RE: Never Forget! Sept 11th, A Day of Infamy (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message

DomKen -> RE: Never Forget! Sept 11th, A Day of Infamy (10/23/2014 7:08:03 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

experienced airline pilots, firemen on the scene, qualified architects, structural engineers, and investigative journalists have all presented evidence that discredits various aspects of what it pleases you to style as the "established facts."

Then present this evidence.

Do your own homework, bozo. It isn't hard to find. I have no interest in trying to convince you of anything. Fact is, I rather enjoy watching you stomp and spit when you don't know what you're talking about. But I would like to hope that at least some of the thread's readers might find themselves motivated to take a look at what's out there, and make up their own minds.

K.


You made the claim. It is up to you to you to back it up coward. I happen to know there is no such evidence but would enjoy humiliating you when you present the usual conspiracy crap.



Politesub53 -> RE: Never Forget! Sept 11th, A Day of Infamy (10/23/2014 4:55:21 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

A three year old could inform you that the suggestion I havent been told the truth means someone has lied.

Not at all. They may believe what they're saying.

You know, like when you imagine that ideas in your head belong to somebody else.

K.





I didnt imagine fuck all, if you are harping on about the racist shit you continually defend.




Politesub53 -> RE: Never Forget! Sept 11th, A Day of Infamy (10/23/2014 4:59:05 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

Still no proof to back up your earlier lie then ?

I realize that you're jealous of Ken, but this feeble shit just isn't in the running. If you want to earn your Asshole Merit Badge, you'll have to do better. Work on that and get back to me, okay?

K.




You claimed I was lied to, if they thought it was the truth, then it wasnt a fucking lie, was it ?

As for gaining an Arsehole Merit Badge, would I get one by using your trick of partially quoting people.




Politesub53 -> RE: Never Forget! Sept 11th, A Day of Infamy (10/23/2014 5:09:49 PM)

Hmmm I have done some research and maybe the conspiracy theorists have a valid point.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5muY64Oyp10




Real0ne -> RE: Never Forget! Sept 11th, A Day of Infamy (10/24/2014 7:06:31 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

Hmmm I have done some research and maybe the conspiracy theorists have a valid point.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5muY64Oyp10


So your comprehensive research on the murder of 3000 people which led to the destruction of 5000 soldiers and the slaughter of over a million middle easterners only managed to produce a British Political Comedy?


The arguments posited in the OP etc are based in physics, cgi, demolition, etc.

However in checking your link had you clicked on a few more you would find these:

American government was created by the British and in the age old British tradition remains:

The Mother of All Big Lies

They’re an American tradition.
They date from the republic’s inception.
Notable ones began in the mid-19th century.

They facilitated annexing Texas. Half of Mexico followed. America became Cuba’s colonial power.

Controlling the Philippines, Guam, Samoa, Hawaii, Haiti, the Dominican Republic, Canal Zone, Puerto Rico and other territories followed.

In 1917, Woodrow Wilson manipulated public sentiment.
He did so with Big Lies.

They turned most Americans into raging German haters.
Big Lies work this way.
Wilson got the war he wanted.

FDR manipulated Japan to attack Pearl Harbor.
Doing so let him wage war.

He had to convince Congress and a pacifist public to go along.

What better way than by manufacturing terror.



9/11 Commissioners say "Official Story" a Lie

9/11 COMMISSIONERS

The co-chairs of the 9/11 Commission (Thomas Keane and Lee Hamilton) said that the CIA (and likely the White House) “obstructed our investigation”.

The co-chairs of the 9/11 Commission also said that the 9/11 Commissioners knew that military officials misrepresented the facts to the Commission, and the Commission considered recommending criminal charges for such false statements, yet didn’t bother to tell the American people (free subscription required).

Indeed, the co-chairs of the Commission now admit that the Commission largely operated based upon political considerations.

9/11 Commission co-chair Lee Hamilton says “I don’t believe for a minute we got everything right”, that the Commission was set up to fail, that people should keep asking questions about 9/11, that the 9/11 debate should continue, and that the 9/11 Commission report was only “the first draft” of history.

9/11 Commissioner Bob Kerrey said that “There are ample reasons to suspect that there may be some alternative to what we outlined in our version . . . We didn’t have access . . . .”

9/11 Commissioner Timothy Roemer said “We were extremely frustrated with the false statements we were getting”

Former 9/11 Commissioner Max Cleland resigned from the Commission, stating: “It is a national scandal”; “This investigation is now compromised”; and “One of these days we will have to get the full story because the 9-11 issue is so important to America. But this White House wants to cover it up”.

9/11 Commissioner John Lehman said that “We purposely put together a staff that had - in a way - conflicts of interest“.

The Senior Counsel to the 9/11 Commission (John Farmer) who led the 9/11 staff’s inquiry, said “I was shocked at how different the truth was from the way it was described …. The tapes told a radically different story from what had been told to us and the public for two years…. This is not spin. This is not true.”



Welcome to 911Truth.org
Published October 8, 2012

Ever since the moment of the first impact at the World Trade Center, a struggle has raged between two broad, competing ideas of what really happened on September 11th, 2001.

The US administration delivered an almost immediate verdict, which can be described as follows: Dispatched by Osama Bin Ladin’s network and motivated by hatred and religious fanaticism, 19 suicide bombers hijacked four planes, crashed three of them into their targets, and caused the collapse of the Twin Towers as a consequence of the resulting damage and fires. The 19 men did not necessarily require any accomplices within the United States; and no one in the US government could have possibly anticipated or prevented the attacks.

Even as the administration exploited this Official Story (or “Official Conspiracy Theory”) as the pretext to launch new wars long in the making, independent researchers began to accumulate a vast body of evidence suggesting a different narrative for 9/11: that of the False Flag Operation.

The 9/11 events and the anomalies in the official story raised Unanswered Questions about:

the unprecedented failure of the US air defense system on the morning of the attacks;

the AWOL military chain of command during the actual attacks, including the inexplicable behavior of the presidential entourage;

the seeming impossibility of official claims with regard to Flight 77;

the evidence that Flight 93 was shot down;

contradictions and dubious evidence in the official claims about the alleged hijackers and masterminds, and doubts about their real identities;

signs that the alleged hijackers enjoyed high-level protection against discovery by honest investigators;

evidence that the alleged hijackers were financed by states allied with US intelligence;

suspicious and massive international financial trades suggesting foreknowledge of the attacks;

widespread signs of official foreknowledge and, in fact, advance preparation for the 9/11 attack scenario;

the long-running links between Islamist fundamentalist terror cells and US covert operations, dating back to CIA support for the anti-Soviet mujahedeen and Osama Bin Ladin himself;

the demolition-like collapse of the Twin Towers and of a third skyscraper, WTC 7;

and questions concerning who could have logically expected to derive benefit in the aftermath of a massive attack on the United States.

The suspicions received further confirmation a few weeks after September 11th, with the arrival of [home grown] anthrax letters targeted only at opposition politicians and media figures, and timed to coincide with the introduction of the USA PATRIOT Act.

Already within those first weeks, loose networks of researchers and investigators formed via the Internet to generally become known as the “9/11 skeptics.” They presented substantial bodies of evidence to show that elements within the US government must have been involved in facilitating or orchestrating the attacks – in other words, that 9/11 was possibly a classic case of “false-flag” or synthetic terrorism, such as corrupt states have often perpetrated on their own citizens.

What motive would people in the US government or establishment have to commit crimes of this magnitude? The outrage caused by September 11th allowed the Bush administration to instantly implement policies its members have long supported, but which were otherwise infeasible. 9/11 was exploited to launch an open-ended, perpetual “war on terror,” actually a war against any and all enemies the US government may designate. The case of Iraq shows that the target countries of this war need have nothing whatsoever to do with 9/11.

The invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan were both planned and prepared in advance of September 11th, with the apparent motive of gaining geostrategic advantage and seizing vital resources. The architects of the Iraq invasion within the Bush administration had earlier been members of the Project for a New American Century.


While generally speaking the political side is not within the scope of my arguments it seems your extensive research is somewhat lacking.

Furthermore simply standing on a soap box shouting bullshit at the slo mo videos presented to the public and forensic material evidence really does not cut the grade to persuade anyone who is not indemnified or otherwise gainfully connected in some way.







MrRodgers -> RE: Never Forget! Sept 11th, A Day of Infamy (10/24/2014 2:23:02 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery


quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

9/11 was a conspiracy. The only question that remains is who were the conspirators and what were their motives.

Again, if people wish to believe the govt....fine. The govt. showed me no proof of their conspiracy theory and theirs has quite a few gaping holes in it that few wish to fill.

Like I've I have also said, that being the case and with the belief that a grand jury will never be formed we had best just mourn the dead and resist further govt. intrusion into our lives for the sake of security.

Well, if "the only question" is who were the conspirators and what were their motives -- lacking that information doesn't make much of a case for a conspiracy.

In fact, it doesn't make any case for it.

You say "if people want to believe the government, fine." But honestly, right back at you -- if you want to believe a conspiracy, fine. But it's still coming down to beliefs, not established facts.

.....and shouldn't there have been the largest search for facts in our nation's history ? Shouldn't there have been a much larger search for truth ? Still, any two or more people conducting such an enterprise...IS a conspiracy.



Politesub53 -> RE: Never Forget! Sept 11th, A Day of Infamy (10/24/2014 4:20:28 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

So your comprehensive research on the murder of 3000 people which led to the destruction of 5000 soldiers and the slaughter of over a million middle easterners only managed to produce a British Political Comedy?



Since one of my first posts here, some nine years ago, was to call you and a few others obnoxious pricks for suggesting 9/11 was an inside job, it hardly seems my comedy post was into 9/11. It didnt state as much, the sketch didnt state as much, but you, half witted tosser that you are, deduced I was speaking about 9/11

It does give me a chance to show how your pea brain works though, you add up two plus two and dont even get as close as five, let alone four. Let me remind you that you have spouted half backed theories about Olympic swimming pools in concentration camps, or that the inmates looked well fed. More bollocks straight from your arse to your keyboard.

You are totally wrong about 9/11, WW1 and WW2, I am not even sure you could pick what fucking day it is, and you only have seven to chose from.

And before you tell me to watch this film or that film this graph or that coloured in drawing, let me tell you I have watched hours of the shit. If anything it runs into days, days I wont see again, but at least I know one simple fact..... You talk bollocks, not just once but constantly. If you had a shred of decency you would stop your obnoxious suggestion that the US Government was responsible for carrying out 9/11





Real0ne -> RE: Never Forget! Sept 11th, A Day of Infamy (10/25/2014 7:08:20 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53


quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

So your comprehensive research on the murder of 3000 people which led to the destruction of 5000 soldiers and the slaughter of over a million middle easterners only managed to produce a British Political Comedy?



Since one of my first posts here, some nine years ago, was to call you and a few others obnoxious pricks for suggesting 9/11 was an inside job, it hardly seems my comedy post was into 9/11. It didnt state as much, the sketch didnt state as much, but you, half witted tosser that you are, deduced I was speaking about 9/11

It does give me a chance to show how your pea brain works though, you add up two plus two and dont even get as close as five, let alone four. Let me remind you that you have spouted half backed theories about Olympic swimming pools in concentration camps, or that the inmates looked well fed. More bollocks straight from your arse to your keyboard.

You are totally wrong about 9/11, WW1 and WW2, I am not even sure you could pick what fucking day it is, and you only have seven to chose from.

And before you tell me to watch this film or that film this graph or that coloured in drawing, let me tell you I have watched hours of the shit. If anything it runs into days, days I wont see again, but at least I know one simple fact..... You talk bollocks, not just once but constantly. If you had a shred of decency you would stop your obnoxious suggestion that the US Government was responsible for carrying out 9/11





Wow you work so hard to get people to turn their heads away without looking at all the filth that has been swept under the carpet.

Too bad you cant seem to bring yourself above the level of childish ad homs and pity plays. The last resort of a lost or non-argument.

Decency? Hitler? Jews? Are you kidding? Can you try to keep it closer than 500 miles off topic! That is a well known DDT "dirty debate trick" typically used by those suffering from a variety of delusions to try and poison the well as I said earlier.

If you had a shred of decency you would stop your obnoxious suggestion that the US Government was responsible for carrying out 9/11

Everyone knows about operation northwoods where the US fully intended to terrorize its own people in the same way 911 was pulled off. Coincidence I am sure.

I really do not know what you hope to accomplish with such pathetic posts that amount to nothing more than a "jess shuddup" rant, because they didnt work then while many people were still in shock, and they certainly wont work now to convince anyone you have a valid argument since you have not made one yet.

Remember, while I am sure you think very highly of your rhetoric it fails the sniff test and certainly is not a counter argument by any stretch of the imagination.

Ok enough on that, I certainly wouldnt want to hold you up or pull any time away from from your intense investigation.

[image]http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d141/4dumdebunkers/wtc2/firee_zps78d07c80.gif[/image]



Musicmystery -> RE: Never Forget! Sept 11th, A Day of Infamy (10/25/2014 8:08:11 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers


quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery


quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

9/11 was a conspiracy. The only question that remains is who were the conspirators and what were their motives.

Again, if people wish to believe the govt....fine. The govt. showed me no proof of their conspiracy theory and theirs has quite a few gaping holes in it that few wish to fill.

Like I've I have also said, that being the case and with the belief that a grand jury will never be formed we had best just mourn the dead and resist further govt. intrusion into our lives for the sake of security.

Well, if "the only question" is who were the conspirators and what were their motives -- lacking that information doesn't make much of a case for a conspiracy.

In fact, it doesn't make any case for it.

You say "if people want to believe the government, fine." But honestly, right back at you -- if you want to believe a conspiracy, fine. But it's still coming down to beliefs, not established facts.

.....and shouldn't there have been the largest search for facts in our nation's history ? Shouldn't there have been a much larger search for truth ? Still, any two or more people conducting such an enterprise...IS a conspiracy.

I can think of a long list of more productive investigations first.

Even better, spend the money on roads and bridges.

Have fun with the tin foil



Real0ne -> RE: Never Forget! Sept 11th, A Day of Infamy (10/25/2014 8:35:17 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

I can think of a long list of more productive investigations first.

Even better, spend the money on roads and bridges.

Have fun with the tin foil


So you are all for sweeping criminal negligence by government under the carpet?



Musicmystery -> RE: Never Forget! Sept 11th, A Day of Infamy (10/25/2014 8:37:03 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne


quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

I can think of a long list of more productive investigations first.

Even better, spend the money on roads and bridges.

Have fun with the tin foil


So you are all for sweeping criminal negligence by government under the carpet?

You can't read either.



Real0ne -> RE: Never Forget! Sept 11th, A Day of Infamy (10/25/2014 9:03:05 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63

Trust in the government has nothing to do with it.

I disagree, trust in the government has everything to do with it!
They performed the investigation,
They decided what to release to the public and what to hold back, (for instance we cant get the data used for NISTs analysis model of WTC7.
The government cannot be trusted, as there are a number of proven events where the government was complicit in operations against the people.
The CIA experimenting with LSD comes to immediately to mind and Operation Northwoods and a host of others.

Even if I was to entertain the notion that the government could have engineered the whole thing, I don't see how that's proven by your arguments about CGI, light poles, or controlled explosions.

If it came to court, its not really "The General Government" per se'. Its actors within government agencies and quasi government agencies that are none the less sanctioned by and ultimately protected by government. Hence plausible deniability.

Keep in mind that you talk about government you are playing in the same pen with 160iq think tanks here are you up to it?

Yes actually it is proof. We have unimpeachable video of molten material and pics of molten iron hanging off of the debris being lifted out some 3 weeks later, and testimony of many qualified people, including the guy who designed the building, the fire department, EMT's, Construction workers, literally everyone recognizes that there was molten iron BUT the government. (and they are getting away with it! Now thats fucking power!)

Why go through all that anyway? If the government wanted to destroy buildings and make the public think that airplanes crashed into them, why couldn't they just put their own agents on the planes and crash them? They could achieve the same result.

Easier yet why not just use remote control, but you are getting very close to how it was actually done.

quote:

Two Flight 175 took off from Logan: CONFIRMED

Flight 175 lifted off from the runway at 8:13. That's the official story.

But the BTS database has N612UA (Flight 175) taking off at 8:23. However, there was no confirmation for this time anywhere.

I am now able to proudly present an eyewitness for the 8:23 wheels-off time of Flight 175: Steven Miller, US Airways pilot, who was next in line behind Flight 175 to take off from the runway.

More here: http://911woodybox.blogspot.com/2008/12/two-flight-175-taking-off-from-boston.html


Its a different world today now that people have the ability to investigate privately. The same things are being found for the other flights.

If these planes didn't crash, then where did they go? Where did the passengers go?

You are presuming there were passengers and that there was in fact a plane with passengers on it, and that it was a 757. None of this has been actually proven, just thrown out by our trustworthy government for you to believe.

What about cellphone calls made from those flights before they crashed?

Again you have no idea who made those calls, they could have been sitting in a room next to you for all you know! The government has to prove their case and they have not and scoff at anyone who demands it. "We the Government"

If the government is going to destroy planes, buildings, and kill innocent people...then they could still do that and create the exact same deception without the use of CGI. Even if what you're trying to prove is true, the whole CGI angle is a complete red herring.

How? When we can see explosions in the wrong places on different views, transparencies, cgi artifacts, and its very easy to see when you look at the explosion what is really happening if you understand how they work. In other words certain devices and types of explosions look a certain way and there is no way to get around it.

[image]http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d141/4dumdebunkers/wtcgi/kkk_zps2be19f46.gif[/image]

CGI is very simple, its quick and the news media just happens to have all this COINCIDENTALLY provided for them by anonymous sources! Perfect plausible deniability!

Hey there is 100 Grand in Escrow for anyone who can produce a demonstratably original as in unmodified recording of an actual impact of the alleged flight 175 into tower 2. Not only is it easy to see its a transparency (CGI) but also the physical characteristics are all fucked up. I would be happy to explain but not in this post. Its already too long.

Like I said you are in the 160 minimum iq playground.

Yeah, I saw those pics, but honestly, I can't make heads nor tails out of that blurry footage.

How about this one also from an anonymous source? It doesnt even have a yellow green skyline. lol

[image]http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d141/4dumdebunkers/wtc2/nopenoplanehere_zpsbhurovvg.gif[/image]

Technically, all news reporters are hired actors. I did see footage of fires and long columns of smoke shown in the more distant shots as well.

Its not like there was no fire, that is not the point. There was not enough fire might be the way to say it.

quote:


People on the street said no plane it was bombs, the news reporters said no planes it was bombs (in the case of wtc2) and lo and behold the news anchor shut the reporter up by saying

"no its definitely a plane I am watching it on my monitor"

the reporter at the scene argued he was wrong and the 'anchor' pulled the well I see it on my monitor card.

Odd, we have a news anchor that sees it "on tv" which is presented as the truth and the reporters who are on the scene are automatically overuled.


Well, there can be any number of explanations for discrepancies like this. I also remember that the reported death toll was much higher than it later turned out to be. People from different angles might see different things.

The death toll was an error and you know this because it was "corrected". The CGI and reporter discrepancy defaults to the anchor despite that it can be totally faked.

The reporter is directly in line of sight and says no plane, they were live on tv arguing this out, the anchor simply said he was full of shit and showed everyone a dark fuzz blob claiming he saw a plan on his monitor. People fell for it. They dont know the difference between hollywood and reality.

This was not "corrected" in the media and its left up to PI's to correct it.


quote:


Now we have a "I seen it on tv" so its gotta be twu society and [B]we are off to the races to kill muslims.[/B]


This is the point where people should have been more skeptical. But even the 9/11 "truthers" left this one alone and instead concentrated on red herrings and irrelevant minutiae.

Using CGI to promote a war is minutia? No they were getting so much irrational EMOTIONAL negative feedback from flag waving blind people [similar to a few posters here] they had no choice but to drop it and let the emotions flow. Of course thats not a reasonable thinking approach but it served its designed purpose [fear and awe], the way life is for some and those who would control them.

Even accepting the government's official version of events, this was still an issue of domestic terrorism and internal security, just like the OKC bombing.

Yeh more easily provable government involvement but that another story for another day.

But after the OKC bombing, we didn't make war on the other side of the planet, did we? So, why would we do so after 9/11? That's what should have been questioned, but the "truthers" wasted so much time on nonsense that they forgot to ask.

It would be pretty hard to invent a plausible explanation for OBL to attack the murrah building to rattle people enough to go to war. These are all reactionary tests to test the public.

Their entire case rested on the supposition that "9/11 was an inside job," but the problem with that is that it carries the implication that if 9/11 [I]wasn't[/I] an inside job, then the government's war-mongering adventurism overseas would be justified. That's what I would take issue with, but even the so-called "truthers" left that question alone.

Its way beyond supposition now days with plenty of material evidence and this post is getting way to fucking long for me to get into now, you make so many statements of the old arguments long put to bed, apparently this subject is not talked about too much on this board.

Besides, if the government wanted to convince the public to go to war in the Middle East, it wouldn't have taken such an elaborate deception to convince them to do so.

Unless you are in government and personally seen all of this unfold rather than evidence you are offering your opinion as to what you think the government would do. We know how well that works out from the excuse Japan would not attack pearl because the water was not deep enough.

Hell, I recall people openly calling for the nuclear destruction of Iran back in 1979, just for attacking our embassy and burning our flag.

Well 18% of the working public work in some form of government job, and most of them are married.

We had already been at war with Iraq, and I recall a lot of people being pissed off in 1991 because the government stopped. There was already such widespread support for that war that it wouldn't have taken any great urging for the public to go along with continuing it until Saddam Hussein's government capitulated. The Middle East has been on a lot of Americans' **** lists for a long time, so if the government's objective was to fool the public into supporting a war in the Middle East, 9/11 would have been completely unnecessary.

As I said, I'm no fan of the government or the media. There may be any number of threats facing society, but that wouldn't make things any different than it's ever been in any country at any time in history. The only reason why so many people make such a big thing about it these days is because since WW2, we've built ourselves up into an affluent "bubble" and insulated ourselves from the problems of the rest of the world. So, now, we're extremely afraid of losing all that power and wealth. FDR was right when he said the only thing we have to fear is fear itself. It's our own fears which will be our undoing. That's our greatest threat.





ok I am done with this post where the blue ends. you throw too much out in one post and they are mostly arguments from 12 years ago that have long since been disposed of. If you want to limit to a couple of arguments per post rather than a write a volume set that would make it much easier to respond with substance instead of one liners just to get through it all.



mnottertail -> RE: Never Forget! Sept 11th, A Day of Infamy (10/25/2014 9:10:23 AM)

EE-YUL!!!! EE-YUL!!!! EE-YUL!!!!



joether -> RE: Never Forget! Sept 11th, A Day of Infamy (10/25/2014 10:57:03 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63
Trust in the government has nothing to do with it.

I disagree, trust in the government has everything to do with it!
They performed the investigation,


Actually many organizations and people investigated things. Not just the US Government. Try taking off the tin foil hat sometime.....

The government is composed of US Citizens. What your saying is, you not only distrust your fellow US Citizen but think there is a conspiracy. That's called 'paranoia'. You might want to get that checked....

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
They decided what to release to the public and what to hold back, (for instance we cant get the data used for NISTs analysis model of WTC7.


Again, they were not the only investigation group/organization that checked the evidence and facts. You would have to show credible evidence that the other organizations whom agree with the government's view is....ALSO....involved with this conspiracy. These organizations span the entire political spectrum. An if a conspiracy had taken place, don't you think Mr. Snowden would have released such information.....by now?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
The government cannot be trusted, as there are a number of proven events where the government was complicit in operations against the people.
The CIA experimenting with LSD comes to immediately to mind and Operation Northwoods and a host of others.


If you don't trust the US Government, why are you a citizen of said government? Renounce your citizenship and then get the fuck out of my county! There is a big difference between 'checking on what the government is doing/not doing' and the level of paranoia you are in. The CIA did many things that the medical community did not like. So did the G. W. Bush administration and torture. The FBI had done some bad stuff, as has the US Marshals, IRS, Treasury, and many other organizations. Go figure, people are imperfect and fuck shit up all the times. I suppose you have lived a perfect life, right? If so, cast the first stone.....as the saying goes....

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63
Even if I was to entertain the notion that the government could have engineered the whole thing, I don't see how that's proven by your arguments about CGI, light poles, or controlled explosions.


If it came to court, its not really "The General Government" per se'. Its actors within government agencies and quasi government agencies that are none the less sanctioned by and ultimately protected by government. Hence plausible deniability.

Keep in mind that you talk about government you are playing in the same pen with 160iq think tanks here are you up to it?


That by right sounds like a delusional set of comments. It just has to be actors with 'smoke and mirrors', right? Do you have the ability to understand how this might sound to someone with their sanity intact? Your accusing the US Government of a conspiracy against the American people with no actual, real, solid, credible evidence. Proving conspiracy at the local level is a tough act to prove in a court room. You basically, metaphorically speaking, have to show scientific evidence that can not be disproved, that God, the Christian version of him, exists. Good luck...

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
Yes actually it is proof. We have unimpeachable video of molten material and pics of molten iron hanging off of the debris being lifted out some 3 weeks later, and testimony of many qualified people, including the guy who designed the building, the fire department, EMT's, Construction workers, literally everyone recognizes that there was molten iron BUT the government. (and they are getting away with it! Now thats fucking power!)


Then those guys are all idiots. Molten material? Steel does not melt at the temperatures that were reported to have burned in those accidents. So how could steel have melted? The simple answer is: it wasn't steel that melted. The building's exterior was lined in aluminum. Aluminum, when subjected to the temperatures that steel....SOFTENS.....does indeed melt. And that is the pool of stuff people saw. Pools of melted aluminum. How do we know this: CHEMISTRY! How much chemistry knowledge do you think EMTs, construction workers, let alone the average person on the street knows? Not much!

Oh, and several groups of people have tested, using chemistry, to show that when temperatures reached 1500-18000 degrees Fahrenheit, steel does indeed soften. What does that mean? Basically each metal had a 'structural integrity' level, or 'how much weight can this metal hold before it fails'. However, as observed through chemistry, metal has a softening point. At this level the amount of weight the metal can hold looses a percentage of its total structural integrity. When steel reaches its softening point, it loses alittle over half its original ability to hold weight. This has also been tested and confirmed using science.

Steel Softening Point: around 1000 F
Steel Melting Point: around 2500 F

I'm sourcing this for the hell of it....

Aluminum Melting Point: around 1220 F

You can test this in a chemistry lab if your really interested RealOne. Place a steel bar and an aluminium bar and subject both to 1500 degrees F, for two hours. Observe what happens.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63
Why go through all that anyway? If the government wanted to destroy buildings and make the public think that airplanes crashed into them, why couldn't they just put their own agents on the planes and crash them? They could achieve the same result.

Easier yet why not just use remote control, but you are getting very close to how it was actually done.


It was performed by those that understood how to fly those planes. Why is the simply explanation to hard for you to grasp? It has to be something else? Like demons, or goblins, or even....'The Thing That Actually Does Go Bonk in the Night'? You have no....EVIDENCE.....of it being anything else. If it was remote controlled, the flight crew would have been 'in' on the conspiracy. Again, you would have to show...EVIDENCE...that this could have happened. And you have nothing either way. So yes, a group of individual took over the planes, they had flight knowledge, and a desire to do something.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
Its a different world today now that people have the ability to investigate privately. The same things are being found for the other flights.


Really? The ability to investigate things have only come about in the last ten years? Do you have....ANY...idea how stupid of a comment this sounds? People have been investigating things long before you were even alive. There ability to investigate things, privately, was not 'put on hold' until some 'tin foil hat' idiot starting bitching. One has to be 'removed from reality' to come with that viewpoint, RealOne. Oh wait, forgot whom I'm speaking to....

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63
If these planes didn't crash, then where did they go? Where did the passengers go?

You are presuming there were passengers and that there was in fact a plane with passengers on it, and that it was a 757. None of this has been actually proven, just thrown out by our trustworthy government for you to believe.


In other words, you didn't answer his question directly. You bitch at the government dodging, evading, and hiding from the facts; and here you are, doing THE SAME EXACT THING! Its wrong for others to do it, but if you do it,....well then....its just 'ok'? Sorry, but you don't hold yourself up to the same standard you bitch at everyone else to stay at; why should anyone take you serious?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63
What about cellphone calls made from those flights before they crashed?

Again you have no idea who made those calls, they could have been sitting in a room next to you for all you know! The government has to prove their case and they have not and scoff at anyone who demands it. "We the Government"


Where is the evidence proving the cellphone came from some other location, besides the person making the call from the plane? You have....NO EVIDENCE. You have at best speculation. Unfortunately, speculation does not equal evidence.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63
If the government is going to destroy planes, buildings, and kill innocent people...then they could still do that and create the exact same deception without the use of CGI. Even if what you're trying to prove is true, the whole CGI angle is a complete red herring.


How? When we can see explosions in the wrong places on different views, transparencies, cgi artifacts, and its very easy to see when you look at the explosion what is really happening if you understand how they work. In other words certain devices and types of explosions look a certain way and there is no way to get around it.

CGI is very simple, its quick and the news media just happens to have all this COINCIDENTALLY provided for them by anonymous sources! Perfect plausible deniability!


This is so laden with bullshit, its hot funny! Lets start with the CGI. How good was the CGI back in 2001? Compared ton 2014? Primitive by any standard. Your going to tell me, that those people on the streets, who saw the planes physically crashing into the buildings.....saw...a CGI scripted event? I hate to break it to you, RealOne, but there is no technology in 2014 to change what the naked eye sees from several hundred feet away from one thing (planes physically hitting the buildings) and another (CGI scripted planes ramming into buildings). If the technology existed in 2001, where is it now?

There are hundreds, if not tens of thousands of people on the streets that saw one or both planes crash into the buildings. Your going to tell me, ALL THESE PEOPLE, are part of the conspiracy, right?

There was no CGI in effect. The crashes were seen from many different angles. No scripted CGI program could handle that sort of data in 2014, let alone 2001. Unless you got the solid, verifiable and credible evidence to back it up. Which you dont....

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
Hey there is 100 Grand in Escrow for anyone who can produce a demonstratably original as in unmodified recording of an actual impact of the alleged flight 175 into tower 2. Not only is it easy to see its a transparency (CGI) but also the physical characteristics are all fucked up. I would be happy to explain but not in this post. Its already too long.


You know why no one has taken up that challenge? Because $100,000 doesnt pay even the basic costs for such an experiment. One needs to build a WTC to the same scale and dimensions as the original. How much does one of those building cost to produce in 2014 numbers? Is it under $100,000? And the jet used, a 747? How much does one of those go for? A $100,000? No, quote doubtful of that too.

People have run the experiments on a much smaller scale, but your apparently not happy with that. So for the sake of the argument, if someone(s) did build another building, JUST TO TEST, it out with a plane loaded up line on that day; would you be able to handle the outcome? The answer is 'no'. You have a viewpoint that is so heavily tied into a belief system that no amount of evidence will convince you otherwise of events. The buildings, people, and planes were all real. You cant accept that reality and that's your problem!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63
Yeah, I saw those pics, but honestly, I can't make heads nor tails out of that blurry footage.

How about this one also from an anonymous source? It doesnt even have a yellow green skyline. lol


So someone used CGI to edit out the plane to show...what? That explosions could happen? Again. Explain how tens of thousands on the streets, roof tops, and even up the the air (there were 200+ aircraft in the air at the time), saw a plane run into the building? Or are all those people....ALSO....involved in this massive cover up and conspiracy?

You realize that's a few hundred thousand people. From across all walks of life, income levels, political viewpoints. educational levels, and mental/emotional health levels.....involved in this conspiracy? Do you have......ANY...idea how silly and stupid you sound?

The rest of your 'material' is just more mindless, insane, and phone 'evidence' about the events that day. The material above should show to the casual and informed observer that your so completely 'off your rocker' as to not be taken seriously. I'm not going to waste further time. If you can not accept reality, I suggest you get a good therapist. Your in dire need of one!



Politesub53 -> RE: Never Forget! Sept 11th, A Day of Infamy (10/25/2014 5:28:22 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

Wow you work so hard to get people to turn their heads away without looking at all the filth that has been swept under the carpet.

Too bad you cant seem to bring yourself above the level of childish ad homs and pity plays. The last resort of a lost or non-argument.

Decency? Hitler? Jews? Are you kidding? Can you try to keep it closer than 500 miles off topic! That is a well known DDT "dirty debate trick" typically used by those suffering from a variety of delusions to try and poison the well as I said earlier.

If you had a shred of decency you would stop your obnoxious suggestion that the US Government was responsible for carrying out 9/11

Everyone knows about operation northwoods where the US fully intended to terrorize its own people in the same way 911 was pulled off. Coincidence I am sure.

I really do not know what you hope to accomplish with such pathetic posts that amount to nothing more than a "jess shuddup" rant, because they didnt work then while many people were still in shock, and they certainly wont work now to convince anyone you have a valid argument since you have not made one yet.

Remember, while I am sure you think very highly of your rhetoric it fails the sniff test and certainly is not a counter argument by any stretch of the imagination.

Ok enough on that, I certainly wouldnt want to hold you up or pull any time away from from your intense investigation.

[image]http://i34.photobucket.com/albums/d141/4dumdebunkers/wtc2/firee_zps78d07c80.gif[/image]



I was simply pointing out how you operate with all your conspracy crap. I am sorry if it touched a nerve brains, but lets not forget you posted the crap in the first place.

And here you are again, talking about me being 500 miles off topic then mentioning Northwoods in relation to 9/11, yes it was suggested, and your then President rejected it out of hand. So how the fack does that translate into Bush must have carried out 9/11 ?



Zonie63 -> RE: Never Forget! Sept 11th, A Day of Infamy (10/26/2014 10:52:04 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
I disagree, trust in the government has everything to do with it!
They performed the investigation,
They decided what to release to the public and what to hold back, (for instance we cant get the data used for NISTs analysis model of WTC7.
The government cannot be trusted, as there are a number of proven events where the government was complicit in operations against the people.
The CIA experimenting with LSD comes to immediately to mind and Operation Northwoods and a host of others.


As I said, I'm no fan of the government, but if trust is the issue here, it's also a matter of trusting those who are accusing the government. There are still some people who believe that the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor was an FDR machination, but even despite that, no one ever claimed or argued that the Japanese didn't attack Pearl Harbor.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
If it came to court, its not really "The General Government" per se'. Its actors within government agencies and quasi government agencies that are none the less sanctioned by and ultimately protected by government. Hence plausible deniability.

Keep in mind that you talk about government you are playing in the same pen with 160iq think tanks here are you up to it?


I doubt that they're all that bright. When we talk about the elite in government, we're talking about muscle-headed jocks and privileged frat boys. They're nothing but silver-spoon idiots and the elite's backward children. If they were really as fucking smart as you claim, America would not be in such sorry shape nowadays.

Setting aside moral considerations, I can accept the notion that governments aren't always "nice" and oftentimes do things in devious, Machiavellian fashion. But judging them solely by the results, it seems pretty obvious that America has been ruled by the biggest generation of fuck-ups the world has ever seen. Considering what they inherited after WW2, all the enormous power and wealth, along with being on top of the world geopolitically and industrially; the fact that America wasted that opportunity and declined so badly in subsequent decades is a testament to the widespread incompetence and stupidity of those in power.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

Yes actually it is proof. We have unimpeachable video of molten material and pics of molten iron hanging off of the debris being lifted out some 3 weeks later, and testimony of many qualified people, including the guy who designed the building, the fire department, EMT's, Construction workers, literally everyone recognizes that there was molten iron BUT the government. (and they are getting away with it! Now thats fucking power!)


Even if we have "unimpeachable video" of molten iron, it still doesn't prove who melted it. If you're trying to prove "whodunit," a picture of a few twisted pieces of molten metal isn't going to cut it.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
Easier yet why not just use remote control, but you are getting very close to how it was actually done.


Point of order here: You're not proving "how it was actually done," since you don't really know. All you have is a theory. Maybe the government is lying about it, but then again, they could also be behind the theories that "9/11 was an inside job." The fact that most conspiracy theories are discussed freely without much interference or challenge from government is also very telling, don't you think?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

quote:

Two Flight 175 took off from Logan: CONFIRMED

Flight 175 lifted off from the runway at 8:13. That's the official story.

But the BTS database has N612UA (Flight 175) taking off at 8:23. However, there was no confirmation for this time anywhere.

I am now able to proudly present an eyewitness for the 8:23 wheels-off time of Flight 175: Steven Miller, US Airways pilot, who was next in line behind Flight 175 to take off from the runway.

More here: http://911woodybox.blogspot.com/2008/12/two-flight-175-taking-off-from-boston.html


Your earlier claim suggested that this flight never existed at all, or at least, the plane in question did not hit the WTC. Now, you're saying there were two planes for the same flight, implying that at least two planes disappeared without trace, yet you KNOW that neither of them hit the WTC. Where did they go? And if there was some secret plan to launch a bogus plane with a bogus flight number, why have it take off from a public airport? Why not have it take off secretly from a military airbase? And why do it all if they weren't going to use the plane to crash into a building anyway?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
Its a different world today now that people have the ability to investigate privately. The same things are being found for the other flights.


Well, anyone can investigate this privately. People investigated the JFK assassination privately.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
You are presuming there were passengers and that there was in fact a plane with passengers on it, and that it was a 757. None of this has been actually proven, just thrown out by our trustworthy government for you to believe.


You just linked to an article which suggests there were two planes for the same flight. Now you're saying there were no planes.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
Again you have no idea who made those calls,


Neither do you.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

they could have been sitting in a room next to you for all you know! The government has to prove their case and they have not and scoff at anyone who demands it. "We the Government"


Look, I'm trying to be open-minded here and give you some benefit of the doubt, but you're trying to set up the argument in such a way in that my only choice is to either believe you or the government. There's no third possibility or alternate scenario you're willing to entertain.

quote:

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63
If the government is going to destroy planes, buildings, and kill innocent people...then they could still do that and create the exact same deception without the use of CGI. Even if what you're trying to prove is true, the whole CGI angle is a complete red herring.



How? When we can see explosions in the wrong places on different views, transparencies, cgi artifacts, and its very easy to see when you look at the explosion what is really happening if you understand how they work. In other words certain devices and types of explosions look a certain way and there is no way to get around it.


If this is really true, then that makes it all the more curious as to why the government would engineer such an elaborate deception when it would have been so much easier to crash REAL planes with REAL passengers into the buildings and still accomplish the same goal.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne


CGI is very simple, its quick and the news media just happens to have all this COINCIDENTALLY provided for them by anonymous sources! Perfect plausible deniability!

Hey there is 100 Grand in Escrow for anyone who can produce a demonstratably original as in unmodified recording of an actual impact of the alleged flight 175 into tower 2. Not only is it easy to see its a transparency (CGI) but also the physical characteristics are all fucked up. I would be happy to explain but not in this post. Its already too long.

Like I said you are in the 160 minimum iq playground.


I doubt that this would be the work of people with 160 IQ, even if what you're saying is absolutely true.

Think of the scenario you're hypothesizing here. Imagine some government bigwigs in a 160 IQ think tank figuring this one out:

Government Bigwig #1: Hey guys, we're long overdue in bombing and invading some helpless, defenseless country. Let's work out some pretext to drum up public opinion in favor of going to war. Something really, really big that will inflame the masses.
Government Bigwig #2: Sounds like a great idea! What did you have in mind?
#1: Well, I was thinking that we could pick up some Arab immigrants, brainwash them into becoming terrorists, and have them hijack some planes...
#2: It's been done before...
#1: Yeah, but this time, we'll have them use the planes as suicide bombers and have them crash into some important landmark that Americans love, like Disneyland.
#2: Sounds promising, although let's not hit Disneyland. Love that Matterhorn ride; I'd hate to lose that. How about the World Trade Center instead?
#1: Yes! Even better!
Government Bigwig #3: I like how you guys are thinking, but let's only PRETEND that planes are crashing into buildings and use CGI and other trick photography to convince the public that it happened. We'll just plant explosives in the buildings and time the CGI just right so as to make it look like planes hit the buildings.
#2: So, we're not going to hijack any planes at all?
#3: Oh yes, we WILL hijack planes, and each flight will have secret planes in addition to the planes scheduled to be used on the listed flights.
#1: Why would we do that if we're not actually going to use the planes to crash into the buildings?
#3: We're the government; we're supposed to do stupid things.
#1: Oh yes, you're right. Silly me.
#2: But if those planes aren't going to actually be used to crash into the buildings and that the whole crash effect will be done with CGI, what will we do with them...and the passengers?
#3: They'll be sent to Area 51 where they'll be put aboard a giant alien spaceship which will take them to their home world. They've been wanting more human subjects for their experiments anyway.
#1: Sounds like it might work. An excellent plan!
Announcer: Government thugs, you just planned the biggest, most despicable terrorist operation ever conceived. What are going to do now?
#1, #2, and #3: We're going to DISNEYLAND!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
Its not like there was no fire, that is not the point. There was not enough fire might be the way to say it.


"Not enough fire" for what? Not every anomaly can be explained, and even sometimes the "experts" might be stumped over such phenomena when events don't go as they would expect. It doesn't mean there's any conspiracy, nor does it even mean that they're incompetent (although that's a more likely explanation than allegations of conspiracy). Sometimes shit doesn't happen the way the experts claim it should have happened. According to the "experts," my uncle should have died of cancer 15 years ago, yet he's still alive and kicking.

So, then, this debate tends to hinge on the idea that "my expert testimony is better than your expert testimony." Those who do not have the technical expertise or understanding are faced with those who say "Hey, I'm an EXPERT! I KNOW about this stuff!"

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

The death toll was an error and you know this because it was "corrected". The CGI and reporter discrepancy defaults to the anchor despite that it can be totally faked.

The reporter is directly in line of sight and says no plane, they were live on tv arguing this out, the anchor simply said he was full of shit and showed everyone a dark fuzz blob claiming he saw a plan on his monitor. People fell for it. They dont know the difference between hollywood and reality.

This was not "corrected" in the media and its left up to PI's to correct it.


It was clearly a chaotic situation on the ground at the time, and the plane hit the building at a relatively high rate of speed. If the reporter had been looking away at the wrong moment, he would have missed the plane hitting the building if it happened that quickly. One thing that strikes me about NYC is that it's very difficult to see much of anything in the air due to all the tall buildings. And with all the smoke and panic, it would probably be difficult to see much of anything from the ground. It's entirely plausible that a reporter on the ground may not have seen the plane. It doesn't mean that anyone is lying. They just saw different things. It happens that way sometimes, even for something as mundane as a traffic accident.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

Using CGI to promote a war is minutia?


It is when the focus is on the CGI and not on the actual pretexts for going to war.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

No they were getting so much irrational EMOTIONAL negative feedback from flag waving blind people [similar to a few posters here] they had no choice but to drop it and let the emotions flow. Of course thats not a reasonable thinking approach but it served its designed purpose [fear and awe], the way life is for some and those who would control them.


Not everyone was gripped with war fever at the time. There were those who had reasonable concerns and dissented against going to war, yet the debate got too confused and convoluted at the public level mainly due to the plethora of conspiracy theories that kept getting thrown at the public. It was a distraction more than anything else; that's what conspiracy theories are designed to do - to distract and confuse the public away from righteous dissent.

Then there's also the basic question of "whodunit?" If one was to attack the government's case at all, it might have been easier to question the alleged link between the hijackers and some guy hiding in a cave in Afghanistan, necessitating that we bomb and invade an entire country just to find a single person. This whole angle about the CGI and molten metal is all a red herring.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

Yeh more easily provable government involvement but that another story for another day.


It still doesn't change the issue that it was an internal matter, not international.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

It would be pretty hard to invent a plausible explanation for OBL to attack the murrah building to rattle people enough to go to war. These are all reactionary tests to test the public.


Why wouldn't it be plausible? There has been ongoing enmity between the Arab/Muslim terrorists and the United States for decades, long before 9/11. We've attacked each other at various times, and it will continue that way in the foreseeable future. That's why there's never been real need to invent anything. There's no need for any elaborate deceptions.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

Its way beyond supposition now days with plenty of material evidence and this post is getting way to fucking long for me to get into now, you make so many statements of the old arguments long put to bed, apparently this subject is not talked about too much on this board.


What arguments have been "put to bed"?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

Unless you are in government and personally seen all of this unfold rather than evidence you are offering your opinion as to what you think the government would do. We know how well that works out from the excuse Japan would not attack pearl because the water was not deep enough.


Are you in the government? Are you speaking with a personal voice of authority with expertise in the relevant scientific and technical fields upon which your claims are based? Or are you just repeating what someone else said, on some other website, using pictures taken with someone else's camera?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

Well 18% of the working public work in some form of government job, and most of them are married.


The point is, it's never taken all that much to get the American public fired up for war, if that was the government's intention.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

ok I am done with this post where the blue ends. you throw too much out in one post and they are mostly arguments from 12 years ago that have long since been disposed of. If you want to limit to a couple of arguments per post rather than a write a volume set that would make it much easier to respond with substance instead of one liners just to get through it all.


I'm just addressing what's being covered in the thread. All these arguments were from 12 years ago, and some would say that your arguments were already disposed of as well. I'm not even against the idea that the government might have done this, but that doesn't mean they did it in the way you say they did. Nor does it mean that their version of "whodunit" is something I automatically believe either.

If you can only deal with one argument at a time, then how about trying this one: If you really wish to find cause to criticize the government and save the people from "those who would control them," why take such a convoluted and highly speculative approach as a way of convincing the public that the government is filled with a bunch of corrupt, greedy, war-mongering scumbags? You want to solve a "whodunit" when it's simply a matter of opposing the government on political principles alone.



Politesub53 -> RE: Never Forget! Sept 11th, A Day of Infamy (10/26/2014 5:38:26 PM)

I am guessing RealOnes idea of 160 minimum means his whole coterie combined. [8|]



ThirdWheelWanted -> RE: Never Forget! Sept 11th, A Day of Infamy (10/26/2014 8:40:09 PM)

So what we're being told is that the 9/11 attacks didn't involve planes at all, that the towers were taken down with construction explosives. Is that correct? I'd love to know when these explosives were supposedly planted, and how they were kept hidden until it was time to set them off? It takes a lot of explosives to bring down a building. That takes a considerable amount of time to set and calibrate correctly, and isn't something that wouldn't be noticed by building workers.



Gauge -> RE: Never Forget! Sept 11th, A Day of Infamy (10/26/2014 9:17:01 PM)

This is a fast reply.

So, the theory being floated is that one of the most complicated conspiracies ever perpetrated on American soil was set up by a government that can't even get a website to run properly?



MrRodgers -> RE: Never Forget! Sept 11th, A Day of Infamy (10/26/2014 9:28:14 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Gauge

This is a fast reply.

So, the theory being floated is that one of the most complicated conspiracies ever perpetrated on American soil was set up by a government that can't even get a website to run properly?

Not quite and no longer even funny.



Page: <<   < prev  9 10 [11] 12 13   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.109375