But Hotrod, if you want to assume in advance from your "experience" at misinterpreting almost everything I have told you (see above) that any further facts or information I might have would be fodder for making fun of then I will not waste my time.


p.s. and if you want to try to prove I am wrong, that the Rothschild and Morgan family dynasties don't own the media, go ahead and try.

What ever it was it was not a fire.

Nope no fire during the WTC bombings. The flames were photoshopped.
Probably no fuel in the planes.

I heard it was all actually a papermache miniature model that they used
just like when they faked the moon landing.

There were people standing in the hole were the plane impacted waiting on a rescue that never came.

So how hot could those fires have really been?

I am glad you can joke about one of t he most horrific things to happen to this country

Don't be ridiculous. If you blow up the images large enough you can
tell that the "flames" look exactly like burning marshmallows.

The system is such a vague, nebulous term that I took it to mean the government. I don't care what fantasy you use to interpret such a colloquial term, it doesn't alter the fallacious nature of your so-called logic. Instead of dodging the point with minutiae, try addressing the problem regarding your fallacious logic.



Ok, so you've found another whacko website and changed your tune. I gave up reading most of the bollocks you post some time ago-just more of same ranting really. Are you really trying to tell me that you've NEVER accused Jews of owning the media? Really? I remember it distinctly, as would many others I'm sure. Come on, JB, surely you don't think Mingle readers are that forgetful?

Whatever, it still doesn't alter the fallacious nature of your so-called logic.

Typical truther evasion tactics.

A pathetic attempt at evading my point, but it is in character. I'm not really all that interested in whatever so-called proof you may have of your original fallacious contention, but yes, it's probably good for a giggle.



You assume I give a ****. I know your rant is crap, but I don't care about proving it to you. You've made up your mind, no doubt based on some poorly manipulated prosopography (I've seen the pattern before with your attempts at 'proving' the Bush family made a fortune out of the Iraq war, and other examples). So, this is yet another attempt to change the subject.

Actually, I've changed my mind. This might be funny. Prove to me that Rothschild and Morgan family dynasties own ALL the media outlets and prove to me that they manipulate the content and inculcate their minions with their ideals in order to further their plans.

This still doesn't alter the fallacious nature of your so-called logic.

How about instead of ranting about minutiae, you actually discuss the logic problems within your so-called hypothesis?

Funny how the Official Version is always mentioned,as if anyone were discussing that!
What we are discussing is the total Impossibility of the Truther's Versions!

Yes, it somehow elevates the alternative hypotheses into credibility if one discredits the so-called 'official story'.

Gee! I think I see a pattern here!

If you are not aware enough to realize that "a government" is not "the system" then you should get more education on that subject.

When I use terms like "the system" I certainly don't mean "the government" You automatically assumed it.

There is nothing wrong with my logic. Name calling does not change that.

As for the Jews owning the media, yes I have said that but only because the Rothschild's and the J.P. Morgans are thought to be "Jews." They may even claim to be Jews. So if a person believes that all you have to do is claim to be a Jew to be a Jew, then Jews own the Media because they are considered to be Jews.

But my claim is that The Rothschild's and the J.P. Morgan family dynasty are not Jewish. They are closer to being Nazi's. (Ashkennazi's who claim to be Jewish)

Now, I will repeat to be clear: THE SYSTEM is corrupt and the system has power and influence over politics, science, universities, grants, salaries, etc.

Therefore to trust the system or anyone influenced or dependent on it, is illogical.

still poopooing the Genome-Research I see!
Must be another Jewish Conspiracy!

My claim is that most of the Major Media is own and controlled by the Rothschild and J.P.Morgan dynasties and I have posted the information previously about who owns what.

If you don't care about that, and don't want to believe that, that is up to you. If you want to disprove that, then that is also up to you.

You have not even read the entire alleged Genome-research you constantly tout. I, on the other hand have read it completely and have a copy of the detailed report on my computer.

It states that only 50% of the Ashkenazi so-called Jews can be traced back to the holy land. Therefore there are many Ashkenazi's that have no relation to your so called real Semitic Jews.

Why don't you read the report?

JB, is there anyone, any human being, any one particular organization, that you do trust?

By the way, Bestinshow or whoever it was that trumpeted the "poll," that was totally unscientific, with a very skewed sample.

It has nothing to do with 'education on the subject'. This is just moronic as it is a vague term that specifies nothing. For example, in Monty Python's Holy Grail in the scene where the king attacks Dennis, the anarchist, the 'system' is the government (e.g. a contraction of 'system of government'). Perhaps it is a cultural anomaly that it has different meanings, or perhaps it is because it is not a very specific term. Whatever, it still doesn't alter the fallacious nature of the logic in your original post. If you are unable to digest this, that is your problem, not mine.



It is poorly though out and is based on innaccurate generalisations, therefore, fallacious.



Ok, apology accepted.



Back to square one including the same fallacious logic.

I know you have demonstrated trouble with the concept before, but the burden of proof is on you owing to the fact that it is you who make this claim, not I.

As I stated earlier:

You've made up your mind, no doubt based on some poorly manipulated prosopography (I've seen the pattern before with your attempts at 'proving' the Bush family made a fortune out of the Iraq war, and other examples).

Um... no its not.

I don't have to prove it unless I have a vested interest in convincing someone else.

That is my claim. If anyone wants to disprove it, I welcome the effort.

There are human beings that I trust.... with certain things.

Organizations? No, I can't think of any that I would completely trust.

Explain to me why you are calling my logic fallacious.

<it's fallacious to say that something must exist because science hasn't proven its nonexistence>

My logic is perfectly sound.

1. IF the system is corrupt... (a premise)

It follows that.....

anything that is dependent, beholding, or benefited by that system is or may also be corrupt.............and therefore, can't be trusted.

Very simple logic.