Jesse Ventura: 911 Pentagon Attack


sjw

Recommended Posts

Still, he's a pretty damn cool dude. I would love to have a cup of coffee with him.

rde

Yeah, he sure has a lot of character. Say what you want about his facts, Americans need a good dose of his "I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore" attitude.

Shayne

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 130
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Still, he's a pretty damn cool dude. I would love to have a cup of coffee with him.

rde

Yeah, he sure has a lot of character. Say what you want about his facts, Americans need a good dose of his "I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore" attitude.

Shayne

Agree. You know what, though. . . I am so distrustful of the media (predictive programming, and ownership of, etc.) that I wonder about the show being on at all. I think sometimes they let that kind of thing go out after it is too late. Distilled, too. I hope not, but I tend to think otherwise.

Still, an awesome dude, and, let's face it, an awesome wrestler--Jesse The Body!

Behold the Fury:

jesse.jpg

rde

Still Believes Wrestling Is Real

Edited by Rich Engle
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you don't have an axe to grind, then why are you posting garbage-can points about WTC 7?

If you don't have an axe to grind, why do you fixate on things you think you can easily refute? You found a wiki article suggesting an explanation. Congrats. I could probably find articles refuting that article. We could do this ad nauseam but the fundamental fact remains that no actual investigation happened.

What do you expect me to do about it?

Again, I agree that there has not been an adequate investigation of the negligence, mistakes, and cover-ups of some government officials. But this doesn't give credibility to some wacko conspiracy theory.

As for the internet -- yes, you will find all kinds of things about 9-11. That's why it is necessary to exercise some judgment when deciding what is credible and what is not. Given your conspicuous lack of judgment, perhaps you will like the following video. It suggests that Satan was responsible:

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TVkAA-sS0aU?fs=1&hl=en_US&rel=0"></param><param'>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TVkAA-sS0aU?fs=1&hl=en_US&rel=0"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TVkAA-sS0aU?fs=1&hl=en_US&rel=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Why has there been no government investigation of Satan's role in 9-11? We have evidence!

Ghs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I have already made clear above, I don't swallow anything "whole", the only point that I have an uncompromising stand on here is that issue of due process: there wasn't any.

What I'm wondering is how much of the government's time and the taxpayers' wealth should be used investigating and answering conspiracy nutjobs' questions in the name of "due process"?

In my experience, any time that you answer one of a conspiracy kook's assertions, and overwhelmingly demonstrate that he doesn't have a clue what he's talking about, he either won't acknowledge the information you've provided and he'll keep repeating things which you've clearly shown to be untrue, or he'll claim that the part of his theory that you refuted was only a small, unimportant part of the whole (when only moments before he had offered it up as his best evidence), and that he has actually been basing his opinions on the other, bigger parts that you haven't refuted. The more of his crap that you refute, the more new crap he'll invent and claim that it's now the basis of his position.

So, for how long should authorities have to deal with such nonsense? As long as a few whackjobs keep insisting that their questions and assertions haven't been addressed, should the government be required to continue wasting time and resources on them in the name of "due process"?

J

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jesse Ventura responds to Shayne's posts:

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kJXR280wbEg?fs=1&hl=en_US&rel=0"></param><param'>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kJXR280wbEg?fs=1&hl=en_US&rel=0"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kJXR280wbEg?fs=1&hl=en_US&rel=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Ghs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jesse Ventura responds to Shayne's posts:

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kJXR280wbEg?fs=1&hl=en_US&rel=0"></param><param'>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kJXR280wbEg?fs=1&hl=en_US&rel=0"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kJXR280wbEg?fs=1&hl=en_US&rel=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Ghs

This would also apply to Shayne's appallingly limited understanding of anarchism on the Teenagers Anarchist thread that he ineptly began...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jesse is a stand-up guy, and I do believe a lot of people were surprised by his political smartness, back when he made the gov-run. I was. He gave some amazing radio. Back then, it was kind of neat just to hear anything close to an LP person talking on media, at all, least of all a guy like him.

His show is late-coming. But, I do wonder about something; I think it was two weeks ago, it looked like they didn't broadcast the show, with no explanation.

It is a decent show, but really flashcard stuff for anyone that has studied these things.

Still, he's a pretty damn cool dude. I would love to have a cup of coffee with him.

rde

I think Ventura is very entertaining as an entertainer, and very likable, but as a government official, he was a fucking moron. Sure, he sometimes sounded and acted like a libertarian, but then he'd turn on a dime and take the opposite position on the next issue (for example, he'd announce that he was vehemently opposed to the idea of taxpayers from one part of the state being forced to pay for something that would only be used by people in another part of the state -- something like, say, using state funds to repair Hermann the German -- and in the next breath he'd be promoting the idea of using state funds to build a light rail line in Minneapolis).

Plus he was very thin-skinned. If you weren't living here in Minnesota when he was Governor, you probably didn't see or hear much of his childish behavior. He was often a whiny little wuss about being picked on by the "jackals" in the press. He threw a lot of embarrassingly retarded tantrums.

J

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A Cuban exile I knew back in 2001 insisted Fidel Castro was behind 9/11, the government knew about it and invasion of Cuba was imminent, for now they were keeping it hush hush. Castro used some kind of radio beam to keep air traffic control from knowing where the planes were, yes there’s proof of this. This was a basically sane person, though very hung up on Castro and a consumer of our local Spanish language talk radio, where he heard this story. So what’s the point? I don’t know, just thought I’d share.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, I agree that there has not been an adequate investigation of the negligence, mistakes, and cover-ups of some government officials. But this doesn't give credibility to some wacko conspiracy theory.

As for the internet -- yes, you will find all kinds of things about 9-11. That's why it is necessary to exercise some judgment when deciding what is credible and what is not. Given your conspicuous lack of judgment, perhaps you will like the following video.

It's not "judgement" you are exercising, it's bias. I'm not biased, so you claim I have a lack of "judgement". Given what you mean by judgement that's no insult, it's a compliment. So thanks.

It's more important to drive energy into an effort to actually investigate than it is for each of us individually to become detectives and figure out what is and isn't true. At this stage, there's no harm in entertaining a wide variety of ideas as long as they have some grounding in fact. In an actual investigation, it would be required to tighten up the constraints about what is and isn't reasonable. But you want to tighten the constraints before an investigation happens. That's the method of a religious zealot. My method is scientific.

Shayne

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I have already made clear above, I don't swallow anything "whole", the only point that I have an uncompromising stand on here is that issue of due process: there wasn't any.

What I'm wondering is how much of the government's time and the taxpayers' wealth should be used investigating and answering conspiracy nutjobs' questions in the name of "due process"?

Congratulations. That's the silliest thing anyone in this thread has yet written.

Shayne

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Congratulations. That's the silliest thing anyone in this thread has yet written.

Do you just wake up feeling like a prick, or do you have to work yourself into it?

LOL

Are you serious? Did you see what he wrote? My character is getting attacked (and you just attacked it again), all I did was attack one little thing he wrote.

Shayne

Edited by sjw
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jesse is a stand-up guy, and I do believe a lot of people were surprised by his political smartness, back when he made the gov-run. I was. He gave some amazing radio. Back then, it was kind of neat just to hear anything close to an LP person talking on media, at all, least of all a guy like him.

His show is late-coming. But, I do wonder about something; I think it was two weeks ago, it looked like they didn't broadcast the show, with no explanation.

It is a decent show, but really flashcard stuff for anyone that has studied these things.

Still, he's a pretty damn cool dude. I would love to have a cup of coffee with him.

rde

I think Ventura is very entertaining as an entertainer, and very likable, but as a government official, he was a fucking moron. Sure, he sometimes sounded and acted like a libertarian, but then he'd turn on a dime and take the opposite position on the next issue (for example, he'd announce that he was vehemently opposed to the idea of taxpayers from one part of the state being forced to pay for something that would only be used by people in another part of the state -- something like, say, using state funds to repair Hermann the German -- and in the next breath he'd be promoting the idea of using state funds to build a light rail line in Minneapolis).

Plus he was very thin-skinned. If you weren't living here in Minnesota when he was Governor, you probably didn't see or hear much of his childish behavior. He was often a whiny little wuss about being picked on by the "jackals" in the press. He threw a lot of embarrassingly retarded tantrums.

J

I mostly agree with this. I think his heart is in the right place, though. And, again, I think it is one of those cases where he might not even know when he shines. I remember catching him here and there on radio interviews where he really was en pointe; basic, decent libertarian values, well-explained. I was kind of impressed. I would like to meet the man, I think it would be worth it, the big 'ol lug. . . :)

rde

Getting dangerously close to starting a worthless but fun thread about wrasslin'.

Edited by Rich Engle
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, I agree that there has not been an adequate investigation of the negligence, mistakes, and cover-ups of some government officials. But this doesn't give credibility to some wacko conspiracy theory.

As for the internet -- yes, you will find all kinds of things about 9-11. That's why it is necessary to exercise some judgment when deciding what is credible and what is not. Given your conspicuous lack of judgment, perhaps you will like the following video.

It's not "judgement" you are exercising, it's bias. I'm not biased, so you claim I have a lack of "judgement". Given what you mean by judgement that's no insult, it's a compliment. So thanks.

It's more important to drive energy into an effort to actually investigate than it is for each of us individually to become detectives and figure out what is and isn't true. At this stage, there's no harm in entertaining a wide variety of ideas as long as they have some grounding in fact. In an actual investigation, it would be required to tighten up the constraints about what is and isn't reasonable. But you want to tighten the constraints before an investigation happens. That's the method of a religious zealot. My method is scientific.

Shayne

I have not complimented you nearly as much as you deserve.

Being unbiased doesn't mean being receptive to any crackpot theory that happens along. There is a big difference between an open mind and a vacant mind.

Ghs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you serious? Did you see what he wrote? My character is getting attacked (and you just attacked it again), all I did was attack one little thing he wrote.

Shayne

Question answered. Answer: it doesn't matter.

J.G. Bennett: "If you have an unpleasant nature, and dislike people, it is no obstacle to the work."

One downside with your general kind of posture is that humor comes very cumbersome and hard when you are like that. In other words, one way or another, it is hard to maintain.

EDIT: And just for the record, I am not attacking your character. I am guessing you have pretty good character. I am attacking your attitude--it is well-known that you come off like a prick. I have to measure, here: I might be a smartass, but even that is better than being a prick. Ask anyone other than other pricks and they will say they find this to be true. Being a prick is a very uncomfortable thing, and it can go on for years, that is the hell of it.

rde

Edited by Rich Engle
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Being unbiased doesn't mean being receptive to any crackpot theory that happens along. There is a big difference between an open mind and a vacant mind.

Ghs

The more crackpot the theory, the easier it should be for an investigation to cite and dismiss. In the context of evidence of a legitimate investigation, any crackpot theory's refutation would be trivial to form on the basis of the premises rationally inferred throughout the investigation. There's no particular reason not to deal with them. Unless of course you're too afraid or too incompetent to do so. Then you're better off acting as you do, jumping up and down spewing character assassinations in the place where your arguments should have been.

It seems to me that the author of "Atheism: The case against God" should know better. I mean, really.

Shayne

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I might be a smartass, but even that is better than being a prick. Ask anyone other than other pricks.

rde

That's the trouble with you. You see, I would never claim that my personality was "better" than yours. I'd say they are different, each having its own things to appreciate and enjoy. If I wanted to get all dogmatic, as you are, I would mock you for being illogical and unserious. But the world has a need for court jesters. Everyone has their role to play, we shouldn't put people down because of it.

Shayne

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another video with a 'theory' about which The Whistler has yet no opinion. It is too bad that the 'due process' investigation he calls for will never happen. That way we have no idea what The Whistler thinks of such aids to inquiry . . .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

William:

Now that is not fair. You know that that the tape in that security camera was planted by Dick Cheney's lesbian daughter. Furthermore, you have proved that government agents scrubbed the scene of all the incriminating evidence. There was a picture clear as day of an FBI agent scurrying away with the evidence!

The psychotic case rest.

Case closed.

Edited by Selene
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another video with a 'theory' about which The Whistler has yet no opinion. It is too bad that the 'due process' investigation he calls for will never happen. That way we have no idea what The Whistler thinks of such aids to inquiry . . .

[video deleted]

Interesting video, Bill. But how do you know that the missile that really hit the Pentagon wasn't specially designed to zig-zag back and forth so it could take out all those poles? Or that it wasn't outfitted with wings?

Time for a musical interlude. The following tune, "The Happy Whistler," was recorded in 1956 by Don Robertson.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pm0kA0U7WsQ?fs=1&hl=en_US&rel=0"></param><param'>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pm0kA0U7WsQ?fs=1&hl=en_US&rel=0"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pm0kA0U7WsQ?fs=1&hl=en_US&rel=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

We now return you to the regularly scheduled horseshit debate.

Ghs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

William:

Now that is not fair. You know that that the tape in that security camera was planted by Dick Cheney's lesbian daughter. Furthermore, you have proved that government agents scrubbed the scene of all the incriminating evidence. There was a picture clear as day of an FBI agent scurrying away with the evidence!

The psychotic case rest.

Case closed.

You clearly haven't learned the conspiratorial way. That FBI agent wasn't scurrying away with evidence. He was in the process of planting it.

Ghs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

William:

Now that is not fair. You know that that the tape in that security camera was planted by Dick Cheney's lesbian daughter. Furthermore, you have proved that government agents scrubbed the scene of all the incriminating evidence. There was a picture clear as day of an FBI agent scurrying away with the evidence!

The psychotic case rest.

Case closed.

You clearly haven't learned the conspiratorial way. That FBI agent wasn't scurrying away with evidence. He was in the process of planting it.

Ghs

OMG! Now I see! Of course you are right.

Adam

A little sad to have lost his conspiratorial virginity

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To show that I am not biased, here is a video reenactment of a missile hitting the Pentagon.

<object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OosEiwwi61k?fs=1&hl=en_US&rel=0"></param><param'>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OosEiwwi61k?fs=1&hl=en_US&rel=0"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OosEiwwi61k?fs=1&hl=en_US&rel=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object>

Ghs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you yahoos put equal vigor into fighting unwarranted government secrecy enforced by the massive power of the State as you did attacking conspiracy theorists who have no power whatever then maybe these conspiracy theories wouldn't exist. And evidently, that'd be a very good thing for you, seeing as how the subject makes you so viciously fearful. Some harmless conspiracy theorist questions the overwhelmingly powerful government and you guys rush to the defense of government in spite of the fact that the most important thing underpinning the conspiracy theorist's views is the individualistic view that the government is accountable to us, not the other way around. That's how I see it and that's how it should be seen: an authoritarian Goliath refusing to let us see all the facts, refusing to be held accountable vs. a tiny David having the courage to question. It's revealing whose side you guys are on and what you choose to mock.

Shayne

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now