|
The Arrivals: The Foundation of the Anti-Christ (pg. 64)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| culorut |
| quote: | Originally posted by colonelcrisp
if i got $0.01 for every time curout or mullet guy used the word "troll" or "trolling" in this thread, you would all be calling me warren buffet by now.....
Seriously i know you guys have limited vocabulary but really, you use the word troll like a 3rd grader who just discovered the word "poop"
give it up already.... |
Welcome to the world of PKC, I didn't step into this thread bashing members here.
We do know PKC invited some troll account user to continue the game, have you read back and taken a look or just ignoring what the obvious is here? |
|
|
| Abercrombie |
 |
|
|
| Abercrombie |
| oh waitaminute... |
|
|
| basilisk |
 |
|
|
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by culorut
Burden of proof is on the official 9/11 fairy tale.
Bud. |
Except it's already been accepted by a trier of fact; subsequently, it is already proven. If you wish to challenge established fact then the burden of proof shifts to you. |
|
|
| culorut |
| quote: | Originally posted by basilisk
|
No doubt about it, who else spends all their time derailing threads and playing troll games better then PKC and his like?
This disease has even spread into other member's threads from other users who think it's fine to do the same. Bringing unwarranted comments serves no purpose to discussion. |
|
|
| culorut |
| quote: | Originally posted by Moral Hazard
Except it's already been accepted by a trier of fact; subsequently, it is already proven. If you wish to challenge established fact then the burden of proof shifts to you. |
That's just your opinion and you're entitled to it. |
|
|
| chw |
don't stop now, i'm still undecided..
how will the whole of TA arrive once and for all at the truth about 911 without this riveting battle of ad hominems? |
|
|
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by culorut
That's just your opinion and you're entitled to it. |
No, see that's the thing. We as democratic nation-states entrust people with the authority to review evidence and make judgments regarding what is and is not factual... these people are called triers of fact and generally are judges, juries, commissioners, magistrates, etc depending on the forum in which the question of fact is being decided. The "official story" regarding 9/11 has been accepted as fact by a number commissions and courts; meaning, every trier of fact entrusted to determine what happened has reviewed evidence and determined that the "official story" is factually correct (on a balance of probabilities... that's the test). So, you see, it's not my opinion; it's the judgment of numerous judges on numerous courts, and commisioners on the 911 commission; and since those persons are the ones that are charged with the responsibility of establishing fact it is not opinion at all; rather, it is fact. In order for it to no longer be fact someone will have to prove to another trier of fact that it is incorrect. So, my poorly educated and terribly misinformed friend... your position is "just your opinion"; however, the position of the 9/11 commission and the judges/juries that heard the civil court cases for the insurance claims are FACT (by definition). |
|
|
| Nrg2Nfinit |
| quote: | Originally posted by culorut
That's just your opinion and you're entitled to it. |
No, it's a matter of FACT. You are arguing your opinion against proven facts.
It's your opinion that the earth is flat, but the FACT is that the earth is round.
It's your opinion that something else hit the pentagon, but the FACT is that an airplane hit it.
Do you understand the difference between fact and opinion? If you can't even comprehend basic concepts and meanings of words, how do you expect to bring any merit to your arguments? |
|
|
| colonelcrisp |
| quote: | Originally posted by Moral Hazard
No, see that's the thing. We as democratic nation-states entrust people with the authority to review evidence and make judgments regarding what is and is not factual... these people are called triers of fact and generally are judges, juries, commissioners, magistrates, etc depending on the forum in which the question of fact is being decided. The "official story" regarding 9/11 has been accepted as fact by a number commissions and courts; meaning, every trier of fact entrusted to determine what happened has reviewed evidence and determined that the "official story" is factually correct (on a balance of probabilities... that's the test). So, you see, it's not my opinion; it's the judgment of numerous judges on numerous courts, and commisioners on the 911 commission; and since those persons are the ones that are charged with the responsibility of establishing fact it is not opinion at all; rather, it is fact. In order for it to no longer be fact someone will have to prove to another trier of fact that it is incorrect. So, my poorly educated and terribly misinformed friend... your position is "just your opinion"; however, the position of the 9/11 commission and the judges/juries that heard the civil court cases for the insurance claims are FACT (by definition). |
such eloquence...... bravo mr Hazard, bravo! |
|
|
| PivotTechno |
| quote: | Originally posted by chw
how will the whole of TA arrive once and for all at the truth about 911 without this riveting battle of ad hominems? |
Consider yourself warned. |
|
|
|
|
