Re: Collapse-A Documentary- Mike Ruppert
Paul slinging thinly veiled insults at anyone who doesn’t agree with him!?
Say it ain’t so!
You’re not the “pig” – in the context, pig isn’t a negative connotation – just a identifier that indicates that the person arguing that 9/11 was an inside job is more at home slinging dirt.
It’s in reference to Dogs post #247.
Neither are you an embattled soul.
The souls at Jonestown weren’t embattled either. Most people didn’t need to be persuaded not to drink the Kool-Aid.
You’re an adult and can make your own decisions; this dead horse has been beaten to the point that it doesn’t serve a purpose.
The material is lacking in substance and is largely conjectural, hypothetical and/or unsubstantiated.
For example, the kinds of inferences were getting are:
“There were explosives planted on the towers.”
What signature did they produce?
How did the implosion occur?
These questions (and many others) were addressed in the other threads – and found to be flimsy at best.
The main assertion that Thermite was used to destroy the Twin Towers is flawed, as all the chemical elements of Thermite existed in the explosion; it’d be like saying “We found evidence that this car crash was caused by Gasoline!”
Sure, there’s gas in the cars, but that’s not evidence that a car burst into flames and caused a collision.
This rabbit hole just doesn’t go very deep if you look at it practically.
The question as to whether the event was allowed to happen or facilitated is valid, but again – almost all the discourse is highly conjectural.
Personally, I think it’s likely that there is *some* element of truth to this – to what degree is a question that spans the spectrum.
Simple neglect all the way to a diabolical conspiracy brewed in the subterranean lair of the Guild of Calamitous Intent .
The end question to me is this:
What do I stand to gain by “knowing” the real story?
Answer? Almost nothing.