[Dual1ty]

If this was a laser, how'd he survive?  How'd those trees survive?

Me thinks this was a normal fire...

I never said it was "a laser" or made any claims about the weapon other than it used the power of the hurricane in some way (obviously electrically) - you just took the narrative from the previous video and told me that's now my "script" because you desperately need a straw man to attack and you think everyone's running on a script like you.

You're either on the wrong forum or you have the wrong brain or the wrong intentions, hence why you're appropriately going to continue to get ignored by me more likely than not.

[Lord Dave]

If this was a laser, how'd he survive?  How'd those trees survive?

Me thinks this was a normal fire...

I never said it was "a laser" or made any claims about the weapon other than it used the power of the hurricane in some way (obviously electrically) - you just took the narrative from the previous video and told me that's now my "script" because you desperately need a straw man to attack and you think everyone's running on a script like you.

You're either on the wrong forum or you have the wrong brain or the wrong intentions, hence why you're appropriately going to continue to get ignored by me more likely than not.

When you post something, especially without comment, it is understood to be something you support.  If you post a video but do not agree with its content, you should say so.

[Dual1ty]

When you post something, especially without comment, it is understood to be something you support.  If you post a video but do not agree with its content, you should say so.

Is that so?

All the videos I post are food for thought for those who are actually capable of thinking for themselves (not my fault that this is hard for you). Not to mention that it's all pieces of a larger puzzle because no one knows exactly what happened and hence using your brain and using discernment are obviously required.

Your interpretation that I "support" everything the videos say is utter garbage just like pretty much everything you post. And your opinion that I should announce what I personally agree or don't agree with irrelevant.

[ichoosereality]

The video claims they were started at 2:20pm 8/8/23, did you not watch it yourself?

Uuuh no, it doesn't.

The actual claims are at 3:14.

I was referring to the section at 7:10.

I never said it was "a laser" or made any claims about the weapon other than it used the power of the hurricane in some way (obviously electrically)...

Are you claiming that an object in space was powered by a hurricane a few thousand miles below it?  How even in theory would that occur?

As LordDave says, if you do not agree with the contents of something you post it would be good to point that out.

[Dual1ty]

I was referring to the section at 7:10.

Yeah, well, the actual claims are where I told you, so curb your nonsense. That 2:20 pm is just one of the times given for a different satellite and it is in UTC. So your whole "argument" is just pathetically wrong just like everything you've said in this thread so far. Stop embarassing yourself.

[ichoosereality]

I was referring to the section at 7:10.

Yeah, well, the actual claims are where I told you, so curb your nonsense. That 2:20 pm is just one of the times given for a different satellite and it is in UTC.

True enough, but it still does not match the timeline.

I never said it was "a laser" or made any claims about the weapon other than it used the power of the hurricane in some way (obviously electrically)...

I note you declined to explain your claim.

[Dual1ty]

I was referring to the section at 7:10.

Yeah, well, the actual claims are where I told you, so curb your nonsense. That 2:20 pm is just one of the times given for a different satellite and it is in UTC.

True enough, but it still does not match the timeline.

Please do elaborate.

I never said it was "a laser" or made any claims about the weapon other than it used the power of the hurricane in some way (obviously electrically)...

I note you declined to explain your claim.

I would explain nothing to you even if you paid me. You already tried to misrepresent my claim and turn it into "Are you claiming that an object in space was powered by a hurricane a few thousand miles below it?". Wtf are you talking about. Everything you say makes zero sense, so I'm already suspecting that it's all deliberately meant to not make sense and confuse people. It's either that or you really are that stupid.

[ichoosereality]

I never said it was "a laser" or made any claims about the weapon other than it used the power of the hurricane in some way (obviously electrically)...

I note you declined to explain your claim.

I would explain nothing to you even if you paid me. You already tried to misrepresent my claim and turn it into "Are you claiming that an object in space was powered by a hurricane a few thousand miles below it?". Wtf are you talking about.

I did not misrepresent anything, I only asked a question.  Obviously I am talking about your statement that the weapon, in orbit, "..used the power of the hurricane in some way (obviously electrically)."

[Dual1ty]

your statement that the weapon, in orbit, "..used the power of the hurricane in some way (obviously electrically)."

You're stitching together a part of my statement with your own garbage and claiming it is still my statement. Now you just went from suspicious to dishonest and next it's going to be you're a liar.

Elaborate about the timeline or GTFO.

[ichoosereality]

your statement that the weapon, in orbit, "..used the power of the hurricane in some way (obviously electrically)."

You're stitching together a part of my statement with your own garbage and claiming it is still my statement. Now you just went from suspicious to dishonest and next it's going to be you're a liar.

Here is your statement

I never said it was "a laser" or made any claims about the weapon other than it used the power of the hurricane in some way (obviously electrically) - you just took the narrative from the previous video and told me that's now my "script" because you desperately need a straw man to attack and you think everyone's running on a script like you.

What does that mean?  Aren't you talking about a weapon in orbit?  and how would it use the power of a hurricane?


re the timeline of the fires, the video you present makes very precise claims, like "the Olinda fire was ignited at approximately 10:47pm August 7th".  But the reports I find like this one
https://www.mauicounty.gov/CivicAlerts.aspx?AID=12621
only say

Shortly after midnight this morning, a brush fire was reported in the Olinda Road area of Kula. Residents in the Auli’i Drive area were evacuated at 3:45 a.m. At 4:50 a.m. residents of Hanamu Road were also evacuated. Firefighter crews from Kula, Makawao, Kahului, and Wailea are on scene. The Fire Department’s Air One helicopter was launched at daybreak to conduct aerial assessment of the fire.

So could it have started at 10:47pm?  sure, but we do not know that as far as I can tell.  Claiming things that precisely match a particular scenario but are not established facts is a classic misinformation technique.

[Dual1ty]

re the timeline of the fires, the video you present makes very precise claims, like "the Olinda fire was ignited at approximately 10:47pm August 7th".  But the reports I find like this one
https://www.mauicounty.gov/CivicAlerts.aspx?AID=12621
only say

Shortly after midnight this morning, a brush fire was reported in the Olinda Road area of Kula. Residents in the Auli’i Drive area were evacuated at 3:45 a.m. At 4:50 a.m. residents of Hanamu Road were also evacuated. Firefighter crews from Kula, Makawao, Kahului, and Wailea are on scene. The Fire Department’s Air One helicopter was launched at daybreak to conduct aerial assessment of the fire.

So could it have started at 10:47pm?  sure, but we do not know that as far as I can tell.  Claiming things that precisely match a particular scenario but are not established facts is a classic misinformation technique.

Well, you would find the source of those claimed timings if you actually did your research instead of trying to misrepresent my claims with "weapons in orbit" when I never talked about weapons in orbit in my entire life. And I also never said that the hurricane "powers the weapon", just that the weapon utilizes the power of the hurricane in some way, which is completely different. So I would appreciate if you don't keep trying to misrepresent what I say.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/article/lahaina-residents-say-police-barricades-prevented-people-from-fleeing-raging-fires-5483563

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/how-did-maui-fire-start-cause-lahaina-hawaii-wildfire/

https://www.facebook.com/countyofmaui/posts/671173878373895/

[ichoosereality]

re the timeline of the fires, the video you present makes very precise claims, like "the Olinda fire was ignited at approximately 10:47pm August 7th".  But the reports I find like this one
https://www.mauicounty.gov/CivicAlerts.aspx?AID=12621
only say

Shortly after midnight this morning, a brush fire was reported in the Olinda Road area of Kula. Residents in the Auli’i Drive area were evacuated at 3:45 a.m. At 4:50 a.m. residents of Hanamu Road were also evacuated. Firefighter crews from Kula, Makawao, Kahului, and Wailea are on scene. The Fire Department’s Air One helicopter was launched at daybreak to conduct aerial assessment of the fire.

So could it have started at 10:47pm?  sure, but we do not know that as far as I can tell.  Claiming things that precisely match a particular scenario but are not established facts is a classic misinformation technique.

Well, you would find the source of those claimed timings if you actually did your research instead of trying to misrepresent my claims with "weapons in orbit" when I never talked about weapons in orbit in my entire life. And I also never said that the hurricane "powers the weapon", just that the weapon utilizes the power of the hurricane in some way, which is completely different. So I would appreciate if you don't keep trying to misrepresent what I say.

I am not trying to misrepresent what you say, only to decipher it.  So if not in orbit, where is this weapon you are referring too and in what way does it or even might it (electrically as you say) use the power of a hurricane?

[Dual1ty]

I am not trying to misrepresent what you say, only to decipher it.  So if not in orbit, where is this weapon you are referring too and in what way does it or even might it (electrically as you say) use the power of a hurricane?

Yeah, sure... go decipher why you believe any narratives from government or MSM or "fact-checkers" even if they don't make physical sense.

Now you're asking me for the location of the murder weapon as if I am the one who did the murder. You make so much sense as always. Next you're gonna ask me to describe exactly how it operates. You're already doing it. What a genius you are.

If you must know where I stand TODAY, right now regarding the "CCP NORAD" satellites (and this is for anyone reading this, not just you because I don't care to explain anything to you) - In my opinion, the satellites probably have something to do with those specific fires (they probably were capable of igniting small local vegetation fires that spread further due to high winds and dry conditions), but nothing to do with houses and people literally getting "dustified" and nothing to do with the many anomalies such as liquified rims all over the place next to intact asphalt (which is intact all over the place too) that make it obvious to anyone who isn't a complete idiot that no wildfire caused the resulting destruction. I could name anomalies all day AND provide evidence for said anomalies because unlike you I actually do research before opening my mouth - that's the difference between me and you who are here just to bust my balls and is happy to believe any "nothing to see here" narratives.

[Lord Dave]

When you post something, especially without comment, it is understood to be something you support.  If you post a video but do not agree with its content, you should say so.

Is that so?

All the videos I post are food for thought for those who are actually capable of thinking for themselves (not my fault that this is hard for you). Not to mention that it's all pieces of a larger puzzle because no one knows exactly what happened and hence using your brain and using discernment are obviously required.

Your interpretation that I "support" everything the videos say is utter garbage just like pretty much everything you post. And your opinion that I should announce what I personally agree or don't agree with irrelevant.

So... if I disagree with a video and pick apart its analysis, I'm not thinking for myself?    Just making sure I understand where you stand on what "thinking for yourself" means.  If I had simply agreed with the video without asking questions excpt those presented in the video, would that be "thinking for myself"?

I am not trying to misrepresent what you say, only to decipher it.  So if not in orbit, where is this weapon you are referring too and in what way does it or even might it (electrically as you say) use the power of a hurricane?

Yeah, sure... go decipher why you believe any narratives from government or MSM or "fact-checkers" even if they don't make physical sense.

Now you're asking me for the location of the murder weapon as if I am the one who did the murder. You make so much sense as always. Next you're gonna ask me to describe exactly how it operates. You're already doing it. What a genius you are.

If you must know where I stand TODAY, right now regarding the "CCP NORAD" satellites (and this is for anyone reading this, not just you because I don't care to explain anything to you) - In my opinion, the satellites probably have something to do with those specific fires (they probably were capable of igniting small local vegetation fires that spread further due to high winds and dry conditions), but nothing to do with houses and people literally getting "dustified" and nothing to do with the many anomalies such as liquified rims all over the place next to intact asphalt (which is intact all over the place too) that make it obvious to anyone who isn't a complete idiot that no wildfire caused the resulting destruction. I could name anomalies all day AND provide evidence for said anomalies because unlike you I actually do research before opening my mouth - that's the difference between me and you who are here just to bust my balls and is happy to believe any "nothing to see here" narratives.

Why would the tar and asphalt being intact be odd?
What, exactly, do you think would happen when hit with the intense heat of a wildfire then cooled once the fire ends?

[Dual1ty]

Cop-assisted mass murder.

Yep. That's what happens when you're just an order-following robot.

I have no respect for those PIGS!



People should've floored it out of there despite the police roadblocks.

What a bunch of sheep.

Then again, they didn't get killed by a wildfire.

Still, the ones who made it out are the ones who didn't just stand still waiting for their slaughter. Fact.

[Lord Dave]

Yeah, heard the roadblocks caused a lot of issues and got people killed.

Thats bad logistics, pure and simple.  And in a place with fires and volcanos, you'd think they'd have a better plan in place.

[Dual1ty]

Imagine calling coordinated mass murder "bad logistics".

[Lord Dave]

Imagine calling coordinated mass murder "bad logistics".

Imagine assuming it was coordinated mass murder and not just someone fucking up badly without evidence of intent to comit mass murder.

[Dual1ty]

[markjo]

Imagine calling coordinated mass murder "bad logistics".

Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity. -- Hanlon's razor