The Ultimate 9/11 Truth/Conspiracy/debunking thread

What's going on in the world today?

Moderators: Loki, exposno1, Parrot, Quasigriz, NickDupree, nmoore63, robroydude, Spinny Spamkiller

Re: The Ultimate 9/11 Truth/Conspiracy/debunking thread

Postby Tyrius » Wed Apr 20, 2011 7:50 am

StCapps wrote:
Tyrius wrote:
StCapps wrote:Unconvincing evidence that a plane crashed at the pentagon? Check.


Sorry I forgot that one of your criteria is that the airline parts be in NIB condition.

Silly me, what was I thinking!!!!
You have a knack for exaggeration.


I'd tell you what your "knack" is for, but everyone is already welll aware of it.
Tyrius
Satrap
 
Posts: 3203
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2010 6:44 am

Re: The Ultimate 9/11 Truth/Conspiracy/debunking thread

Postby wilk0260 » Wed Aug 03, 2011 9:14 pm

The time has come to realize you
networked in a market and stop being a fucking
commodity And if you didn't understand what I've
just said then you already waiting to get fucked -Immortal Technique
User avatar
wilk0260
Contributing Member
 
Posts: 181
Joined: Tue Aug 17, 2010 9:46 am
Location: Minnesnowta

Re: The Ultimate 9/11 Truth/Conspiracy/debunking thread

Postby Dr. Strangelove » Wed Aug 03, 2011 10:22 pm

:shakinghead:


I have a masters degree in computer science (AI). My opinions about what is possible right now, or where things will go in our near future, are opinions. I am a software engineer. My opinions about the quality of a particular piece of software are my opinions. I am not a professor of computer science. My opinions do not trump NIST research and processes. What these people are doing is exactly that.

I am sure we can find architects and structural engineers who will disagree with with the truthers. Should we then trump the truther architects and engineers with these other engineers? You can see the airliner crash into the building for yourself. These conspiracies make no sense at all. If the government could crash the plane into the building, then why would they then need explosives in the building? Do people even think that far ahead of their theories?

Lastly, while I may have only taken the first three courses of physics for scientists and engineers (three semesters worth), strength of materials, etc., and it has been a while, I am rather certain that the g vector of something like one of the twin towers was far, far higher than any relatively minuscule strength of the building materials themselves after equilibrium was lost. The numbers likely are beyond the point where the materials resisting the fall would matter much at all. Once you have that much mass falling, there is not much in the way to slow it down at all. But it has been a while. I freely admit that. The difference is that I would not attempt to fluff up my credentials like these people did. Stating my opinion is one thing. Attempting to mislead people about my standing relative to a body like NIST.. that's not so cool. It's quite weak and dishonest. They should have just made their argument why NIST was wrong. Attempting to make their argument by out-credentialing NIST is not only fallacious but quite dishonest, in my opinion.
“If the human race is to survive, then for all but a very brief period of its history, the word ship will mean space ship.” –Arthur C. Clarke
User avatar
Dr. Strangelove
Archon
 
Posts: 36647
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2008 10:21 pm

Re: The Ultimate 9/11 Truth/Conspiracy/debunking thread

Postby wilk0260 » Thu Aug 04, 2011 10:23 am

Dr. Strangelove wrote::shakinghead:


I have a masters degree in computer science (AI). My opinions about what is possible right now, or where things will go in our near future, are opinions. I am a software engineer. My opinions about the quality of a particular piece of software are my opinions. I am not a professor of computer science. My opinions do not trump NIST research and processes. What these people are doing is exactly that.

I am sure we can find architects and structural engineers who will disagree with with the truthers. Should we then trump the truther architects and engineers with these other engineers? You can see the airliner crash into the building for yourself. These conspiracies make no sense at all. If the government could crash the plane into the building, then why would they then need explosives in the building? Do people even think that far ahead of their theories?

Lastly, while I may have only taken the first three courses of physics for scientists and engineers (three semesters worth), strength of materials, etc., and it has been a while, I am rather certain that the g vector of something like one of the twin towers was far, far higher than any relatively minuscule strength of the building materials themselves after equilibrium was lost. The numbers likely are beyond the point where the materials resisting the fall would matter much at all. Once you have that much mass falling, there is not much in the way to slow it down at all. But it has been a while. I freely admit that. The difference is that I would not attempt to fluff up my credentials like these people did. Stating my opinion is one thing. Attempting to mislead people about my standing relative to a body like NIST.. that's not so cool. It's quite weak and dishonest. They should have just made their argument why NIST was wrong. Attempting to make their argument by out-credentialing NIST is not only fallacious but quite dishonest, in my opinion.


But add this information to many other coincidences and things become a little less clear. Like congressman who called out the 9/11 commission for being a joke, all receiving anthrax letters. Anthrax that was of a purity that has only ever been produced by the American government. So did terrorists steal anthrax from the US government and we never heard about it? Or the war games going on that day. One that simulated a Russian attack over the north pole, that pulled many of the US fighter groups away from the east coast. Or the war game that simulated hijacked aircraft, that put "ghost" images on the radars of air traffic controllers. These war games were only addressed once in the 9/11 commission and most of that was classified. Or the fact that the Pentagon had 45 minutes warning that a hijacked plane was heading towards Washington and they scrambled jets from Langley out to the ocean. The insider trading. Or this interview with Osama Bin Laden on Oct. 10 2001 (http://911review.com/articles/usamah/khilafah.html). Also the fact that none of the timelines given by multiple government agencies match. Or that the FBI never charged Bin Laden with 9/11.

Then there is the smoking gun in my opinion, Mike Vreeland. He was being held in a prison in Canada. A month before 9/11 he wrote a letter that he gave to the guards that said not to open until after 9/11. Here it is (sorry its hard to read, a clearer version is in the book "Crossing the Rubicon" by Mike Ruppert):
Image
The letter was written in an ink that was from a pen weight that is banned by the prison. Vreeland had an illegal pen removed from his cell, after he wrote the letter but before 9/11. He said he was Naval Intelligence, which the US denied, but his lawyer called Naval Intelligence in court and was directed to his office voicemail. He had foreknowledge of 9/11. http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/092602_vreeland_gnn.html

When you add all of these things together, the buildings almost become irrelevant. The question becomes is this the work of poorly trained terrorist pilots who were able to succeed due to a failure of every system we have in place to prevent these things or was there someone running interference that allowed it to happen? Are you a conspiracy theorist or a coincidence theorist?
The time has come to realize you
networked in a market and stop being a fucking
commodity And if you didn't understand what I've
just said then you already waiting to get fucked -Immortal Technique
User avatar
wilk0260
Contributing Member
 
Posts: 181
Joined: Tue Aug 17, 2010 9:46 am
Location: Minnesnowta

Re: The Ultimate 9/11 Truth/Conspiracy/debunking thread

Postby Witten » Fri Dec 23, 2011 2:48 pm

just my two cents on the issue

i'm posting on a topic that irks me for some reason, maybe it's the fact that it's spouted constantly by people living here in the middle east caught in denial and ignorance, whatever it is i just find the assertion the US government planned and carried out the 9/11 attacks for some abstract benefit is so naive and delusional.

So maybe if you 9/11 conspiracy theorists can enlighten me on your logic i can begin to look at your opinions with a new found respect.

my main logical gripe is, What on earth was so important to the US government that it required them to pull off such an elaborate, destructive, and risky conspiracy? the potential risks and costs simply outweigh the potential benefits. Especially when history has shown there are so many easier and less riskier ways to achieve whatever they were after.

If it's invasion of country x or y, or passing bill x or y, then there are so many much more easier ways of pulling it off without having to conduct such a conspiracy. How many attacks on US soil and deaths of American citizens did it take to escalate Vietnam? there's a fair bit of evidence (including the testimony of McNamara himself) that the US claim of a concentrated effort by North Vietnamese leadership to attack US vessels in the gulf was false. Regardless of whether or not it was intentional, the point is, that the only spark it took, to propel congress to passing the Tonkin gulf resolution and plunging the US into a winless quagmire costing the lives of over 58,00 americans were sketchy reports of an NV torpedo attack which cost the lives of 0 US servicemen on the other side of the pacific.

There are countless examples of the US government finding whatever flimsy rationale to go into war or perpetuate a weak threat and it didn;t require the loss of life of a single US civilian or a single attack on US home soil. Just about every other US intervention after (and some prior) to world war 2 is a testament to that.

And last time i checked the main reason we went to war in Iraq was under the false pretense of WMDs, not because of 9/11. their alleged links with Al-Qaeda was a half-assed secondary point at best, and if there was some mass government conspiracy to link Iraq to 9/11 then they barely put in any effort , because even the official 9/11 commission which (under your logic) would have every reason to perpetuate the notion that Saddam was somehow linked to attacking the US states that, 'there is no indication that Iraq has collaborated with Al-Qaeda to plan out any attacks on the US'.

And on that note, why make the Taliban and Bin Laden in Afghanistan the scapegoat? Why not Iraq? the Taliban are a proxy of a key US ally in Pakistan and can be instrumental in keeping Iran in check. Why make a notorious 'graveyard of empires' your scapegoat? For some gas pipeline? In fact, the Taliban offered to allow said pipeline to be built in exchange for international recognition on the part of the US in the 90s. Not to mention, if it was for some gas pipeline, why hasn't to this date, out of the hundreds of billions spent by the US, has not a single foundation been laid on the project?

And again, none of this requires the US government to kill over 2,000 of its own citizens and conduct an attack on its financial and defense heart. The government can spin, lie and deceive its way to anything without having to harm US citizens in a disastrous attack on their own soil.

And as for the cover up for the 'trillions of dollars missing' : http://www.911myths.com/html/rumsfeld__9_11_and__2_3_trilli.html
User avatar
Witten
Contributing Member
 
Posts: 464
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 11:22 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: The Ultimate 9/11 Truth/Conspiracy/debunking thread

Postby Inquizitr » Fri Dec 23, 2011 8:57 pm

You missed a big one:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/9442970/Collateral-Damage-US-Covert-Operations-and-the-Terrorist-Attacks-on-September-11-200128062008
But hey, why would anyone think the government could have done something so heinous. I guess you just have more faith in the goodness of human nature, or is it just the government for which you harbor such feelings. Because, as I look around, I see the potential for abhorrent behavior in human beings, especially when they are doing something for the so-called greater good, which in this case was establishing a massive military presence in the middle east to protect Israel and stage for an attack against the emerging nuclear power of Iran. Not a coincidence Afghanistan and Iraq both border Iran.
But maybe it was just a happy coincidence that Cheney and his friends made millions of dollars off of private military contracts, and evidence was destroyed that could have implicated high up people in embezzlement of billions of dollars. It also drove people to support Republican war mongering, for a while. I am sure these people are way too moral to have planned, or even allowed something so advantageous to themselves to happen.
To be governed is to be watched, inspected, spied upon, directed, law-driven, numbered, regulated, enrolled, indoctrinated, preached at, controlled, checked, estimated, valued, censured, commanded, by creatures who have neither the right nor the wisdom nor the virtue to do so. ~ Pierre-Joseph Proudhon
User avatar
Inquizitr
Senior Member
 
Posts: 972
Joined: Thu Sep 24, 2009 4:46 pm

Re: The Ultimate 9/11 Truth/Conspiracy/debunking thread

Postby navy62802 » Fri Dec 23, 2011 9:57 pm

Wow! This thread is 67 pages long.
User avatar
navy62802
Hetairoi
 
Posts: 5773
Joined: Sun Aug 24, 2008 9:02 pm
Location: Hell

Re: The Ultimate 9/11 Truth/Conspiracy/debunking thread

Postby Witten » Sat Dec 24, 2011 12:02 am

navy62802 wrote:Wow! This thread is 67 pages long.


i know, i have a feeling whatever argument is going to be stated has been mentioned and tread over a million times on the same thread.
User avatar
Witten
Contributing Member
 
Posts: 464
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 11:22 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: The Ultimate 9/11 Truth/Conspiracy/debunking thread

Postby Witten » Sat Dec 24, 2011 12:26 am

Inquizitr wrote:You missed a big one:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/9442970/Collateral-Damage-US-Covert-Operations-and-the-Terrorist-Attacks-on-September-11-200128062008
But hey, why would anyone think the government could have done something so heinous. I guess you just have more faith in the goodness of human nature, or is it just the government for which you harbor such feelings. Because, as I look around, I see the potential for abhorrent behavior in human beings, especially when they are doing something for the so-called greater good, which in this case was establishing a massive military presence in the middle east to protect Israel and stage for an attack against the emerging nuclear power of Iran. Not a coincidence Afghanistan and Iraq both border Iran.
But maybe it was just a happy coincidence that Cheney and his friends made millions of dollars off of private military contracts, and evidence was destroyed that could have implicated high up people in embezzlement of billions of dollars. It also drove people to support Republican war mongering, for a while. I am sure these people are way too moral to have planned, or even allowed something so advantageous to themselves to happen.


Don't pull the 'oh well, i guess i'm just too realistic, cynical and hardcore for ya'll optimistic beliefs' why don't you actually read the argument i posted and look up the link, eh?.

None of the benefits you mentioned requires flying planes into buildings on your own soil, you under-estimate the government's ability to manipulate the people by more conventional means.

To convince the public to invade any country they just need to; Faked reports of an attack, BS interventionist political rhetoric, BS political rhetoric claiming it's threatening US interests etc. all of these methods have been used throughout history by virtually every nation with imperialist ambitions. and.it.has. worked. no actually bang required.

So why all of a sudden do you need to plan an elaborate and destructive conspiracy which, if substantial evidence leaked you were directly responsible, you and your party would be virtually crucified.The cost/benefit ratio doesn't add up. under your theory, They would be spending too much time and effort on something that could be achieved by much easier and common method.

Invading Iraq and Afghanistan has only strengthened Iran, The Taliban (Sunni) and Saddam's Iraq (Sunni) both hated Iran (Shia) .And if the goal is Iran why not invade Iran directly? It can't be because they're afraid, or they were wary of the dangers of occupying Iran. If they're too dumb to see the sectarian violence of Iraq coming they sure as hell would be clueless about Iran.
User avatar
Witten
Contributing Member
 
Posts: 464
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 11:22 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: The Ultimate 9/11 Truth/Conspiracy/debunking thread

Postby Runicmadhamster » Sat Dec 24, 2011 2:07 am

Witten wrote:Don't pull the 'oh well, i guess i'm just too realistic, cynical and hardcore for ya'll optimistic beliefs' why don't you actually read the argument i posted and look up the link, eh?.

None of the benefits you mentioned requires flying planes into buildings on your own soil, you under-estimate the government's ability to manipulate the people by more conventional means.

To convince the public to invade any country they just need to; Faked reports of an attack, BS interventionist political rhetoric, BS political rhetoric claiming it's threatening US interests etc. all of these methods have been used throughout history by virtually every nation with imperialist ambitions. and.it.has. worked. no actually bang required.

So why all of a sudden do you need to plan an elaborate and destructive conspiracy which, if substantial evidence leaked you were directly responsible, you and your party would be virtually crucified.The cost/benefit ratio doesn't add up. under your theory, They would be spending too much time and effort on something that could be achieved by much easier and common method.

Invading Iraq and Afghanistan has only strengthened Iran, The Taliban (Sunni) and Saddam's Iraq (Sunni) both hated Iran (Shia) .And if the goal is Iran why not invade Iran directly? It can't be because they're afraid, or they were wary of the dangers of occupying Iran. If they're too dumb to see the sectarian violence of Iraq coming they sure as hell would be clueless about Iran.

+1
I doubt the US government set it up, only a Stalin or Hitler figure would sacrifice so many people for their own personal gain, or even their countries gain, and no one in the bush government could even approach Stalin in terms of intelligence or Hitler in terms of ruthlessness
User avatar
Runicmadhamster
Satrap
 
Posts: 2757
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2011 9:43 pm
Location: New Zealand

Re: The Ultimate 9/11 Truth/Conspiracy/debunking thread

Postby Witten » Sat Dec 24, 2011 3:25 am

Runicmadhamster wrote:
Witten wrote:Don't pull the 'oh well, i guess i'm just too realistic, cynical and hardcore for ya'll optimistic beliefs' why don't you actually read the argument i posted and look up the link, eh?.

None of the benefits you mentioned requires flying planes into buildings on your own soil, you under-estimate the government's ability to manipulate the people by more conventional means.

To convince the public to invade any country they just need to; Faked reports of an attack, BS interventionist political rhetoric, BS political rhetoric claiming it's threatening US interests etc. all of these methods have been used throughout history by virtually every nation with imperialist ambitions. and.it.has. worked. no actually bang required.

So why all of a sudden do you need to plan an elaborate and destructive conspiracy which, if substantial evidence leaked you were directly responsible, you and your party would be virtually crucified.The cost/benefit ratio doesn't add up. under your theory, They would be spending too much time and effort on something that could be achieved by much easier and common method.

Invading Iraq and Afghanistan has only strengthened Iran, The Taliban (Sunni) and Saddam's Iraq (Sunni) both hated Iran (Shia) .And if the goal is Iran why not invade Iran directly? It can't be because they're afraid, or they were wary of the dangers of occupying Iran. If they're too dumb to see the sectarian violence of Iraq coming they sure as hell would be clueless about Iran.

+1
I doubt the US government set it up, only a Stalin or Hitler figure would sacrifice so many people for their own personal gain, or even their countries gain, and no one in the bush government could even approach Stalin in terms of intelligence or Hitler in terms of ruthlessness


ruthlessness isn't my point. it's practicality. No leader no matter how ruthless would go to the trouble of planning an intricate and destructive conspiracy if there is a much easier and commonly used method of achieving their goal, it's all common sense.
User avatar
Witten
Contributing Member
 
Posts: 464
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 11:22 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: The Ultimate 9/11 Truth/Conspiracy/debunking thread

Postby Inquizitr » Sat Dec 24, 2011 6:40 am

You attribute common sense to the government, where you should not.
The greater the death toll, the more easily the people will be led into a situation they would not normally have accepted. Before Pearl Harbor, the citizenry was soundly against using combat forces against Germany. The next day, you could scarcely find one person who wasn't ready to attack Japan and all of their allies. Of course the cause was more noble back then, to rescue England from the Germans and China from the Japanese, rather than protecting our own selfish desire for cheap oil and deflecting a military threat toward Israel, but our government has shown a propensity for doing stupid things to enrich their own power for the sake of just that.
I am not saying our government did it for sure, but to dismiss the idea as implausible because the government could have done something else that would have taken more time and effort and may not have given the same guaranteed result, is just foolish.
I feel it may be more likely another government also was involved. Their may have been rogue elements in intelligence agencies in several governments who assisted the highjackers. I just don't buy the idea that these Islamist's acted alone in this. The operation was too complex, and too many factors worked out just as some people with high authority would have liked them too. There is more to 9/11 than meets the unquestioning eye.
To be governed is to be watched, inspected, spied upon, directed, law-driven, numbered, regulated, enrolled, indoctrinated, preached at, controlled, checked, estimated, valued, censured, commanded, by creatures who have neither the right nor the wisdom nor the virtue to do so. ~ Pierre-Joseph Proudhon
User avatar
Inquizitr
Senior Member
 
Posts: 972
Joined: Thu Sep 24, 2009 4:46 pm

Re: The Ultimate 9/11 Truth/Conspiracy/debunking thread

Postby Witten » Sat Dec 24, 2011 1:18 pm

Inquizitr wrote:You attribute common sense to the government, where you should not.
The greater the death toll, the more easily the people will be led into a situation they would not normally have accepted. Before Pearl Harbor, the citizenry was soundly against using combat forces against Germany. The next day, you could scarcely find one person who wasn't ready to attack Japan and all of their allies. Of course the cause was more noble back then, to rescue England from the Germans and China from the Japanese, rather than protecting our own selfish desire for cheap oil and deflecting a military threat toward Israel, but our government has shown a propensity for doing stupid things to enrich their own power for the sake of just that.
I am not saying our government did it for sure, but to dismiss the idea as implausible because the government could have done something else that would have taken more time and effort and may not have given the same guaranteed result, is just foolish.
I feel it may be more likely another government also was involved. Their may have been rogue elements in intelligence agencies in several governments who assisted the highjackers. I just don't buy the idea that these Islamist's acted alone in this. The operation was too complex, and too many factors worked out just as some people with high authority would have liked them too. There is more to 9/11 than meets the unquestioning eye.


It's good to question. But at the end of the day you go with the most plausible and concrete scenario. You can;t just make things up. a conspiracy sounds nice but when you look at it from the government's point of view, it's impractical, needless, and the most difficult and risky option to achieve their personal goals.

could have done something else that would have taken more time and effort and may not have given the same guaranteed result, is just foolish.
So you're saying the option that is tried and tested throughout history and involves skills (rhetoric, deception, BS) that politicians are experts at and is less risky "takes more time and effort and less guarantee"? But panning an elaborate and in your own words "complex" conspiracy that is highly susceptible to leaks, and failures due to infinite variables is somehow a better option?

Military threat towards Israel? Cheap Oil? again, if Iraq or Iran were the main prize why not go after them from the get go. And Iraq was hardly a military threat, they were beaten down to submission and prime for invasion long before 9/11. The US public and government despised Saddam and were already itching to go to war, that sentiment was around years before 9/11.

Do you believe Congress would have voted against the war in Iraq if 9/11 hadn't occurred? Tell me honestly, that you believe the "evidence" of WMDs and alleged terrorist connections, plus over a decade of open hostility between the US/UK and Iraq would not have been enough to persuade congress to invade Iraq.

The government is stupid, which is why the idea that they can pull something like this off all the more ridiculous. The government is also lazy, their attempts at pinning blame on Iraq for WMDs and terrorist links proves just how bad they are at hiding conspiracies.

That's another thing that doesn't make sense about 9/11 conspiracy theories. The government that was so effective in plotting out a conspiracy in 9/11 flat out didn't give a shit when it came to Iraq. They didn't even try to cover up the fact the wrong about Iraq's non-existent WMDs and false terrorist connections and it still worked. Government conspiracies are sloppy, full of nothing but political BS, and blatantly obvious, but you know what? they get results.

Why can't you believe Islamic extremists carried out the attacks? They've hijacked loads of planes before and they've shown little apprehension to martyrdom. It doesn't take an intelligence expert to plan something like this. They weren't "goat herders in caves" they were educated westernized types. I'm not even entirely convinced that it was Al-Qaeda and Bin Laden directly involved in the planning. It's more likely it's the same kind of people that committed the London bombings. radicalized young rich and went to Afghanistan to get more training, connections, and support.

And you over-estimate the capability of the government security to respond to threats, they are far from omnipotent and decisive. they are inefficient, bureaucratic, and prone to leaks. What stopped the under-wear bomber or Time square bombing from being successful? It wasn't FBI agents.
User avatar
Witten
Contributing Member
 
Posts: 464
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 11:22 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: The Ultimate 9/11 Truth/Conspiracy/debunking thread

Postby Inquizitr » Sat Dec 24, 2011 3:27 pm

If all you say is true, why have there been no more attacks? Have we done something to appease the enemy? Tens of thousands of people have been murdered in the US over the last 10 yrs, tons and tons of heroin and cocaine have crossed into the US with police unable to halt the carnage, but somehow the government is able to prevent a single nuke from slipping over our porous border?
I do believe it was easier for the Bush administration to launch it's preemptive war against Iraq after 9/11. People got used to the idea of war after attacking Afghanistan. It seemed painless. Or are you saying we could have invaded Afghanistan without 9/11.
The government did accuse Iraq of having an Al Qaeda connection, but denied it after the invasion had been completed. They did not seem to care about the lack of WMD after the attack, because at that point, they had realized just how gullible and powerless the American people were. But then the Reps lost Congress in 2006, so maybe not as powerless as the administration thought. We are finally leaving Iraq. It took 5 yrs for that vote of mine to count.
Right after 9/11, the people of the US were ready to believe anything the government said. Everybody had a flag on their car and their patriotism on their sleeve. Nothing the government could have done through rhetoric could have had the same result as the attacks of 9/11. It spread fear and blind obedience (and still does) to government like nothing else could have. And when the government needs that blind obedience again, then we will be attacked again, but I am sure it will only be a coincidence, right?
To be governed is to be watched, inspected, spied upon, directed, law-driven, numbered, regulated, enrolled, indoctrinated, preached at, controlled, checked, estimated, valued, censured, commanded, by creatures who have neither the right nor the wisdom nor the virtue to do so. ~ Pierre-Joseph Proudhon
User avatar
Inquizitr
Senior Member
 
Posts: 972
Joined: Thu Sep 24, 2009 4:46 pm

Re: The Ultimate 9/11 Truth/Conspiracy/debunking thread

Postby RAnthony » Sat Dec 24, 2011 6:22 pm

They didn't need to attack again. The first one worked, and they tricked us into starting a land war in Asia. Celebration time for them! Game over for us, unless we wake up.
"I unsettle all things. No facts are to me sacred; none are profane; I simply experiment, an endless seeker with no past at my back." - Ralph Waldo Emerson

"So who the fuck are you RAnthony? Are you anything like the people you don't respond to say you are?"
User avatar
RAnthony
Hetairoi
 
Posts: 5459
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2007 11:27 pm
Location: Austin, Texas

PreviousNext

Return to Current Events

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: coyo7e, doc_loliday and 9 guests