boarders, countries, everything concerning government

its all bullshit to me

we should be living on a planet not in Canada or stuff like that
i dont belong to a country i belong to life
life is much more powerfull than what we think we are
one day we will all disappear from the surface of this earth and life will go on like we never existed
we should try to live in a great world instead of trying to kill our neighbor cause we want his oil and because we think is way of living is not correct
its not like i think the rest of the world lives in a decent way, oh no its not like that but at least theyre not trying to implant their way of life here

___________________
*** Sig edited -> no banner ads in sig
http://img709.**************/img709/8407/machinebanner.jpg

quote:

tu ris, mais le seul A+ que j'ai a l'universite etait un cours de philosophie

Je t'crois, je t'crois...It's just that I got a visual of you in a greek toga philosophizing amongst us mortals

Epicurus....

Basically, to sum up what you wrote:
1-when something is not clear, it is better to go with what seems to be clearer...
Well, no, i dont believe in that - too many times in the past people have been "forced" to believe something and when people do that, it just limits their intellectuality. If no one can believe that there are other possibilities, then the world cannot evolve dont you think? i mean isnt it by doubting something that you somehow discover the truth?
How many times have people decided to believe something and later on, after X years, found out that this was false?

2-i do know that there are not enough evidence out there to show that the US had anything to do with the attacks - but this just doesnt mean that there isnt any evidence - they could just be hidden or destroyed or wotever.....

3-You see, you cant really compare the unicorns' existence to 9/11 mystery. The unicorns may exist in some part of the world which has not been discovered yet - no one has reached that area. Whereas 9/11 attacks, the evidence is there, held by people....and it's just hidden and will not come out right now....
To get the 9/11 evidence, we'd have to talk to the people behind it, and to find out whether unicorns exist, we'd have to ask God (as silly as this may sound - but he's the only one that knows, right?)
one is reachable, the other isnt.....so u cant really compare those two......

4-The idea behind Pearl Harbour attack - i am not sayin that: Oh, well, it happened once, so it must have happened on 9/11 also. but i am just sayin that: "celui qui vole un oeuf, vole un boeuf" - meaning: if you do somethin bad once, you're very likely to do it again - and even worse....And i dont want to go through all that "Pearl Harbor was not a surpise" thing, i did it once in high-school and am not doin it again.....i think it has been shown enough times already....and the point is: people believe it was a surprise attack because they were "forced" to believe so.......yet, it turned out to be "somethin planned and known in advance".

Anyway, this is an opinion vs opinion discussion....you could be wrong just like i could be wrong.....

i like u deejiuana

ure true about the opinion against opinion
but i strongly believe it shouldnt be about that
just because this crazy guy is president, all hes saying should be considered as true??????????
damn

were going nowhere with such attitude
and their policies wil go on & on
i just cant imagine what kind of project they have now for USA but it surely is bad in any way

u see, i dont have a problem with the attitude of not accepting anything coming from such people

they are wrong, they kill people, they want their profit
they should be banned of earth
(i wish fast could ban those (*&/(&*?/?%/$&?%$/&?%/ out of here as fast as he can with some of my friends)

___________________
*** Sig edited -> no banner ads in sig
http://img709.**************/img709/8407/machinebanner.jpg

quote:

Originally posted by Epicurus Deejiuana, I'm not saying it's not possible. There is no absolute certainty when it comes to knowledge and truth. However, there is a best approximation of what is true and what is not, and that is based on good sound empirical evidence.

Where is the sound empirical evidence that the pentagon was hit with a 757?

Any videos showing it happened?

Nope

Any eyewitnesses in a city of 7 million people say they saw a 757?

Nope (Quite the contrary)

Any pictures showing a 757 hit the pentagon?

Nope. There are pictures of an explosion and a destroyed uninhabited part of the pentagon. but none of the actual plane flying into the pentagon.

The only reason people today believe a 757 hit the pentagon is because the american government officials said one did. And they don't even claim to have seen it happen. Reason would tell me to believe the hundreds of eyewitnesses who saw a small aircraft and millions of people who didnt see a 100+ decibal jumbo jet fly into the most secure building in the world.

quote:

(i wish fast could ban those (*&/(&*?/?%/$&?%$/&?%/ out of here as fast as he can with some of my friends)

lol...wow - toute la haine man...hehehe
Puis je sais qu'on doit pas croire tout ce que Mr.Bush dit...

Anyway, well, that's true - u see, the only problem i have with americans is that they are limited to what they believe, see, hear, and all that - but it's not their fault afterall - it's their government's fault - why? they only restrict TV contents to USA issues....ask an american guy where the pyramids are - answer: errrrrr, Europe? Ask a Canadian guy where Pyramids are - answer: ummmm, afria - egypt? well, at least they got that right....

So, what's the problem with americans? Their government forces them to believe, live, and see one thing - in one way - that this is the USA, everything we say is true and we are more powerful than others....

Epic, if u were american, i'd have rested my case, but you're not - you are able to see things differently than americans, so just dont limit yourself and limit your intelectuality by believing what "the powerful ones" say.....

When something is not 100% true (and pffft, is that even possible anyway?) just dont believe it - and dont believe something else, just believe that there are A LOT of other possibilities and that there are A LOT of things hidden or undiscovered....

quote:

Originally posted by Deejiuana Anyway, this is an opinion vs opinion discussion....you could be wrong just like i could be wrong.....

the implication is far far more dangerous if he is wrong.

yup i really agree with deejiuana and discojoe

Well i've seen a documentary stating that FBI/CIA had in hands documents confirming a terrorist attack being organised and that was suppose to have has target an economical base of the country (for 9/11),recently again in the news this time,not a documentary, ridge set the level of security at orange for practically the same threat of terrorist attack against economic poles of the u.s.a. That leaves me perplex because there's no doubt in my mind that they have a lot of people working for them internationally (*coughing* spies *coughing*)and for them not to have taken caution to any information leading to believe there's a credible threat to the security of the country is mind buggling when we know the existence of such "easy to make" but efficient weaponry as "dirty bombs" and biochemical weaponry (well biochemicals arent mediocre at all). Its true,i do not have any proof of it,then again,who will. Having access to such documents requires...being very close to the action.

Another disturbing statement is that well we all know saudis were very much implicated in the terrorist attack,but at the time,no actions were taken against the saudis even after Bush publicly proclamed war on terrorism and all countries that sponsors it.And in reports,all parts concerning saudis has been erased/hidden.

But i agree with epicurus you that perhaps the information has been mishandled/has not been taken seriously by CIA/NSA before the attack, but in such cases,i think NSA should have been more careful since this is the national security agency, and well they have to do anything possible to ensure the security of the country, even if it means spying on other countries. And if such infos were available,why not take it with the proper caution it deserves since its not only the administration that is at risk,but mostly the civilians.

But all we can do is suppose. Saying that the terrorist attack was badly handled and there was no way to make sure of what and when it happened is easy to say since the facts has been stated,yet again those were facts that were hand written by the hand of humans,and not any hands,american administration hands. In this case,we cannot be 100% sure of anything since we havent seen or heard anything.

And i dont know if its true,but heard in a documentary that ben laden's family in the u.s. were flown away from the usa,what im not sure about its if it was before or after the attacks,and if its before,well its fishy.

quote:

Basically, to sum up what you wrote: 1-when something is not clear, it is better to go with what seems to be clearer... Well, no, i dont believe in that - too many times in the past people have been "forced" to believe something and when people do that, it just limits their intellectuality. If no one can believe that there are other possibilities, then the world cannot evolve dont you think? i mean isnt it by doubting something that you somehow discover the truth? How many times have people decided to believe something and later on, after X years, found out that this was false?

No, that's not what I said, and you're making and knocking down a straw man argument, probably unintentionally. What I said could not be clearer. If you have good reliable evidence that supports a certain theory, you should believe that theory rather than one that doesn't have this strong support for it. However, as I said many times before, it does not mean that this theory that you now believe is the correct one as it can be disproven later on WHEN equally reliable but contrary evidence is provided in support of mutually exclusive alternative theories. The point being that my methodology does not preclude what you call evolution or limits anyone's intellectuality. On the contrary, in fact, it enhances it. The scientific method proceeds in EXACTLY this way, and believe me, science does very well for itself.

Furthermore, I'm not asking you to not doubt or forcing you to believe something. I'm simply providing a certain methodology for you to adhere to, a methodology that in my opinion has been used very successfully throughout the scientific age and should be applied in my opinion in most if not all situations, including this one. To give you a simple example, if I was living in the 19th century, I would believe that all matter behaved according to Newton's laws, and that the universe was deterministic. That was the best reliable evidence people at that time had, and had good reason to believe it, despite the fact that we now know this to be wrong, according to Quantum physics which claims that the Universe if inherently random. Note that believing in something does not necessarily imply a static position regarding your beliefs. They may change over time, of course, but ONLY when there is equally good reliable evidence in support of this change.

quote:

2-i do know that there are not enough evidence out there to show that the US had anything to do with the attacks - but this just doesnt mean that there isnt any evidence - they could just be hidden or destroyed or wotever.....

Fine, then until this evidence comes up, I don't believe you're entitled to hold that position since you have no evidence to support it. What you're doing is exactly what Bush is doing with WMDs in Iraq. Well, Saddam could have destroyed them or misplaced them. Tell me, do you believe that Iraq had WMDs?

quote:

3-You see, you cant really compare the unicorns' existence to 9/11 mystery. The unicorns may exist in some part of the world which has not been discovered yet - no one has reached that area. Whereas 9/11 attacks, the evidence is there, held by people....and it's just hidden and will not come out right now....

Until this evidence comes out, if it ever does, I am absolutely in the right to be very skpetical of this "hidden evidence", just like I have every right to be skeptical about WMDs in Iraq.

quote:

4-The idea behind Pearl Harbour attack - i am not sayin that: Oh, well, it happened once, so it must have happened on 9/11 also. but i am just sayin that: "celui qui vole un oeuf, vole un boeuf" - meaning: if you do somethin bad once, you're very likely to do it again - and even worse....And i dont want to go through all that "Pearl Harbor was not a surpise" thing, i did it once in high-school and am not doin it again.....i think it has been shown enough times already....and the point is: people believe it was a surprise attack because they were "forced" to believe so.......yet, it turned out to be "somethin planned and known in advance".

I understand the point you're making. But regardless, every event is its own beast, and every event needs to be justified independently. You might be right in that you are now more doubting about what they say, but regradless, you still have to provide good evidence.

quote:

Anyway, this is an opinion vs opinion discussion....you could be wrong just like i could be wrong.....

Finally, although this might be an opinin versus opinion disucssion, at least I'm attempting to support my opinion with a clear rational methodology that you would be good to adopt.

quote:

Where is the sound empirical evidence that the pentagon was hit with a 757?

Are you being serious? I thought I already posted this article. I guess you must have overlooked it as evidence.

Bodies identified in Pentagon attack

The point being that they have already identified all people killed on flight AA 77 (except for 5 of them because no remains were found) AT the pentagon site! What more evidence do you want? Let's see, a plane containing these passengers dissapears that day. They have all the names on that plane, and all these people's remains (except for 5) show up on the pentagon lawn.

Can you please explain to me how that could happen in your scenario?

quote:

Epic, if u were american, i'd have rested my case, but you're not - you are able to see things differently than americans, so just dont limit yourself and limit your intelectuality by believing what "the powerful ones" say.....

Deejiuana, believe me when I tell you that I am intelligent and wise enough to draw my own conclusions without help from the aformentioned "powerful ones"

quote:

When something is not 100% true (and pffft, is that even possible anyway?) just dont believe it - and dont believe something else, just believe that there are A LOT of other possibilities and that there are A LOT of things hidden or undiscovered....

Uh huh...so I guess, by your own admission, that means you're an agnostic regarding everything

Epic,
well, sry for not providing evidence, but i think i can skip that when it comes to debating something logical and not logical....

and anyway,

what is logical?

what is true?

what is evidence?

what is reliable evidence? "If you have good reliable evidence that supports a certain theory, you should believe that theory rather than one that doesn't have this strong support for it. "

what is a clear rational methodology? "I'm attempting to support my opinion with a clear rational methodology"

what is right?

what is wrong?


people see these things in very different ways - what may be a clear rational methodology to you could be something useless and not good enough to make me believe what you are saying. Furthermore, the examples i have provided may be nothing but bullshit which are never gonna make u believe or think about what i am saying....

Now come on Epic, dont tell me that you dont think or believe that govenrments hide evidence - and if you want evidence that this is true, well, where are the video tapes that the FBI confiscated? Analyzing them? nu uhhhh.....

Do i believe whether Iraq had WMDs? Well, i dunno and this is what i said earlier - USA was not able to properly show that they HAD WMDs and IRAQ was NOT able to prove that they didnt have any.....both are equally possibilities, but i dont go for any....




You're just asking me to come up with evidence to everything i say, and well, i am not really gonna do that - i believe in things without needing any evidence...you may not.....and here, you obviously dont....i dont want this to go on forever, so wotever, i said what i wanted to say....