Quote:
Originally Posted by Stimpy
I thought Flabbibulin's post was trite and insulting, making juvenile leaps of logic meant to belittle the poster in question. He completely failed to acknowledge the differences in the situations or the scales of magnitude. His predicament was a result of having mandatory insurance, while the WTC situation was a matter of an owner including a multiplier clause in the event of a terrorist attack. In one instance we're talking about having his sh*tbox replaced and the other reaping billions of dollars. I didn't see that as an argument of the posters logic, but a shot at it instead. I've yet to see anyone bother to actually discuss the issue the poster raised, that being the wind fall for many of those who had a vested interest in many related interests.
|
No. It was perfect. If you're using the literal meaning of the story by saying the scale is wrong, perhaps you need to improve your reading comprehension skills.
The point is: Motive/Benefactors is not the same as Conspiracy.
Were you able to get that? Several conspiracy theorists in this thread have already said that it was a great excuse to go to war/other things that happened, which means that it is obvious that it is a conspiracy.
The jump from Benefits -> Conspiracy is the fallacy that mr. thymebalm chose to make, and it was rightfully pointed out. Then he chose to be condescending to all the posters and left.
You say that it is complex because we're trying to tie in socio-economic and geopolitical motives to what happened. However, he only chooses to do so only when it is convenient. For example, why has no conspiracy theorist tied in cost-benefit analysis of killing some 5000 innocents, two of the greatest buildings ever constructed, ridiculous increases in cost for security (across the country), reduction in economic power just for several million barrels of oil a day? Like a cognitive bias regarding the strength of materials (that I helped COGENT realize), a billion dollars is not a lot of money. Neither is one trillion. What happened that day was so obviously a net loss for the states, that anything about insurance winnings is just completely crazy.
How about tying in human nature and wondering how some hundred thousand people has to remain silent about this whole operation over years and years?
Look, you remind me of other posters on this site who attempt to be objective but clearly are defending one point of view (like an unnamed Apple fan). Why don't you give us your full thoughts on the issue, rather than latching onto other people's arguments or giving fence-sitting positions that skew reality under the guise of objectism?