Question:
1. I think we did land on the Moon, but I would never label someone who thinks differently a "nut". The people that think we haven't been have a lot of good evidence, and the motive was there to fake it.
2. Why do you label people who don't believe the "official" government version of 9/11 "nuts"? How do you know for sure that the military industrial complex, certain Americans, government officials or anyone else who would have motive to destroy the buildings didn't assist the terrorists? You know how fishy it looks.
I just wonder why you call people "nuts" or other words like that when you don't have complete evidence that they are wrong?
I would think an intelligent person like yourself would be open to all sides until there was absolute proof.
Thanks!
RPF
Thanks for the questions and for the compliment Ron Paul Fan. That was actually three questions.
1. I do throw that "nut" word around quite a bit huh?
Look mang, I like to engage in theoretical discussions. We do it on the board all the time. I do it in real life all the time. I do it in my classroom, in my profession, with my kids, friends. But I also believe in cutting to the chase on certain things. Regarding the moon, it's a dumb theory. Plain and simple. We did not fool the entire world into believing that we landed on the moon when we really didn't. If I start debating something so asinine, it really makes me sort of a dope. It would be like debating whether or not Ronald Reagan was actually shot. Or whether Timothy McVeigh was really executed. . . . I have no problem calling a dumb theory . . . dumb.
2. The 911 conspiracy theory is also dumb. You have people saying we shot missiles into the Pentagon, used holograms to fake planes flying into the World Trade Center, secretly planted explosives in a building, secretly landed two planes, murdered the passengers, and disposed of the planes. Someone on this board actually said one of the passengers was secretly released overseas several years ago. This stuff is absolutely ridiculous. It is insulting to the victims of 911. It is insulting to the family members of the victims.
3. Like most of the sane world, I have all the evidence I need regarding 911. It was one of the worst days of my life. I believe my eyes. I saw the planes hit the buildings. It doesn't look fishy to me at all. Terrorists attacked the United States and murdered American citizens. No, the president of the United States and hundreds of other military, government, and civilian people did not engage in a mass conspiracy to carry out the 911 attacks. It's a stupid theory.
4. I interact with a lot of people and I have never had a person, other than two of my softball teammates, talk to me about a 911 conspiracy. (I have never had a person talk to me about the alleged fake moon landing.) It's telling. This conversation was over a year ago. They burned my ear for nearly an hour. It was torture. We couldn’t get past the “what happened to the bodies” question (mine). They used the 911 talking points: “it’s up to the person accepting the ‘official story’ to explain what happened to the bodies,” or something like that. It’s comical.
5. There is a reason why no mainstream media outlet, no presidential candidate, etc. do not talk about this nonsense. It makes absolutely no sense. No presidential candidate can allege that we faked the moon landing and be taken seriously. No presidential candidate can talk about this 911 conspiracy stuff and be taken seriously. Youandme recently posted that Ron Paul disavowed that nonsense the other day. Why? Because it doesn't make any dang sense and he actually wants the public to believe he is a legitimate candidate. How quickly do you think his presidential candidacy would sink if he held a press conference to say we faked the moon landing, or that missile were shot into the Pentagon on 911?
Now, this might be the most I've ever posted on 911 (or the faked moon landing), but you asked.