"Truther Top 20 Jewish Self-Victimization Examples" on InfoGalactic - join to contribute

submitted by JasonCarswell from infogalactic.com

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (22 children)

How is action and facts discovered by US law enforcement an arbitrary observation? Finding a van with bomb making materials and residue seems pretty relevant to me.

[–]wizzwizz4 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (21 children)

All it means is that the person wanted to make a bomb. It doesn't mean they blew up the Holby City hospital at 4:37 PM, or whatever. Lots of people want to commit acts of terrorism. Fewer follow through, and fewer of those succeed. That doesn't mean people in the first category are automatically in the last ­– just that you have reason to suspect them (and can arrest them for the former if that's illegal).

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (18 children)

Well law enforcement certainly suspected and arrested both the dancing Israelis and around 200 Israelis posing as art students. Motive, opportunity, evidence...

[–]wizzwizz4 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (17 children)

Law enforcement suspected and arrested them… for something else. I don't see how that contradicts what I'm saying.

And it is an arbitrary observation. Look, here's an example.

Look, you can cancel fractions by removing duplicate digits, like this:

16   1
-- = --
64    4

Proof:

19/95, 26/65, 49/98…

[–]JasonCarswell[S] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (16 children)

You sound like MarTim.

[–]wizzwizz4 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (15 children)

Sorry; that sounded more coherent in my head. But you do see what I'm saying, don't you?

There's a wealth of good evidence – enough to argue any way if you really want: if you start from a conclusion you'll be able to find all sorts of impressive evidence to back it up, and that won't change the truthiness of the conclusion!

[–]JasonCarswell[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (14 children)

No.

Also, you're not informed. It's not truthy. It's fact. Watch the 9/11 videos.

[–]wizzwizz4 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (13 children)

"Truthiness" is programmer slang for the truth value of something, i.e. whether it is true or false. Sorry! I forget that not all well-informed, interesting-to-talk-to people are hackers. (I should get out more.)

Also, you're not informed. […] It's fact.

I'm not watching the videos, because that'll interfere with my approach. Currently, I've got two assertions, that 9/11 was caused by two different groups; I need to find a way to distinguish between the two. And the way in which I will do that is to come up with several tests, not knowing the answers beforehand, writing them down, then researching them myself. I'll do that when I've got time; I don't at the moment.

But I don't appreciate people forcing a set of views on me. I don't want to be "informed" by anyone but myself, or someone I trust to give me verifiable evidence. So what if I get to the facts later than everybody else? I'll be fairly certain that I'm right, instead of simply believing that I am, and what's more I can demonstrate it to other similarly-thinking people and they can critique my method. Slow and steady and rigorous wins the race. (Though it's a bit trickier if I assume that evidence can be falsified; I'll have to work through a method for that first.)

[–]JasonCarswell[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (12 children)

Oh! I never knew what "truthiness" was!

Of course I know what truthiness is. I watched this first episode back when: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truthiness

You should get out more and watch those 9/11 videos. You have no approach because you have no information, context, or understanding of what the rest of us are on board with or at the very least know the elements.

9/11 was NOT 2 groups. It was a whole concert of elements.

Do your research as you like. But I advise to to stop talking about it because you sound foolish and not everyone will have the patience to deal with it. I'm about ready to ignore you on this topic because you won't even look at the common references. I don't care if you believe it or not and I'm not forcing anything on you - but you can't expect to have a discussion about foo if you won't even look at foo.

On this topic no one can be "right" because the government and countless other actors won't release information and are actively covering it up. Many things are known and certain. Many things are up for speculation based on what's known. Many things we know we don't know. And to quote Donald Rumsfeldt, there are unknown unknowns. And he'd like to keep it that way.

Good luck reinventing the 9/11 wheel. While you're at it figure out who killed JFK. I'm done.

[–]wizzwizz4 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

After some introspection, I realise that my proposed approach, was completely and utterly useless. I fell afoul of the Dunning-Kruger effect, which I know can be incredibly irritating. I will defer to your expertise on the matter for at least the next year and a half.

[–]JasonCarswell[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Dude, you're tech savvy but you don't seem to have much truther knowledge.

Did you even watch any of these? : https://saidit.net/s/SaidItSurveys/comments/9hi/saiditsurvey_how_to_gently_red_pill_newbie/lav

The Corbett videos have transcipts on his site you can read if you don't like videos, but the images help. Also YouTube has a less than great auto-transcription.

If you haven't you're not on the same page. You don't have to agree with any of it, but you have to at least know what's being put out there - the good, the bad and the ugly - to discuss it.

Laws don't matter to those above the laws.

Seriously.

[–]wizzwizz4 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

I continue to insist that I am not interested in politics.

Anyone who says they are not interested in politics is like a drowning man who insists he is not interested in water.

— Mahatma Gandhi