This doesn't look right to me

[LARED]

A car crashing into the house with enough force to nearly completely enter the house does not also break the window frame? Even though the connecting wall is pushed back much further than the window frame. Notice how the window frame just seems to hangs in space. The wall supporting it is gone yet it almost looks perfectly normal. Also how does the small window not get broken? That flower pot BEHIND the car is not broken. How does a car run it over without breaking a clay pot?

The car hardly looks damaged. It looks like it was staged. I mean come'on how obvious is it that the whole thing is staged for some unknown reason?

Can anyone give me an answer to these questions. Anyone?

Also look at the house number 1421; 1X4X2+1=9, and 3*3 = 9. 33 shows up again. Showing maybe nanonukes were involved.


This image is included just because it's cool

[deconstruct911]

1. I can't answer your questions

but can you answer mine? Did the owner just get the house by putting down say....4 grand? Did the owner get coverage for such an event? Is there insurance company going to pay the full home value? Maybe close to double if disputed? Is the city the owner lives in going to clear the wreckage and build a new home or fix the home on site?

If not the owner is getting ripped off big time!

[LARED]

7. deconstruct911, I knew I could count on you to

ask the hard questions. This event is getting more mysterious by the minute.

[Make7]

2. There are so many hidden clues.

I will offer just one for now...

Take a look at the license plate number - WBF590. If you translate the letters into numbers by position in the alphabet, you get 2326590. Very cleverly they used this number because it is the phone number for Dollar General Corp. Obviously the message for people in the know is that this was a joint military (general) and business (corp) operation to supplement a revenue stream (dollar).

There are more clues, but I don't want to give away too much...
 

[LARED]

8. Nice catch

Some will say this is just a coincidence, and oddity among the debris? I don't think so

[Bonobo]

3. So this forum has become now just a place to mock people?

What utter contempt.

You should feel some shame.

Whichever side you are on, the people looking ost deeply into this usually are those that suffered the greatest anguish and pain over the terrible events of 9/11.

First discussion in GD was stopped and this place created.

Now you seem to have driven people out and are openly mocking the other side.

Shame? Do you have any? What about empathy?

Yeah, I know you will play it off as 'just a joke', but you need to consider your actions.

I will call this to the attention of the mods and admins and see if this is really what they want in this forum.

[Make7]

5. This seems an odd position for you to take.

duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=8607988&mesg_id=8609085
Were you not recently advocating for essentially eliminating all rules here at DU?

Now in this thread you feel you should bring something you do not like to the attention of the mods and admins? Do you not believe in having fewer rules strongly enough to follow that idea with action (or should I say inaction)?
 

[Bonobo]

6. That's a reasonable critique.

But the reason there is a 9/11 forum to begin with is because of too many rules.

If I had my way, we wouldn't be all stuck together in the dungeon where little light can penetrate.

As it is, stuck in a dungeon, I prefer not to have bullies as cellmates.

[SecularMotion]

21. The advantage of eliminating the rules

is to allow threads like this, which openly mock other DU members, to be removed without quibble.

[Make7]

22. Wouldn't people be able to post whatever they wanted to if there were no rules?

Would that not include posting things that openly mock other DU members?

I am not sure that I am following your line of reasoning. Why would any threads at all be removed if the rules were eliminated? Who would be able to remove threads, and what criteria would they use in making such a decision?
 

[SecularMotion]

24. Here's the quote from Skinner's post and a link to the thread

"We are committed to maintaining Democratic Underground as a community that welcomes a wide range of Democratic and progressive viewpoints. Now that we have a Democratic President, we will remain open to members who are generally critical of him, members who are generally supportive of him, and the majority of members who do not fall neatly into either camp. We considered many possible approaches -- from adding lots of new rules to getting rid of most of them -- and eventually came to realize that the DU rules we already have are actually pretty good."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8603151

My line of reasoning would be to do away with the specific rules and just follow common sense and courtesy when discussing Democratic and progressive viewpoints with other members. I think the mods should be given more leeway to suspend or ban members who are chronic disruptors or simply pushing an agenda.

[Make7]

25. I think my confusion was caused by your use of the word eliminate.

My interpretation of the word is that eliminating something would cause it to cease to exist - which apparently differs from how you used it. You mean changing the specific rules into a more vaguely defined general rule. Unfortunately the conversation up to the point where you entered was based on a post in another thread:

Bonobo wrote:

I would eliminate all rules and see how it goes.

Leave ignore. And ignore reply, block user.

That's probably about it.

So if I am understanding you correctly, your previous post meant that the advantage of eliminating the rules is to allow threads to be removed without quibble for breaking a common courtesy rule. And in this most recent post you further clarified that by stating there should also be rules preventing chronic disruption and the pushing of an agenda.

Would it be acceptable to push the agenda of getting Democratic Party candidates elected to office?
 

[SecularMotion]

26. I was following your use of the word "eliminating"

I guess I took it for granted that basic purpose of the site would not change

"We are committed to maintaining Democratic Underground as a community that welcomes a wide range of Democratic and progressive viewpoints."


"Would it be acceptable to push the agenda of getting Democratic Party candidates elected to office?"

There's no question that falls within the purpose of the site.

No, I wouldn't be in favor of eliminating ALL rules. Just keep a basic Golden Rule.

As a Democrat and Progressive, I'm comfortable here. I don't really worry about breaking any rules except for calling another member a troll. I bite my tongue many times.

[LARED]

9. Why are you blaming me for pointing out this important

finding? If the PTB allow this incipient investigation to move forward, people will start to catch on.

Your outrage should be pointed at the people that DID this.

But seriously

What I am doing is not mocking people, (well a little) I am trying to teach them to think critically by forcing them to acknowledge their biases are causing them to see reality incorrectly. To look at the facts of the case and draw logical conclusions rather than draw a conclusion and force facts into a box.

[deconstruct911]

20. Is that right?

So who do you suggest is behind 9 11 and why?

Do you suggest there is no correlation between the amount of heroin produced in the 80’s/90's and the amount produced since the invasion?

Do you suggest the opium randomly ended up in Afghanistan? Did a bunch of birds fly over Afghanistan and drop poppy seeds, and the rest is history?

Do you deny the cia has run the global drug trade for decades?

Do you suggest the NSA act of 47 was to protect the people from external threats because the government otherwise has to tell people what they use their money for?

Do you think your thread suggests you "think critically"?

[LARED]

23. I'm pretty sure all those things you list have lead up to

the incredible findings in the OP.

Just connect the dots.

[zappaman]

4. Obviously, it as staged

That looks like it could be controlled demolition, with an elaborate staging afterwards.
They may have done some shady things on their computer and wanted it destroyed so there would be no record whatsoever if they did some weird transactions.
And I would not be surprised if our alien overlords suggested the idea.
Because that makes sense.

[LARED]

10. ##*()~~/]

The herder is out of the rain, but the umbrella was lost. ^^*$%

[zappaman]

13. already?

33.(yhY)
tin cans in the ocean.

[spooked911]

11. nothing in that picture goes against the laws of physics

this is a standard collision.

[zappaman]

12. A breakthrough Spooked?

EVERY SINGLE picture you have ever presented doesn't go against a SINGLE LAW of physics.
You, however, have a fixed conclusion in your mind and refuse to acknowledge what your eyes are seeing when it comes to the WTC.
I applaud you for finally allowing a tiny bit of common sense and reason to enter your thought process.
Now, apply the same logic you applied to this picture, to...say...the picture of the car overturned at the WTC and see what you come up with.

[spooked911]

17. Sorry, you're the one who needs a breakthrough.

I have presented several things that go against the official story, and against physics in some cases. Sorry if you can't see it, or won't see it, or you aren't allowed to admit it.

[zappaman]

18. no you haven't

you have presented not one iota of evidence that any thing other than 2 passenger planes manned by hijackers took down the WTC.
notice I use the word "evidence" and not "this doesn't look right".
"no-planers" are an embarrassment to this board, the democratic party, any rational human being, and themselves.

[LARED]

19. This was a standard collision as well

[William Seger]

32. Yes, there is something very wrong

That case of Fresca in a plastic bag on the the trunk! It couldn't possibly have stayed there when the car crashed through the wall!

[whatchamacallit]

14. I've seen some lame and pointless posts in my time, but...

Nice work :eyes:

[LARED]

15. It might be lame, but it's not pointless nt

[PufPuf23]

16. This is a blatant callout and mocking of other posters nt

[Xenotime]

27. And the numbers on the license plate, see the pattern there too?

[Name removed]

28. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

29. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

30. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[LARED]

31. 100 % score

* patternicity, or a tendency to find meaningful patterns in random noise; Check

* agenticity, or the bent to believe the world is controlled by invisible intentional agent; Check

* confirmation bias, or the seeking and finding of confirmatory evidence for what we already believe; Check

* hindsight bias, or tailoring after-the-fact explanations to what we already know happened. Check

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=125x289411