so that makes it fine??.......lol.........don't all the rich families from around the world send theyre kids 2 our high end schools??>>>>oh well maybe im wrong but most of the art of class has come from our class system >>>>or that of Nazi Germany in its hey day ......
Larry Silverstone makes 7 billion from wtc insurance policy. [video]http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=pCUQdB5wSH0[/video]
Far far far far far too many coincidences for it to be some terrorist attack. Expert engineers and architects have pretty much debunked the collapsing from fire lies. Never mind building 7 just falling down into it's own footprint, collapsed from "smoke damage" Far too many convenient facts like shipping away the rubble before it can be examined. Too many convenient coincidences like who was actually killed when the planes struck in the towers and the pentagon. [video=youtube;RAAztWC5sT8]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=RAAztWC5sT8[/video]
sisu I must say tho ........if it isn't a false flag operation, then im very very fking impressed by the flying capabilities of the men that flew these planes>>>>>>how many lessons in small air craft did they have now??.....straight into a passenger plane and bang targets hit.....the guy that hit the pentagon should be the new bomber harris of his time for his quality skills of attack
Good pilots? your joking right, your talking about a plane that was already in the air, all the hard word of taking off was done, all they had to do was steer the bloody thing, and thats used as a reason to why it was a conspiracy, cos they couldn't fly the plane? Now granted they are smaller planes, people with very little experience, we are not talking about steering a plane in mid air here either, we are talking about landing a plane, I mean what the "terrorists" did, can hardly be classed difficult compared to landing, can it? All you need to really worry about is using a GPS system, how to go up down left and right, and how to use a throttle. i mean kids have been known to drive a manual car without experience, so think its safe to say a grown man with some pilot training could steer a plane into a building with minimal effort.
So who flew the planes if the terroists didn't? Or wasn't there any planes to begin with? This is becomming weirder and weirder.
swans your not serious surely>>>>>>have you watched the computer showing the change of direction.......ok they were given the freedom of the air by the American air force who were on exercise at the time but yet I find it still fking impressive and after talking 2 men I know who have been flying small air craft for years they would tell you that it isn't no mean feet going from small 2 seriously large and hitting the target on a 100% average have you ever heard of a black box being found>....strange they normally turn up>>>another coincidence I suppose>>>>>>>>
So they put remote controls in the planes, explosives in the buildings (buildings that are populated by thousands of people), had shady meetings with Al Qauda persuading them into hijacking a couple of air planes in a suicide mission (why would they help the american government?). That sounds like a pretty insane plan. Surly there must be easier ways to accomplish the same
Never ceases to amaze me that people are taken in by videos on YouTube that don't come from a truly independent source and make wild, unsubstantiated claims. "far too many coincidences for it to be some terrorist attack" No. A sweeping statement with no foundation. "Expert engineers and architects have pretty much debunked the collapsing from fire lies". No. Wrong again. Who are these engineers? There have been no independent, unbiased experts that have done any such thing. See the thermite argument earlier. "Far too many convenient facts like shipping away the rubble before it can be examined. Too many convenient coincidences like who was actually killed when the planes struck in the towers and the pentagon. " You're reaching. People died. Some famous, most less so. The rubble point has been dealt with ad nauseam earlier. As with most things there is a less glamourous explanation. Trouble is most of the conspiracy theorists look for a conspiracy because they inately don't trust any government and in some cases are outright anti-government. I'm not saying that's not justified but it also means if you approach the debate with a biased view you'll find exactly what you're looking for even when there's a logical explanation. You really need to be more objective. For example, at the time that Blair was taking us to war I said he was lying and that the Americans were too. That proved to be correct, but that doesn't mean to say the whole thing was orchestrated from the outset. Far too many make that quantum leap without any justification imo. Videos put up on YouTube by the Russians and by conspiracy theorists don't really qualify as objective evidence in my book.
[video=youtube;CNmfkycrhDw]https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=CNmfkycrhDw[/video] just another coincidence.... and more lies>>> [video=youtube;YYkc4gD2ID4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=YYkc4gD2ID4[/video]
I have a very hard time w these conspiration theories: they all seem very convincing; but then Again: It's the same with the UFO debate --> do you believe in UFOs? In spite of all this I still don't believe in UFOs, the rhetorics are all the same; Maybe I'm naïve: I believe the US were on the moon, that there was a 9/11, that there is no Bermuda Triangle, or Atlantis, to be found that there is a Greenhouse Effect (but also that .the climate has always been changing). This was a fun discussion - but then if you were right (conspirationalists) what would you do about it? [video=youtube;CCds1GMHcHs]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CCds1GMHcHs[/video] [video=youtube;Ajnsuxxw8Ys]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ajnsuxxw8Ys[/video] [video=youtube;h-SY9JCazA0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h-SY9JCazA0[/video] [video=youtube;qesfp3JI9O4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qesfp3JI9O4[/video]
...... Ok that's one of the craziest things ive ever heard . all you need to know is How to go up down and left and right and use a GPS system !
"Videos put up on YouTube by the Russians and by conspiracy theorists don't really qualify as objective evidence in my book". the people speaking out are not Russians or "conspiracy theorists" they are the men on the ground that day, the colleagues of them that lost they`re lives trying 2 save people from burning 2death in the towers>>>>>>>doesn't that speak volumes or didn't you listen 2 the fire fighter who says major protocols were not carried out in the aftermath of this attack......surely the American government owes its people a true and honest and full report of how it failed 2 stop the attack in its own soil>>>>> and evidence is evidence in my book you have 2 look at both sides 2 come 2the conclusion and your final position on the subject matter .....my position is it was a false flag op and they got the invasion they wanted ....with the help of a naïve nation of course ......I`ll leave it like that on my part>>>>>>> ps aussie don't trust the media in times of this nature>>>we all saw what propaganda can do 2 a nation on its arse in Nazi Germany.......think out of the box for once dude yeah it will help the evolution of mankind in the long run
mikra I`d like a new type government(like Iceland created after the revolution out there) that is open and honest whilst working on "our" behalf>>>>>>and please don't call evidence conspiracy because it a word that is made 2 take out the seriousness of the true subject in hand.......
[video=youtube;ds6Rmg9Uzf4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=ds6Rmg9Uzf4[/video] we can change for the better no matter what the nanny state we live in says.....break free from the shackles of old politics and step into the future
funny they(the media) didn't show a peaceful revolution but we get front row seats for violent ones like Egypt and Syria [video=youtube;YH0_JQW--gc]https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=YH0_JQW--gc[/video] Daniel craig has no limits
I certainly wasn’t being arrogant but feel free to project, but then I doubt your OP meant to come across as misjudged in its tone and I’m afraid it did. Obviously this is somewhere where we simply differ, but even if your sentiment was sincere I can’t agree with it when taking into account the other beliefs you put forward. As for calling my point appalling…do kindly jog on. Obviously this is entirely subjective but I don’t think I’m the one being appalling here. Zogby have a history of incredibly inaccurate polling (Ctrl+f Zogby on this new york times article) http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/15/before-citing-a-poll-read-the-fine-print/?_r=0 and even if the poll does have much truth to it, it still doesn’t disprove my point that there are many people who have been affected by the disaster that would be quite reasonably insulted by your insinuations. Yeah, because you’re on a personal talking relationship with all of them yourself right? Yes, we’ve heard that a few times. But you haven’t made a good effort to actually back up the “truth that lies in the middle”, and in fact the most routinely backed up side of the argument, the one with some meaningful evidence behind it, is version A – the official story. The reason I take a moral high ground is because you’re insinuating that a massive amount of people were complicit in a conspiracy to commit mass murder, and then cover it up, with paltry evidence and no respect for them whatsoever. Calling me arrogant and appalling is hypocritical. Don’t presume I don’t know any more about the subject matter than you do either, that IS arrogant and misjudged and I think you’re confusing us both having a right to an opinion with you trying to give your poor argument equal legitimacy to some of the others made here. I’m not closing my mind at all – if I was I’d be one of those fools who believes in censoring people with your beliefs, something I said I opposed in my original post. I respect your right to question things, but I also think you’re wrong – you’re confusing being called out on bull**** claims with me trying to stop you making them. So as you put it, you can “rant all you like” about freedom of speech but I’m not censoring you. Blocking up and go “you’re restricting my freedom of speech!” and calling me arrogant because I vehemently disagree with your beliefs and asked you to substantiate them isn’t some sort of brave stand for freedom of speech, it’s a cop out. Creating a debate is fine, and yes it does stir people – I think we’ve both displayed that. However, I’m afraid I don’t agree with you on respect. If you had any respect for the seriousness of the subject matter, you would actually back up your claims and try to prove the official story wrong rather than making spurious claims. I mean seriously, at no point in that post have you actually made an effort to either A. dispute the official story or B. prove the "truth inbetween" you claim exists. You simply quoted a poll from an unreliable polling company that wasn't decisive either way in trying to prop up your plastic sympathy, and the rest of your post was a poorly argued personal attack. Your post didn’t actually try to reinforce your argument, you just decided to try and use it to make a personal attack against me and go on a bizarre rant about free speech that completely misses the point of my criticism. 1. Labelling me arrogant for being dismissive of your unsubstantiated, uninformed opinion. Would I be arrogant if I told an EDL member their idea of race was inaccurate? 2. Criticising me for taking the moral high ground because I treat the subject with some degree of seriousness in regards to not flatly making stuff up. 3. Complaining that I’m somehow closed entirely to alternative opinion, something which I haven’t done, and implying that I don’t respect your right to an opinion, which is also a false presumption. The second half of your post was bizarre really and to be honest it seems awfully like you just don’t like me taking a strongly negative view of your opinion, so instead of issuing a rebuttal to what I’m saying you’re going off on one about free speech. Oh and surprise surprise, aberdude is coming in to launch Operation Delusion. Hooray for lunacy! Yeah, you told him! To be honest, I’ve read through the last few pages and all I can see is poorly written nutty crap. Ironically calling for evidence of Bin Ladens body on page 10 when you can almost certainly produce **** all to prove your absurd conspiracy theory. See NJ, this is an example of my way of looking at it that you seem to have misjudged a bit yourself…I definitely respect people’s right to an opinion. That doesn’t mean I have to respect the opinion itself or be kind about it. Now that the thread has turned into a melting pot for stupidity, I'm out. I thought I'd got away from this when I had a rather frustrating argument with a drunk Donny fan in Mallorca who thought that 9/11 bankrupted the US (lol) but clearly not.
