Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Creative Speculation
In reply to the discussion: 9/11 Free Fall 7/18/13: Dr. deHaven-Smith and "conspiracy theory" [View all]Ace Acme
(1,464 posts)23. So now you're down to argument-by-emoticon and argument-by-label.
If you believe 19 hijackers flew 4 airplanes into 3 buildings you're a conspiracy theorist. It certainly hasn't been proven. Unlike you, I don't claim to know what happened on 9/11. I'm not a conspiracy theorist.
So what motivates your holy jihad against conspiracy theorists that is so aggressive that you attack even innocent bystanders like me?
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
115 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
9/11 Free Fall 7/18/13: Dr. deHaven-Smith and "conspiracy theory" [View all]
damnedifIknow
Jul 2013
OP
You claimed that the "conspiracy theorist" label was not applied to legitimate skeptics
Ace Acme
Oct 2013
#6
Non sequitur, false dichotomy, straw man nonsense was your attempt at an argument nt
Ace Acme
Oct 2013
#12
The history of those alleged hijackers' training includes registered addresses
Ace Acme
Nov 2013
#31
So, the best you can do is fart in the general direction of some of the confessions
William Seger
Nov 2013
#34
It was possible to access most of the main structural columns from the elevator shafts
Ace Acme
Nov 2013
#61
Most of the main structural core columns were accessible from the elevator shafts
Ace Acme
Nov 2013
#64
NIST lied. The collapses were not explained. The 10 mysteries were not addressed.
Ace Acme
Nov 2013
#82
The point is irrelevant. Bazant's model does not resemble reality. NIST does not name him.
Ace Acme
Nov 2013
#98
I understand what he says just fine. What he says bears no resemblance to reality. nt
Ace Acme
Nov 2013
#102
So your best is to change the subject and try to ignore the fact that your expert
Ace Acme
Nov 2013
#36
"Confessions" to interested parties that are known to lie to achieve their objectives
Ace Acme
Nov 2013
#43