Dilbert14 comments

Posted in: Woman arrested for abusing 2-week-old twins See in context

I said it million times and I'll say it again. Baby licence! Just to train stupid people like her. Why not? Isn't it obvious that most new moms can use some kind of training for how to rare a child? I'm sure these type of incidents will ceast to exist if we had the concept.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Posted in: 50% of Americans support legalizing marijuana: poll See in context

RomeoR,

I think the reason it can be a gateway drug is because it's available at the same place that other hard drugs are available. It's the dealers who suggest, other hard drugs to innocent pot smokers. If it were seperated and legal, noone would decide to try hard drugs.

Furthermore, if pot was legal, drug dealer would be a thing in the past. This is their primary income and without it they wouldn't be able to survive, dealing hard drugs only. Legalization of pot can be the the solution to drug war. Legalization can (and will) bring drug lords and even terrorists to their end.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Posted in: 50% of Americans support legalizing marijuana: poll See in context

Everyone is responsible of their own lives. It's not governments responsibility to have a say about people's mental state. They can regulate and restrict chemical drugs, hard drugs, but not a plant that can be consumed as it is, without going through any chemical process.

Even though I'm for legalization, I wouldn't want to see it being advertised for. Absolutely no advertising should be done. It can even be licenced, only people with licence should grow it, and be responsible for self consumption, not resale.

People are waking up to the fact that it's just an innocent, harmless plant.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Posted in: NZ, Australia condemn Japan's plan to go ahead with whaling See in context

SHAME on Japan!! Especially in these troubled times, they still insist that this barbaric act should go on. SHAME!!! Japan = Killers of sealife.

-3 ( +6 / -9 )

Posted in: Japan to go ahead with whaling despite activist threats See in context

Time to donate to seasheperd. I hope they can be as successfull as last year.

8 ( +10 / -2 )

Posted in: Ten years on, do you believe al-Qaida was responsible for the events of 9/11? See in context

Here are some highly credible people talking about 911. http://www.infowars.com/highly-credible-people-question-911/ You official story believers will one day know the real truth.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Posted in: Ten years on, do you believe al-Qaida was responsible for the events of 9/11? See in context

I keep reading things like "110 floors can crash down into each other at the same speed that something would drop IN OPEN AIR, WITH NO RESISTANCE." as if this the most obviously impossible thing ever. I don't think it's the most impossible thing ever and it's completely uninteresting to me.

Could the reason why, it's completely uninteresting to you be becuase it defies laws of physics? You can't claim to be a scientist and ignore the fact that building would never fall in freefall speeds, unless all internal columns were all severed in synch.

As a matematician, maybe you could help us calculate the possibilities of these many events coming together in one day.

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

Posted in: Ten years on, do you believe al-Qaida was responsible for the events of 9/11? See in context

I've yet to see one tiny shred of credible evidence of a controlled demolition.

Because you keep on ignoring them. In the link I posted, it explains how three independant research at all three buildings found traces of thrmite.

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

Posted in: Ten years on, do you believe al-Qaida was responsible for the events of 9/11? See in context

@pawatan,

I think we can go back and forth all day long about this. I think you're not being reasonable at all, suggesting that WTC#7 could fall the way it did. I know it could not have. I know explosives were planted in all three buildings and demolutuion was planned by experts. I know no plane hit pentagon and I know for sure some people had advanced knowldge of the events. I know silversteen bought the buildings couple months prior to the event and I know he doubled his money from insurance afterwards. There's no convincing me as there's no convincing you. You have a faith in system and you would fight to protect it. I on the other hand have no faith in humans, especially ones in power. I know power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. above all, I know they are doing the things thety do because they know most people will believe the official story they come up with and won't question any further. Just know that your ignorance is being counted on by the elites.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Posted in: Ten years on, do you believe al-Qaida was responsible for the events of 9/11? See in context

A PhD in physics and former student of physics teacher David Chandler had analysed the twin tower collapse, watch the part of the video here. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQAkgKQ7G-U&feature=player_embedded#!

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Posted in: Ten years on, do you believe al-Qaida was responsible for the events of 9/11? See in context

A PhD in physics and former student of physics teacher David Chandler had analysed the twin tower collapse, watch the part of the video here. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQAkgKQ7G-U&feature=player_embedded#!

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Posted in: Ten years on, do you believe al-Qaida was responsible for the events of 9/11? See in context

All buildings do this when the supports are destroyed.

Exactely as you said, when the supports are destroyed, all at the same time. All internal columns were destroyed at the same time. Rubble was also removed very fast becuase internal columns were cut at a length that would fit on a truck. It's a trademark of a company called "controlled demolutions". Same goes for twin towers.

That's why I mentioned the other buildings that have collapsed, there's no controversy over the reasons they collapsed yet they collapsed in on themselves.

Yes, I didn't think they were going to land on the next block, surely they fall down. But if it wasn't a controlled demolution, parts of the building would stand, not pulverize like it did.

How can you say it is "unscientific and impossible"? Are you a structural engineer? If not, how can you make a judgement? From watching You Tube videos?

I also try my best to select videos of dependable unbiassed sources. AEfor911truth is one of the good one. I watch their videos and believe what they say. I don't need to be a structural engineer to realize NIST report is a total farce. What they suggest is impossible and therefore not scientific. I can just believe over 1300 engineers and arhitects when they prove their points.

There's plenty of reasons to lie. People have agendas. I don't think these people are lying, I think they just aren't very good at their jobs. Politics will do that to you.

Governments have agendas, they are the ones in politics, not architects and engineers. Now you think you know more about structural engineering than those 1300 A&E professionals who have built many buildings all around the world. Care to comment to that?

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Posted in: Ten years on, do you believe al-Qaida was responsible for the events of 9/11? See in context

pawatan, If you saw the video, you've seen how they compared WTC#7 collapse to other controlled demolutions. How buildings implode into themselves when all internal columns are severed at the same time. Building #7 is doing exactely the same thing, it's coming down really fast and onto itself. NIST is government controlled and can not be trusted. Their report is unscientific and impossible. They will say what they are told by their bosses. The AEfor911 truth is a movement. These professionals have gathered together to point out the impossibilities surrounding the official report and I believe them 100%. They have no reason to lie, noone to report to, paid by noone, not corrupted by politics and know what they are talkign about.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Posted in: Ten years on, do you believe al-Qaida was responsible for the events of 9/11? See in context

Pawatan, If you're comparing the Sampoong building to WTC#7, we're on very different levels. Read this:

"Originally designed as an office building with four floors, it was changed to a large department store during its construction by Lee Joon, the future chairman of the building. This involved cutting away a number of support columns in order to install escalators. When the original contractors refused to carry out these changes, Lee ignored and fired them and hired his own building company for the construction."

Do you still think it's similar to WTC#7?

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Posted in: Ten years on, do you believe al-Qaida was responsible for the events of 9/11? See in context

@pawatan,

Sorry, I have nothing more to say to you if you keep ignoring the evidence I presented. This video is made by Architects and Engineers for 911 truth. It shows clearly how WTC#7 came down. It's clear case of controlled demoultion.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

Posted in: Ten years on, do you believe al-Qaida was responsible for the events of 9/11? See in context

@pawatan, I didn't ignore it, just that I can't explain it as well and detailed as it's explained in this video. If you can spare 15minutes, please watch it.

And WTC 7 didn't collapse anything at all like a controlled demo. It collapsed partially before collapsing completely.

It is collapsed exactely like it would in controlled demolution. It totally collapsed at one time, watch the video.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Posted in: Ten years on, do you believe al-Qaida was responsible for the events of 9/11? See in context

@pawatan, please watch http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZEvA8BCoBw&feature=player_embedded Everything I want to explain is in this video. As you know, #7 building wasn't the only building around and not the closest to the twin towers. I know it's hard to accept it, it wasn't easy for me either. But uunfortunately, it's the truth.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

Posted in: Ten years on, do you believe al-Qaida was responsible for the events of 9/11? See in context

@Horsfella, I very well know that it was a controlled demolution. Silversteen admited it by saying "fires were too intense and decision was made to pull it" Let me ask one question. Were you curious enough to do your own research on the subject? Or are you just repeating what you heard on CNN?

@ Hatsoff, I don't know. All I know is buildings don't fall on free fall speeds and get pulverized. WTC#7 is obvious case of controlled demolution.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Posted in: Ten years on, do you believe al-Qaida was responsible for the events of 9/11? See in context

@WillB,

I can't believe you gave Windsor building as an example of fires bringing buildings down. It is an example of how steel structures can burn all night but doesn't crumble on themselves. It It burned from top to bottom for 13 hours and it did not fall. Nothing can explain the pulverizing 110 story buildings of WTC after very short and isolated case of fire. except controlled demolution.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Posted in: Ten years on, do you believe al-Qaida was responsible for the events of 9/11? See in context

Why is noone talking about WTC#7? Doesn't anyone know about it? What happened to it? All you official story believers, did you see it coming down? Would you say that fires brought it down? Just know that your ignorance is being counted on by the elite. They know they can do something like this and get away with it becuase most people will believe what TV is telling them. I would like one of you believers to make comment on WTC#7. Here's my comment: Obvious controlled demolution. ANd of course if that building was brought down in controlled demolution, so were the others.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Posted in: Ten years on, do you believe al-Qaida was responsible for the events of 9/11? See in context

Of course, it is also theoretically possible that Al Qaeda operatives sneaked into the twin towers and planted bombs the night before 9/11.

Of course that brings up the question of why would Al Qaeda drives plane into the buildings they already planted bombs?

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Posted in: Ten years on, do you believe al-Qaida was responsible for the events of 9/11? See in context

@patawan, If you know your physics, then you would know there would be no way for those buildings to fall in freefall speeds. Falling top floors would hit the floor below and it would create a resistance. if you're interested about the subject, watch the video of engineers and architects http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8182697765360042032# it's a long video, but worth watching if you really wanna know the truth. These people are certified engineers and architects, it's their job to build a strong building that won't collapse on itself. Yes, even if a plane hits it. Look at the immense internal columns, to suggest that kerosine fire had melted the core of the building all the way to the first floor is psuedo science to me.

Also have you heard of Building#7? It went down about 2 hours after two towers went down. Do you have an opinion on how that happened? Have you seen it going down? Do you think fires brought down that building too? I don't mean to attack you ideas, just curious myself that how a man with a knowledge of physics would suggest that plane impact and fire on couple of floors can result to whole 110 floors being pulverized.

0 ( +6 / -6 )

Posted in: Ten years on, do you believe al-Qaida was responsible for the events of 9/11? See in context

@ka_chan, do you even know what you're saying? Are you an architect? or engineer? Here's a video for you, watch what real experts are saying about "the design" of twin towers. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8182697765360042032#

-3 ( +4 / -7 )

Posted in: Ten years on, do you believe al-Qaida was responsible for the events of 9/11? See in context

No I don't. What happened to building 7? Why does over 1200 architects and engineers are saying buildings don't fall the way they did at the event? Sorry to say, but if you believe the official story, you're stupid.

-1 ( +9 / -11 )

Posted in: Norway killer's manifesto praises Japan for not adopting multiculturalism See in context

Funny how he is referred to as a "gunman" and not a terrorist.

Yeah, only muslims can be terrorist, rest are just gunmans. When it first unfolded, they were sure it was Al-qaida. Even when they knew it was a blond european man, they said al-qaida recruiting blond europeans.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Posted in: Japan, Australia clash at whaling talks See in context

in the history of the organization they have never intentionally killed or harmed (bombed) anyone

You sure about that?

They certainly intentionally hurt people economically. I would call sinking peoples ships and then showing off about it pretty sick."

yes, I'm sure about that. Noone got seriously hurt. Japan claimed one of their sailors had a minor injury, that's it. All their actions has one goal, saving the lives of sea creatures from profit hunters. Killers of nature against protecters of nature.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Posted in: Japan, Australia clash at whaling talks See in context

Zenny, fair enough. Understand and respect your view. I on the other hand can't stand watching these great creatures being harpooned to painfull death. Not even one of them. I think their lives are hard as it is, natural conditions and predators are keeping their numbers down. Calling seasheperd extreemists is a seperate issue and I don't think you're right on that. Extreemists would take extreeme measures to fight the situation. Throwing rancid butter to whalers doesn't qualify. Throwing bombs would. Fact is, they are keeping the number of dead whales to minimum. That's what matters. They haven't seriously hurt anyone either. So I'm with them all the way, same as all other people who beg them to do a good job and donate.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Posted in: Japan, Australia clash at whaling talks See in context

Zenny, Don't wanna start a long discussion on this, but anyone who doesn't agree that whales should be killed can not hate what Seasheperd is doing. If you have better idea, they are willing to hear. I think throwing stuff at them is just a last resort and way of showing their feelings. Other than that, whalers are as violent, if not more violent than they are. So I support any and every action taken by seasheperd. They are the ones braving the cold and isolation. They are the ones taking action, doing what they believe must be done, saving these magnificent creatures from painfull death.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

Posted in: Japan, Australia clash at whaling talks See in context

Zenny, Their goal is to save as many whales as possible. Blocking the ship to bring the dead whale for processing prevents it from going and killing more whales. So, yes, one whale is not saved, but many others are this way. It's much better than throwing stuff at them and hope they feel bad about what they're doing. It's not a violent act either, just park their boat very close to the processign ship, noone can be hurt. Whalers must throw stuff at them to get them leave.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

Posted in: Japan, Australia clash at whaling talks See in context

Time to donate to SeaSheperd again. They are the only ones that can stop the whalers. There will never be an agreement and Japan will do its best to kill as many whales as they can. Seasheperd was very effective in last years fight. They discovered a new method of stopping more whales to be transferred to processign ship which proved very effective. I'm very hopefull that they will keep the number dead whales to minimum.

1 ( +6 / -5 )

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites


©2022 GPlusMedia Inc.