Occupy Building 7 – November 19 and 20

No offense, but the last thing OWS needs are truthers.

reply to post by ATH911


In my years HERE. On ATS. Then to prove me wrong you posted references to 5 other sites. Wow. Like I said, facts aren't your forte.

Also, I am pretty sure you can dig through all the posts HERE and probably find some, but I don't remember seeing them. Its not a word I use.

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by ATH911

 

In my years HERE. On ATS.

I didn't necessarily say here on ATS, did I now?

Originally posted by ATH911

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by ATH911

 

In my years HERE. On ATS.

I didn't necessarily say here on ATS, did I now?

No, I did. So to prove I was wrong you posted reference to other sites. I know that you can search the internet and find just about anything.

I did a Google search for "911 truthers retarded" ...and ATH911 is right those words do often show up in the same sentence together. It was also amazing how many times it was truthers calling each other retards.

The truther most singled out for this name was Killtown, next in line was Simon Shack and after that it was just generic truthers.

I also did a search for "911 debunker retarded"... not as many hits.

reply to post by waypastvne


Interesting. I got no such thing when I googled that. Did you just lie about that?

reply to post by hooper


Poor hooper, so desperate to win an argument!

Originally posted by GringoViejo
No offense, but the last thing OWS needs are truthers.

Because it will turn off the neocons that are already turned off by OWS?

The Occupy movements are desperate to avoid any involvement with 9/11 Truthers as they know that their credibility would be irreparably damaged.

Personally I agree with a lot of what OWS and OLSX are saying and that gives you some insight as to why I personally bother to post here (aside from simple entertainment). Your quest for "truth" is not just pointless and asinine, it actually actively damages a genuine critique of capitalism, conspiracy and wrongdoing. That annoys me.

Originally posted by ATH911
Don't you skeptics often say how "retarded" truthers are and how we suffer from mental illness?

If that's what we are and you skeptics are "entertained" by that, that means you skeptics are pointing and laughing at people who are mentally challenged and have mental illness. For shame.

I long for the day you truthers stop manufacturing your "evidence" to suit your agenda. I have never said any such thing. From day one, I have always said the truthers are by and large intelligent and articulate people. The problem is that they're TOO intelligent, actually, as they know how to explore the deep dark corners of the Internet and locate those damned fool conspiracy websites that go out of their way to appeal to their intellectual side. They simply don't understand they're being run by a bunch of con artists trying to milk people out of their money, and they're lying through their teeth. A true mentally challenged person wouldn't even be able to surf the web and most people of average intelligence wouldn't know how to find such websites to begin with. You're gullible and a bit naive on how the internet works, perhaps, but you're certainly not stupid.

In fact, the only one here who ever explicitely compared truthers to mentally challenged people in recent memory is you. I would retract this, if I were you.

Originally posted by ATH911

Originally posted by GringoViejo
No offense, but the last thing OWS needs are truthers.

Because it will turn off the neocons that are already turned off by OWS?

And the fallacious thinking that anyone who dosn't agree with OWS is a Neocon doesn't hesitate to show itself. Sad, I figured you guys would have better rhetoric after a decade. But sure, if you want to destroy what little credibility OWS has left, by all means, head down there. They aren't protesting the government, they don't want to get political, and they don't want to have an agenda. so they aren't going to accomplish anything. They're camping, not protesting.

Originally posted by hooper
In my years here...

Years?

Hooper Registered: 2/9/2009

Years?

Just sayin'...

reply to post by ANOK


Yes, that would be years.
2009, 2010, 2011.
That's plurual for year.
Meaning more than one.
3 is more than 1.
Therefore: Years.

reply to post by hooper


Yet, hardly substantial. Therefore, when you say "in all my years" followed by some observation, it lends no credibility to your statement and makes you sound pompous.

But don't feel bad, I registered this year, and I am pompous.

Originally posted by ANOK

Originally posted by hooper
In my years here...

Years?

Hooper Registered: 2/9/2009

Years?

Just sayin'...

OH BOY!!! ANOK is is finally going to do some Truther Math for us.

Are you going to run some impact force numbers too ?

Originally posted by ANOK

Originally posted by hooper
In my years here...

Years?

Hooper Registered: 2/9/2009

Years?

Just sayin'...

Truther Math at it's finest!

Just sayin' mate

Originally posted by Six Sigma
Truther Math at it's finest!

Just sayin' mate

Three years is hardly 'years' now is it?

Maybe if you're still in high school it might seem like 'years'.

Originally posted by ANOK

Two years is hardly 'years' now is it?

Maybe if you're still in high school it might seem like 'years'.

Dude, 1+1 = what? 2

2 is a plural number representing a value of more-than-one. Do you get it? He has been here for years. Face it, you have a little bit of egg in your face. Nothing new here for you.

Oh, and yes when I was in High School, it was for years. (4 to be exact) Is that still considered "hardly?"

Originally posted by ANOK

Originally posted by Six Sigma
Truther Math at it's finest!

Just sayin' mate

Three years is hardly 'years' now is it?

Maybe if you're still in high school it might seem like 'years'.

edit on 11/8/2011 by ANOK because: typo

I see now why you have all these problems understanding quite basic stuff. Leaving aside the literal meaning of years, by which three years is definitely, you know, years, he wasn't even using the term in the sense you're implying. He didn't say "in all my years here" implying a lengthy time. He just said that in the years he'd been here he hadn't seen X.

Seriously, someone starred your post. They should be gravely embarrassed.

Originally posted by Six Sigma


Dude, 1+1 = what? 2

2 is a plural number representing a value of more-than-one. Do you get it? He has been here for years. Face it, you have a little bit of egg in your face.

Whoa there buddy... truthers pride themselves on independent thought. YOU SAY 1+1=2. But why should they take your word for it. Right now they're scouring YouTube for a source who will tell them otherwise. We have to be ready to defend arithmetic from first priciples.