image stats
date added
previous votes
log in


indent register
indent recover

On that day he was a normal human being

1 star2 stars3 stars4 stars5 stars
On that day he was a normal human being

Comments for: On that day he was a normal human being
jgoins Report This Comment
Date: November 02, 2014 07:06AM

I really wish he was back in charge instead of the chimp in charge now.
Onyma Report This Comment
Date: November 02, 2014 12:12PM

Oh God no, good riddance. Go forwards, not backwards. Or ass backwards in his case. Hopefully the next one will be better.
Richard Johnson Report This Comment
Date: November 02, 2014 03:43PM

9/11 was NOT the work of Arab hijackers. Watch "Missing Links", "War by Deception 2012", "Painful Deceptions", and listen to the words of men like Dr. Alan Sobrosky. 9/11 was the work of Israeli Mossad and a subset of Neocons in U.S. intelligence --most of whom were of Jewish descent, or were pro-Zionist gentiles. Wake up!

"It is 100% CERTAIN that 9-11 was a MOSSAD operation, period."
-- Dr. Alan Sabrosky, former director of Strategic Studies Institute, U.S. Army War College

Go to You-Tube and do a search of "Did Israel's Mossad Do 9/11?"

Go to You-Tube and do a search of "Dancing Israelis."
DarkKlown Report This Comment
Date: November 02, 2014 05:18PM

I can do searches for 'magic' and 'god'. Doesn't mean they exist...
pulse Report This Comment
Date: November 02, 2014 07:45PM

If I search for badger, badger, badger I'll also find dancing badgers.
woberto Report This Comment
Date: November 03, 2014 04:23AM

I thought you would comment on this one DK but not in response to trolls, rather...
"The Pet Goat" (often erroneously called "My Pet Goat"winking
smiley is a children's story from the book Reading Mastery II: Storybook 1 by Siegfried Engelmann and Elaine C. Bruner.
It gained attention on September 11, 2001; U.S. President George W. Bush was reading the story to children at Emma E. Booker school in Sarasota, Florida when he was informed of the ongoing terror attacks.
jgoins Report This Comment
Date: November 03, 2014 07:56AM

I guess if it is found on the internet it must be true, nobody can lie on the internet. I own a bridge in New York City and will sell it to you for $50.00. So I guess it is Mossad who is cutting people's heads off and fighting in Syria too?
BlahX3 Report This Comment
Date: November 03, 2014 08:55PM

Oh no, that's too simple. It is the Islamic State alright, but perhaps covertly supported by Mossad in order to garner anti-Islamic sentiment around the world and serve the dual purpose of killing as many other Muslims as they can in the process. Then NATO bombs the fuck outa them. Net result is maximum amount of dead Muslims for the shekel.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/11/2014 08:58PM by BlahX3.
DarkKlown Report This Comment
Date: November 03, 2014 09:38PM

Occam's razor (also written as Ockham's razor and in Latin lex parsimoniae) is a problem-solving principle devised by William of Ockham (c. 1287–1347). It states that among competing hypotheses, the one with the fewest assumptions should be selected. Other, more complicated solutions may ultimately prove correct, but—in the absence of certainty—the fewer assumptions that are made, the better.

The application of the principle can be used to shift the burden of proof in a discussion. However, Alan Baker, who suggests this in the online Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, is careful to point out that his suggestion should not be taken generally, but only as it applies in a particular context, that is: philosophers who argue in opposition to metaphysical theories that involve allegedly “superfluous ontological apparatus”.[a] Baker then notices that principles, including Occam’s Razor, are often expressed in a way that is not clear regarding which facet of “simplicity” — parsimony or elegance — is being referred to, and that in a hypothetical formulation the facets of simplicity may work in different directions: a simpler description may refer to a more complex hypothesis, and a more complex description may refer to a simpler hypothesis.

Solomonoff's theory of inductive inference is a mathematically formalized Occam's Razor: Shorter computable theories have more weight when calculating the probability of the next observation, using all computable theories which perfectly describe previous observations.

In science, Occam's Razor is used as a heuristic (discovery tool) to guide scientists in the development of theoretical models rather than as an arbiter between published models. In the scientific method, Occam's Razor is not considered an irrefutable principle of logic or a scientific result; the preference for simplicity in the scientific method is based on the falsifiability criterion. For each accepted explanation of a phenomenon, there is always an infinite number of possible and more complex alternatives, because one can always burden failing explanations with ad hoc hypothesis to prevent them from being falsified; therefore, simpler theories are preferable to more complex ones because they are better testable and falsifiable.

So either:

a) Bush arranged to have planes flown into a few buildings on US soil so he could invade Iraq and Afghanistan and managed to cover it up the only proof he did fly it into the building is from people who had no connection to the conspiracy and use choppy footage from the incidents to make wild arguments that it was Bush. This from a government that has multiple people step forward to 'leak' information that was already public knowledge and from a govenment that is basically incompetant and has no real control over anything they are ment to be in control over and are really just figure heads to give the populas a beliefe that the world is ordered and not chaos.


b) a group of muslims got together and easily hijacked some planes then flew them into a few buildings

Sorry but reading stories to some 5 year olds at a primary school is basically as good as what the 'leader of the free world' can do.
jgoins Report This Comment
Date: November 04, 2014 07:39AM

Prior to 2001 airport security was a joke anyone could get whatever they wanted into the planes and before then planes hijacked were just used to garner ransoms or political statements. None prior to then were used as weapons and hijackers had a desire to live. Where would the government find people to kill themselves flying planes into buildings?