One in three American's Say U.S. Aided in 9/11
One in three American's Say U.S. Aided in 9/11
I just want to add, that whatever your opinions are on this, I am not intending on insulting you personally, I just strongly disagree with your opinions, so if I have been robust and abrupt with you I am sorry, but conspiracy theories are something that generally annoy me greatly, so I tend to debate them in this manner.
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
One in three American's Say U.S. Aided in 9/11
There's an interesting account of the final couple of days of the Warren Commission's internal compromises negotiated by John J McCloy, "The only prominent lawyer among the seven commissioners, he brokered the final consensus - avoiding a minority dissenting report - and the crucial wording of the primary conclusion of the final report" as wikipedia puts it. I don't have Kai Bird's biography of him to hand, it's in Birstall at the moment, or I'd put up the key paragraphs from there.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
One in three American's Say U.S. Aided in 9/11
Galbally;523549 wrote: I just want to add, that whatever your opinions are on this, I am not intending on insulting you personally, I just strongly disagree with your opinions, so if I have been robust and abrupt with you I am sorry, but conspiracy theories are something that generally annoy me greatly, so I tend to debate them in this manner.
Yes, I got the names mixed up, but purely a simple mistake. The comments I made about the Report still stand. Just substitute the name of the report that’s all.
Two Jumbo Jets crashed into the sides of the WTC but not a scrap of material either body or engine was found outside the towers. ? No disintegration of the plane’s body took place. It just went through an extremely tough steel and concrete reinforced wall like it was made of butter.
The Pentagon was also hit by another ‘supposed’Jumbo but again no physical evidence of aeroplane parts smashing into the wall and disintegrating and falling to the ground.
The hole in the Pentagon wall was not sufficient to run a bus through it let alone something the size of a Jumbo. Again a Jumbo Jet went through the wall as though the wall was made of putty, instead of walls designed to withstand the impact of a ballistic missile or rocket warhead.
Bin Laden designed and implemented and executed this attack on the WTC from 8,000 miles away in the mountains of Afghanistan.
Untrained Arab’s with a crash course in flying a single engined trainer, flew complicated and sophisticated Jumbo’s and hit the target of a few feet of WTC wall from an altitude of 25,000. Something which a Jumbo pilot of 30 years experience state they could not achieve.
The WTC towers collapsed after being hit by one single Jumbo jet, when those towers had been built and designed to withstand earthquakes, tornado’s, hurricanes, and were certified by the designers and constructors to be so strong that ten Jumbo jets would not bring them down.
That three Jumbo Jets were used as terrorist ‘missiles’ but not one single passenger or crew survived, and no body parts ever found.
That three scheduled flights just completely disappeared off the face of the earth.
Planes, bodies, everything.
That three large Jumbo jet on three scheduled flights were allowed to veer off course and fly into protected air space without being challenged by anything or anybody.
That a very large building, built as a ‘bunker’ for the safety of the Mayor of NY and his staff suddenly collapsed, although it was a long way away from the WTC towers.
That the Mayor and his staff were ‘all’ completely and ‘fortuitiously’ away from the building at the time – at a time when an attack on the heart of the American financial centre was underway.
That the NY firefighters were lying when they said they saw and heard explosions on many difference floors of the WTC towers, long after the planes had hit.
That GWBush was in a school listening to children reading and was told that America was under attack but did nothing. That he further made statements about knowing the attack was taking place by looking at TV screens in the school, when no TV’s existed.
All of this, and much more was achieved by Bin Laden and his ‘terrorists’ 8,000 miles away with almost no communication facilites whatever.
That Bin Laden denied being involved, when it would have suited his ‘cause’ and given his propaganda the biggest boost it could ever have had or ever will have.
So it goes on and on, and there is miles more of it, all irrefutable evidence, evidence and reality which some people choose to ignore.
Who runs this Country. ?
Who fuels the ‘Celtic Tiger’ ?
Shannon used as a staging ground and refuelling terminal. ?
The biggest influence in an agreed peace between N.I. & the South. ?
Afghanistan. ?
Venezuela: Bush's next oil war?
Lebanon. ?
Iraq. ?
WMD. ?
Iran.
Colombia. Provides the US with much oil and is a geopolitical keystone in South America. The USA is at war in Colombia as certainly as in Iraq - it is just another front.
El Salvador.
U.S. Corporate Interests in Colombia
Terrorize the US population into more fear from terrorist attacks and then pass new laws to infringe the basic human rights of US citizens in the name of National Security.
Maybe you never viewed ‘farenheight 9/11. ? An award winning documentary. ?
Why should you, it has too much evidence in it and shows up the ‘official’ view for what it is, a massive cover up.
What a shame you have shut off your mind to the possibility of even considering other evidence. You accuse the conspiracy theorists of being locked into unreality, and refusing to see events as they truly are, but you are just as guilty as your mind is closed to any other possibilities. Whats good for the Goose is good for the Gander too.
I don’t know what RTE program your referring to so I cannot comment upon it.
My views are not limited to an RTE program, or to reading the report by the ‘prejudiced’ commission, or to accepting the main stream media’s version of events, but has been arrived at by viewing and reading ‘all’ the evidence of all parties and all viewpoints. !
The official ‘theory’ of what happened is purely that, a theory, and has not a shred of evidence to support it. ! So, you support the official view, without any evidence, and I will support the ‘unofficial’ view, which has so much evidence in support of it that it would take weeks to itemise here. !
Hopefully one day you will allow your eyes and mind to be opened once again to enable you to appreciate that ‘official’ viewpoints are more often than not corrupt and prejudiced towards ‘vested interests’, and those who stand to gain the most. ?
Your insulting remarks were completely unnecessary. Retaliation would be all too easy, but your resorting to such remarks only shows you up for being childish yourself and it is therefore not surprising that your mind is already a closed book. A closed mind is a mind that has narrow perspectives and narrow thinking and is therefore unworthy of education.
If you should change your mind and decide to look at ‘all’ the evidence then I would welcome any further comments, if not, which appears most likely, then its goodbye and good luck.
Yes, I got the names mixed up, but purely a simple mistake. The comments I made about the Report still stand. Just substitute the name of the report that’s all.
Two Jumbo Jets crashed into the sides of the WTC but not a scrap of material either body or engine was found outside the towers. ? No disintegration of the plane’s body took place. It just went through an extremely tough steel and concrete reinforced wall like it was made of butter.
The Pentagon was also hit by another ‘supposed’Jumbo but again no physical evidence of aeroplane parts smashing into the wall and disintegrating and falling to the ground.
The hole in the Pentagon wall was not sufficient to run a bus through it let alone something the size of a Jumbo. Again a Jumbo Jet went through the wall as though the wall was made of putty, instead of walls designed to withstand the impact of a ballistic missile or rocket warhead.
Bin Laden designed and implemented and executed this attack on the WTC from 8,000 miles away in the mountains of Afghanistan.
Untrained Arab’s with a crash course in flying a single engined trainer, flew complicated and sophisticated Jumbo’s and hit the target of a few feet of WTC wall from an altitude of 25,000. Something which a Jumbo pilot of 30 years experience state they could not achieve.
The WTC towers collapsed after being hit by one single Jumbo jet, when those towers had been built and designed to withstand earthquakes, tornado’s, hurricanes, and were certified by the designers and constructors to be so strong that ten Jumbo jets would not bring them down.
That three Jumbo Jets were used as terrorist ‘missiles’ but not one single passenger or crew survived, and no body parts ever found.
That three scheduled flights just completely disappeared off the face of the earth.
Planes, bodies, everything.
That three large Jumbo jet on three scheduled flights were allowed to veer off course and fly into protected air space without being challenged by anything or anybody.
That a very large building, built as a ‘bunker’ for the safety of the Mayor of NY and his staff suddenly collapsed, although it was a long way away from the WTC towers.
That the Mayor and his staff were ‘all’ completely and ‘fortuitiously’ away from the building at the time – at a time when an attack on the heart of the American financial centre was underway.
That the NY firefighters were lying when they said they saw and heard explosions on many difference floors of the WTC towers, long after the planes had hit.
That GWBush was in a school listening to children reading and was told that America was under attack but did nothing. That he further made statements about knowing the attack was taking place by looking at TV screens in the school, when no TV’s existed.
All of this, and much more was achieved by Bin Laden and his ‘terrorists’ 8,000 miles away with almost no communication facilites whatever.
That Bin Laden denied being involved, when it would have suited his ‘cause’ and given his propaganda the biggest boost it could ever have had or ever will have.
So it goes on and on, and there is miles more of it, all irrefutable evidence, evidence and reality which some people choose to ignore.
Who runs this Country. ?
Who fuels the ‘Celtic Tiger’ ?
Shannon used as a staging ground and refuelling terminal. ?
The biggest influence in an agreed peace between N.I. & the South. ?
Afghanistan. ?
Venezuela: Bush's next oil war?
Lebanon. ?
Iraq. ?
WMD. ?
Iran.
Colombia. Provides the US with much oil and is a geopolitical keystone in South America. The USA is at war in Colombia as certainly as in Iraq - it is just another front.
El Salvador.
U.S. Corporate Interests in Colombia
Terrorize the US population into more fear from terrorist attacks and then pass new laws to infringe the basic human rights of US citizens in the name of National Security.
Maybe you never viewed ‘farenheight 9/11. ? An award winning documentary. ?
Why should you, it has too much evidence in it and shows up the ‘official’ view for what it is, a massive cover up.
What a shame you have shut off your mind to the possibility of even considering other evidence. You accuse the conspiracy theorists of being locked into unreality, and refusing to see events as they truly are, but you are just as guilty as your mind is closed to any other possibilities. Whats good for the Goose is good for the Gander too.
I don’t know what RTE program your referring to so I cannot comment upon it.
My views are not limited to an RTE program, or to reading the report by the ‘prejudiced’ commission, or to accepting the main stream media’s version of events, but has been arrived at by viewing and reading ‘all’ the evidence of all parties and all viewpoints. !
The official ‘theory’ of what happened is purely that, a theory, and has not a shred of evidence to support it. ! So, you support the official view, without any evidence, and I will support the ‘unofficial’ view, which has so much evidence in support of it that it would take weeks to itemise here. !
Hopefully one day you will allow your eyes and mind to be opened once again to enable you to appreciate that ‘official’ viewpoints are more often than not corrupt and prejudiced towards ‘vested interests’, and those who stand to gain the most. ?
Your insulting remarks were completely unnecessary. Retaliation would be all too easy, but your resorting to such remarks only shows you up for being childish yourself and it is therefore not surprising that your mind is already a closed book. A closed mind is a mind that has narrow perspectives and narrow thinking and is therefore unworthy of education.
If you should change your mind and decide to look at ‘all’ the evidence then I would welcome any further comments, if not, which appears most likely, then its goodbye and good luck.
"Power to the People".
"Lies are expensive, the Truth is Cheap".
"Lies are expensive, the Truth is Cheap".
One in three American's Say U.S. Aided in 9/11
Yes, I got the names mixed up, but purely a simple mistake. The comments I made about the Report still stand. Just substitute the name of the report that’s all.
Two Jumbo Jets crashed into the sides of the WTC but not a scrap of material either body or engine was found outside the towers. ? No disintegration of the plane’s body took place. It just went through an extremely tough steel and concrete reinforced wall like it was made of butter.
The Pentagon was also hit by another ‘supposed’Jumbo but again no physical evidence of aeroplane parts smashing into the wall and disintegrating and falling to the ground.
The hole in the Pentagon wall was not sufficient to run a bus through it let alone something the size of a Jumbo. Again a Jumbo Jet went through the wall as though the wall was made of putty, instead of walls designed to withstand the impact of a ballistic missile or rocket warhead.
Bin Laden designed and implemented and executed this attack on the WTC from 8,000 miles away in the mountains of Afghanistan.
Untrained Arab’s with a crash course in flying a single engined trainer, flew complicated and sophisticated Jumbo’s and hit the target of a few feet of WTC wall from an altitude of 25,000. Something which a Jumbo pilot of 30 years experience state they could not achieve.
The WTC towers collapsed after being hit by one single Jumbo jet, when those towers had been built and designed to withstand earthquakes, tornado’s, hurricanes, and were certified by the designers and constructors to be so strong that ten Jumbo jets would not bring them down.
That three Jumbo Jets were used as terrorist ‘missiles’ but not one single passenger or crew survived, and no body parts ever found.
That three scheduled flights just completely disappeared off the face of the earth.
Planes, bodies, everything.
That three large Jumbo jet on three scheduled flights were allowed to veer off course and fly into protected air space without being challenged by anything or anybody.
That a very large building, built as a ‘bunker’ for the safety of the Mayor of NY and his staff suddenly collapsed, although it was a long way away from the WTC towers.
That the Mayor and his staff were ‘all’ completely and ‘fortuitiously’ away from the building at the time – at a time when an attack on the heart of the American financial centre was underway.
That the NY firefighters were lying when they said they saw and heard explosions on many difference floors of the WTC towers, long after the planes had hit.
That GWBush was in a school listening to children reading and was told that America was under attack but did nothing. That he further made statements about knowing the attack was taking place by looking at TV screens in the school, when no TV’s existed.
All of this, and much more was achieved by Bin Laden and his ‘terrorists’ 8,000 miles away with almost no communication facilites whatever.
That Bin Laden denied being involved, when it would have suited his ‘cause’ and given his propaganda the biggest boost it could ever have had or ever will have.
So it goes on and on, and there is miles more of it, all irrefutable evidence, evidence and reality which some people choose to ignore.
Who runs this Country. ?
Who fuels the ‘Celtic Tiger’ ?
Shannon used as a staging ground and refuelling terminal. ?
The biggest influence in an agreed peace between N.I. & the South. ?
Afghanistan. ?
Venezuela: Bush's next oil war?
Lebanon. ?
Iraq. ?
WMD. ?
Iran.
Colombia. Provides the US with much oil and is a geopolitical keystone in South America. The USA is at war in Colombia as certainly as in Iraq - it is just another front.
El Salvador.
U.S. Corporate Interests in Colombia
Terrorize the US population into more fear from terrorist attacks and then pass new laws to infringe the basic human rights of US citizens in the name of National Security.
Maybe you never viewed ‘farenheight 9/11. ? An award winning documentary. ?
Why should you, it has too much evidence in it and shows up the ‘official’ view for what it is, a massive cover up.
What a shame you have shut off your mind to the possibility of even considering other evidence. You accuse the conspiracy theorists of being locked into unreality, and refusing to see events as they truly are, but you are just as guilty as your mind is closed to any other possibilities. Whats good for the Goose is good for the Gander too.
I don’t know what RTE program your referring to so I cannot comment upon it.
My views are not limited to an RTE program, or to reading the report by the ‘prejudiced’ commission, or to accepting the main stream media’s version of events, but has been arrived at by viewing and reading ‘all’ the evidence of all parties and all viewpoints. !
The official ‘theory’ of what happened is purely that, a theory, and has not a shred of evidence to support it. ! So, you support the official view, without any evidence, and I will support the ‘unofficial’ view, which has so much evidence in support of it that it would take weeks to itemise here. !
Hopefully one day you will allow your eyes and mind to be opened once again to enable you to appreciate that ‘official’ viewpoints are more often than not corrupt and prejudiced towards ‘vested interests’, and those who stand to gain the most. ?
Your insulting remarks were completely unnecessary. Retaliation would be all too easy, but your resorting to such remarks only shows you up for being childish yourself and it is therefore not surprising that your mind is already a closed book. A closed mind is a mind that has narrow perspectives and narrow thinking and is therefore unworthy of education.
If you should change your mind and decide to look at ‘all’ the evidence then I would welcome any further comments, if not, which appears most likely, then its goodbye and good luck.[/QUOTE]
Firstly let me reiterate, if you were insulted by my manner I honestly apologize, (as I said in my last post), you are a newbie here and I have no wish to be confrontational with you, but if we disagree then we disagree and so be it, and yes I am quite desultory about conspiracy theories in general because I (in general) do not believe them. This is not because I am a cheerleader for the US administration of the day or any other vested interest, and I am not as foolish as to think that governments tell the truth about much of what they do either, and everyone, everyone has an agenda, always. I am also not foolish enough to think that those who set themselves up as champions of the "real" truth, and take an alternate view of the world to mainstream opinion do not also have many, many agendas. So yes, I have seen a lot of controversial stuff about oil, politics, power, war, all of it, and in many instances I agree with the analysis, if I judge it based on something tangible and not inference or simply a "desire" to believe something is so, or a domestic agenda that is not really about the issue being discussed at all.
In looking at any event in human affairs, (as in nature) I tend to find that the principal of Occam's Razor is always useful, and this in basically say that when trying to determine why a sequence or pattern of events occurs the simplest explanation is usually the correct one. The more convoluted or dependent upon this theory, or that theory, that something is, the more unlikely it is, and this is (in general) one of the truths of life. Which is why in general I am deeply suspicious of grand theories about any human affairs, whether they be nationalist theories, capitalist theories, left-wing theories, or anyones theories. I always look to the idea of whether something is possible, desirable, and profitable, in all human matters, and of them all whether something is possible is always the most important and informs everything else. I am sure that there are people in the US government who would like to do a lot of things, and here as well, but something of the scale you are suggesting is just impossible, too risky, and not of enough benefit to those who might attmept it for it to be even a runner.
The US government did not need to attack its own cities as a pretext for war, or any of its foreign policies, it didn't need one in Vietnam, and it didn't need one to bomb Kosovo, invade Kuwait, occupy south Korea, assassinate Alende, finance the Contra's in Latin America, invade Grenada, topple the government of Panama, so why do all this for a grubby little oil war or some delusional scheme to "reshape" the middle east. It have engaged on such adventures at an opening cost much less great to itself so why bother? It could have invaded Iraq on any pretext (and the sequence of events leading up to that war bear this out). It will (if pushed enough) attack Iran without any need to first destroy some expensive US real estate. If this type of idea is so good, why wasn't it already done? Why not invade Iran in 79? Libya in 86? Who would have stopped them, us? Hardly. This supposed scheme about big corporate interests, right wing republicans, and oil barons conspiring together to take over the world is not flyable because there are too many differing parties, too much to lose, and also its just too complicated and too long-term for it to work, and anyone who was clever enough trying to attempt such a cockamamie scheme would see this immediately. Considering the inability of US forces to maintain law and order in downtown Bagdad, the wiping out of Republican politicians in the US government, and the general failure of western attempts to have any influence (other than a disastrous one) in the middle east should show that the problem is not that someone is masterminding some big plot, the problem is that the people in charge do not know what they are doing, and the illusion that they do is fast disapearing.
I am aware that you will not agree with any of this, and you, like I, have your own conclusions which I will not agree with in the slightest, thats fine, you have every right to your opinon as I, however wrong I think you are. BTW I have seen Farenheit 911, and I thought it was a good movie also, but not the last word on all these issues, just an interesting perspective made into a movie, (and in some cases what it was implying is probably true), but then again, perhaps Micheal Moore has just as much of a bias or agenda as everyone else.
So perhaps we should leave this September 11th argument alone for a while, and I will talk to you about our own country later, and answer the questions you posed about Ireland.
Two Jumbo Jets crashed into the sides of the WTC but not a scrap of material either body or engine was found outside the towers. ? No disintegration of the plane’s body took place. It just went through an extremely tough steel and concrete reinforced wall like it was made of butter.
The Pentagon was also hit by another ‘supposed’Jumbo but again no physical evidence of aeroplane parts smashing into the wall and disintegrating and falling to the ground.
The hole in the Pentagon wall was not sufficient to run a bus through it let alone something the size of a Jumbo. Again a Jumbo Jet went through the wall as though the wall was made of putty, instead of walls designed to withstand the impact of a ballistic missile or rocket warhead.
Bin Laden designed and implemented and executed this attack on the WTC from 8,000 miles away in the mountains of Afghanistan.
Untrained Arab’s with a crash course in flying a single engined trainer, flew complicated and sophisticated Jumbo’s and hit the target of a few feet of WTC wall from an altitude of 25,000. Something which a Jumbo pilot of 30 years experience state they could not achieve.
The WTC towers collapsed after being hit by one single Jumbo jet, when those towers had been built and designed to withstand earthquakes, tornado’s, hurricanes, and were certified by the designers and constructors to be so strong that ten Jumbo jets would not bring them down.
That three Jumbo Jets were used as terrorist ‘missiles’ but not one single passenger or crew survived, and no body parts ever found.
That three scheduled flights just completely disappeared off the face of the earth.
Planes, bodies, everything.
That three large Jumbo jet on three scheduled flights were allowed to veer off course and fly into protected air space without being challenged by anything or anybody.
That a very large building, built as a ‘bunker’ for the safety of the Mayor of NY and his staff suddenly collapsed, although it was a long way away from the WTC towers.
That the Mayor and his staff were ‘all’ completely and ‘fortuitiously’ away from the building at the time – at a time when an attack on the heart of the American financial centre was underway.
That the NY firefighters were lying when they said they saw and heard explosions on many difference floors of the WTC towers, long after the planes had hit.
That GWBush was in a school listening to children reading and was told that America was under attack but did nothing. That he further made statements about knowing the attack was taking place by looking at TV screens in the school, when no TV’s existed.
All of this, and much more was achieved by Bin Laden and his ‘terrorists’ 8,000 miles away with almost no communication facilites whatever.
That Bin Laden denied being involved, when it would have suited his ‘cause’ and given his propaganda the biggest boost it could ever have had or ever will have.
So it goes on and on, and there is miles more of it, all irrefutable evidence, evidence and reality which some people choose to ignore.
Who runs this Country. ?
Who fuels the ‘Celtic Tiger’ ?
Shannon used as a staging ground and refuelling terminal. ?
The biggest influence in an agreed peace between N.I. & the South. ?
Afghanistan. ?
Venezuela: Bush's next oil war?
Lebanon. ?
Iraq. ?
WMD. ?
Iran.
Colombia. Provides the US with much oil and is a geopolitical keystone in South America. The USA is at war in Colombia as certainly as in Iraq - it is just another front.
El Salvador.
U.S. Corporate Interests in Colombia
Terrorize the US population into more fear from terrorist attacks and then pass new laws to infringe the basic human rights of US citizens in the name of National Security.
Maybe you never viewed ‘farenheight 9/11. ? An award winning documentary. ?
Why should you, it has too much evidence in it and shows up the ‘official’ view for what it is, a massive cover up.
What a shame you have shut off your mind to the possibility of even considering other evidence. You accuse the conspiracy theorists of being locked into unreality, and refusing to see events as they truly are, but you are just as guilty as your mind is closed to any other possibilities. Whats good for the Goose is good for the Gander too.
I don’t know what RTE program your referring to so I cannot comment upon it.
My views are not limited to an RTE program, or to reading the report by the ‘prejudiced’ commission, or to accepting the main stream media’s version of events, but has been arrived at by viewing and reading ‘all’ the evidence of all parties and all viewpoints. !
The official ‘theory’ of what happened is purely that, a theory, and has not a shred of evidence to support it. ! So, you support the official view, without any evidence, and I will support the ‘unofficial’ view, which has so much evidence in support of it that it would take weeks to itemise here. !
Hopefully one day you will allow your eyes and mind to be opened once again to enable you to appreciate that ‘official’ viewpoints are more often than not corrupt and prejudiced towards ‘vested interests’, and those who stand to gain the most. ?
Your insulting remarks were completely unnecessary. Retaliation would be all too easy, but your resorting to such remarks only shows you up for being childish yourself and it is therefore not surprising that your mind is already a closed book. A closed mind is a mind that has narrow perspectives and narrow thinking and is therefore unworthy of education.
If you should change your mind and decide to look at ‘all’ the evidence then I would welcome any further comments, if not, which appears most likely, then its goodbye and good luck.[/QUOTE]
Firstly let me reiterate, if you were insulted by my manner I honestly apologize, (as I said in my last post), you are a newbie here and I have no wish to be confrontational with you, but if we disagree then we disagree and so be it, and yes I am quite desultory about conspiracy theories in general because I (in general) do not believe them. This is not because I am a cheerleader for the US administration of the day or any other vested interest, and I am not as foolish as to think that governments tell the truth about much of what they do either, and everyone, everyone has an agenda, always. I am also not foolish enough to think that those who set themselves up as champions of the "real" truth, and take an alternate view of the world to mainstream opinion do not also have many, many agendas. So yes, I have seen a lot of controversial stuff about oil, politics, power, war, all of it, and in many instances I agree with the analysis, if I judge it based on something tangible and not inference or simply a "desire" to believe something is so, or a domestic agenda that is not really about the issue being discussed at all.
In looking at any event in human affairs, (as in nature) I tend to find that the principal of Occam's Razor is always useful, and this in basically say that when trying to determine why a sequence or pattern of events occurs the simplest explanation is usually the correct one. The more convoluted or dependent upon this theory, or that theory, that something is, the more unlikely it is, and this is (in general) one of the truths of life. Which is why in general I am deeply suspicious of grand theories about any human affairs, whether they be nationalist theories, capitalist theories, left-wing theories, or anyones theories. I always look to the idea of whether something is possible, desirable, and profitable, in all human matters, and of them all whether something is possible is always the most important and informs everything else. I am sure that there are people in the US government who would like to do a lot of things, and here as well, but something of the scale you are suggesting is just impossible, too risky, and not of enough benefit to those who might attmept it for it to be even a runner.
The US government did not need to attack its own cities as a pretext for war, or any of its foreign policies, it didn't need one in Vietnam, and it didn't need one to bomb Kosovo, invade Kuwait, occupy south Korea, assassinate Alende, finance the Contra's in Latin America, invade Grenada, topple the government of Panama, so why do all this for a grubby little oil war or some delusional scheme to "reshape" the middle east. It have engaged on such adventures at an opening cost much less great to itself so why bother? It could have invaded Iraq on any pretext (and the sequence of events leading up to that war bear this out). It will (if pushed enough) attack Iran without any need to first destroy some expensive US real estate. If this type of idea is so good, why wasn't it already done? Why not invade Iran in 79? Libya in 86? Who would have stopped them, us? Hardly. This supposed scheme about big corporate interests, right wing republicans, and oil barons conspiring together to take over the world is not flyable because there are too many differing parties, too much to lose, and also its just too complicated and too long-term for it to work, and anyone who was clever enough trying to attempt such a cockamamie scheme would see this immediately. Considering the inability of US forces to maintain law and order in downtown Bagdad, the wiping out of Republican politicians in the US government, and the general failure of western attempts to have any influence (other than a disastrous one) in the middle east should show that the problem is not that someone is masterminding some big plot, the problem is that the people in charge do not know what they are doing, and the illusion that they do is fast disapearing.
I am aware that you will not agree with any of this, and you, like I, have your own conclusions which I will not agree with in the slightest, thats fine, you have every right to your opinon as I, however wrong I think you are. BTW I have seen Farenheit 911, and I thought it was a good movie also, but not the last word on all these issues, just an interesting perspective made into a movie, (and in some cases what it was implying is probably true), but then again, perhaps Micheal Moore has just as much of a bias or agenda as everyone else.
So perhaps we should leave this September 11th argument alone for a while, and I will talk to you about our own country later, and answer the questions you posed about Ireland.
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
One in three American's Say U.S. Aided in 9/11
Galbally;524629 wrote: Yes, I got the names mixed up, but
I am aware that you will not agree with any of this, and you, like I, have your own conclusions which I will not agree with in the slightest, thats fine, you have every right to your opinon as I, however wrong I think you are. BTW I have seen Farenheit 911, and I thought it was a good movie also, but not the last word on all these issues, just an interesting perspective made into a movie, (and in some cases what it was implying is probably true), but then again, perhaps Micheal Moore has just as much of a bias or agenda as everyone else.
So perhaps we should leave this September 11th argument alone for a while, and I will talk to you about our own country later, and answer the questions you posed about Ireland.
You are dealing in ‘hypotheses’ I am dealing in facts.
What you have stated you believe in is exactly what “they†want you to believe, and knew when they went ahead with it that the majority of people would believe, which is why they got away with it (so far !)
The simplistic view is of course the easy way out, and in some instances viewing the simple answer as the right answer might be correct, but when faced with so much evidence and outright facts that simplistic viewpoint becomes dangerous.
The whole scenario from start to finish was given a simplistic reason, “hey, Usama sent his terrorists in here to blow us upâ€. Simple. Effective. Believable. Because to believe anything else would be too horrific to contemplate. !
But, great minds, educated minds, enquiring minds, experienced minds looked at what happened and said “hang on, that’s not possible, that’s not how it happenedâ€.!
So, they looked at it all again, and put everything together and upon review of actually what happened, the facts, decided that the ‘official’ view had so many holes in it as to be leaking like the proverbial cabbage colander. In determining, from the facts, what probably happened it was inevitable that such a massive occurance would generate equally massive suspicions, suspicions that would be quite mind bogling, but their cause, to reveal the truth, would have been completely undermined if they had become fearful of revealing their findings even though that would implicate the Administration, big business, politicians, governments (Israel), high officials, and even the army, air force, and all the vast security apparatus in the USA.
To class these men (and women) as idiots, hell bent on an illusiary ‘conspiracy theory at the expense of commonsense and being ‘neive’ and stupid, is to discredit mans evolution into the intelligent human being he has become.
To finish this discussion on 9/11 I regretfully have to point out again that you have avoided answering any of the specific questions put to you. Questions that those learned men asked themselves when conducting their examination of events, the answers to which now form the theory, and the irrefutable evidence of a definite conspiracy and cover up. !
I am aware that you will not agree with any of this, and you, like I, have your own conclusions which I will not agree with in the slightest, thats fine, you have every right to your opinon as I, however wrong I think you are. BTW I have seen Farenheit 911, and I thought it was a good movie also, but not the last word on all these issues, just an interesting perspective made into a movie, (and in some cases what it was implying is probably true), but then again, perhaps Micheal Moore has just as much of a bias or agenda as everyone else.
So perhaps we should leave this September 11th argument alone for a while, and I will talk to you about our own country later, and answer the questions you posed about Ireland.
You are dealing in ‘hypotheses’ I am dealing in facts.
What you have stated you believe in is exactly what “they†want you to believe, and knew when they went ahead with it that the majority of people would believe, which is why they got away with it (so far !)
The simplistic view is of course the easy way out, and in some instances viewing the simple answer as the right answer might be correct, but when faced with so much evidence and outright facts that simplistic viewpoint becomes dangerous.
The whole scenario from start to finish was given a simplistic reason, “hey, Usama sent his terrorists in here to blow us upâ€. Simple. Effective. Believable. Because to believe anything else would be too horrific to contemplate. !
But, great minds, educated minds, enquiring minds, experienced minds looked at what happened and said “hang on, that’s not possible, that’s not how it happenedâ€.!
So, they looked at it all again, and put everything together and upon review of actually what happened, the facts, decided that the ‘official’ view had so many holes in it as to be leaking like the proverbial cabbage colander. In determining, from the facts, what probably happened it was inevitable that such a massive occurance would generate equally massive suspicions, suspicions that would be quite mind bogling, but their cause, to reveal the truth, would have been completely undermined if they had become fearful of revealing their findings even though that would implicate the Administration, big business, politicians, governments (Israel), high officials, and even the army, air force, and all the vast security apparatus in the USA.
To class these men (and women) as idiots, hell bent on an illusiary ‘conspiracy theory at the expense of commonsense and being ‘neive’ and stupid, is to discredit mans evolution into the intelligent human being he has become.
To finish this discussion on 9/11 I regretfully have to point out again that you have avoided answering any of the specific questions put to you. Questions that those learned men asked themselves when conducting their examination of events, the answers to which now form the theory, and the irrefutable evidence of a definite conspiracy and cover up. !
"Power to the People".
"Lies are expensive, the Truth is Cheap".
"Lies are expensive, the Truth is Cheap".
One in three American's Say U.S. Aided in 9/11
scaminfo;524951 wrote: You are dealing in ‘hypotheses’ I am dealing in facts.
What you have stated you believe in is exactly what “they” want you to believe, and knew when they went ahead with it that the majority of people would believe, which is why they got away with it (so far !)
The simplistic view is of course the easy way out, and in some instances viewing the simple answer as the right answer might be correct, but when faced with so much evidence and outright facts that simplistic viewpoint becomes dangerous.
The whole scenario from start to finish was given a simplistic reason, “hey, Usama sent his terrorists in here to blow us up”. Simple. Effective. Believable. Because to believe anything else would be too horrific to contemplate. !
But, great minds, educated minds, enquiring minds, experienced minds looked at what happened and said “hang on, that’s not possible, that’s not how it happened”.!
So, they looked at it all again, and put everything together and upon review of actually what happened, the facts, decided that the ‘official’ view had so many holes in it as to be leaking like the proverbial cabbage colander. In determining, from the facts, what probably happened it was inevitable that such a massive occurance would generate equally massive suspicions, suspicions that would be quite mind bogling, but their cause, to reveal the truth, would have been completely undermined if they had become fearful of revealing their findings even though that would implicate the Administration, big business, politicians, governments (Israel), high officials, and even the army, air force, and all the vast security apparatus in the USA.
To class these men (and women) as idiots, hell bent on an illusiary ‘conspiracy theory at the expense of commonsense and being ‘neive’ and stupid, is to discredit mans evolution into the intelligent human being he has become.
To finish this discussion on 9/11 I regretfully have to point out again that you have avoided answering any of the specific questions put to you. Questions that those learned men asked themselves when conducting their examination of events, the answers to which now form the theory, and the irrefutable evidence of a definite conspiracy and cover up. !
Okay, here we go again, specific questions.
1. The planes could not have brought down the towers. Fact. The collapse of the twin towers is the most studied structural collapse in history, it was recorded live, on television by hundreds of cameras across the city at every concieveable angle, both by News corporations, private citizens, and the official agencies who responded to the event. The plans of the twin towers are available, the structural characteristics of the buildings are still available, the people who survived the collapse (over 10,000) are available for interview and they all tell the same story, and the people who designed the towers were involved in studying why it fell. Every actual engineering and scientific study conducted (US government, non US government and independent) has concluded that the collapse was due to the structural failure of both buildings due to the damage cause by the impact of a fully laden Boeing 757 traveling at a velocity of approximately 550 mph, and the weakening of the steel superstructure around the impact sites due to the fires caused by the hundreds of thousands of litres of high octane aviation fuel and the combustible material in the buildings.
2. No one survived the crash why? Well, to be honest the possibility of survining an incident where you were strapped into a hijacked Boeing 757 laden with 40,000 litres of aviation fuel, that was flown past its engine safety limit (to maximize impact speed and the kinetic energy involved in the impact), into a very, very solid 110 story skyscraper, designed to withstand (in terms of being able to remain standing), the impact of a plane hitting it, (unfortunately not at nearly 600 miles an a hour or at its maximum weight), then having survived the energy associcated with this first impact, to avoid the 3,000 degree fire, while the couple of millions of tons of debris of this building also unfortunately fell on top you, (because of the double whammy of the structural damage of the impact, plus the fuel fire), is a pretty slim possibility, best described as probability of death 1, of survival. 0
3. No bodies were ever found, untrue, urban myth, body parts of the victims were found, they were just very small, badly burned body parts, they did give them back to the relatives though as they could be genetically identified, not very nice. I am as yet unaware whether they relatives claim the pieces of the their loved ones they were given back, were not the correct pieces. BTW, this was the same for all of the 3,000 killed, the building was reduced to rubble, and the people inside to an organic paste, a very unpleasant thing to have to say, but thats what happens when a building 110 stories high with a mass of millions of tonnes falls on top of you.
3. The mayor was not in his office "conveniently", the mayor of New York is not in his office most of the time, and you are suggesting that the Mayors office, the port authority, the buildings owners, the NYPD, and the NYFD were all in on this? Thats about 50,000 people for starters, big conspiracy, how do they get them all to keep quiet, must have done the same thing they did when they convinced the 40,000 people who worked on the Moon Landing to lie convincingly about everything for 45 years eh?
4. The federal aviation authority knew and allowed the planes to fly off course (presumably remote controlled,), so how did the people in the airport at Boston not notice the fact that the passengers who got on those planes were not real, and that the planes themselves had no pilots? This is all in spite the of the fact that again, thousands of people work in the air traffic control system, the tapes and cockpit voice tape transcripts are available, and all of the people who happened to be working that day in the military and the FAA all co-oberate the conventional story, as well as the families of the victims, if this is so murky, why do the relatives of those who were murdered not speak out, there are tens of thousands of them, are they in on this as well?
That is to answer a few of your specific questions, I will answer more if you want. Again, why do you accept 100 percent the validity of those who make claims that this is a Israeli/NWO plot, while rubbishing the very serious, sober and independent people who examined this event (they were not all CIA agents as far as I am aware) and claim to be open minded? Is it that difficult to accept that in fact the people who did this, did this. Why are the German government (with mountains of legally accepted evidence) currently prosecuting several young men who lived in Hamburg who were directly involved in this plot, why would the German government do this? Why do the intelligence services in Saudi Arabia, Syria, Turkey, Germany, and Britain, in fact every major government in the world and all the available criminal evidence tally with that of the US investigation? Why do senior members of extremist Islamic organizations' "take" on what happened also happen to agree with the American version of events, and also boast of it. Why do Al-Queda affiliated organizations claim this event as a great victory for their cause and a testament to their abilities if they did not do it? Why is that so? A happy coincidence of interests between deadly enemies? You also dismiss the eyewitness testimony of tens of thousands of people who actually witnessed and lived through these events, and then claim that you are acting all enlightened, and with some deeper knowledge of these affairs, methinks you are not being completely honest with yourself.
Also again, I am not trying to insult you personally, and I am not close-minded about any matters such as these, and I want to reiterate that as you still seem quite pissed off, and its not my intention or desire to continue with a slagging match with you. But I have every right to state my view on this matter, as do you.
What you have stated you believe in is exactly what “they” want you to believe, and knew when they went ahead with it that the majority of people would believe, which is why they got away with it (so far !)
The simplistic view is of course the easy way out, and in some instances viewing the simple answer as the right answer might be correct, but when faced with so much evidence and outright facts that simplistic viewpoint becomes dangerous.
The whole scenario from start to finish was given a simplistic reason, “hey, Usama sent his terrorists in here to blow us up”. Simple. Effective. Believable. Because to believe anything else would be too horrific to contemplate. !
But, great minds, educated minds, enquiring minds, experienced minds looked at what happened and said “hang on, that’s not possible, that’s not how it happened”.!
So, they looked at it all again, and put everything together and upon review of actually what happened, the facts, decided that the ‘official’ view had so many holes in it as to be leaking like the proverbial cabbage colander. In determining, from the facts, what probably happened it was inevitable that such a massive occurance would generate equally massive suspicions, suspicions that would be quite mind bogling, but their cause, to reveal the truth, would have been completely undermined if they had become fearful of revealing their findings even though that would implicate the Administration, big business, politicians, governments (Israel), high officials, and even the army, air force, and all the vast security apparatus in the USA.
To class these men (and women) as idiots, hell bent on an illusiary ‘conspiracy theory at the expense of commonsense and being ‘neive’ and stupid, is to discredit mans evolution into the intelligent human being he has become.
To finish this discussion on 9/11 I regretfully have to point out again that you have avoided answering any of the specific questions put to you. Questions that those learned men asked themselves when conducting their examination of events, the answers to which now form the theory, and the irrefutable evidence of a definite conspiracy and cover up. !
Okay, here we go again, specific questions.
1. The planes could not have brought down the towers. Fact. The collapse of the twin towers is the most studied structural collapse in history, it was recorded live, on television by hundreds of cameras across the city at every concieveable angle, both by News corporations, private citizens, and the official agencies who responded to the event. The plans of the twin towers are available, the structural characteristics of the buildings are still available, the people who survived the collapse (over 10,000) are available for interview and they all tell the same story, and the people who designed the towers were involved in studying why it fell. Every actual engineering and scientific study conducted (US government, non US government and independent) has concluded that the collapse was due to the structural failure of both buildings due to the damage cause by the impact of a fully laden Boeing 757 traveling at a velocity of approximately 550 mph, and the weakening of the steel superstructure around the impact sites due to the fires caused by the hundreds of thousands of litres of high octane aviation fuel and the combustible material in the buildings.
2. No one survived the crash why? Well, to be honest the possibility of survining an incident where you were strapped into a hijacked Boeing 757 laden with 40,000 litres of aviation fuel, that was flown past its engine safety limit (to maximize impact speed and the kinetic energy involved in the impact), into a very, very solid 110 story skyscraper, designed to withstand (in terms of being able to remain standing), the impact of a plane hitting it, (unfortunately not at nearly 600 miles an a hour or at its maximum weight), then having survived the energy associcated with this first impact, to avoid the 3,000 degree fire, while the couple of millions of tons of debris of this building also unfortunately fell on top you, (because of the double whammy of the structural damage of the impact, plus the fuel fire), is a pretty slim possibility, best described as probability of death 1, of survival. 0
3. No bodies were ever found, untrue, urban myth, body parts of the victims were found, they were just very small, badly burned body parts, they did give them back to the relatives though as they could be genetically identified, not very nice. I am as yet unaware whether they relatives claim the pieces of the their loved ones they were given back, were not the correct pieces. BTW, this was the same for all of the 3,000 killed, the building was reduced to rubble, and the people inside to an organic paste, a very unpleasant thing to have to say, but thats what happens when a building 110 stories high with a mass of millions of tonnes falls on top of you.
3. The mayor was not in his office "conveniently", the mayor of New York is not in his office most of the time, and you are suggesting that the Mayors office, the port authority, the buildings owners, the NYPD, and the NYFD were all in on this? Thats about 50,000 people for starters, big conspiracy, how do they get them all to keep quiet, must have done the same thing they did when they convinced the 40,000 people who worked on the Moon Landing to lie convincingly about everything for 45 years eh?
4. The federal aviation authority knew and allowed the planes to fly off course (presumably remote controlled,), so how did the people in the airport at Boston not notice the fact that the passengers who got on those planes were not real, and that the planes themselves had no pilots? This is all in spite the of the fact that again, thousands of people work in the air traffic control system, the tapes and cockpit voice tape transcripts are available, and all of the people who happened to be working that day in the military and the FAA all co-oberate the conventional story, as well as the families of the victims, if this is so murky, why do the relatives of those who were murdered not speak out, there are tens of thousands of them, are they in on this as well?
That is to answer a few of your specific questions, I will answer more if you want. Again, why do you accept 100 percent the validity of those who make claims that this is a Israeli/NWO plot, while rubbishing the very serious, sober and independent people who examined this event (they were not all CIA agents as far as I am aware) and claim to be open minded? Is it that difficult to accept that in fact the people who did this, did this. Why are the German government (with mountains of legally accepted evidence) currently prosecuting several young men who lived in Hamburg who were directly involved in this plot, why would the German government do this? Why do the intelligence services in Saudi Arabia, Syria, Turkey, Germany, and Britain, in fact every major government in the world and all the available criminal evidence tally with that of the US investigation? Why do senior members of extremist Islamic organizations' "take" on what happened also happen to agree with the American version of events, and also boast of it. Why do Al-Queda affiliated organizations claim this event as a great victory for their cause and a testament to their abilities if they did not do it? Why is that so? A happy coincidence of interests between deadly enemies? You also dismiss the eyewitness testimony of tens of thousands of people who actually witnessed and lived through these events, and then claim that you are acting all enlightened, and with some deeper knowledge of these affairs, methinks you are not being completely honest with yourself.
Also again, I am not trying to insult you personally, and I am not close-minded about any matters such as these, and I want to reiterate that as you still seem quite pissed off, and its not my intention or desire to continue with a slagging match with you. But I have every right to state my view on this matter, as do you.
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
One in three American's Say U.S. Aided in 9/11
To answer some of your questions about our own country.
Who runs this Country. ?The women, and long may it continue.
Who fuels the ‘Celtic Tiger’ ? People foolishly buying houses they cannot afford.
Shannon used as a staging ground and refuelling terminal. ? We are not Neutral, its a convenient and typically hypocritical Irish answer to an Irish problem.
The biggest influence in an agreed peace between N.I. & the South. ? Money.
Afghanistan. ? September 11th, no one gave a monkeys before then, or even after they weren't too bothered about the plight of Afganistan, which is one of the many foolish reasons that Iraq was invaded.
Venezuela: Bush's next oil war? No, but Chavez won't live to see 60, well, he wont die in bed, definetly.
Lebanon. ? Israel vs Syria watched by hapless Lebanese civilians in the way, a terrible war.
Iraq. ? USA vs all comers watched by hapless Iraqi civilians, an even more terrible war.
WMD. ? A smokescreen, Tony Blair should have resigned in April 2003, he should be ashamed of himself.
Iran. About to be attacked by Israel. There goes the neighborhood. Who would have though nuclear weapons would cause so many problems?
Colombia. Provides the US with much oil and is a geopolitical keystone in South America. The USA is at war in Colombia as certainly as in
Iraq - it is just another front. Yes, it has been for years, but its a much cheaper kind of war, and everyone who snorts coke is contributing to the people's misery in Columbia, something for those Celtic tiger people to think about no?.
El Salvador. A Mess, no arguments from me.
U.S. Corporate Interests in Colombia. Making as much money as possible, as always, they are corporations, and are not very interested in being nice to third world peasants, neither are European companies, Japanese Companies, or that exciting new corporation called the "Peoples Republic of China". When they get to be the biggest most powerful country in the world, the yanks wont seem so bad at all, trust me on that one.
Who runs this Country. ?The women, and long may it continue.
Who fuels the ‘Celtic Tiger’ ? People foolishly buying houses they cannot afford.
Shannon used as a staging ground and refuelling terminal. ? We are not Neutral, its a convenient and typically hypocritical Irish answer to an Irish problem.
The biggest influence in an agreed peace between N.I. & the South. ? Money.
Afghanistan. ? September 11th, no one gave a monkeys before then, or even after they weren't too bothered about the plight of Afganistan, which is one of the many foolish reasons that Iraq was invaded.
Venezuela: Bush's next oil war? No, but Chavez won't live to see 60, well, he wont die in bed, definetly.
Lebanon. ? Israel vs Syria watched by hapless Lebanese civilians in the way, a terrible war.
Iraq. ? USA vs all comers watched by hapless Iraqi civilians, an even more terrible war.
WMD. ? A smokescreen, Tony Blair should have resigned in April 2003, he should be ashamed of himself.
Iran. About to be attacked by Israel. There goes the neighborhood. Who would have though nuclear weapons would cause so many problems?
Colombia. Provides the US with much oil and is a geopolitical keystone in South America. The USA is at war in Colombia as certainly as in
Iraq - it is just another front. Yes, it has been for years, but its a much cheaper kind of war, and everyone who snorts coke is contributing to the people's misery in Columbia, something for those Celtic tiger people to think about no?.
El Salvador. A Mess, no arguments from me.
U.S. Corporate Interests in Colombia. Making as much money as possible, as always, they are corporations, and are not very interested in being nice to third world peasants, neither are European companies, Japanese Companies, or that exciting new corporation called the "Peoples Republic of China". When they get to be the biggest most powerful country in the world, the yanks wont seem so bad at all, trust me on that one.
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
One in three American's Say U.S. Aided in 9/11
Galbally;525044 wrote: Okay, here we go again, specific questions.
Also again, I am not trying to insult you personally, and I am not close-minded about any matters such as these, and I want to reiterate that as you still seem quite pissed off, and its not my intention or desire to continue with a slagging match with you. But I have every right to state my view on this matter, as do you.
Very true. We both have the right to state our opinions.
However, it is very comforting to know that the WTC was carried out by Osama and his terrorists. It can all be ‘pidgeonholed’ very nicely. The known enemy can be fought, for its convenience is its attraction. Whereas the unknown enemy cannot. Who wants to believe that such dark and unnamed forced exist ? Nobody. It is so sinister that the mind boggles at the implications. So, that’s the end of our discussion on 9/11. We beg to differ.
Also again, I am not trying to insult you personally, and I am not close-minded about any matters such as these, and I want to reiterate that as you still seem quite pissed off, and its not my intention or desire to continue with a slagging match with you. But I have every right to state my view on this matter, as do you.
Very true. We both have the right to state our opinions.
However, it is very comforting to know that the WTC was carried out by Osama and his terrorists. It can all be ‘pidgeonholed’ very nicely. The known enemy can be fought, for its convenience is its attraction. Whereas the unknown enemy cannot. Who wants to believe that such dark and unnamed forced exist ? Nobody. It is so sinister that the mind boggles at the implications. So, that’s the end of our discussion on 9/11. We beg to differ.
"Power to the People".
"Lies are expensive, the Truth is Cheap".
"Lies are expensive, the Truth is Cheap".
One in three American's Say U.S. Aided in 9/11
[QUOTE=Galbally;525076]To answer some of your questions about our own country.
Who runs this Country. ?The women, and long may it continue.
:wah: .An interesting point. ! No doubt women wish it were true. ?
Who fuels the ‘Celtic Tiger’ ? People foolishly buying houses they cannot afford.
Thats a little 'too' simple. The money has to be there in the first place, to allow the mad buyers to purchase, and without American big business it would not be there. The withdrawal of that business (quite likely at some point) would be catastropic to the economy and all house buying, and everything else, would cease very abruptly.
Shannon used as a staging ground and refuelling terminal. ? We are not Neutral, its a convenient and typically hypocritical Irish answer to an Irish problem. Its a convenience, yes, but also a convenience to have big business controlling the economy also .? Give us the use of Shannon or we withdraw. ?
The biggest influence in an agreed peace between N.I. & the South. ? Money. Clinton
Afghanistan. ? September 11th, no one gave a monkeys before then, or even after they weren't too bothered about the plight of Afganistan, which is one of the many foolish reasons that Iraq was invaded. A very convenient 'staging ground' for middle east operations. ?
Venezuela: Bush's next oil war? No, but Chavez won't live to see 60, well, he wont die in bed, definetly.
Agreed
Lebanon. ? Israel vs Syria watched by hapless Lebanese civilians in the way, a terrible war. Agreed
Iraq. ? USA vs all comers watched by hapless Iraqi civilians, an even more terrible war. Made genuine and acceptable, because of 9/11. ?
WMD. ? A smokescreen, Tony Blair should have resigned in April 2003, he should be ashamed of himself. Blair. ? Only Blair. !!!!
Iran. About to be attacked by Israel. There goes the neighborhood. Who would have thought nuclear weapons would cause so many problems? Who ? Me. ! The current 'powder keg' of the middle east and the world.. ? Develop nuclear power for peaceful use and you invite 'disaster' and being trampled on by those who already have but don't want anybody else to have. ?
Colombia. Provides the US with much oil and is a geopolitical keystone in South America. The USA is at war in Colombia as certainly as in
Iraq - it is just another front. Yes, it has been for years, but its a much cheaper kind of war, and everyone who snorts coke is contributing to the people's misery in Columbia, something for those Celtic tiger people to think about no?. Yes.
El Salvador. A Mess, no arguments from me.
U.S. Corporate Interests in Colombia. Making as much money as possible, as always, they are corporations, and are not very interested in being nice to third world peasants, neither are European companies, Japanese Companies, or that exciting new corporation called the "Peoples Republic of China". When they get to be the biggest most powerful country in the world, the yanks wont seem so bad at all, trust me on that one. Most probably, IF the USA ever 'lets' them get that far. ?
Who runs this Country. ?The women, and long may it continue.
:wah: .An interesting point. ! No doubt women wish it were true. ?
Who fuels the ‘Celtic Tiger’ ? People foolishly buying houses they cannot afford.
Thats a little 'too' simple. The money has to be there in the first place, to allow the mad buyers to purchase, and without American big business it would not be there. The withdrawal of that business (quite likely at some point) would be catastropic to the economy and all house buying, and everything else, would cease very abruptly.
Shannon used as a staging ground and refuelling terminal. ? We are not Neutral, its a convenient and typically hypocritical Irish answer to an Irish problem. Its a convenience, yes, but also a convenience to have big business controlling the economy also .? Give us the use of Shannon or we withdraw. ?
The biggest influence in an agreed peace between N.I. & the South. ? Money. Clinton
Afghanistan. ? September 11th, no one gave a monkeys before then, or even after they weren't too bothered about the plight of Afganistan, which is one of the many foolish reasons that Iraq was invaded. A very convenient 'staging ground' for middle east operations. ?
Venezuela: Bush's next oil war? No, but Chavez won't live to see 60, well, he wont die in bed, definetly.
Agreed
Lebanon. ? Israel vs Syria watched by hapless Lebanese civilians in the way, a terrible war. Agreed
Iraq. ? USA vs all comers watched by hapless Iraqi civilians, an even more terrible war. Made genuine and acceptable, because of 9/11. ?
WMD. ? A smokescreen, Tony Blair should have resigned in April 2003, he should be ashamed of himself. Blair. ? Only Blair. !!!!
Iran. About to be attacked by Israel. There goes the neighborhood. Who would have thought nuclear weapons would cause so many problems? Who ? Me. ! The current 'powder keg' of the middle east and the world.. ? Develop nuclear power for peaceful use and you invite 'disaster' and being trampled on by those who already have but don't want anybody else to have. ?
Colombia. Provides the US with much oil and is a geopolitical keystone in South America. The USA is at war in Colombia as certainly as in
Iraq - it is just another front. Yes, it has been for years, but its a much cheaper kind of war, and everyone who snorts coke is contributing to the people's misery in Columbia, something for those Celtic tiger people to think about no?. Yes.
El Salvador. A Mess, no arguments from me.
U.S. Corporate Interests in Colombia. Making as much money as possible, as always, they are corporations, and are not very interested in being nice to third world peasants, neither are European companies, Japanese Companies, or that exciting new corporation called the "Peoples Republic of China". When they get to be the biggest most powerful country in the world, the yanks wont seem so bad at all, trust me on that one. Most probably, IF the USA ever 'lets' them get that far. ?
"Power to the People".
"Lies are expensive, the Truth is Cheap".
"Lies are expensive, the Truth is Cheap".
One in three American's Say U.S. Aided in 9/11
To answer some of your questions about our own country.
Who runs this Country. ?The women, and long may it continue.
:wah: .An interesting point. ! No doubt women wish it were true. ?
Well, ever try arguing with an Irish woman, you know what the results are. If you are an Irish man having a typical relationships with an Irish woman, and have ever wondered who was boss, don't.
Who fuels the ‘Celtic Tiger’ ? People foolishly buying houses they cannot afford.
Thats a little 'too' simple. The money has to be there in the first place, to allow the mad buyers to purchase, and without American big business it would not be there. The withdrawal of that business (quite likely at some point) would be catastropic to the economy and all house buying, and everything else, would cease very abruptly. We all bought into it, its our own fault, we are muppets.
Shannon used as a staging ground and refuelling terminal. ? We are not Neutral, its a convenient and typically hypocritical Irish answer to an Irish problem. Its a convenience, yes, but also a convenience to have big business controlling the economy also .? Give us the use of Shannon or we withdraw. ? No, its "give us the use of shannon or we will go somewhere else, to another airport, and spend our money there, and also no shamrock on paddys day in pennsylvania avenue for a couple of years" I think, I don't hear the locals complaining that much, they know what side their bread is buttered on, mercenery, but realistic.
The biggest influence in an agreed peace between N.I. & the South. ? Money. Clinton At the end of the day, the only thing that will bring us all together will be the promise of enourmous amounts of cash for everyone involved, as always.
Afghanistan. ? September 11th, no one gave a monkeys before then, or even after they weren't too bothered about the plight of Afganistan, which is one of the many foolish reasons that Iraq was invaded. A very convenient 'staging ground' for middle east operations. ? Maybe, or maybe that was the actual valid place where these camps were, as well as a country that desperatly needed outside help, and if we had helped make Aganistan a functioning state for its people again, and concentrated on that, instead of allowing this lunatic adverturism in Iraq, we wouldn't be where we are now.
Venezuela: Bush's next oil war? No, but Chavez won't live to see 60, well, he wont die in bed, definetly.
Agreed Yup, you know it.
Lebanon. ? Israel vs Syria watched by hapless Lebanese civilians in the way, a terrible war. Agreed Very Sad.
Iraq. ? USA vs all comers watched by hapless Iraqi civilians, an even more terrible war. Made genuine and acceptable, because of 9/11. ? . Yes, and it was a complete load of bollocks, and Americans are finally starting to ask, "WTF are we doing there?", watch the neo-con dream of a continuous republican administration in the US die another death.
WMD. ? A smokescreen, Tony Blair should have resigned in April 2003, he should be ashamed of himself. Blair. ? Only Blair. !!!! Lets be realistic about this.
Iran. About to be attacked by Israel. There goes the neighborhood. Who would have thought nuclear weapons would cause so many problems? Who ? Me. ! The current 'powder keg' of the middle east and the world.. ? Develop nuclear power for peaceful use and you invite 'disaster' and being trampled on by those who already have but don't want anybody else to have. ? You shouldn't play with fire, you might get burned, the Iranians have their own reasons and its all very understandable, but they are playing for very high stakes indeed.
Colombia. Provides the US with much oil and is a geopolitical keystone in South America. The USA is at war in Colombia as certainly as in
Iraq - it is just another front. Yes, it has been for years, but its a much cheaper kind of war, and everyone who snorts coke is contributing to the people's misery in Columbia, something for those Celtic tiger people to think about no?. Yes. . Yes, lets write a letter to the Indo editoral staff about it, then again they are probably too coked out of their heads in a party in Reynards to read at the moment.
El Salvador. A Mess, no arguments from me.
U.S. Corporate Interests in Colombia. Making as much money as possible, as always, they are corporations, and are not very interested in being nice to third world peasants, neither are European companies, Japanese Companies, or that exciting new corporation called the "Peoples Republic of China". When they get to be the biggest most powerful country in the world, the yanks wont seem so bad at all, trust me on that one. Most probably, IF the USA ever 'lets' them get that far. ? The USA, wont have much choice, unless they want to start a Nuclear war, which they do not, the Chinese will have over-taken the USA and Europe economically in 20 years, and militarilty in about 30, there is nothing to be done about it, its just history repeating itself, we will all just have to adjust to a new reality, again, it won't be so bad, but we will have to be a lot less lazy.
Who runs this Country. ?The women, and long may it continue.
:wah: .An interesting point. ! No doubt women wish it were true. ?
Well, ever try arguing with an Irish woman, you know what the results are. If you are an Irish man having a typical relationships with an Irish woman, and have ever wondered who was boss, don't.
Who fuels the ‘Celtic Tiger’ ? People foolishly buying houses they cannot afford.
Thats a little 'too' simple. The money has to be there in the first place, to allow the mad buyers to purchase, and without American big business it would not be there. The withdrawal of that business (quite likely at some point) would be catastropic to the economy and all house buying, and everything else, would cease very abruptly. We all bought into it, its our own fault, we are muppets.
Shannon used as a staging ground and refuelling terminal. ? We are not Neutral, its a convenient and typically hypocritical Irish answer to an Irish problem. Its a convenience, yes, but also a convenience to have big business controlling the economy also .? Give us the use of Shannon or we withdraw. ? No, its "give us the use of shannon or we will go somewhere else, to another airport, and spend our money there, and also no shamrock on paddys day in pennsylvania avenue for a couple of years" I think, I don't hear the locals complaining that much, they know what side their bread is buttered on, mercenery, but realistic.
The biggest influence in an agreed peace between N.I. & the South. ? Money. Clinton At the end of the day, the only thing that will bring us all together will be the promise of enourmous amounts of cash for everyone involved, as always.
Afghanistan. ? September 11th, no one gave a monkeys before then, or even after they weren't too bothered about the plight of Afganistan, which is one of the many foolish reasons that Iraq was invaded. A very convenient 'staging ground' for middle east operations. ? Maybe, or maybe that was the actual valid place where these camps were, as well as a country that desperatly needed outside help, and if we had helped make Aganistan a functioning state for its people again, and concentrated on that, instead of allowing this lunatic adverturism in Iraq, we wouldn't be where we are now.
Venezuela: Bush's next oil war? No, but Chavez won't live to see 60, well, he wont die in bed, definetly.
Agreed Yup, you know it.
Lebanon. ? Israel vs Syria watched by hapless Lebanese civilians in the way, a terrible war. Agreed Very Sad.
Iraq. ? USA vs all comers watched by hapless Iraqi civilians, an even more terrible war. Made genuine and acceptable, because of 9/11. ? . Yes, and it was a complete load of bollocks, and Americans are finally starting to ask, "WTF are we doing there?", watch the neo-con dream of a continuous republican administration in the US die another death.
WMD. ? A smokescreen, Tony Blair should have resigned in April 2003, he should be ashamed of himself. Blair. ? Only Blair. !!!! Lets be realistic about this.
Iran. About to be attacked by Israel. There goes the neighborhood. Who would have thought nuclear weapons would cause so many problems? Who ? Me. ! The current 'powder keg' of the middle east and the world.. ? Develop nuclear power for peaceful use and you invite 'disaster' and being trampled on by those who already have but don't want anybody else to have. ? You shouldn't play with fire, you might get burned, the Iranians have their own reasons and its all very understandable, but they are playing for very high stakes indeed.
Colombia. Provides the US with much oil and is a geopolitical keystone in South America. The USA is at war in Colombia as certainly as in
Iraq - it is just another front. Yes, it has been for years, but its a much cheaper kind of war, and everyone who snorts coke is contributing to the people's misery in Columbia, something for those Celtic tiger people to think about no?. Yes. . Yes, lets write a letter to the Indo editoral staff about it, then again they are probably too coked out of their heads in a party in Reynards to read at the moment.
El Salvador. A Mess, no arguments from me.
U.S. Corporate Interests in Colombia. Making as much money as possible, as always, they are corporations, and are not very interested in being nice to third world peasants, neither are European companies, Japanese Companies, or that exciting new corporation called the "Peoples Republic of China". When they get to be the biggest most powerful country in the world, the yanks wont seem so bad at all, trust me on that one. Most probably, IF the USA ever 'lets' them get that far. ? The USA, wont have much choice, unless they want to start a Nuclear war, which they do not, the Chinese will have over-taken the USA and Europe economically in 20 years, and militarilty in about 30, there is nothing to be done about it, its just history repeating itself, we will all just have to adjust to a new reality, again, it won't be so bad, but we will have to be a lot less lazy.
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
One in three American's Say U.S. Aided in 9/11
According to the heading of this Thread 33% of Americans have at last woken up. ! :wah: 33% and counting. ? 
As soon as it reaches 51% we are in the majority. ! :driving:
As soon as it reaches 51% we are in the majority. ! :driving:"Power to the People".
"Lies are expensive, the Truth is Cheap".
"Lies are expensive, the Truth is Cheap".
One in three American's Say U.S. Aided in 9/11
Don't believe everything you read!
My candle's burning at both ends, it will not last the night. But ah, my foes, and oh, my friends--It gives a lovely light!--Edna St. Vincent Millay
One in three American's Say U.S. Aided in 9/11
Lulu2;526236 wrote: Don't believe everything you read!But it's true, Lulu. The original article really exists, the poll Scripps Howard and Ohio University jointly commissioned is reported http://www.scrippsnews.com/911poll
Thirty-six percent of respondents overall said it is "very likely" or "somewhat likely" that federal officials either participated in the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon or took no action to stop them "because they wanted the United States to go to war in the Middle East."
"One out of three sounds high, but that may very well be right," said Lee Hamilton, former vice chairman of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (also called the 9/11 commission.) His congressionally appointed investigation concluded that federal officials bungled their attempts to prevent, but did not participate in, the attacks by al Qaeda five years ago.
"A lot of people I've encountered believe the U.S. government was involved," Hamilton said. "Many say the government planned the whole thing. Of course, we don't think the evidence leads that way at all."
The poll also found that 16 percent of Americans speculate that secretly planted explosives, not burning passenger jets, were the real reason the massive twin towers of the World Trade Center collapsed.
Conspiracy groups for at least two years have also questioned why the World Trade Center collapsed when fires that heavily damaged similar skyscrapers around the world did not cause such destruction. Sixteen percent said it's "very likely" or "somewhat likely" that "the collapse of the twin towers in New York was aided by explosives secretly planted in the two buildings."
Thirty-six percent of respondents overall said it is "very likely" or "somewhat likely" that federal officials either participated in the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon or took no action to stop them "because they wanted the United States to go to war in the Middle East."
"One out of three sounds high, but that may very well be right," said Lee Hamilton, former vice chairman of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (also called the 9/11 commission.) His congressionally appointed investigation concluded that federal officials bungled their attempts to prevent, but did not participate in, the attacks by al Qaeda five years ago.
"A lot of people I've encountered believe the U.S. government was involved," Hamilton said. "Many say the government planned the whole thing. Of course, we don't think the evidence leads that way at all."
The poll also found that 16 percent of Americans speculate that secretly planted explosives, not burning passenger jets, were the real reason the massive twin towers of the World Trade Center collapsed.
Conspiracy groups for at least two years have also questioned why the World Trade Center collapsed when fires that heavily damaged similar skyscrapers around the world did not cause such destruction. Sixteen percent said it's "very likely" or "somewhat likely" that "the collapse of the twin towers in New York was aided by explosives secretly planted in the two buildings."
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious.
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
One in three American's Say U.S. Aided in 9/11
The poll also found that 16 percent of Americans speculate that secretly planted explosives, not burning passenger jets, were the real reason the massive twin towers of the World Trade Center collapsed.
Conspiracy groups for at least two years have also questioned why the World Trade Center collapsed when fires that heavily damaged similar skyscrapers around the world did not cause such destruction. Sixteen percent said it's "very likely" or "somewhat likely" that "the collapse of the twin towers in New York was aided by explosives secretly planted in the two buildings."
Again, yes this true there have been other building fires, but it seems to be overlooked that but these buildings did not also absorb the impact of a large fully laden 757 hitting it at 550 mph somewhere in their superstructures, which to me wold seem to be an elementary issue, no?. If you watch the collapses very carefully, you will see that the buildings' collapse is centered on the point where the planes have entered the buildings in both cases, (the second tower to be hit goes first because it was hit lower down, more mass above to hold up, and also the superstructure in the second tower to be hit-(and above the point where the plane hit)-starts to fall slightly to one side first, before gravity overwhelms this tendency to fall in line with sheering forces and then it goes straight down (again it falls toward the side it was hit on, which is what you would expect). The first tower takes longer because it was hit higher up, less mass above acting on the weakening remaining steel superstructure, longer to collapse. So obviously the weight of the superstructure above these points, finally overwhelms the ability of the buildings to continue to hold them up, and the rest is gravity, freefall. Just another little specific point to consider.
Conspiracy groups for at least two years have also questioned why the World Trade Center collapsed when fires that heavily damaged similar skyscrapers around the world did not cause such destruction. Sixteen percent said it's "very likely" or "somewhat likely" that "the collapse of the twin towers in New York was aided by explosives secretly planted in the two buildings."
Again, yes this true there have been other building fires, but it seems to be overlooked that but these buildings did not also absorb the impact of a large fully laden 757 hitting it at 550 mph somewhere in their superstructures, which to me wold seem to be an elementary issue, no?. If you watch the collapses very carefully, you will see that the buildings' collapse is centered on the point where the planes have entered the buildings in both cases, (the second tower to be hit goes first because it was hit lower down, more mass above to hold up, and also the superstructure in the second tower to be hit-(and above the point where the plane hit)-starts to fall slightly to one side first, before gravity overwhelms this tendency to fall in line with sheering forces and then it goes straight down (again it falls toward the side it was hit on, which is what you would expect). The first tower takes longer because it was hit higher up, less mass above acting on the weakening remaining steel superstructure, longer to collapse. So obviously the weight of the superstructure above these points, finally overwhelms the ability of the buildings to continue to hold them up, and the rest is gravity, freefall. Just another little specific point to consider.
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
One in three American's Say U.S. Aided in 9/11
Also, here is another point to consider. If this whole episode was just instigated by some all-powerful cabal within the American Government, why stop at this little attack? If you want a reason to "reshape" the world, and declare unending war on anyone you like, why not simply get a smallish nuclear device and set it off in one of your less important cities, or perhaps a city of an allied nation, (one in Europe perhaps?). Because once a nuclear bomb had gone off in a western city, you would be in a situation where normal politics and diplomacy would be over, the population would be terrified beyond the point that they would question anything you were doing in the name of protecting them, and also it would give you liscence to use these weapons on whoever it was you didn't like while the dust was settling, it would also be a lot easier to do than this messy, and very prone to go wrong plane-hijacking stunt, (which only seems more attractive if you don't actually have WMDs or the means to deliver them, which the US has in abundance), so why not go for broke? Hmnnnnnn?
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
One in three American's Say U.S. Aided in 9/11
Lulu2;526236 wrote: Don't believe everything you read!
Ok. I don't believe it then. I believe its 45% instead. !
Ok. I don't believe it then. I believe its 45% instead. !
"Power to the People".
"Lies are expensive, the Truth is Cheap".
"Lies are expensive, the Truth is Cheap".
One in three American's Say U.S. Aided in 9/11
Galbally;526542 wrote: The poll also found that 16 percent of Americans speculate that secretly planted explosives, not burning passenger jets, were the real reason the massive twin towers of the World Trade Center collapsed.
Conspiracy groups for at least two years have also questioned why the World Trade Center collapsed when fires that heavily damaged similar skyscrapers around the world did not cause such destruction. Sixteen percent said it's "very likely" or "somewhat likely" that "the collapse of the twin towers in New York was aided by explosives secretly planted in the two buildings."
Again, yes this true there have been other building fires, but it seems to be overlooked that but these buildings did not also absorb the impact of a large fully laden 757 hitting it at 550 mph somewhere in their superstructures, which to me wold seem to be an elementary issue, no?. If you watch the collapses very carefully, you will see that the buildings' collapse is centered on the point where the planes have entered the buildings in both cases, (the second tower to be hit goes first because it was hit lower down, more mass above to hold up, and also the superstructure in the second tower to be hit-(and above the point where the plane hit)-starts to fall slightly to one side first, before gravity overwhelms this tendency to fall in line with sheering forces and then it goes straight down (again it falls toward the side it was hit on, which is what you would expect). The first tower takes longer because it was hit higher up, less mass above acting on the weakening remaining steel superstructure, longer to collapse. So obviously the weight of the superstructure above these points, finally overwhelms the ability of the buildings to continue to hold them up, and the rest is gravity, freefall. Just another little specific point to consider.
The weight above the crash point was no way near enough to collapse the whole building. It was built to withstand 'far' greater weights and impact than that. The way the building fell was 'not' consistant with a mere hole in its side, and burning fuel. The fire would have gone upwards anyway, not downwards. According to the offical theory that means that fire would have been consuming the top side of the building and therebye making it lighter. The weight of Dust and ashes from a fire is nothing compared to steel and reinforced concrete, which were all intact below the fire. ? It also ignores that the fact that hardly a single brick fell outwards. It was a controlled demolition, and that cannot be denied. And, can a mere Jet puncture a hole in the building so that wings, engines, tailplane, everything disappears into the hole like threading a carrot through a mincer. ? The structure that the Jet hit is solid high tensile steet, and reinforced concrete, 'not' a thin flimsy mesh. There are pictures and video's around the world of deliberate test crashes whereupon a jumbo was flown into a reinforced wall. The Jet crumpled up like a tin can upon impact when flown into such strength and was stopped in its tracks immediately. A jet plane is not an irressistable force and when confronted by an immovable object it just disintegrates like the proverbial tin can.
The towers could not possibly have collasped in such a manner without 'considerable assistance'. So, lets ignore the evidence of the designers, the constructors, the experienced tructural engineers, the firemen, the eye witnesses, the video evidence, the experience from other fires in other skyscrapers around the world (which burnt for days and days without falling) and accept the 'official' story. To accept anything else is what ? Nieve. ? Scaremongering. ? Stupid. ? Or maybe tooo mind boggling to contemplate. ? If they can assassinate the actual President himself, and then his brother headed for the presidency, why stop at a few 'dispensable' people in a sky scraper, when so much more is at stake. ?
Conspiracy groups for at least two years have also questioned why the World Trade Center collapsed when fires that heavily damaged similar skyscrapers around the world did not cause such destruction. Sixteen percent said it's "very likely" or "somewhat likely" that "the collapse of the twin towers in New York was aided by explosives secretly planted in the two buildings."
Again, yes this true there have been other building fires, but it seems to be overlooked that but these buildings did not also absorb the impact of a large fully laden 757 hitting it at 550 mph somewhere in their superstructures, which to me wold seem to be an elementary issue, no?. If you watch the collapses very carefully, you will see that the buildings' collapse is centered on the point where the planes have entered the buildings in both cases, (the second tower to be hit goes first because it was hit lower down, more mass above to hold up, and also the superstructure in the second tower to be hit-(and above the point where the plane hit)-starts to fall slightly to one side first, before gravity overwhelms this tendency to fall in line with sheering forces and then it goes straight down (again it falls toward the side it was hit on, which is what you would expect). The first tower takes longer because it was hit higher up, less mass above acting on the weakening remaining steel superstructure, longer to collapse. So obviously the weight of the superstructure above these points, finally overwhelms the ability of the buildings to continue to hold them up, and the rest is gravity, freefall. Just another little specific point to consider.
The weight above the crash point was no way near enough to collapse the whole building. It was built to withstand 'far' greater weights and impact than that. The way the building fell was 'not' consistant with a mere hole in its side, and burning fuel. The fire would have gone upwards anyway, not downwards. According to the offical theory that means that fire would have been consuming the top side of the building and therebye making it lighter. The weight of Dust and ashes from a fire is nothing compared to steel and reinforced concrete, which were all intact below the fire. ? It also ignores that the fact that hardly a single brick fell outwards. It was a controlled demolition, and that cannot be denied. And, can a mere Jet puncture a hole in the building so that wings, engines, tailplane, everything disappears into the hole like threading a carrot through a mincer. ? The structure that the Jet hit is solid high tensile steet, and reinforced concrete, 'not' a thin flimsy mesh. There are pictures and video's around the world of deliberate test crashes whereupon a jumbo was flown into a reinforced wall. The Jet crumpled up like a tin can upon impact when flown into such strength and was stopped in its tracks immediately. A jet plane is not an irressistable force and when confronted by an immovable object it just disintegrates like the proverbial tin can.
The towers could not possibly have collasped in such a manner without 'considerable assistance'. So, lets ignore the evidence of the designers, the constructors, the experienced tructural engineers, the firemen, the eye witnesses, the video evidence, the experience from other fires in other skyscrapers around the world (which burnt for days and days without falling) and accept the 'official' story. To accept anything else is what ? Nieve. ? Scaremongering. ? Stupid. ? Or maybe tooo mind boggling to contemplate. ? If they can assassinate the actual President himself, and then his brother headed for the presidency, why stop at a few 'dispensable' people in a sky scraper, when so much more is at stake. ?
"Power to the People".
"Lies are expensive, the Truth is Cheap".
"Lies are expensive, the Truth is Cheap".
One in three American's Say U.S. Aided in 9/11
Galbally;526598 wrote: Also, here is another point to consider. If this whole episode was just instigated by some all-powerful cabal within the American Government, why stop at this little attack? If you want a reason to "reshape" the world, and declare unending war on anyone you like, why not simply get a smallish nuclear device and set it off in one of your less important cities, or perhaps a city of an allied nation, (one in Europe perhaps?). Because once a nuclear bomb had gone off in a western city, you would be in a situation where normal politics and diplomacy would be over, the population would be terrified beyond the point that they would question anything you were doing in the name of protecting them, and also it would give you liscence to use these weapons on whoever it was you didn't like while the dust was settling, it would also be a lot easier to do than this messy, and very prone to go wrong plane-hijacking stunt, (which only seems more attractive if you don't actually have WMDs or the means to deliver them, which the US has in abundance), so why not go for broke? Hmnnnnnn?
Why ? Because they wanted to hit the heart of 'America' not some other less important city in another part of the world. ! The attack had to be upon America itself so that America would feel sufficiently angry and upset so as to retaliate. ! Hitting some other city would not have achieved the same impact (excuse the pun) ! And to use a nuclear device. ?? Now that really is unecessary. ! What about winds and fallout ! Using a sledgehammer to crack a nut. ?
Why ? Because they wanted to hit the heart of 'America' not some other less important city in another part of the world. ! The attack had to be upon America itself so that America would feel sufficiently angry and upset so as to retaliate. ! Hitting some other city would not have achieved the same impact (excuse the pun) ! And to use a nuclear device. ?? Now that really is unecessary. ! What about winds and fallout ! Using a sledgehammer to crack a nut. ?
"Power to the People".
"Lies are expensive, the Truth is Cheap".
"Lies are expensive, the Truth is Cheap".
One in three American's Say U.S. Aided in 9/11
http://www.forumgarden.com/forums/showthread.php?t=8016
Very interesting. ? Presumably it will be said that these authors are nuts, too. ??
Very interesting. ? Presumably it will be said that these authors are nuts, too. ??
"Power to the People".
"Lies are expensive, the Truth is Cheap".
"Lies are expensive, the Truth is Cheap".
One in three American's Say U.S. Aided in 9/11
scaminfo;526669 wrote: The weight above the crash point was no way near enough to collapse the whole building. It was built to withstand 'far' greater weights and impact than that. The way the building fell was 'not' consistant with a mere hole in its side, and burning fuel. The fire would have gone upwards anyway, not downwards. According to the offical theory that means that fire would have been consuming the top side of the building and therebye making it lighter. The weight of Dust and ashes from a fire is nothing compared to steel and reinforced concrete, which were all intact below the fire. ? It also ignores that the fact that hardly a single brick fell outwards. It was a controlled demolition, and that cannot be denied. And, can a mere Jet puncture a hole in the building so that wings, engines, tailplane, everything disappears into the hole like threading a carrot through a mincer. ? The structure that the Jet hit is solid high tensile steet, and reinforced concrete, 'not' a thin flimsy mesh. There are pictures and video's around the world of deliberate test crashes whereupon a jumbo was flown into a reinforced wall. The Jet crumpled up like a tin can upon impact when flown into such strength and was stopped in its tracks immediately. A jet plane is not an irressistable force and when confronted by an immovable object it just disintegrates like the proverbial tin can.
The towers could not possibly have collasped in such a manner without 'considerable assistance'. So, lets ignore the evidence of the designers, the constructors, the experienced tructural engineers, the firemen, the eye witnesses, the video evidence, the experience from other fires in other skyscrapers around the world (which burnt for days and days without falling) and accept the 'official' story. To accept anything else is what ? Nieve. ? Scaremongering. ? Stupid. ? Or maybe tooo mind boggling to contemplate. ? If they can assassinate the actual President himself, and then his brother headed for the presidency, why stop at a few 'dispensable' people in a sky scraper, when so much more is at stake. ?
Actually the reason they fell as they did and didn't fall outwards is precisely because the mass of those buildings relatve to the structural integdirty once the superstructure failed (which had no "bricks" in it) meant that if fell in freefall by acceleration due to gravity. Once those buildings had started to collapse there was no way that the structure underneath could withstand even momentarily the great mass of material falling directly onto it and accererating due to gravity, therefore they went straight down, text book physics, not demolition. The structure of the buildings was such that the extenernal steel skeleton took the load of the overall mass of the building, but after a certain level of damage was caused to this very strong steel structure, its obvious now that the buildings had no chance. The second plane hit somehwere in the 70s in terms of stories, so that meant that above that point there was hundreds of thousands of tones of material from the upper stories (which were not dust and ash) weighing down upon that part of the building that had suffered the impact of the plane and the subsquent intense fuel-air fire. Hence the collapse, (once the point at which the damaged steel stucture could no longer suppot the weight above it was reached). Yes those buildings were designed to survive a plane impact, and they did, for a while, but the designers had rekoned on a plane travelling much slower, and also of course the did not factor in the fuel fire caused by a fully loaded plane, or the massive explosions caused by the ignition of the tanks on impact (which also caused massive damage to the stuctures as the energy expended in those explosions was enormous.
As for the nuke thing, well if you are prepared to fly places into buildings in the early morning in New York and potentially kill 30,000+ people in your own city, also cause your economy billions upon billions of dollars of damage, fire a cruise missile into your own military headquarters, and also try to fly a plane into your own seat of governemnt, then why the quams about hitting Seattle with a 1 megatone nuke that would kick-start your neo-con century up in a more unstoppable way? Why bother with this tricky and in reality impossible-to-pull-off scheme, when you could secretly access a small bomb, put it in your own city (you choose which one), set if off from across the country, and then nuke or attack whoever you wanted to afterwards, and no one would say anything because we would all be too busy hiding under mattresses waiting for WWIII? I mean if you are gonna have an evil and insane plot why not just knock yourself out, thats what I would do? Maybe they didn't do that because in fact, although they are not exactly mother teresa, they would actually baulk at attacking their own country in such a heinous and unforgiveable way? What do you think that Americans would do if they thought that their governemnt was as crazy as the conspiracy people suggest? The army would mutiny for a start, the people would lynch those responsible, the entire country would collapse and the whole basis upon which you presume these people are operating (to make the US invincible so they can take over the world) would fall to dust. Why risk all this, and their own already extremely large amount of power to follow some lunactic conspiracy that would never, and can never work? It might be fair to say that there are always a few people mad enough to take such crazy risks for zero returns, but in general most such people end up in asylums or in the Socialist Workers party, not in power, to achieve power you have to have a sense of whats reality and whats not, otherwise the people behind you will quickly cut your throat and take whataever power you have away from you.
The towers could not possibly have collasped in such a manner without 'considerable assistance'. So, lets ignore the evidence of the designers, the constructors, the experienced tructural engineers, the firemen, the eye witnesses, the video evidence, the experience from other fires in other skyscrapers around the world (which burnt for days and days without falling) and accept the 'official' story. To accept anything else is what ? Nieve. ? Scaremongering. ? Stupid. ? Or maybe tooo mind boggling to contemplate. ? If they can assassinate the actual President himself, and then his brother headed for the presidency, why stop at a few 'dispensable' people in a sky scraper, when so much more is at stake. ?
Actually the reason they fell as they did and didn't fall outwards is precisely because the mass of those buildings relatve to the structural integdirty once the superstructure failed (which had no "bricks" in it) meant that if fell in freefall by acceleration due to gravity. Once those buildings had started to collapse there was no way that the structure underneath could withstand even momentarily the great mass of material falling directly onto it and accererating due to gravity, therefore they went straight down, text book physics, not demolition. The structure of the buildings was such that the extenernal steel skeleton took the load of the overall mass of the building, but after a certain level of damage was caused to this very strong steel structure, its obvious now that the buildings had no chance. The second plane hit somehwere in the 70s in terms of stories, so that meant that above that point there was hundreds of thousands of tones of material from the upper stories (which were not dust and ash) weighing down upon that part of the building that had suffered the impact of the plane and the subsquent intense fuel-air fire. Hence the collapse, (once the point at which the damaged steel stucture could no longer suppot the weight above it was reached). Yes those buildings were designed to survive a plane impact, and they did, for a while, but the designers had rekoned on a plane travelling much slower, and also of course the did not factor in the fuel fire caused by a fully loaded plane, or the massive explosions caused by the ignition of the tanks on impact (which also caused massive damage to the stuctures as the energy expended in those explosions was enormous.
As for the nuke thing, well if you are prepared to fly places into buildings in the early morning in New York and potentially kill 30,000+ people in your own city, also cause your economy billions upon billions of dollars of damage, fire a cruise missile into your own military headquarters, and also try to fly a plane into your own seat of governemnt, then why the quams about hitting Seattle with a 1 megatone nuke that would kick-start your neo-con century up in a more unstoppable way? Why bother with this tricky and in reality impossible-to-pull-off scheme, when you could secretly access a small bomb, put it in your own city (you choose which one), set if off from across the country, and then nuke or attack whoever you wanted to afterwards, and no one would say anything because we would all be too busy hiding under mattresses waiting for WWIII? I mean if you are gonna have an evil and insane plot why not just knock yourself out, thats what I would do? Maybe they didn't do that because in fact, although they are not exactly mother teresa, they would actually baulk at attacking their own country in such a heinous and unforgiveable way? What do you think that Americans would do if they thought that their governemnt was as crazy as the conspiracy people suggest? The army would mutiny for a start, the people would lynch those responsible, the entire country would collapse and the whole basis upon which you presume these people are operating (to make the US invincible so they can take over the world) would fall to dust. Why risk all this, and their own already extremely large amount of power to follow some lunactic conspiracy that would never, and can never work? It might be fair to say that there are always a few people mad enough to take such crazy risks for zero returns, but in general most such people end up in asylums or in the Socialist Workers party, not in power, to achieve power you have to have a sense of whats reality and whats not, otherwise the people behind you will quickly cut your throat and take whataever power you have away from you.
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
One in three American's Say U.S. Aided in 9/11
Also, how many people would have to in on this 1, to achieve it as an objective 2. to keep it hushed up, 3. to make sure that no one ever found out about it? How many? So lets take your argument on, there is this ultra-fascistic, power-mad, stop at nothing cabal within the American system who run it all, so who is in on it? All the senators, governors, military, judiciary, mayors, generals, democrats, republicans, liberals, oil barons, Hollywood, tv stations, newspapers, journalists, intellectuals, cops. There are many interests and factions contained within the American political system, who also have access to the levers of governemnt, how could these people be stopped from finding out what you had done? You would have to have them all in on it, including leaders from other governments, (who have intelligence agents at all levels in the US, and know what is going on, just like they do in other countries). So how would the convince the other governments to go along with this thing? Is everyone in on it? Is everyone who Deny's this is possible "in" on it?
A conspiracy is always only as strong as its weakest link, and the bigger that chain is, the harder it is to make it work, which is why real conspiriacies involve very small groups of people, and events that appear mundane, but actually are facilitating some achievable agenda. For an example, the recent revelations that Special Branch in N.I. were colluding in the murder of innocent catholics is a good example of a real conspiracy. They were able to do this because it involved a small amount of people, who operated with no questions asked in an extra-legal environment, (and sanctioned by a small, powerful group of people from above) who were able to collude in these dirty little murders, that were not untypical of what was happening anyway, they didn't try to do any more because it would have been harder to get away with, not because they were morally against such things, and they didn't include everyone in the police force or the N.I. office because if they had, they wouldn't have gotten away with it, and it would have come out much more quickly than now. By and large they achieved what they wanted at the time to achieve. But even that little game hasn't worked because now we know about some of it, more will come out, and its only 10 years later.
Or Kennedy, of all of these conspiracies its at least plausible, because you only need 3 guys, rifles, and its just shooting one man in a car, an easy enough thing to do, (but damn hard to cover up as well, especially seeing as that mans brother was the US Attorney General of the time). I am not saying there was no cover up, there obviously was one, a rather clumsy one actually, but what the truth behind who was involved are is still far from certain, I would suspect that it was the Cubans, Moscow, and rouge CIA, no-one else, though other hypothesis are not impossible on that one, it is a strange affair no doubt about it. So please how in gods name do you think that anyone would be capable of pulling off this thing that you are suggesting, its just a complete fantasy.
A conspiracy is always only as strong as its weakest link, and the bigger that chain is, the harder it is to make it work, which is why real conspiriacies involve very small groups of people, and events that appear mundane, but actually are facilitating some achievable agenda. For an example, the recent revelations that Special Branch in N.I. were colluding in the murder of innocent catholics is a good example of a real conspiracy. They were able to do this because it involved a small amount of people, who operated with no questions asked in an extra-legal environment, (and sanctioned by a small, powerful group of people from above) who were able to collude in these dirty little murders, that were not untypical of what was happening anyway, they didn't try to do any more because it would have been harder to get away with, not because they were morally against such things, and they didn't include everyone in the police force or the N.I. office because if they had, they wouldn't have gotten away with it, and it would have come out much more quickly than now. By and large they achieved what they wanted at the time to achieve. But even that little game hasn't worked because now we know about some of it, more will come out, and its only 10 years later.
Or Kennedy, of all of these conspiracies its at least plausible, because you only need 3 guys, rifles, and its just shooting one man in a car, an easy enough thing to do, (but damn hard to cover up as well, especially seeing as that mans brother was the US Attorney General of the time). I am not saying there was no cover up, there obviously was one, a rather clumsy one actually, but what the truth behind who was involved are is still far from certain, I would suspect that it was the Cubans, Moscow, and rouge CIA, no-one else, though other hypothesis are not impossible on that one, it is a strange affair no doubt about it. So please how in gods name do you think that anyone would be capable of pulling off this thing that you are suggesting, its just a complete fantasy.
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
One in three American's Say U.S. Aided in 9/11
Galbally;527074 wrote:
fire a cruise missile into your own military headquarters,
.
:D Succes. ! An admission that a cruise missile went into the Pentagon. ? NOT the official story surely. !
Didn't another Jet go into that as well. ? So, one part of their story is authentic but the other part is false. ? The seeds of doubt, maybe ?
Surely to be genuine their whole story has to be faultless. ? No gaps in it otherwise the whole story from beginning to end could be under a cloud of suspicion. ? :-2
fire a cruise missile into your own military headquarters,
.
:D Succes. ! An admission that a cruise missile went into the Pentagon. ? NOT the official story surely. !
Didn't another Jet go into that as well. ? So, one part of their story is authentic but the other part is false. ? The seeds of doubt, maybe ?
Surely to be genuine their whole story has to be faultless. ? No gaps in it otherwise the whole story from beginning to end could be under a cloud of suspicion. ? :-2
"Power to the People".
"Lies are expensive, the Truth is Cheap".
"Lies are expensive, the Truth is Cheap".
One in three American's Say U.S. Aided in 9/11
Galbally;527110 wrote:
How many? So lets take your argument on, there is this ultra-facistic, power-mad, stop at nothing cabal within the American system who run it all, so who is in on it? All the senators, governors, military, judiciary, mayors, generals, democrats, republicans, liberals, oil barons, hollywood, tv stations, newspapers, journalists, intellectuals, cops.
.
JFK. ? Bobby. ? Pearl Harbour. ? If it was done then, why could it not have been done for 9/11. ? There were enough 'cover ups' and 'silences' then, and a blatantly false Commission of enquirey, so why not now. ?
The only difference is that the stakes for 9/11 were much higher than JFK etc, therefore the motives higher, and the results of success higher. ! Confirmation of Bush's and Rumsfelds and Cheney's dire warnings about 'Saddam' and terrorists, and a licence to go and kill them all, AND secure the oil fields. The regeneration of Israel's image which had been shattered by the 'palestinian affair', etc. etc. The 'remobilisation' of the American armaments industry, the removal of Saddam by a 'peaceful' army dedicated to the removal of terrorism and its replacement by 'democracy'. The list goes on and on. !
I agree all about 'so many people being kept quiet', but the law of averages says that that cannot happen forever. One day, somewhere, somehow, the truth will leak. ! When it does I wonder who of us will be back on here first. ?
Anyway, it has all become a little boring, so once again we 'beg to differ'. !
How many? So lets take your argument on, there is this ultra-facistic, power-mad, stop at nothing cabal within the American system who run it all, so who is in on it? All the senators, governors, military, judiciary, mayors, generals, democrats, republicans, liberals, oil barons, hollywood, tv stations, newspapers, journalists, intellectuals, cops.
.
JFK. ? Bobby. ? Pearl Harbour. ? If it was done then, why could it not have been done for 9/11. ? There were enough 'cover ups' and 'silences' then, and a blatantly false Commission of enquirey, so why not now. ?
The only difference is that the stakes for 9/11 were much higher than JFK etc, therefore the motives higher, and the results of success higher. ! Confirmation of Bush's and Rumsfelds and Cheney's dire warnings about 'Saddam' and terrorists, and a licence to go and kill them all, AND secure the oil fields. The regeneration of Israel's image which had been shattered by the 'palestinian affair', etc. etc. The 'remobilisation' of the American armaments industry, the removal of Saddam by a 'peaceful' army dedicated to the removal of terrorism and its replacement by 'democracy'. The list goes on and on. !
I agree all about 'so many people being kept quiet', but the law of averages says that that cannot happen forever. One day, somewhere, somehow, the truth will leak. ! When it does I wonder who of us will be back on here first. ?
Anyway, it has all become a little boring, so once again we 'beg to differ'. !
"Power to the People".
"Lies are expensive, the Truth is Cheap".
"Lies are expensive, the Truth is Cheap".
One in three American's Say U.S. Aided in 9/11
scaminfo;527348 wrote: JFK. ? Bobby. ? Pearl Harbour. ? If it was done then, why could it not have been done for 9/11. ? There were enough 'cover ups' and 'silences' then, and a blatantly false Commission of enquirey, so why not now. ?
The only difference is that the stakes for 9/11 were much higher than JFK etc, therefore the motives higher, and the results of success higher. ! Confirmation of Bush's and Rumsfelds and Cheney's dire warnings about 'Saddam' and terrorists, and a licence to go and kill them all, AND secure the oil fields. The regeneration of Israel's image which had been shattered by the 'palestinian affair', etc. etc. The 'remobilisation' of the American armaments industry, the removal of Saddam by a 'peaceful' army dedicated to the removal of terrorism and its replacement by 'democracy'. The list goes on and on. !
I agree all about 'so many people being kept quiet', but the law of averages says that that cannot happen forever. One day, somewhere, somehow, the truth will leak. ! When it does I wonder who of us will be back on here first. ?
Anyway, it has all become a little boring, so once again we 'beg to differ'. !
Yes agreed, lets leave this september 11th stuff because we wont agree on it, its cool with me. You will find on other topics I am a much more fun person to have a conversation with. Well, most topics, I can go off on rants sometimes, but I try not to, I'm 35 you see, its that middle-aged grumpy sod thing kicking in. :wah:
The only difference is that the stakes for 9/11 were much higher than JFK etc, therefore the motives higher, and the results of success higher. ! Confirmation of Bush's and Rumsfelds and Cheney's dire warnings about 'Saddam' and terrorists, and a licence to go and kill them all, AND secure the oil fields. The regeneration of Israel's image which had been shattered by the 'palestinian affair', etc. etc. The 'remobilisation' of the American armaments industry, the removal of Saddam by a 'peaceful' army dedicated to the removal of terrorism and its replacement by 'democracy'. The list goes on and on. !
I agree all about 'so many people being kept quiet', but the law of averages says that that cannot happen forever. One day, somewhere, somehow, the truth will leak. ! When it does I wonder who of us will be back on here first. ?
Anyway, it has all become a little boring, so once again we 'beg to differ'. !
Yes agreed, lets leave this september 11th stuff because we wont agree on it, its cool with me. You will find on other topics I am a much more fun person to have a conversation with. Well, most topics, I can go off on rants sometimes, but I try not to, I'm 35 you see, its that middle-aged grumpy sod thing kicking in. :wah:
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
One in three American's Say U.S. Aided in 9/11
Succes. ! An admission that a cruise missile went into the Pentagon. ? NOT the official story surely. !
Damn, I let the cat out of the bag, well you know "too much" now, you know what that means, don't worry, you won't feel a thing! :wah:
Damn, I let the cat out of the bag, well you know "too much" now, you know what that means, don't worry, you won't feel a thing! :wah:
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
One in three American's Say U.S. Aided in 9/11
Dr G, your so smart. Thats my views and opinions but i could never express myself like that, I vote Dr G for Prime Minister
I am nobody..nobody is perfect...therefore I must be Perfect!
One in three American's Say U.S. Aided in 9/11
SuzyB;527911 wrote: Dr G, your so smart. Thats my views and opinions but i could never express myself like that, I vote Dr G for Prime Minister
Erm, smart, erm, well except when it comes to talking the right type of headache tablets! But no, seriously, an Irish prime minister? Of the UK? Well I was born in Birmingham so I could qualify, (just), but I dunno the Unionists would probably be a bit upset or something. Also, I have to become king of Scotland soon as well, so that will take up a lot of time, but I will look into it me dears!
Erm, smart, erm, well except when it comes to talking the right type of headache tablets! But no, seriously, an Irish prime minister? Of the UK? Well I was born in Birmingham so I could qualify, (just), but I dunno the Unionists would probably be a bit upset or something. Also, I have to become king of Scotland soon as well, so that will take up a lot of time, but I will look into it me dears!
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
One in three American's Say U.S. Aided in 9/11
Galbally;527704 wrote: I can go off on rants sometimes, but I try not to, I'm 35 you see, its that middle-aged grumpy sod thing kicking in. :wah:
OMG. ! Thats terrible. ! Almost half your life gone. :-1
Oh well. don't worry too much. When you get to my age you are allowed to start worrying.
But not until then. By then of course you will have gained such an insight into life you might even begin to believe in the conspiracy. ! In fact, one hopes you might even become a Champion of it. ?
OMG. ! Thats terrible. ! Almost half your life gone. :-1
Oh well. don't worry too much. When you get to my age you are allowed to start worrying.
But not until then.
By then of course you will have gained such an insight into life you might even begin to believe in the conspiracy. ! In fact, one hopes you might even become a Champion of it. ?"Power to the People".
"Lies are expensive, the Truth is Cheap".
"Lies are expensive, the Truth is Cheap".
One in three American's Say U.S. Aided in 9/11
scaminfo;528055 wrote: OMG. ! Thats terrible. ! Almost half your life gone. :-1
Oh well. don't worry too much. When you get to my age you are allowed to start worrying.
But not until then. By then of course you will have gained such an insight into life you might even begin to believe in the conspiracy. ! In fact, one hopes you might even become a Champion of it. ?
I know, poor me, :wah: I tell ya I nearly didn't live to be 36 last night, I had a bit of a situation with an aspirin allergy. Getting away from the conspiracy stuff, you should also talk to Jenny Swan, she's Irish as well, she's about today, she's a nice girl, from down cork way!
Oh well. don't worry too much. When you get to my age you are allowed to start worrying.
But not until then.
By then of course you will have gained such an insight into life you might even begin to believe in the conspiracy. ! In fact, one hopes you might even become a Champion of it. ?I know, poor me, :wah: I tell ya I nearly didn't live to be 36 last night, I had a bit of a situation with an aspirin allergy. Getting away from the conspiracy stuff, you should also talk to Jenny Swan, she's Irish as well, she's about today, she's a nice girl, from down cork way!
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
One in three American's Say U.S. Aided in 9/11
Galbally;528109 wrote: I know, poor me, :wah: I tell ya I nearly didn't live to be 36 last night, I had a bit of a situation with an aspirin allergy. Getting away from the conspiracy stuff, you should also talk to Jenny Swan, she's Irish as well, she's about today, she's a nice girl, from down cork way!
Where do I find her. ? :-3 Does she have a 'nick'. ?
Might be a nice change, from disagreeing with you. ? :wah:
Where do I find her. ? :-3 Does she have a 'nick'. ?
Might be a nice change, from disagreeing with you. ? :wah:
"Power to the People".
"Lies are expensive, the Truth is Cheap".
"Lies are expensive, the Truth is Cheap".
One in three American's Say U.S. Aided in 9/11
scaminfo;528354 wrote: Where do I find her. ? :-3 Does she have a 'nick'. ?
Might be a nice change, from disagreeing with you. ? :wah:
Oh she is about on the boards talking about various non-conspiracy related things, it would be nice to have some more people to talk about Ireland to sometimes, then again, we all do that anyway all the time so its nice to get away from it init? Anyway you can pm her if you want to introduce yourself.
her nickname is jennyswan!
Might be a nice change, from disagreeing with you. ? :wah:
Oh she is about on the boards talking about various non-conspiracy related things, it would be nice to have some more people to talk about Ireland to sometimes, then again, we all do that anyway all the time so its nice to get away from it init? Anyway you can pm her if you want to introduce yourself.
her nickname is jennyswan!
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
One in three American's Say U.S. Aided in 9/11
Just so as this interesting thread doesn't die, how about some others contributing to it. ? Galbally and I are surely not the only one's with serious beliefs or disbeliefs about it all. ???
"Power to the People".
"Lies are expensive, the Truth is Cheap".
"Lies are expensive, the Truth is Cheap".
One in three American's Say U.S. Aided in 9/11
Don't worry scaminfo, other people will come along I am sure, and it comes back a lot this topic obviously.
"We are never so happy, never so unhappy, as we imagine"
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
Le Rochefoucauld.
"A smack in the face settles all arguments, then you can move on kid."
My dad 1986.
-
Parker_scramble
- Posts: 61
- Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2007 11:33 pm
One in three American's Say U.S. Aided in 9/11
*parker see nypost and doesnt read any further*
-
Sweet Tooth
- Posts: 589
- Joined: Tue Jan 23, 2007 1:03 pm
-
Available Jones
- Posts: 7
- Joined: Mon May 07, 2007 3:11 am
One in three American's Say U.S. Aided in 9/11
Insteadf of asking "why" ask who would, could, or did profit from such an occurrence. After that you figure out how they could go about it.
-
Retchingdog
- Posts: 9
- Joined: Fri May 18, 2007 9:08 am
One in three American's Say U.S. Aided in 9/11
Planes hit the twin towers.
The bulk of the fuel on board the planes was burned away in some 30 seconds - one minute.
The rest of the fire gives off sooty smoke which means that it lacks oxygen to burn "hot". Way too cool to affect the steel frames of the buildings.
The towers were designed to withstand plane impacts and they did.
All of a sudden, each tower collapses in its own footprint at near free-fall speed, which is physically impossible without "help".
In the whole history of steel-framed buildings, not a single one ever collapsed by fire. Let alone being converted to mostly fine dust.
I don't know who did it, but after a 25-year career as a quality controller at a major European explosives manufacturer, I recognize a controlled demolition when I see one.
The Retching Dog.
PS: Even the MASSIVE core columns of the building came down in neat 40-50 foot sections. Just think about it.
The bulk of the fuel on board the planes was burned away in some 30 seconds - one minute.
The rest of the fire gives off sooty smoke which means that it lacks oxygen to burn "hot". Way too cool to affect the steel frames of the buildings.
The towers were designed to withstand plane impacts and they did.
All of a sudden, each tower collapses in its own footprint at near free-fall speed, which is physically impossible without "help".
In the whole history of steel-framed buildings, not a single one ever collapsed by fire. Let alone being converted to mostly fine dust.
I don't know who did it, but after a 25-year career as a quality controller at a major European explosives manufacturer, I recognize a controlled demolition when I see one.
The Retching Dog.
PS: Even the MASSIVE core columns of the building came down in neat 40-50 foot sections. Just think about it.