How to be a presumptious prat in one easy lesson - cpunk!

Status
Not open for further replies.
#1
So the thread ended with this post from this obnoxious cünt:
Jeeeezus Christ. Enough's enough! It's Saturday evening and a bunch of otherwise sensible Arrsers are arguing the toss about 9/11. There are better things to do than trying to have rational discussions with 'Truthers': they aren't rational and they don't understand your arguments. They are coming from the same territory as Holocaust deniers.

These kinds of discussion are bad for Arrse, because they create bad feeling and they attract attention seeking fuckwits and liars like frenchperson, bugsy and SLRboy/goodkurtz/shittered_sh1te to the site.

So let's knock it on the head. There are plenty of places on the internet where you can argue with truthers about 9/11 until the cows come home.
Isn't it good to know that folks like cpunk are around to show us when we've reached the limits?

After all, he's a MOD, and we all very aware that they know absolutely everything there is to know, don't we?

So quite apart from the delusional cspunk, was anybody else interested in continuing with the thread originally started by LISpace on the collapses of 9/11? I know I'd like to continue with the thread, if only for its politeness and sobriety.

Notwithstanding cspunk and his drunken rantings, can we have the thread reopened, please?

MsG
 
#3
Bugsy said:
So the thread ended with this post from this obnoxious cünt:
Jeeeezus Christ. Enough's enough! It's Saturday evening and a bunch of otherwise sensible Arrsers are arguing the toss about 9/11. There are better things to do than trying to have rational discussions with 'Truthers': they aren't rational and they don't understand your arguments. They are coming from the same territory as Holocaust deniers.

These kinds of discussion are bad for Arrse, because they create bad feeling and they attract attention seeking fuckwits and liars like frenchperson, bugsy and SLRboy/goodkurtz/shittered_sh1te to the site.

So let's knock it on the head. There are plenty of places on the internet where you can argue with truthers about 9/11 until the cows come home.
Isn't it good to know that folks like cpunk are around to show us when we've reached the limits?

After all, he's a MOD, and we all very aware that they know absolutely everything there is to know, don't we?

So quite apart from the delusional cspunk, was anybody else interested in continuing with the thread originally started by LISpace on the collapses of 9/11? I know I'd like to continue with the thread, if only for its politeness and sobriety.

Notwithstanding cspunk and his drunken rantings, can we have the thread reopened, please?

MsG
 
#6
mark1234 said:
I can see where he's coming from, there are several 9/11 threads, each going on 60 pages.

Has it got anywhere?
I can see where he's coming from too, Mark, and it's not what you think. The very fact that so many folks have contributed to the thread means that there are a lot of concerns to be addressed.

But we get this self-important twät declaring that his opinion the only valid one and unilaterally closing a thread that was very interesting. He's only a MOD! He's only supposed to clock that folks play the game on threads, not decide what's discussed and for how long or to what extent.

That's the problem when you hand any kind of power like this to folks who can't handle it; you get situations like this.

MsG
 

OldSnowy

LE
Moderator
Book Reviewer
#7
Just a personal thought, of course, this is the British Army Rumour Service, not "tinfoil hats-r-us". Aren't there special places on the 'net for nutters to discuss their ravings about 9/11, Kennedy assasinations (various), Princess Di car crash, moon landings, alien abductions, etc?

Why, I believe there are.



So, please, why don't you FECK OFF from here, jout monomaniacal nutjobs.
 
#8
o ffs!, the 9/11 thread was getting more troll and droll every page, the never ending and recirculation of the same deluded rhetoric was giving me a migraine.
rational discussion? 'death beams?' 'dustification?' the 'truthers' are as fukin insane as the blokes who hijacked and flew the planes into the buildings in the first place.

to the hole.
 
#9
OldSnowy said:
Just a personal thought, of course, this is the British Army Rumour Service, not "tinfoil hats-r-us". Aren't there special places on the 'net for nutters to discuss their ravings about 9/11, Kennedy assasinations (various), Princess Di car crash, moon landings, alien abductions, etc?

Why, I believe there are.



So, please, why don't you FECK OFF from here, jout monomaniacal nutjobs.
Too true, OldSnowy, there are any number of sites for such discussions, but why should/would that exclude them from being discussed on ARRSE?

MsG
 
#10
Bugsy said:
mark1234 said:
I can see where he's coming from, there are several 9/11 threads, each going on 60 pages.

Has it got anywhere?
I can see where he's coming from too, Mark, and it's not what you think. The very fact that so many folks have contributed to the thread means that there are a lot of concerns to be addressed.

But we get this self-important twät declaring that his opinion the only valid one and unilaterally closing a thread that was very interesting. He's only a MOD! He's only supposed to clock that folks play the game on threads, not decide what's discussed and for how long or to what extent.

That's the problem when you hand any kind of power like this to folks who can't handle it; you get situations like this.

MsG
About 6 of us, on a regular basis, not exactly queuing at the doors and I had sacked it because I was really fed up of going around in circles.

Anyway more disturbing is why CPUNK keeps cows in his house

F*cking weirdo
 
#11
OldSnowy, you do have a point, but alos, there are dozens of sites for almost all the crap that gets discussed on here, should they all be closed as well?
 
#13
Bugsy:

It's not a debate, it's the same lies and refutations repeated as nauseum. The only reason that the refutations continue is that the same disproved claptrap keeps coming up time and again.

There isn't a magic number of repetitions that make it true.
 
#14
Neither having been party to the original thread, and the assault on the moderator, I now feel compelled to interceed.

1.. The whole 9/11 building collapse scenario was disputed at lenght in the US federal courts, in particular regard to sympathetic building collapse.

Not only did the Federal court pass judgement on the cause of the collapse, in an insurance related liability claim, my learned frineds are still living off their annual bonus from the year the judgement was passed.

In a professional capacity, a large team of expert witnesses from Weildinger Associates was called in to produce post-strike analysis calulations. These were critical in the judgement in favour of the builders of the twin-towers.

so the conspiracy has not only subverted the US legal profession ( possible) but a large international civil engineering house, answerable to an international board, perhaps?

Consult with figure 1 on page 13 Here. My view is that you are outside the cone of plausibility.

2. As a long-standing Arrse subsciber, I am extremely uncomfortable with any topic that places the Arrse community in the "Tin Foil Hat" arena. This could be used by some journalists to undermine our credibility. There are many other places to discuss such matters, I invite you to join co-conspiritors over there. I am struggling to see how discussion regarding a "conspiracy" about the origin of 9/11, has a direct baring on the cut and thust of daily life in the British Army.

Could I invite other Arrsers to post their views below?
 
#15
Well said subbsonic.
ARRSE is not the correct forum for debates(?) of this nature.
I will assume that, like myself,people log into ARRSE for light relief,a laugh or to veiw topics that directly affect their world or Army connection in whatever form that takes.
Global conspiricies are generally not on the radar

Now can we get back to some basic sexist debauchery
 
#16
'I am struggling to see how discussion regarding a "conspiracy" about the origin of 9/11, has a direct baring on the cut and thust of daily life in the British Army'

TBH i havnt read the thread, but to close a thread down, beacause you disagree with what is being posted there, within the rules, to me at least seems over the top. as for the above comment, in some respects i do agree, but then, i fail to see what half of the sh1t on here has to do with the daily life of the BA.
I guess im just in an awkard mood tonight, ah well..
 
#17
mandown said:
TBH i havnt read the thread
mybe you should. i bet your back here before your halfway through with a changed mind that it should be binned.
 
#18
Who gives a fuck?

Even if it was faked, do you fuckwits really think that the all seeing US Government, with more intelligence organs than you can shake a stick at, would allow evidence such as seismic recordings/amateur film to get into the public domain for muppets to rant about conspiracy theories?

Regardless of who did it, people died. Like this poor bastard. I think thats the part that a lot of "conspiracy theorists" tend to forget.
 
#19
Like subsonic I was not a party to the discussion. I was online for page one and as some rightly said why was the thread in the Naafi in the first place.

The title to the thread was a "Sensible discussion" it was neither a debate nor a discussion just pointless back and forth arguments that went nowhere.

I for one think the MOD was right for binning it, there are plenty of other places (maybe even in this site i.e. the old 9/11 threads) where the "discussion" could of been raised again, but certainly not in the Naffi.
D_M
 
#20
incendiarycutlery said:
Bugsy:

It's not a debate, it's the same lies and refutations repeated as nauseum. The only reason that the refutations continue is that the same disproved claptrap keeps coming up time and again.

There isn't a magic number of repetitions that make it true.
Incendiarycutlery, thanks for you input, but I'd tend to disagree with your findings.

However many discussions are carried out on what did or didn't happen on 9/11, they will, by their nature, draw in many who don't express their opinions but draw their own conclusions. By deliberately suppressing/forcing the debate in one direction, as cspunk is wont to do, you achieve one of two aims: either you "convince" folks of your opinion, or you make them hungry to learn more. There's no telling which way things will swing in that case. Quite apart from the fact that I've taken part in discussions about 9/11 on at least three different occasions on ARRSE and this cspunk geezer didn't feel the need to pipe up and deliver his omnescient decision then, so why now?

So let's have an open discussion on the subject on ARRSE, and why not? Either folks will be convinced of one side or the other. In both cases a result will have been achieved.

MsG
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top