Political Crossfire Forums

[Patriot911]

yanniv wrote: Patriot911 wrote: yanniv wrote: Free Thinkr wrote: yanniv wrote: MG1962 wrote: Quote: That would just fuel the fire.

zzzzziiiiiiiiippppppppt

Wrong answer - Leaving him alive is doing the same thing.

Warning self defeating arguement alert

Killing him would be even bigger is all I'm saying.
Bigger and more obvious than 9/11? :lol: Sure, whatever.

Everyone knows there is a conspiracy theory to pretty much every event. Dylan Avery is just another one of the theorists.
But when he gains a lot of attention and all of a sudden dies... it brings more fire to the fuel.

Thats the whole point. The government, if it were anywhere near as ruthless and bloodthirsty as you claim, would have knocked him off when loose change first came out and before anyone even knew who he was. They wouldn't have let it get this big.

All I'm saying is it would get more attention and people would be highly suspicious why the government would knock off one guy. When that happens a lot more people become suspicious and will look into it. It is better if you just leave a minority of people believing it then chance a majority.

First off, the government wouldn't put a stamp on it saying "This is a government hit". Instead he has an accident where the only people saying it is a conspiracy is the very few people who even know who he is. It doesn't grow outside the still small conspiracy community. Instead he has gone on and created several videos now and the conspiracy community has grown. Your logic for why the government wouldn't knock him off is flawed as the reasons for not knocking him off are identical to what happened by letting him live.

[psholtz]

Patriot911 wrote: First off, the government wouldn't put a stamp on it saying "This is a government hit". Instead he has an accident where the only people saying it is a conspiracy is the very few people who even know who he is. It doesn't grow outside the still small conspiracy community. Instead he has gone on and created several videos now and the conspiracy community has grown. Your logic for why the government wouldn't knock him off is flawed as the reasons for not knocking him off are identical to what happened by letting him live.
Which proves my point..

Suppose Dylan Avery does die. The government is going to stage it to make it look like a suicide. Then I'll come back to you and say: "see! they really did get him" and you'll just come back and say "no! It was a suicide"..

So what's your point? :?

You believe there is no conspiracy b/c Dylan Avery lives.. Supposing Dylan Avery dies, you'll *still* believe there is no conspiracy. So what will it take to prove to you that there is a conspiracy? Clearly, nothing concerning Dylan Avery's life or death will do so, so I don't know why you insist on always bringing up this red herring over and over again..

[Wizard From Oz]

Quote: You believe there is no conspiracy b/c Dylan Avery lives.. Supposing Dylan Avery dies, you'll *still* believe there is no conspiracy. So what will it take to prove to you that there is a conspiracy? Clearly, nothing concerning Dylan Avery's life or death will do so, so I don't know why you insist on always bringing up this red herring over and over again..

Well you could try a novel approach like maybe facts or something

[Patriot911]

MG1962 wrote: Quote: I could state what i have done in the past to get the word out, but then it would just be text on a forum post. There is no united front in a nation where divisions is the norm. If that comes my ass will be there.

Do a search for "Glamis Sand Dunes" if you want to see previous posting on what i have done.

See this is my point. How united where the people in South Africa when Ghandi began his actions. You want a united front, sometime you need to lead from the front, instead of sitting back and waiting.

Sadly I didn't get anything useful on the Dunes thing :( I fear whatever you did has been swamped by tourist information and reports of vehicle accidents)

First, I think Ghandi was India. Mandella was South Africa. Your point is the same regardless.

Second, I believe Gremlin wanted you to do a search on PCF to listen to him brag about distributing copies of loose change to people.

[psholtz]

MG1962 wrote: Quote: You believe there is no conspiracy b/c Dylan Avery lives.. Supposing Dylan Avery dies, you'll *still* believe there is no conspiracy. So what will it take to prove to you that there is a conspiracy? Clearly, nothing concerning Dylan Avery's life or death will do so, so I don't know why you insist on always bringing up this red herring over and over again..

Well you could try a novel approach like maybe facts or something
My post above has nothing to do w/ facts..

It has to do w/ even *if* Dylan Avery died, and even *if* the government quietly yanked all his videos, you guys STILL would not believe the government was involved. Witness the case of Hunter S Thompson.. He was working on a book about Jeff Gannon and male prostitute/sex slave/pedophila rings in the White House, and a couple weeks before he publishes his work he turns up dead.. and yet you guys don't believe the government got him. You just think the "committed suicide"...

Dylan Avery would be no different..

Even if Avery *did* turn up dead, you *still* would not believe that the USG had anything to do w/ it.

[psholtz]

Patriot911 wrote: MG1962 wrote: Quote: I could state what i have done in the past to get the word out, but then it would just be text on a forum post. There is no united front in a nation where divisions is the norm. If that comes my ass will be there.

Do a search for "Glamis Sand Dunes" if you want to see previous posting on what i have done.

See this is my point. How united where the people in South Africa when Ghandi began his actions. You want a united front, sometime you need to lead from the front, instead of sitting back and waiting.

Sadly I didn't get anything useful on the Dunes thing :( I fear whatever you did has been swamped by tourist information and reports of vehicle accidents)

First, I think Ghandi was India. Mandella was South Africa. Your point is the same regardless.

Second, I believe Gremlin wanted you to do a search on PCF to listen to him brag about distributing copies of loose change to people.
I believe Gandhi did actually do some work in South Africa too..

However, I fail to see how Gandhi or South Africa is relevant to much of anything here..

[Patriot911]

psholtz wrote: Patriot911 wrote: First off, the government wouldn't put a stamp on it saying "This is a government hit". Instead he has an accident where the only people saying it is a conspiracy is the very few people who even know who he is. It doesn't grow outside the still small conspiracy community. Instead he has gone on and created several videos now and the conspiracy community has grown. Your logic for why the government wouldn't knock him off is flawed as the reasons for not knocking him off are identical to what happened by letting him live.
Which proves my point..

Suppose Dylan Avery does die. The government is going to stage it to make it look like a suicide. Then I'll come back to you and say: "see! they really did get him" and you'll just come back and say "no! It was a suicide"..

So what's your point? :?

You believe there is no conspiracy b/c Dylan Avery lives.. Supposing Dylan Avery dies, you'll *still* believe there is no conspiracy. So what will it take to prove to you that there is a conspiracy? Clearly, nothing concerning Dylan Avery's life or death will do so, so I don't know why you insist on always bringing up this red herring over and over again..

I didn't bring it up. ;-) If Dylan died and it looked like an accident, it doesn't prove there was a conspiracy. People die all the time and despite what you think, they're not all conspiracy related.

The main point is still valid. If the government was ruthless enough to be behind 9/11, they wouldn't stop at some punk kid trying to get the "truth" out. So far you've claimed the government is too passive to do this, yet they are agressive enough to pull off 9/11. Just another in an almost endless list of contradictions from you. You've also claimed nobody found to be involved in 9/11 would ever be tried or conviced based on their supposed value to the corporations. :roll:

Given that anyone found to be involved in 9/11 faces the death sentence, they wouldn't let some punk assed kid come out with a video that would either expose them or get enough people interested that it exposes them. Nobody has been able to adequately explain how this kid remains alive if he is supposedly exposing these powerful people who are above the law.

[psholtz]

Patriot911 wrote: If Dylan died and it looked like an accident, it doesn't prove there was a conspiracy. People die all the time and despite what you think, they're not all conspiracy related.
Which is my point..

If the government killed Avery, they would make it look like accident, and you would remain unconvinced..

Is this why you love arguing this absurd point to death? (no pun intended)..

Because either way, you can still claim that you would remain unconvinced?

Quote: If the government was ruthless enough to be behind 9/11, they wouldn't stop at some punk kid trying to get the "truth" out. So far you've claimed the government is too passive to do this, yet they are agressive enough to pull off 9/11. Just another in an almost endless list of contradictions from you. You've also claimed nobody found to be involved in 9/11 would ever be tried or conviced based on their supposed value to the corporations.
I addressed this point in my Fabian socialist post above.

Please return to and address that post, point-by-point, if you have anything further to add in this regard.

Quote: Given that anyone found to be involved in 9/11 faces the death sentence
Only in a common law court would an insider involved w/ 9/11 face the death penalty..

Common law courts do not exist in America today.

No insider has anything to fear from the U.S. court system, as it is presently constituted.

[Wizard From Oz]

Quote: I believe Gandhi did actually do some work in South Africa too..


Thats correct. It is where he got his start as an activist, by helping to lead demonstrations that ultimately changed the law giving greater equality to Indians.

I dont use him as an example in India because by the time he got there, he had a huge base following and was not starting as a single man trying to make a difference

[JohnnyQ]

Quote: First off, the government wouldn't put a stamp on it saying "This is a government hit"

Well yeah, my mistake there, but you know what I mean. Look at it like this. A kid commits suicide. After looking into it he made films about 9/11 being an inside job, people like Alex Jones would blow up on this and it would be every where. Word would spread... he would be like a "martyr" so to speak.

Quote: Instead he has an accident where the only people saying it is a conspiracy is the very few people who even know who he is. It doesn't grow outside the still small conspiracy community.

Like I said... it would just fuel the fire for the theorists to push the movement because the government is killing people in order to cover it up. After 9/11, I'm sure 95% (my guess) believe it was the work of Al Qaeda. There was no one saying otherwise besides the very few.

Quote: Instead he has gone on and created several videos now and the conspiracy community has grown.

3 1/2 years after he came out with Loose Change. By then the people who knew inside about 9/11 could already push their policys/new world order/agenda whatever you want to call it. Why worry about what some kids have to say? As long as they get what they want I'm sure they could care less was a few people would believe.

Quote: Your logic for why the government wouldn't knock him off is flawed as the reasons for not knocking him off are identical to what happened by letting him live.

I would understand your point of view if he made this video immediately after 9/11 and "commited suicide". But instead this was within the last year and half or so and gained a lot of attention fast.

edit: quote system doesn't quite like me. :lol:

[Otacon]

psholtz wrote:

Is this why you love arguing this absurd point to death? (no pun intended)..


It's not an absurd point. The USG would have murdered Dylan way back when Loose Change first hit the Internet before things could get out of hand.

[JohnnyQ]

Otacon wrote: psholtz wrote:

Is this why you love arguing this absurd point to death? (no pun intended)..


It's not an absurd point. The USG would have murdered Dylan way back when Loose Change first hit the Internet before things could get out of hand.

Why go after Avery, when you could go after the credible scholars for 9/11 truth? The 9/11 truth movement was founded before Loose Change came out.

[Otacon]

yanniv wrote: Otacon wrote: psholtz wrote:

Is this why you love arguing this absurd point to death? (no pun intended)..


It's not an absurd point. The USG would have murdered Dylan way back when Loose Change first hit the Internet before things could get out of hand.

Why go after Avery, when you could go after the credible scholars for 9/11 truth? The 9/11 truth movement was founded before Loose Change came out.

Did they have the video that supposedly prooves that 9/11 was an inside job? No. Before Dylan came along with Loose Change, the 9/11 Truth Movement had almost nothing to work with.

[JohnnyQ]

Otacon wrote: yanniv wrote: Otacon wrote: psholtz wrote:

Is this why you love arguing this absurd point to death? (no pun intended)..


It's not an absurd point. The USG would have murdered Dylan way back when Loose Change first hit the Internet before things could get out of hand.

Why go after Avery, when you could go after the credible scholars for 9/11 truth? The 9/11 truth movement was founded before Loose Change came out.

Did they have the video that supposedly prooves that 9/11 was an inside job? No. Before Dylan came along with Loose Change, the 9/11 Truth Movement had almost nothing to work with.

Anyone could make a video... to me Avery is your typical kid. But when you have scholars talking about 9/11 being an inside job for whatever reason, then you know you have a bigger problem.