>> ^shinyblurry:

God loves everyone, you included, and He does want you around. He doesn't create people He doesn't love. This video completely misses the point on both sides of the issue. The issue that God has with homosexuals is the same issue that He has with any human being. Every single one of us has sinned and have fallen short..and there is no one good, not one. I myself am personally disgusted by all of the prejudice that Christians show homosexuals. It is not what Christ taught, at all. Christ taught us to love one another, and to show that love always. If a Christian treats you like that, they are not following what He said.
>> ^FlowersInHisHair:
As a gay atheist, it doesn't matter a jot to me whether or not the desert god Yahweh "wants me around" or not.
I don't believe we were created by a god in the first place, and since it also supposedly created HIV, snakes, ebola, Uwe Boll, river blindness, periods, earthquakes and asbestos, I don't think an argument based on that god's idea of "good" and "bad" is built on solid ground. So while I appreciate what this guy's trying to do, this argument doesn't move me much.


I don't want to be impolite, because like the fellow in the video I think you mean well, so I'll just say "thanks, but no thanks".

God loves everyone, you included, and He does want you around. He doesn't create people He doesn't love. This video completely misses the point on both sides of the issue. The issue that God has with homosexuals is the same issue that He has with any human being. Every single one of us has sinned and have fallen short..and there is no one good, not one. I myself am personally disgusted by all of the prejudice that Christians show homosexuals. It is not what Christ taught, at all. Christ taught us to love one another, and to show that love always. If a Christian treats you like that, they are not following what He said.

>> ^FlowersInHisHair:
As a gay atheist, it doesn't matter a jot to me whether or not the desert god Yahweh "wants me around" or not.
I don't believe we were created by a god in the first place, and since it also supposedly created HIV, snakes, ebola, Uwe Boll, river blindness, periods, earthquakes and asbestos, I don't think an argument based on that god's idea of "good" and "bad" is built on solid ground. So while I appreciate what this guy's trying to do, this argument doesn't move me much.

As a gay atheist, it doesn't matter a jot to me whether or not the desert god Yahweh "wants me around" or not.

I don't believe we were created by a god in the first place, and since it also supposedly created HIV, snakes, ebola, Uwe Boll, river blindness, periods, earthquakes and asbestos, I don't think an argument based on that god's idea of "good" and "bad" is built on solid ground. So while I appreciate what this guy's trying to do, this argument doesn't move me much.

If someone would strip the 6lbs of flesh colored, asbestos infused foundation from that skull, I swear it would be on fire.

While the responses to questions 2, 4, 5 and 11 are consistent with the explanation that no explosives were used, they aren't strong enough to imply that there were no explosives.

That's because NIST was charged with simply determining the cause of the collapse. They determined a few things. Airliners filled with jet fuel were crashed into the towers hours before they collapsed. The collapse of the towers appears to start with the collapse of the floors that were crashed into by the airliners. Expert study of the damage caused to the building, including simulations and past direct experiment determined that the airliner crash and resulting fires were sufficient to cause the collapse. NIST then concluded that the cause of the collapse was the airliners that crashed into the towers that day.

They didn't specifically study the possibility of pre-planted explosives causing the collapse. There were thorough analysis of the dust from the collapse though, and they looked for trace elements of almost anything and everything. The came up with traces of asbestos and even pesticides, but no high explosives.

They didn't specifically test for pre-planted terrorist agents with arc welders cutting the buildings support beams either, but why should they?

They didn't specifically study the possibility of trained monkeys with hacksaws being pre-positioned at the pillars causing the collapse either, but why should they?

>> ^therealblankman:
That is a Ship-breaking operation on the coast of either Pakistan or India or Bangladesh.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ship_breaking
It's one of the worst examples of labour exploitation and environmental destruction in the world, It's performed in these countries because of non-existent environmental and safety laws. They essentially just run the old ships onto the beach and dismantle them by hand. Some of the hazards that the workers are exposed to, other than being run over by freighters, include PCBs and asbestos. 40,000 people live in a shanty-town in Alang, India doing this job, and on average 1 worker dies per day.


Yeah I was about to declare "fail" until I realized "they meant to do that."

Sad business, funny 'parking job.' Love the sub-caption.

That is a Ship-breaking operation on the coast of either Pakistan or India or Bangladesh.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ship_breaking

It's one of the worst examples of labour exploitation and environmental destruction in the world, It's performed in these countries because of non-existent environmental and safety laws. They essentially just run the old ships onto the beach and dismantle them by hand. Some of the hazards that the workers are exposed to, other than being run over by freighters, include PCBs and asbestos. 40,000 people live in a shanty-town in Alang, India doing this job, and on average 1 worker dies per day.

>> ^choggie:
Why then, did Larry Silverstein, owner of the WTC compound, in need of asbestos removal and major repairs say "we had to pull it" when asked about WTC 7? Answer-He got sloppy on the record.


If you go look up the source, you'll find Silverstein doesn't say "we", he says the firefighters decided to "pull", in light of the terrible loss of life they'd seen already, and then they watched the building collapse.

I don't see how your claim makes any sense. What's your scenario here? Insurance fraud? Would Silverstein deliberately blow up his building to cash in on the attacks only to suddenly forget he did that and admit to it all on TV? Seriously? Or are you saying it was part of a plot to further enrage the American people to bolster the Bush administration? Why would they demolish the building in secret? Just saying it was too badly damaged by who-knows-what related to the plane crashes and it was seen as safest to just take the whole thing down would have been enough. I don't see how the claim it was blown up makes any sense - what's the motive?

....and that was not a plane that hit the pentagon (show the films confiscated)..and the burning WTC 7 simply HAD to come down!!! After all, it was on fire...we always drop buildings into their own footprints that have been burning for over 5 hrs in the U.S....especially ones with so much cool government spook shit in them, and especially ones with the NY office of Emergency management, IRS, Secret Service, and SEC...

Yeah yeah yeah, "The heat from the uncontrolled fires caused steel floor beams and girders to thermally expand, leading to a chain of events that caused a key structural column to fail." blah blah blah....

Why then, did Larry Silverstein, owner of the WTC compound, in need of asbestos removal and major repairs say "we had to pull it" when asked about WTC 7? Answer-He got sloppy on the record.

Any one of the simple questions swept under the rug of time and apathy should be vigorously and publicly questioned.

You have a downright ornery case of myopia.

Re: point 2, has it never occurred to you that companies can "force misery" on your and your loved ones by producing defective and unsafe goods and services? I guess this has never happened in the history of capitalism. Asbestos, defective tires, tainted formula, bad pharms, etc, etc, etc. Fraudulent mortgages, incompetent surgery, fraudulent auto repairs, etc, etc, etc.

Anyway, what about the rest of the points?

======
"I'm referring to banks legitimately denying loans to people who did not qualify and then getting accused of being racists, economic prejudice, age prejudice, and so on."

How do you know the difference? Do you investigate every case?

>> ^EndAll
Also note how when putting the puffin breast on the grill, he lets his hands soak in the flames to situate it right. Completely unfazed.


It's a well known fact that chefs have hands made of asbestos and awesome.

I think Elvis did it.

He was made of molten steel and asbestos, and then the other guy got terrorism insurance like three days before The USA WTC Attacks of 911 and also ran a fake-flag against the Pentagons, which was NOT AN AIRPLANE, but was actually lazers shooting from super hi-tech rhinestones on his cape.

Everyone was in on it. Elvis "died" a long time ago, to receive the proper training to pull this off, not even thinking of all the co-ordination with the Pelosi Elite Task Force, who then planted and lit thermite explosives all over WTC 41 and 47.

They knew some skeptics could catch on to their evil plan one day, so they thought "hey, lets send out some of the absolutely stupidest people on the planet to push the 'inside job' theory!!", knowing the public would never buy their shit, Pelosibot3000 XL thought of only one name...Reid.

"Harry! Get Alex Jones on the phone!" Cried PLB3kXL.

"He's so fucking stupid, dishonest and unqualified, absolutely NOONE will buy this shit 8 years after it happened!"

And there you have it my friends.

PLB3kXL has successsfuullyy pulled teh woolz over all sheeple's eyes.

And, also.

Memorare, you took my quote completely out of context. I was responding to the allegation that the towers were brought down because of a potentially costly asbestos clean up coupled with a cover up of investigations of Enron, WorldCom and DoD. I don't deny that evil people will make war for financial and political gains, I just don't think this event was perpetrated by our government or was allowed to happen through inaction.

Just so I'm clear about what you are implying: the WTC and surrounding buildings were brought down by loaded passenger jets because of costly asbestos issues in combination with a cover up of the Enron and WorldCom investigations, and part of the Pentagon was destroyed to hide an internal DoD investigation. What about the plance crash in PA? Just theatrics to make it all seem reasonable?

Do you really believe that there are people in this world that are so evil that they believe they are justified in making this happen at the cost of thousands of lives, and who would actually go through with it? And do you really believe that the people that helped said evil people are so loyal that none of them have come forward with evidence in the 8 years since? These are evil people you are talking about, corrupted and driven only by money and power, so why hasn't anyone of the thousands of required to make this plan happen come forward and written a book or given interviews that would earn them millions in fees? How many conspiracies of government have ever gone on without at least one person speaking up and bringing things to light?

You must live in a sad, fucked up little world if you really believe any of this.

Some things to consider:

The towers had asbestos issues.

The insurance companies were held not liable in a prior to 911 court case for the asbestos removal, people don't realize sections of those towers were to become uninhabitable very shortly for being uninsurable.

Can you imagine the symbol of power to the world in NYC being a uninhabitable empty building?

The office that got hit in the Pentagon was the same office where they were conducting the investigation into the 2.3 trillion missing from the defense department that Rumsfeld announced on Sept 10... no more investigation.

Cheney had bought Dresser Industries in 1998 and that made Halliburton responsible for their asbestos abatement.

Halliburton Pays Dearly but Finally Escapes Cheney's Asbestos Mess

The World Trade Center was also a huge asbestos liability and realistically held very little value due to the overwhelming costs associated with the removal of said asbestos. It's funny how it all ties together, isn't it? http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/003500.php

It was well-known by the city of New York that the WTC was an asbestos bombshell. For years, the Port Authority treated the building like an aging dinosaur, attempting on several occasions to get permits to demolish the building for liability reasons, but being turned down due the known asbestos problem. Further, it was well-known the only reason the building was still standing until 9/11 was because it was too costly to disassemble the twin towers floor by floor since the Port Authority was prohibited legally from demolishing the buildings.

The projected cost to disassemble the towers: $15 Billion. Just the scaffolding for the operation was estimated at $2.4 Billion!

In other words, the Twin Towers were condemned structures. How convenient that an unexpected “terrorist” attack demolished the buildings completely.

WTC Building 7 was a part of the WTC complex, and covered under the same insurance policy. This 47-storey steel-framed structure, which was NOT struck by an aircraft, mysteriously collapsed 8 hours later that same day into its own footprint at freefall speed — exactly in the manner of the Twin Towers.

Halliburton was legally responsible for the WTC's asbestos problems. It would have been fought out in court but Halliburton might lose. They couldn't do a controlled demolition because of the asbestos. Of all the buildings in NYC, this one was the one whose demolition would be most advantageous for the vice president of the United States. And the first responders paid the price, on 911 and later.

To add to the convenience, Silverstein had the towers insured against terrorist attacks so that not only would he get to stop paying for the lease, he would even get most of his down payment back.

He also claimed entitlement to be paid the 3.6 billion insurance sum twice, arguing that the towers were destroyed in two separate attacks. This resulted in a long court battle and resulted in him eventually collecting his billions.

In short, privatizing the lease of the property and making sure all physical evidence was quickly destroyed by recycling the steel allowed Silverstein to collect on the insurance policy instead of having to go through lengthy forensic analysis over who or what really knocked down the towers.

It doesn't prove a conspiracy but is again one of those important coincidences to take place for the whole thing to play out plausibly.

As for building 7, lets keep in mind that all paperwork for SEC investigation of ENRON and WorldCom were destroyed in its collapse, and the cases had to be abandoned. How much that was worth personally or in cold hard cash is up to anyone's guess.

http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/wtc_payment.html http://www.freewebs.com/inside-man/