Poll

What is the truth about the 911 attack on the World Trade Center?

Hijacked Planes were flown into the two towers.  Resulting fires caused the collapse.
14 (60.9%)
The planes were CGI and it was controlled demolition
2 (8.7%)
Something other than planes were flown into the twin towers,  missiles drones etc.
2 (8.7%)
The planes were holographic projections from a special satellite, and it was a directed energy weapon
1 (4.3%)
Something else.
3 (13%)
Denspressure
1 (4.3%)

Total Members Voted: 23

Voting closed: March 06, 2017, 10:56:40 PM

911 What is the truth?

  • 6866 Replies
  • 164043 Views
*

disputeone

  • Ranters
  • 15030
  • Or should I?
Re: 911 What is the truth?
« Reply #5760 on: September 25, 2017, 09:44:35 PM »
Friendly reminder if you can debunk my points on wtc 7 to do so and to please stop personally attacking me.
For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this.

The reason I am consistently personally attacked here.
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=69306.msg1960160#msg1960160

*

disputeone

  • Ranters
  • 15030
  • Or should I?
Re: 911 What is the truth?
« Reply #5761 on: September 25, 2017, 09:45:24 PM »
This post debunks your assertion that the entire core collapsed leaving the outside intact and then the "outer facade" collapsing at free-fall.

Please read it and respond to it.
Here.
Can you debunk this post? If it's as stupid and I'm as stupid as you all claim surely a smart guy like you can debunk it.

No the video of the collapse shows the failure of columns 79, 80, and 81, causing a partial building collapse. (The collapse of the east penthouse.)

None of these were core columns and then after a few seconds, the entire core failed nearly simultaneously causing a 2.25 second symmetrical free-fall of the entire bulding. Remeber the "outer facade" had 18 structural support columns making any natural free-fall impossible.

@Rayzor.
You still haven't addressed your post trying to debunk Newton. Do you stand by it?

You seriously think I'm trying to debunk Newton?

I do, yes.

See.
We'll soon see about that.

Yes,  Hulsey's  simultaneous collapse theory.   What a joke.

In order for the building to collapse at free-fall the entire core had to fail nearly simultaneously. Structural resistance slows fall acceleration. If you don't like it take it up with Newton, not me.

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/Newt.html

Ah, I see where you went wrong,  you forgot that the center had already collapsed / was collapsing BEFORE the facade came down.  I really can't keep holding you hand while you work through these things, you have to start to think for yourself if you are going to be a good anon campaigner.

Thats not true that's the conclusions of the fraudulent NIST report. That is merely the lie we were sold.

Furthermore, even if the entire inner core collapsed leaving the entire "facade" intact (which is impossible because of the cross bracing) there were still 18 support columns around the exterior.



A free fall collapse even under your fairytale conditions is still impossible without a controlled demolition. You are trying to debunk Newton.

Q.E.D.


Edit.
Video evidence.
[Youtube][/youtube]

For reference Rayzor believes this debunks it. Notice he says it's "been debunked" since his first post on the topic.

We already debunked that free-fall argument.   But just to recap,  how is it possible for the rooftop of a building to fall?   Doesn't the fact that it collapsed at all mean that the building structure supporting the roof is collapsing,    why would you be surprised that it fell at a free fall rate.   At least until it hit ground and other debris piled up,   The graph in the NIST shows it quite clearly.   

You say you work in the industry,  you mean the building industry?   In what capacity?

What caused the core to collapse at free-fall


What caused the core to collapse at free-fall



Opposed to hovering in place?

Watch the video. When the west penthouse fails the building immediately collapses.

Video evidence.
[Youtube][/youtube]

When the west penthouse fails the building immediately collapses.

Gee, I wonder what was holding up the penthouse?

The core. Therefore as soon as the core failed the building came down. Hulsey is right.
Video evidence.
[Youtube][/youtube]

Unbalanced forces are a problem aren't they.

Please elaborate on what you mean by unbalanced forces. Using the information in your short post it's hard to understand your meaning.

http://study.com/academy/lesson/unbalanced-force-definition-example-quiz.html

Seems like you're on the right track, keep researching.

Quote
Unbalanced forces are forces that cause a change in the motion of an object.

Very good.

Now this article shows us why a 2.25 second symmetrical free-fall of wtc 7 is impossible.

Quote
Any push or pull is a force. To describe a force, you must know two things. You must know the size of the force and the direction of the force. Suppose two teams are playing tug of war. Each team is pulling with equal force, but in opposite directions. Neither team can make the other team move. Forces that are equal in size but opposite in direction are called balanced forces.

Newtons third does debunk the idea of a fire induced natural collapse of wtc 7, no doubt about that.

Quote
If two forces are in opposite directions, then the net force is the difference between the two forces, and it is in the direction of the larger force. Consider two dogs playing tug of war with a short piece of rope. Each is exerting a force, but in opposite directions.

So we could look at gravitational potential energy, inertia and structural resistance to calculate the predicted fall acceleration of wtc 7 if the NIST conclusions were correct and the collapse was progressive starting with the failure of column 79 on floor 13.

Spoiler.
It isnt 2.25 seconds of very close to 9.8m/s2.

If I'm going to put in the effort show me it's worth it.

[Youtube][/youtube]
For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this.

The reason I am consistently personally attacked here.
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=69306.msg1960160#msg1960160

*

disputeone

  • Ranters
  • 15030
  • Or should I?
Re: 911 What is the truth?
« Reply #5762 on: September 26, 2017, 02:42:01 AM »
I'm gonna school Mick West if anyone wants to watch, Bhs if you want to join in for some lulz. That whole site is dripping with fear ;D.

https://www.metabunk.org/invitation-to-debate-mick-west-on-wtc-7.t9090/

Edit. @Rayzor I'm not sure if they are allowed to use your tactics there.

I guess I'll find out.
Edit. Been waiting 33 minutes for this post to be approved...

Quote
To get started I would set out to prove that the 2.25 seconds of free-fall acceleration of the entire roofline of wtc 7, in effect a 2.25 second symmetrical free-fall is impossible for any fire induced collapse. I have a knowlege of the building and the engineering principles involved. It's hard to have a polite debate on this subject and I was hoping you could offer me one.

I'll await your answer.
dispute.

Like really metabunk?
« Last Edit: September 26, 2017, 03:02:15 AM by disputeone »
For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this.

The reason I am consistently personally attacked here.
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=69306.msg1960160#msg1960160

Re: 911 What is the truth?
« Reply #5763 on: September 26, 2017, 03:25:40 AM »
Your link doesn't work.
'Requested thread cant be found'

*

disputeone

  • Ranters
  • 15030
  • Or should I?
Re: 911 What is the truth?
« Reply #5764 on: September 26, 2017, 03:30:34 AM »
I'm still waiting for the moderators to approve the thread. Over an hour now.

No idea why.
For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this.

The reason I am consistently personally attacked here.
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=69306.msg1960160#msg1960160

*

JerkFace

  • 9694
  • Looking for Occam
Re: 911 What is the truth?
« Reply #5765 on: September 26, 2017, 03:32:20 AM »
I'm gonna school Mick West if anyone wants to watch, Bhs if you want to join in for some lulz. That whole site is dripping with fear ;D.

This should be good for a giggle,  don't forget to remind them about Newton.   

Post a link.  The one you put up earlier is broken.
Stop gilding the pickle, you demisexual aromantic homoflexible snowflake.

*

disputeone

  • Ranters
  • 15030
  • Or should I?
Re: 911 What is the truth?
« Reply #5766 on: September 26, 2017, 03:32:46 AM »
Post a link.  The one you put up earlier is broken.

I'm still waiting for the moderators to approve the thread. Over an hour now.

No idea why.
For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this.

The reason I am consistently personally attacked here.
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=69306.msg1960160#msg1960160

*

disputeone

  • Ranters
  • 15030
  • Or should I?
Re: 911 What is the truth?
« Reply #5767 on: September 26, 2017, 03:39:40 AM »
He claims to have """debunked""" Hulseys report.

When it hasn't even been released. His main point in """debunking""" it is that it hasn't been released ;D ;D ;D. I can smell the desperation. Smells like winning.

Edit.
https://www.metabunk.org/9-11.f28/
Lulzy.

This is the thread waiting to be approved for clarity. OP and first post.

Quote
Hi Mick I would like to offer a debate to you on the collapse of wtc 7 if you find that acceptable.

I have done my research and would enjoy a structured conversation.

Quote
To get started I would set out to prove that the 2.25 seconds of free-fall acceleration of the entire roofline of wtc 7, in effect a 2.25 second symmetrical free-fall is impossible for any fire induced collapse. I have a knowlege of the building and the engineering principles involved. It's hard to have a polite debate on this subject and I was hoping you could offer me one.

I'll await your answer.
dispute.
« Last Edit: September 26, 2017, 03:57:52 AM by disputeone »
For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this.

The reason I am consistently personally attacked here.
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=69306.msg1960160#msg1960160

*

disputeone

  • Ranters
  • 15030
  • Or should I?
Re: 911 What is the truth?
« Reply #5768 on: September 26, 2017, 04:04:11 AM »
HE ALSO CLAIMS A GIANT STEPPED ON WTC 7!!!!

https://www.metabunk.org/how-buckling-led-to-free-fall-acceleration-for-part-of-wtc7s-collapse.t8270/

Man he's gonna be pissed when even by his logic he's gonna need 52 giants.

(Warning cartoon giants.)
[youtube][/youtube]

Edit.

Even then all of the core columns had to fail simultaneously for the 2.25 second symmetrical free-fall.

Lol.
« Last Edit: September 26, 2017, 04:11:10 AM by disputeone »
For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this.

The reason I am consistently personally attacked here.
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=69306.msg1960160#msg1960160

*

JerkFace

  • 9694
  • Looking for Occam
Re: 911 What is the truth?
« Reply #5769 on: September 26, 2017, 06:40:11 AM »
HE ALSO CLAIMS A GIANT STEPPED ON WTC 7!!!!

https://www.metabunk.org/how-buckling-led-to-free-fall-acceleration-for-part-of-wtc7s-collapse.t8270/

Man he's gonna be pissed when even by his logic he's gonna need 52 giants.

(Warning cartoon giants.)
[youtube][/youtube]

Edit.

Even then all of the core columns had to fail simultaneously for the 2.25 second symmetrical free-fall.

Lol.

I still don't see a link to your thread on Metabunk?   
Stop gilding the pickle, you demisexual aromantic homoflexible snowflake.

*

disputeone

  • Ranters
  • 15030
  • Or should I?
Re: 911 What is the truth?
« Reply #5770 on: September 26, 2017, 07:22:23 AM »
I still don't see a link to your thread on Metabunk?

Yeah apparently they dont want to debate wtc 7.



The posts and thread above """didn't meet gudelines.""" Apparently debunking the 9/11 official story is forbidden and censored there?

I wonder why they don't want an honest debate? I wonder why they have to censor free speech?
« Last Edit: September 26, 2017, 07:35:29 AM by disputeone »
For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this.

The reason I am consistently personally attacked here.
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=69306.msg1960160#msg1960160

Re: 911 What is the truth?
« Reply #5771 on: September 26, 2017, 07:34:55 AM »
Well, free speech doesn't mean that they, on a private platform, have to accept or publish your opinion.

Anyway, just write them an email and ask what the issue with your post was.

*

disputeone

  • Ranters
  • 15030
  • Or should I?
Re: 911 What is the truth?
« Reply #5772 on: September 26, 2017, 07:36:16 AM »
I have already. Waiting for a response. I'll post one here if I get one.
For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this.

The reason I am consistently personally attacked here.
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=69306.msg1960160#msg1960160

*

Crouton

  • Flat Earth Inspector General of High Fashion Crimes and Misdemeanors
  • Planar Moderator
  • 9229
  • V is for Viceroy
Re: 911 What is the truth?
« Reply #5773 on: September 26, 2017, 07:37:51 AM »
Oh wow, they have a flat earth section there. I wonder if they ever reference this forum.
Intelligentia et magnanimitas vincvnt violentiam et desperationem.
The truth behind NASA's budget

*

disputeone

  • Ranters
  • 15030
  • Or should I?
Re: 911 What is the truth?
« Reply #5774 on: September 26, 2017, 07:39:26 AM »
Right under 9/11.

You would know.
Old friend.

Edit. To confirm I have not been sent an email or allowed an honest debate as of this moment. They sure do moderate that forum like commies.
« Last Edit: September 26, 2017, 02:49:21 PM by disputeone »
For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this.

The reason I am consistently personally attacked here.
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=69306.msg1960160#msg1960160

*

sokarul

  • 15840
  • Discount Chemist
Re: 911 What is the truth?
« Reply #5775 on: September 27, 2017, 09:00:45 AM »
I'm still going to respond to the post on the other page.
Sokarul

ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

*

disputeone

  • Ranters
  • 15030
  • Or should I?
Re: 911 What is the truth?
« Reply #5776 on: September 27, 2017, 04:28:20 PM »
I'm still going to respond to the post on the other page.

I look forward to it.
For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this.

The reason I am consistently personally attacked here.
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=69306.msg1960160#msg1960160

*

disputeone

  • Ranters
  • 15030
  • Or should I?
Re: 911 What is the truth?
« Reply #5777 on: September 29, 2017, 05:45:53 PM »
I'm still going to respond to the post on the other page.

I look forward to it.
For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this.

The reason I am consistently personally attacked here.
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=69306.msg1960160#msg1960160

*

Bullwinkle

  • Flat Earth Curator
  • 16259
  • "Umm, WTF ???"
Re: 911 What is the truth?
« Reply #5778 on: September 29, 2017, 10:37:03 PM »
RE can never win this argument.
FE can't be disproved.

*

disputeone

  • Ranters
  • 15030
  • Or should I?
Re: 911 What is the truth?
« Reply #5779 on: September 30, 2017, 01:34:25 AM »
That's not a rebuttal Bullwinkle. Even by the standard I hold you to. I'm waiting for Sokaruls rebuttal.
For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this.

The reason I am consistently personally attacked here.
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=69306.msg1960160#msg1960160

*

sokarul

  • 15840
  • Discount Chemist
Re: 911 What is the truth?
« Reply #5780 on: September 30, 2017, 12:18:19 PM »
I'm still going to respond to the post on the other page.

I look forward to it.
It happened 16 years ago. What are you in a hurry for?
Sokarul

ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

*

Bullwinkle

  • Flat Earth Curator
  • 16259
  • "Umm, WTF ???"
Re: 911 What is the truth?
« Reply #5781 on: October 03, 2017, 07:21:48 PM »
That's not a rebuttal Bullwinkle. Even by the standard I hold you to.

I have lower standards.   ;)
RE can never win this argument.
FE can't be disproved.

*

Heiwa

  • 7439
Re: 911 What is the truth?
« Reply #5782 on: October 04, 2017, 11:06:41 AM »
That's not a rebuttal Bullwinkle. Even by the standard I hold you to.

I have lower standards.   ;)

LOL

*

Crouton

  • Flat Earth Inspector General of High Fashion Crimes and Misdemeanors
  • Planar Moderator
  • 9229
  • V is for Viceroy
Re: 911 What is the truth?
« Reply #5783 on: October 04, 2017, 12:16:34 PM »
Okay so we've got a few days of quiet time here before it turns into the thunderdome again.  Thought I'd get out a few questions that I've wanted to ask but I didn't feel like participating in a mosh pit.

BHS, these questions are directed at you.  I'm not trying to change your mind.  I'm just trying to understand your point of view here.  Maybe you've answered these questions elsewhere but this thread started out very toxic and only got worse.  So finding actual information here is very difficult.

Anyways.

1. 
My understanding of WTC1 and 2 going down is: 
Airplane crashes into tower.
The crash in addition to causing structural damage also destroys the firing proofing on the support beams.
The remaining fuel in the plane sets part of the tower ablaze.
The heat from the fire weakens the beams.
Eventually they can't support the weight of the floors above them and the progressive collapse brings the tower down.

My question is why do you find this explanation unlikely?

2.
If the plane crash didn't bring down WTC1&2 then what do you believe did?  It seems very unlikely that a conventional demolition wouldn't have been noticed.  Explosives are very loud.  Do you think it was thermite or something else?

3.
WTC7.  D1 has accused me of intentionally misinterpreting Wolf's explanation of why that tower collapsed in such an odd way.  I assure you I am not.  If I'm misunderstanding what wolf said here and he wants to set the record straight then I'll happily own up to it.  As far as I can tell though he provided a great explanation for how WTC7 would have looked like a controlled demolition.  Which is not to say he's definitely correct.  Just that it fits the facts as far as I can tell.
Are you of the opinion that WTC7 was brought down by controlled demolition?
If 911 was a false flag then isn't it possible that WTC7 was just collateral damage?
Intelligentia et magnanimitas vincvnt violentiam et desperationem.
The truth behind NASA's budget

*

disputeone

  • Ranters
  • 15030
  • Or should I?
Re: 911 What is the truth?
« Reply #5784 on: October 26, 2017, 11:24:06 PM »
Bump.

This post debunks your assertion that the entire core collapsed leaving the outside intact and then the "outer facade" collapsing at free-fall.

Please read it and respond to it.
Here.
Can you debunk this post? If it's as stupid and I'm as stupid as you all claim surely a smart guy like you can debunk it.

No the video of the collapse shows the failure of columns 79, 80, and 81, causing a partial building collapse. (The collapse of the east penthouse.)

None of these were core columns and then after a few seconds, the entire core failed nearly simultaneously causing a 2.25 second symmetrical free-fall of the entire bulding. Remeber the "outer facade" had 18 structural support columns making any natural free-fall impossible.

@Rayzor.
You still haven't addressed your post trying to debunk Newton. Do you stand by it?

You seriously think I'm trying to debunk Newton?

I do, yes.

See.
We'll soon see about that.

Yes,  Hulsey's  simultaneous collapse theory.   What a joke.

In order for the building to collapse at free-fall the entire core had to fail nearly simultaneously. Structural resistance slows fall acceleration. If you don't like it take it up with Newton, not me.

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/Newt.html

Ah, I see where you went wrong,  you forgot that the center had already collapsed / was collapsing BEFORE the facade came down.  I really can't keep holding you hand while you work through these things, you have to start to think for yourself if you are going to be a good anon campaigner.

Thats not true that's the conclusions of the fraudulent NIST report. That is merely the lie we were sold.

Furthermore, even if the entire inner core collapsed leaving the entire "facade" intact (which is impossible because of the cross bracing) there were still 18 support columns around the exterior.



A free fall collapse even under your fairytale conditions is still impossible without a controlled demolition. You are trying to debunk Newton.

Q.E.D.


Edit.
Video evidence.
[Youtube][/youtube]

For reference Rayzor believes this debunks it. Notice he says it's "been debunked" since his first post on the topic.

We already debunked that free-fall argument.   But just to recap,  how is it possible for the rooftop of a building to fall?   Doesn't the fact that it collapsed at all mean that the building structure supporting the roof is collapsing,    why would you be surprised that it fell at a free fall rate.   At least until it hit ground and other debris piled up,   The graph in the NIST shows it quite clearly.   

You say you work in the industry,  you mean the building industry?   In what capacity?

What caused the core to collapse at free-fall


What caused the core to collapse at free-fall



Opposed to hovering in place?

Watch the video. When the west penthouse fails the building immediately collapses.

Video evidence.
[Youtube][/youtube]

When the west penthouse fails the building immediately collapses.

Gee, I wonder what was holding up the penthouse?

The core. Therefore as soon as the core failed the building came down. Hulsey is right.
Video evidence.
[Youtube][/youtube]

Unbalanced forces are a problem aren't they.

Please elaborate on what you mean by unbalanced forces. Using the information in your short post it's hard to understand your meaning.

http://study.com/academy/lesson/unbalanced-force-definition-example-quiz.html

Seems like you're on the right track, keep researching.

Quote
Unbalanced forces are forces that cause a change in the motion of an object.

Very good.

Now this article shows us why a 2.25 second symmetrical free-fall of wtc 7 is impossible.

Quote
Any push or pull is a force. To describe a force, you must know two things. You must know the size of the force and the direction of the force. Suppose two teams are playing tug of war. Each team is pulling with equal force, but in opposite directions. Neither team can make the other team move. Forces that are equal in size but opposite in direction are called balanced forces.

Newtons third does debunk the idea of a fire induced natural collapse of wtc 7, no doubt about that.

Quote
If two forces are in opposite directions, then the net force is the difference between the two forces, and it is in the direction of the larger force. Consider two dogs playing tug of war with a short piece of rope. Each is exerting a force, but in opposite directions.

So we could look at gravitational potential energy, inertia and structural resistance to calculate the predicted fall acceleration of wtc 7 if the NIST conclusions were correct and the collapse was progressive starting with the failure of column 79 on floor 13.

Spoiler.
It isnt 2.25 seconds of very close to 9.8m/s2.

If I'm going to put in the effort show me it's worth it.

Recognise that
For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this.

The reason I am consistently personally attacked here.
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=69306.msg1960160#msg1960160

*

disputeone

  • Ranters
  • 15030
  • Or should I?
Re: 911 What is the truth?
« Reply #5785 on: October 26, 2017, 11:34:50 PM »
I'm still going to respond to the post on the other page.

I look forward to it.
For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this.

The reason I am consistently personally attacked here.
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=69306.msg1960160#msg1960160

*

sokarul

  • 15840
  • Discount Chemist
Re: 911 What is the truth?
« Reply #5786 on: October 27, 2017, 09:17:43 AM »
Sokarul

ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

*

disputeone

  • Ranters
  • 15030
  • Or should I?
Re: 911 What is the truth?
« Reply #5787 on: October 27, 2017, 10:25:54 AM »
If not now then when? If not you then who?
For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this.

The reason I am consistently personally attacked here.
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=69306.msg1960160#msg1960160

*

RocketSauce

  • 1440
  • I kill penguins for fun
Re: 911 What is the truth?
« Reply #5788 on: October 27, 2017, 11:43:26 AM »
If not now then when? If not you then who?

What are you hoping from this thread?
Do you want the 10 active people on this site to say... yes we agree with you?
Then what? Do you move to another forum to get more people to agree with you?
What if you get 50 people to agree with you, Then what? Do you rally everyone to.... what? Get the government to tell you the real truth? Why would they do that?
Quote from: Every FE'r

Please don't mention Himawari 8
Quote from: sceptimatic
Impossible to have the same volume and different density.

*fact*
Extra Virgin Penguin Blood is a natural aphrodisiac

*

Bullwinkle

  • Flat Earth Curator
  • 16259
  • "Umm, WTF ???"
Re: 911 What is the truth?
« Reply #5789 on: October 27, 2017, 01:13:02 PM »

What are you hoping from this thread?
Do you want the 10 active people on this site to say... yes we agree with you?
Then what? Do you move to another forum to get more people to agree with you?
What if you get 50 people to agree with you, Then what? Do you rally everyone to.... what? Get the government to tell you the real truth? Why would they do that?



Walk into the shrink wherever you are, just walk in, say, "Shrink, . . . you
Can get anything you want at Alice's Restaurant", and walk out.

You know, if one person, just one person, does it, they may think he's
Really sick and they won't take him.

And if two people do it, in harmony, they may think they're both faggots and
They won't take either of them.

And if three people do it! Can you imagine three people walkin' in, singin'
A bar of "Alice's Restaurant" and walkin' out? They may think it's an
Organization!

And can you imagine fifty people a day? I said FIFTY people a day . . .
Walkin' in, singin' a bar of "Alice's Restaurant" and walkin' out? Friends,
They may think it's a MOVEMENT, and that's what it is: THE ALICE'S
RESTAURANT ANTI-MASSACREE MOVEMENT! . . . and all you gotta do to join is to
Sing it the next time it comes around on the guitar.
RE can never win this argument.
FE can't be disproved.