http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pgcvZQcMSdM
What do you think about it?
Printable View
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pgcvZQcMSdM
What do you think about it?
Oh, for fucks sake.
If the financial side of war on terror was fighting money laundering, which should have involved financial tightening and regulation, how is that druglords are laundering so much money in US and banking system is so non regulated?
Drugs, terrorism and shadow banking
Quote:
“This has created a shadow banking system…”
The largely unregulated stored-value card industry, he said, made it difficult for law enforcement to spot transaction patterns that can help identify money launderers and financiers of terrorism.
A QUESTION TO TIM GEITHNER
So if the cards are such a threat, why is there no regulation? It is a question two senators, Joseph Lieberman and Susan Collins, asked in a February 16 letter to U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner.
The two, respectively the chairman and the ranking member of the Senate’s Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, last year authored an amendment to close the stored-value card loophole.
The amendment became part of an act on credit card accountability and disclosure President Barack Obama signed into law on May 22 last year. The amendment stipulated that the Treasury Department work out regulations on the sale, issuance, redemption and international transportation of stored value cards within 270 days.
The deadline lapsed on February 16 and the letter asks for an explanation for the delay in issuing rules. So far, there has been no reply.
It was just a matter of time he posted this.
Well Dread, you were there in NY. You may tell how reasonable or not is the argument of this guy. He is interviewed by some European news reporter. I might like your view. I do not use to fall for such theories, but this one really amazed me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreadnaught
It's a totally unreasonable argument. Bye.
The guy is a chemist. :bored:
I think the definition of 'demolition' got stretched a bit there. It didn't use to mean; fly jetliners into a building to bring it down.
Also, I don't think you can call it science if you decided upon the outcome before you started researching.
What the fuck is this stupid shit doing in Debate and Discussion? Has all the discussion about sensible standards in here gone out the fucking window? Jesus.
newsflash!
Danish scientist Niels Harrit is totally clueless about controlled demolition
On a side note, if you look closely at the images right before the collapse (and that is all that truthers seem to do all day and night), you can notice, thanks to the nice straight lines on the tower, that the outside walls are leaning inwards - a bit like this: )(. That means that the horizontal, load bearing steel bars were weakened and dragging the walls inside. Structural collapse, no demolition, and I didn't need 10 minutes of babbling on youtube for it.
Of course, I got this info from the NIST which is part of the great conspiracy.
Ahh of course, somebody disagreeing with someone else, who made idiotic claims you agree with, immediately makes them evil...Quote:
Originally Posted by ar81
That and Timmy was my favorite mod in AtariCC. :twisted:Quote:
Originally Posted by Illusions
I am just having hving a good time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Illusions
Isn't this forum about saying harsh things in a friendly environment?:D
The amazing thing is that people have not even watched it and they are judging it a priori.
Yeah, no one ever debunked controlled demolition of the WTC before.
'We' rather seriously looked into these truth theories, and so far none of them had any merit. Now some new idiot comes telling the world that he has found proof for what is 'widely known anyway'; the WTC was demolished. That's not science that is looking for arguments leading up to your conclusion. And you still think we should take anything that man says serious?Quote:
Originally Posted by ar81
I want to point out that at least 1150 architects and engineers have signed a petition calling for a new investigation, including an inquiry into the possibility of explosives. I don't see why these professionals would put their reputations on the line if there weren't some substance to the idea.
Whatever made the buildings fall is a matter of fact. Perhaps it would help to detach yourself for a moment from the emotional baggage of 9/11, and simply focus on the question of why the buildings fell? Don't worry about "conspiracies" or who did what. Just think about what could destroy the buildings in that particular way.
Gravity.
Alpha, you can't have your cake and eat it, too. You either believe in the 9/11 nutjob theories or you don't. You can't put forth these theories and then retreat behind "I was just playing around" when proven wrong.
I'll make a two hour video detailing how September 11th was pulled off by a combination of several dozen pixies and leprechauns, along with a handful of angry kobolds. Would you watch the whole thing before considering it moronic, or just call it as it is from the get go?Quote:
Originally Posted by ar81
Clearly one can go to university an idiot and come out still an idiot. That would explain why people would put their reputation - if they ever had one - on the line.Quote:
Originally Posted by ar81
As for what brought down the buildings, what about : 2 planes, a shitload of kerosine, explosive fire and ... last but not least.. gravity.
Do you know more than those architects and engineers?Quote:
Originally Posted by Hazir
Why should I? Every single time these people come out they do the same; they work from the premise that there was a demolition. From that alone one can conclude that they aren't engaging in sound science.Quote:
Originally Posted by ar81
Oh I see. I must believe in your expert opinion, instead of 1150 idiots who studied and know more about buildings than you.:pQuote:
Originally Posted by Hazir
No, actually you could start to think and realise what science entails. Rather than believing and rearranging 'evidence' to support your believes. This man disqualified himself the moment he disclosed his methodology, which consisted of a believe in demolition and a search for proof of that. He was never interested in finding the truth.Quote:
Originally Posted by ar81
And why are you ignoring the views of other experts, most of them far better qualified than these morons? Cognitive dissonance at its best.Quote:
Originally Posted by ar81
I considered posting that, but I am better at exercising self-control than the rest of you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
Hey, Dready-dear, weren't you going to suspend alpha for ad-spam?
Enlighten me. What experts?Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
The fact that you do not like it does not mean it is spam.Quote:
Originally Posted by littlelolligagged
How about some suspension in the old Chinese Firewall style?
No, this was ad-spam. And it should be a permaban, but whatever.Quote:
Originally Posted by ar81