Some interesting stuff on here for anyone into a bit of Chomsky.....................
You must log in or register to see media
@BringBackFootie.You must log in or register to see images
Most of your 9/11 ones for a start offLike?![]()

Most of your 9/11 ones for a start off![]()

I rest my caseOfficial story - Planes flew at impossible speeds into small targets by pilots the best of whom could barely fly a cessna.
Whatever the truth, that is not it and you'd have to be a loon to think otherwise![]()


I rest my case![]()
I don't know the official story? Ok mateDoesn't make sense, you don't even know the official story, as in the whole story as in the reports do you? So how can you say they were true?
That sums up your debate skills on such matters![]()
I don't know the official story? Ok mate
I watched the ****er live on TV, I trust my own eyes.
The only official line I've never bought was the plane that was flying towards the Whitehouse wasn't shot down, when it patently was. The rest was what it was, you believe otherwise, in my book you're ****ing barking for doing so. That's it, no point going over it yet again.
So ALLof the TV networks were in on it?The footage you seen was not live, I watched it too. It was fed from the US. When we seen that footage the event had already happened.
This is what people come up with when they think about it, answers on a postcard
You must log in or register to see images
Let me repeat what I've said before- I think we all need a healthy scepticism when dealing with official lines.I don't do "believe", I prefer to actually learn what actualy goes on saint........
.........And you think I am "mad"?
Let me repeat what I've said before- I think we all need a healthy scepticism when dealing with official lines.
However, it's a big leap from having doubts about an official story to eagerly embracing the worst-possible scenario alternative.
The reason I made the Hollywood reference is because I often see alternative theories based purely on inconsistencies in the official line- inconsistencies are simply equated with falsehood.
I would say the opposite was true, it's the anomalies that make something more plausible.
Unlike a work of fiction, reality doesn't have a neatly plotted storyline where everything ultimately falls into place and it's the people we all trust that turn out to be the bad guys.
In stressful and/or chaotic situations, it's perfectly natural for there to be discrepancies in eye-witness accounts and the gathering and processing of information. People will offer accounts to support their own prejudices, others will simply misinterpret what they see, yet others will lie to cover their mistakes-real or perceived.
Fiction is all neat and tidy- the real world is messy.
Well for the first bit, lets pretend we live in a fantasy world where politicians military and intelligence services AND media don't tell lies (we know it is 100% not the case though)
When this lot give an official story full of holes, wtf do you expect, and add to that we are talking professional liars here lets not forget.
So you ask why I am suspicious, has Hillsborough taught you nothing? If I had a penny for every time I was ridiculed over the years over Hillsborough, apparently I was mad claiming it was a fit of of the fans that went right to No10.
Now you might dismiss that cos you always believed Hillsborough was not a "Conspiracy theory" but millions did.
Now there are dingbats out there, and others out to discredit credible investigations. It's very hit and miss looking up stuff especially now with the right to be forgotten, the web is being cleansed.
But there are people out there that use the same methods the police do, compare evidence against the claims, check people behaviour and connections and possible motives, this is how the actual researchers go about all of that. Exactly in the same way the police do, part of police work is having theories of a conspiracy to commit crime. Granted the citizen journalists are not trained like police but they are the ONLYT narrative outside of the official one, everything else is tightly controlled either directly or through self censor. Think I am wrong on this? You'll find I am not.
So we find now that the CIA run troll armies out of their Special Operations division. UK GCHQ has JTRIG Online deception program, and have psychologists working for them to assist in writing up the documentation for online manipulation of people. Russian trolls, Chinese trolls, israeli trolls and trolls who just like to shoot down debate by saying "conspriacy theory" because one doesn't agree.
The flight 712 thing was clearly a debatable issue and no firm answers. The idea that the flight was shot down by accident is not some wild crazy idea, there are claims that support it and claims that support the official story. No one can prove anything, to even suggest it is not likely the military might try cover their arses is ludicrous. "It's entirely possible"