have not proven their claims. But you can't grasp that concept.
Whatever. Clearly any further attempt to explain this concept to you is an exercise in futility. If you don't understand what I am saying, how can you then find it difficult to grasp that I believe it? You are not capable of "explaining" a concept that you don't grasp yourself. Don't even try. I speak English the same as you. I understand what you are writing, it is just absurd and wrong. It is incorrect. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The only way you can assert that the burden of proof is on the person who disputes the official government conspiracy theory of 9-11, is if you assume that their version is true.
Why would anyone assume their version is true when the evidence does not support it? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hotrod what I cannot "grasp" is the idea that you actually believe what you are saying. I said that they made the claims and they have not proven their claims. They have no evidence. You say that the burden of proof is "mine" to prove that their claims are not true. That makes NO Sense at all because they have not proven their claims. But you can't grasp that concept.
Whatever. Clearly any further attempt to explain this concept to you is an exercise in futility. If you don't understand what I am saying, how can you then find it difficult to grasp that I believe it? You are not capable of "explaining" a concept that you don't grasp yourself. Don't even try. I speak English the same as you. I understand what you are writing, it is just absurd and wrong. It is incorrect. Your stance is absurd, but then, I'm used to that. |
|
|
|
|
