+1 for the stupid tag.

Willie, I like your stance on pot legalization, but don't make yourself out to be an absolute nutbag.

When men age they lose their testosterone, and begin to act worse than women! Chalk Willie's opinion to being an old geezer. And hey get off his lawn!

"I saw a building fall that didn't get hit by nothing," added Nelson, referring to WTC Building 7, which collapsed in the late afternoon of September 11."



Ok Willy, whatever you say...

I've stood inches away from Willie when we both worked at Austin City Limits.

He had the worst dandruff I've ever seen on a human being.

Well, that settles that debate. Now we just need Willie to chime in on who shot Kennedy.

Apparently his braids are too tight.

Whiskey river took his mind ...

/Apparently

Step away from the weed!

Dude. He's high. Like.. all the time. Occasionally he's going to misjudge the size of his hands(my hands are huge), be amazed by said misjudgements of the size of his hands (woah), or engage in speculation as to the existance of a conspiracy (9/11!!!!). These are the options he goes with to keep from getting fat on munchies. Let's let it go.

FTA: "I saw a building fall that didn't get hit by nothing"

So...it DID get hit by something, you say?

/Double negative FTW

I think Willie may be on to something. I think he should make a video about it or something...

men should NEVER

highlight
lowlight
braid their hair

jeeesus. i will not be smoking what this guy is smoking.

Serious question: we all know the science of 9/11. It wasn't undertaken by the government. Why, however, would the motives for such a conspiracy be so thoroughly unbelievable? The notion of a government sabotaging their own works, blaming it on a foreign enemy, and developing a war have been around since the days of the German Reichstag and the Japanese railways in Manchuria. Hell, it goes beyond even that. Yet the concept of this administration or a certain element in the federal government either allowing an attack to happen or creating it outright are deemed "silly" and unbelievable.

Of course it didn't happen that way, but why is that a ludicrous concept?

Never underestimate the ability of people who have no background in a field to claim authority.

We biatch about "internet experts" but celebrities have been doing this for decades.

The end of the 20th century will be best known as we rebeled against reason and logic. Great counterculture you got there hippies. What's the encore? Un-invent the wheel?

WFern: Serious question: we all know the science of 9/11. It wasn't undertaken by the government. Why, however, would the motives for such a conspiracy be so thoroughly unbelievable? The notion of a government sabotaging their own works, blaming it on a foreign enemy, and developing a war have been around since the days of the German Reichstag and the Japanese railways in Manchuria. Hell, it goes beyond even that. Yet the concept of this administration or a certain element in the federal government either allowing an attack to happen or creating it outright are deemed "silly" and unbelievable.

Of course it didn't happen that way, but why is that a ludicrous concept?

It isn't a ludicrous concept. Why do you think people believe that it is?

Radioactive Ass: "I saw a building fall that didn't get hit by nothing," added Nelson, referring to WTC Building 7, which collapsed in the late afternoon of September 11."

Ok Willy, whatever you say...

Perhaps I'm blind, but what am I seeing here? It looks to be a building with smoke billowing away.

WFern:

The ludicrous concept is the controlled demolition. I don't think the administration knew it was going to happen and purposely turned a blind eye, but that isn't batshiat crazy.

dreamcrusher: It isn't a ludicrous concept. Why do you think people believe that it is?

I see it denounced frequently, typically by average folks, but sometimes by more well known individuals. Even South Park, of all things, declared it a "retarded" train of thought. Penn & Teller, on a show dedicated to conspiracy theories, interviewed a fire chief present on 9/11 who nearly wept in essentially claiming "the government wouldn't do that." They supported him entirely, of course.

WFern: Radioactive Ass: "I saw a building fall that didn't get hit by nothing," added Nelson, referring to WTC Building 7, which collapsed in the late afternoon of September 11."

Ok Willy, whatever you say...

Perhaps I'm blind, but what am I seeing here? It looks to be a building with smoke billowing away.

Obviously it was hit by smoke. Since it's billowing away it couldn't have IMploded, could it? Just basic science.

/I dunno either
//Wrong photo?

WFern:
Of course it didn't happen that way, but why is that a ludicrous concept?

You're going to tell me that- and this is the important part- the BUSH administration was capable of coming up with such an exercise? I understand you're saying they didn't actually do it, you're saying why shouldn't we believe they might've considered it. But seriously, dude- they're stupid, not evil. As much as I dislike the guy and his team, there's no way any of them would have seriously considered murdering several thousand American citizens.

Now, taking advantage of that situation? Probably. Thinking about pulling it off? I don't think so.

As spoken by a man with no bias whatsoever against our government.

ragekage: You're going to tell me that- and this is the important part- the BUSH administration was capable of coming up with such an exercise? I understand you're saying they didn't actually do it, you're saying why shouldn't we believe they might've considered it. But seriously, dude- they're stupid, not evil. As much as I dislike the guy and his team, there's no way any of them would have seriously considered murdering several thousand American citizens.

Now, taking advantage of that situation? Probably. Thinking about pulling it off? I don't think so.

That's part of why I don't believe it.

The Nixon administration?... Maybe. This administration, couldn't formulate a war to a point of understanding the difference between Sunni and Shia Muslims in Iraq, so I doubt their "planning" went far beyond that.

"... I saw a building fall that didn't get hit by nothing ..."



I see a whole lot of something bouncing off of the building he says was hit by nothing.

The great thing about conspiracies are they work great on people with shallow minds, never a question. And then they run out to buy an American flag or some other American symbol made in China.

Smoke another one Willie!

WFern:I see it denounced frequently, typically by average folks, but sometimes by more well known individuals. Even South Park, of all things, declared it a "retarded" train of thought. Penn & Teller, on a show dedicated to conspiracy theories, interviewed a fire chief present on 9/11 who nearly wept in essentially claiming "the government wouldn't do that." They supported him entirely, of course.

Because every sane and rational person knows it isn't a conspiracy. You said it yourself. If this was something small, like an individual assassination, or if there were significantly less evidence to support the official claim, it would not be ludicrous at all. But in this particular case, the evidence and common sense should tell you that this was, in fact, exactly what it looks like.

Take this for instance. I believe that there is intelligent life somewhere in the universe (or at least if there isn't right now, there was at some point in the past, and most likely will be in the future). That is a totally rational hypothesis based on evidence and reasoning. But if i were to tell you that there is a race of subterranean ninja midgets living below the surface of Mars, and that if you didn't believe that, then you are a sheep -- then that would be ludicrous.

See the difference?

At least he's not trying to sound like he has an engineering degree, those are the worst ones. He's being honest and saying that the extent of his knowledge is limited to the implosion of one other building, probably also seen on tv.

"I seen it this once on the tee-vee....that buildin' fell straight down. Looked tha same to mah eyes, so it must be what happened."

/I'll still listen to his music....the talkin, not so much.

that picture makes me wanna play sim city.

Falcc: Perhaps I'm blind, but what am I seeing here? It looks to be a building with smoke billowing away.

Obviously it was hit by smoke. Since it's billowing away it couldn't have IMploded, could it? Just basic science.

/I dunno either

Do you not see the 12'+ 20 story+ and god knows how deep gash in that photo? Not to mention the smaller holes to either side of that gash? The south face of WTC 7 was smooth. Here's one showing it (partially), what with all of the loony conspiracy people out there it's hard to GIS WTC 7 and not get loony hits...

Knobbs: As spoken by a man with no bias whatsoever against our government.

Son, if you don't have a bias against the Federal Government at this point, you just ain't payin attention:



Here's a hint: those are IOUs written with your name on them.

CarbonCarby: I see a whole lot of something bouncing off of the building he says was hit by nothing.

Yes random debris did bounce off of and strike WTC7.
In your mind this makes it come down in perfect symmetry at nearly free-fall speed quite nicely into its own footprint? Have you ever interacted with matter before? Unexpected structural failure in all three buildings would have resulted in a sort of 'sloughing off' of material. Conservation Of Momentum and the laws of Thermodynamics (if they were in operation that day) would mean that the energy from one floor falling would be absorbed by the next, and so on.

There is no way that these buildings could have imploded into dust at nearly the same speed as dropping a billiard ball from the top floor. I know the TV told you it is true. I believed it for over 2 years myself. But you need to trust your Lying Eyes on this one.

Here are some boring guys who study such things, like math more than beer, and get made fun of by juvenile Internet shut-ins.

Just ignore them and continue watching TV.

ragekage: they're stupid, not evil. .

Ok, you may have a point that these are stupid people but you did not just claim that none of them are evil. I mean, most people would consider the war profiteering to be evil all by itself, but it's arguable that Dick Cheney is actually objectively evil to some extent. I didn't watch the SOTU address but I saw some of the lowlights, at one point Cheney smiled. I actually felt some of my blood freeze. I mean, lots of people are called evil but he's actually got a detectable malevolence. I got the shakes and the dry heaves, I swear. He's farking evil. It freaks me out just thinking about it.


Radioactive Ass: Falcc: Perhaps I'm blind, but what am I seeing here? It looks to be a building with smoke billowing away.

Obviously it was hit by smoke. Since it's billowing away it couldn't have IMploded, could it? Just basic science.

/I dunno either

Do you not see the 12'+ 20 story+ and god knows how deep gash in that photo? Not to mention the smaller holes to either side of that gash? The south face of WTC 7 was smooth. Here's one showing it (partially), what with all of the loony conspiracy people out there it's hard to GIS WTC 7 and not get loony hits...

To be honest? No. I can't figure out for the life of me what I'm looking at or where I'm supposed to be looking in the photos. I mean I'm sure something's there but I'm just not seeing it. I see smoke, and then there's a green box centered around what just looks like smooth building. Is the gash in the smoke? I don't think these are very good pics.

In America we only believe what the TV tells us. If it wasn't covered by a major news outlet, then it isn't real. If you question the official media definition of reality, then you are crazy. Society is so programmed that they will silence anyone breaking ranks. No Nazi SS is required.

Luckily there are people who are brave enough to keep asking questions and we have other options from the prefab reality dispensed by the TV.

Until there is more information this is basically a religious discussion. I've talked to Young Earth Creationists before and it is very similar reasoning. I can show hundreds of experiments that easily show insurmountable evidence that the Earth is much older than 6,000 years and they instead doubt the sources, set up strawmen, and even come up with data from their 'scientists' that disagree with mine. We look at the same information and perceive reality very differently.

I can watch the symmetrical near free-fall implosion of WTC7, do the math and be quite sure that I didn't see an accidental structural failure caused by random flying debris and fire. Actually it is a common sense observation that must be later undone. I know that I too somehow initially believed that it just 'fell down'. For the record, the NIST cannot fully explain what happened to WTC7 and the 9/11 commission report simply ignored it.

At the end of the day.. if you need to believe something no amount of evidence and data will change your belief. Beliefs are challenged when the one holding them asks questions and the belief stands or changes based on the answers.

/used to be a bible thumping Baptist too

WFern: Serious question: we all know the science of 9/11.

Anybody who thinks that the impact/fires caused the WTC towers to collapse at free-fall speed doesn't know squat about science. If the towers were made out of warm butter the collapse would've taken longer than it did.

When you're right, you're right, Willie! Buildings never collapse from the top, straight down, without resistance, in mere seconds, strictly by accident - even when hit by planes. Except for this one time. Oh, and three times in a row. With an abundance of foreknowledge that happened to be ignored or overlooked. By coincidence. Like, a bunch of times. And yet no one's been fired or held accountable.

Nothing to see here.

Resume flaming.

BearToy:

Do you believe that the U.S. government caused 9/11, that the U.S. turned a blind eye to it, or that WTC7 was a controlled demo for other reasons?

misterhowl: And yet no one's been fired or held accountable.

I disagree. As do thousands of dead Al - Qaeda and Taliban fighters, and the former government of Afghanistan.

DarthBrooks: I've stood inches away from Willie when we both worked at Austin City Limits.

He had the worst dandruff I've ever seen on a human being.

Dandruff, or pot ashes?

Free fall speeds? Get your head out of your ass.



See that derbis falling down well below the collapse? THAT is falling at free fall speeds. The actual collapse is not.

See, the ones that think they're engineers are the worst.

I Said: misterhowl: And yet no one's been fired or held accountable.

I disagree. As do thousands of dead Al - Qaeda and Taliban fighters, and the former government of Afghanistan.

We never got Osama but he's dead and assassinated anyway.

m2313: We never got Osama but he's dead and assassinated anyway.

I'm not getting your point. I think it's disgusting that we haven't caught him, but to say "no one was held accountable" for 9/11 is silly.

I Said: Do you believe that the U.S. government caused 9/11, that the U.S. turned a blind eye to it, or that WTC7 was a controlled demo for other reasons?

I believe that there are enough oddities that we are owed an unbiased, non-political, external, investigation involving real scientists who don't check with the WhiteHouse to see what they should think. I believe that the actual scientific evidence is obfuscated and I do not understand why any American sworn to protect The Constitution would want to do that. I do not understand why our President and Vice President would not proudly and publicly talk separately to the 9/11 commission under oath. I do not understand why our President and Vice President vigorously resisted any kind of investigation into the worst terrorist attack on American soil since Pearl Harbor.

I will admit to you that I would very much like to be wrong on what I have researched to be the reasons of this.
But the truth is the truth.
It doesn't care if you are I understand it.

I Said: m2313: We never got Osama but he's dead and assassinated anyway.

I'm not getting your point. I think it's disgusting that we haven't caught him, but to say "no one was held accountable" for 9/11 is silly.

My point is even the main target is down so if you look at it optimistically they've all been held accountable.

BearToy:

Gotcha. I can't argue against more investigations, I suppose. I don't see the harm.

But as someone who assumes "Bush & co. were shady about this bc their shady about everything" (I mean, they won't even let the public know who was in energy policy meetings years ago)I just chalk it up to "They are incompetent and secretive. Always". I simply don't see a big difference in their actions here and their actions in every other decision they have ever made.

See that derbis falling down well below the collapse? THAT is falling at free fall speeds. The actual collapse is not.

Bless your heart.
It is a wonder you don't fall down more.

I love you Willie, but damn...

/have fun with your Truther thread folks
/it's too farkin late to get started with the segment of the populace too looney for Art Bell
/good night and watch out for the black helecopters

BearToy: I do not understand why our President and Vice President would not proudly and publicly talk separately to the 9/11 commission under oath. I do not understand why our President and Vice President vigorously resisted any kind of investigation into the worst terrorist attack on American soil since Pearl Harbor.

Could it be because it might reveal incompetence at every level of government? I have no problem with questioning the government, do it all the time myself. For me, until I see real evidence of a conspiracy I'll go with the more plausible theory.

You are half right: This is just like arguing science with a creationist, only I'm not so sure that you are on the side you think you are.

911 was an inside job.
All you who believe the official version are beyond being an idiot. Basically, you are on the lowest level of farking stupid there is.