You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
G: I have no doubt Saddam Hussein was a very nasty man. The gassing of Kurds in Northern Iraq is fact (wonder where he got that idea from).
At the time the inspectors went in, there were no WMDs. There din't need to be really; any excuse to invade wooduv done. The presence of WMDs was irrelevant, really. The USA just needed any excuse to invade Iraq, and 9-11 popped up as the perfect, convenient reason. The fact that Bin Laden has had nowt to do wit Iraq was also irrelevant. The West needed to steam in and finish the job started several years previously. IE, the overthrowing of the (democratically elected) government, and the control of the nation's resources. Iraq is also a convenient launch-pad for any Western military action against any other Middle-eastern Nation...
Anyway.
As for the 'official report', well, I've skimmed through it, and it does not in any way actually conclusively prove what it suggests, as there was no evidence to prove the claims within it!
As for me being a structural engineer, well; I believe what my own eyes tell me, not some report produced by the very people who want us to believe their version of events. And I'll listen to what real structural engineers have had to say on the subject; ie, many do not believe the buildings collapsed simply from the effects of fire.
'Computer modelling'! LOL! 'Cos of course, that would provide 'proof', eh??
Now then as far as evidence is concerned, could I just remind you thats its you conspiracy folks who need to prove your argument, not the other way. Its you telling me which way is up, not the other way around. I quite simply believe that the most logical conclusion is the right one. Now then about this evidence you can't produce ........
You are very amusing!
In a crime situation, the investigators would need to provide incontrovertible proof that certain events took place, before they could categorically state what really happened. In this situation, as the 'evidence' had been conveniently removed, before investigators could examine it, then the claims of the official report are unfounded.
The tissue of lies created by the US authorities is a joke, and a disgrace.
[url= http://www.reviewjournal.com/lvrj_home/2001/Sep-16-Sun-2001/news/17011253.html ]Passports of hijackers found in 9-11 debris...[/url]
Come on. It's farcical. It would be funny, if so many people haddunt died.
Do yourselves a favour. Open you eyes, and your minds. Stop acting like sheep.
Come on. What about the London bombings. Don't you have the balls to say that it was a conspiracy too? Surely it must be?
Skipped over a few points there Rudy.
Now then is
you admitting that I was right and that Saddam Hussein did have WMD's? Further to that is it also agreement that you did indeed raise the matter?The gassing of Kurds in Northern Iraq is fact
Incidentally I think you might find that Husseins consistent attempts to hood wink and mislead the weaspons inspectors may have had more to do with the invasion than anything else. Seems like it may have backfired on him somewhat.
In a crime situation, the investigators would need to provide incontrovertible proof that certain events took place, before they could categorically state what really happened. In this situation, as the 'evidence' had been conveniently removed, before investigators could examine it, then the claims of the official report are unfounded.
Trying to divert again? By removed, I take it you mean the painstaking way in which the rubble was sifted through and then taken out of the city, once the intial serach for survivors was finished.
Now you introduced the concept of "alternative theories" all I have done is offer to eat my (unwashed) shorts if you can produce some evidence to back up your fantasies. I'm still waiting, so how about a direct response to a direct question. Can you produce some evidence to support your suggestion?
The fact that there were attack scenario exercises taking place at exactly the same time and place of the actual bomb attacks, is either incredible coincidence, or something far more sinister.
Personally, I really, really, really don't want to believe that anyone could be so evil as to deliberately stage an event like this. It's too terrifying to contemplate. Bt this 'coincidence' is something no-one seems to be comfortable talking about.
[url= http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=821 ]
[/url]1. CIA Sponsored Exercise on the Morning of 9/11On the morning of September 11 2001, within minutes of the attack on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, the CIA had been running "a pre-planned simulation to explore the emergency response issues that would be created if a plane were to strike a building". The simulation was held at the CIA Chantilly Virginia Reconnaissance Office.
The Bush administration described the event as "a bizarre coincidence". The matter was not mentioned by the media.(AP, 22 August 2002)
The CIA sponsored simulation consisted in a "scheduled exercise" held on the morning of September 11, 2001, where "a small corporate jet crashed into one of the four towers at the agency's headquarters building after experiencing a mechanical failure. (Quoted in Associated Press, 22 August 2002.)
The news concerning the 9/11 Chantilly aircraft crashing simulation was hushed up. It was not made public at the time. It was revealed almost a year later, in the form of an innocuous announcement of a Homeland Security Conference. The latter entitled "Homeland Security: America's Leadership Challenge" was held in Chicago on September 6, 2002, barely a few days before the commemoration of the tragic events of 9/11.
[i]Now then is
"The gassing of Kurds in Northern Iraq is fact"
you admitting that I was right and that Saddam Hussein did have WMD's? Further to that is it also agreement that you did indeed raise the matter?[/i]
Obviously at some point he did have "Weapons of Mass Destruction" - for fairly small values of "mass". Similarly, he used gas against the Iranians. That's not the same as having weapons that can kill millions of people thousands of miles away, as was claimed at the time by Bush and Bliar. 45 minutes, anyone?
i believe everything i read on the internet,
them nasty boys ^ have got me all confuzled now.
steel is not that useless a material when heated up.
Well hot steel lose it mechanical properties (bend become softer)
Wood is apparently better (I know I was surprise too). As it keep is mechanical property . Depending on how long you want a wooden pillar to resist fire, you have to make sure it's big enough as there is a ratio of cm/hour/temperature of wood that got burned. So it' the diameter of the wood big enough to resist the "weight" plus some more width to "resist" the fire.
I'm still waiting, so how about a direct response to a direct question. Can you produce some evidence to support your suggestion?
Can you?
By removed, I take it you mean the painstaking way in which the rubble was sifted through and then taken out of the city, once the intial serach for survivors was finished.
No, I mean the way that all the rubble was loaded into trucks and driven out of the city, after the search for survivors was called off, before investigators had the opportunity to study samples. Much of the metal was recycled very soon after. Bit odd, woon't you say?
Want salt and pepper with those shorts?
Like I said to Rudy, he absolutely did have WMD's. No more no less. I'm certainly not going to get into a completely separate argument over that..... well not just yet anyway.
I wonder if that poor girl was thinking about conspiracy theories when those nutjobs were beating the crap out of her...
No, I mean the way that all the rubble was loaded into trucks and driven out of the city, after the search for survivors was called off, before investigators had the opportunity to study samples. Much of the metal was recycled very soon after. Bit odd, woon't you say?
Nope thats pretty much exactly what I'd expect, and who says nobody was allowed to inspect the rubble? But then what does it matter becuase obviously all the guys working on the removal of the debris were obviously also on the payroll of the CIA, so they wouldn't have said anything if they spotted anything unusual in the aftermath right? So maybe the inspectors were on the payroll too..... I mean where will it all end???
Can you?
Yep but then thats not whats in question here is it?
[i]* Notes that Rudeboy has on multiple occasions failed to respond to questions of whether or not he believes 7/11 was perpetrated by the British Government. Concludes that Rudeboy is dodging the issue because he knows to answer the question would lead to him being ridiculed or it will undermine his whole argument.
Rudeboy is happy to hypothesise about events in other countries but lacks the courage of his convictions and cannot debate matters closer to home.
Notes that Rudeboy is a coward. Will consider continued evasion as reinforcement of this opinion.
[/i]
Go on then!
I await your 'proof' with great anticipation, considering no-one else has been able to 'prove' the real reason for the towers' collapse yet!
Notes that Rudeboy has on multiple occasions failed to respond to questions of whether or not he believes 7/11 was perpetrated by the British Government.
I have responded. Try reading. 🙄 And it's '7/7'....
And I believe it is entirely possible. The evidence presented to the public suggests that it was indeed a horrific act perpetrated by those alleged to have done it. But we don't know the whole truth.
Britain did, it could be argued, need it's own 9-11. And it got one.
As for possible involvement by anyone other than those we understand to have carried out the attacks, well, it is indeed a terrifying thought. But again, I'm willing to keep an open mind.
Whoever did it, are/were evil. Of that, there is no question. But it's a very, very different situation from 9-11.
Am I a coward? I don't believe so, based on the evidence of the way I've conducted myself throughout my life.
But you don't have to believe that....
I wonder if that poor girl was thinking about conspiracy theories when those nutjobs were beating the crap out of her...
I'm guessing that we'll be finding that she was a CIA plant to discredit the Taleban fairly shortly
Rudy Said :
I await your 'proof' with great anticipation, considering no-one else has been able to 'prove' the real reason for the towers' collapse yet!
G said (several times)
Yep but then thats not whats in question here is it?
&
Now you introduced the concept of "alternative theories" all I have done is offer to eat my (unwashed) shorts if you can produce some evidence to back up your fantasies. I'm still waiting, so how about a direct response to a direct question. Can you produce some evidence to support your suggestion?
Sorry son, You're not going to divert me with that one.
PS : Quick while no one else is looking ..... a bit of advice if you don't mind, When you're self evidently in a hole, Stop Digging!
im curious rudeboy
were the moon landings fake too?
does elvis live?
bigfoot?
jfk?
fly a jumbo jet into a building and it will fall down, why do you find that so hard to believe?
the bush admin then went into afgan to take out the taleban thinking it would be a peace of p!ss then carried on into iraq to settle w's dady complex
they didnt push on the saudis where most of the attackers were actually from coz of their oil and $$ ties they went straight for the mouthpiece ie osama
thats corruption, incompetence and arrogance
not the military-industrial complex killing a load of their own
[url= http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0711/banovic-0711.html ]and if you really want to find out about the WTC collapse maybe you should look in some actual peer reviewed scientifc journals rather than tin-foil-hat-blogspots.com[/url]
[i]Like I said to Rudy, he absolutely did have WMD's. No more no less. I'm certainly not going to get into a completely separate argument over that..... well not just yet anyway. [/i]
Good plan. Not even Bliar claims that any more, so your chances of convincing anyone would be slim.
RudeBoy
I have responded. Try reading.
No, you skirted around the issue. If somewhere in your garbled waffle you actually did answer yes you believe it was, or no you believe it was not then I must have missed it which I think is wholly excusable considering the torrents of shit you've been spewing.
Youse're getting boring now, and it's starting to descend into personal abuse once more. I can't be bothered, as you obviously believe you are right, and that's that.
Good argument though. Thanks for the game.
Take care now.
GNARGNAR - Member
* Notes that Rudeboy has on multiple occasions failed....... Will [u]consider[/u] continued evasion as reinforcement of this opinion.
Consider!
ive got a brand new dell mouse that auto scrolls past his gibbering nonsense.
hang on i will find you a linky.
RudeBoy - Member
Youse're getting boring now, and it's starting to descend into personal abuse once more. I can't be bothered, as you obviously believe you are right, and that's that.Good argument though. Thanks for the game.
Take care now.
Translation
RudeBoyI'm out of my depth. It's clear to me that to take this argument any further would expose me as an idiot or a troll so I will feign disinterest in order to try and appear to be above the issue despite the fact that I've gone to great lengths to try and prove my point to no avail. I am not unlike a small biy who pretends not to want the latest toy his friend has just received for his birthday.
GNARGNAR - MemberCome on. What about the London bombings. Don't you have the balls to say that it was a conspiracy too? Surely it must be?
i'd say that the UK gov were aware of what was going on. that isn't meant to reduce what happened to something trivial or take away from the emergency services that day (any day) but i do believe that it could have been stopped.
[i]ive got a brand new dell mouse that auto scrolls past his gibbering nonsense.[/i]
Man, that's something I'd pay good money for!!!
[url= 
]steel girders at WTC sliced [/url]
Youse're getting boring now, and it's starting to descend into personal abuse once more. I can't be bothered, as you obviously believe you are right, and that's that.Good argument though. Thanks for the game.
Take care now.
2 - 0 8)
For the hard of thinking:
This argument will simply continue for ever, if left unchecked. I feel no compulsion to continue, as I've made all my points, and the abuse/character assassination that's starting to creep in suggests that people are starting to get really wound up. Gnargnar; do you consider anyone who you don't agree with, to be an 'idiot', or a 'coward'?
Quite frankly, I can't be bothered with this anymore. Let's face it, we're never going to come to an amicable agreement over this, so it's pointless carrying on, really.
Feel free to continue slagging me off, if it makes you feel better. Water off a duck's back, to me. I just won't be paying any more attention. Sorry to spoil the fun.
Bye bye!
[i]For the hard of thinking:
This argument will simply continue for ever, if left unchecked. I feel no compulsion to continue, as I've made all my points, and the abuse/character assassination that's starting to creep in suggests that people are starting to get really wound up. Gnargnar; do you consider anyone who you don't agree with, to be an 'idiot', or a 'coward'?[/i]
Please Mummy, make it stop 🙁
[i]alpin -steel girders at WTC sliced[/i]
and??
i imagine many steel girders were left with sharp edges when hundreds of thousands on tonnes of skyscraper fell on them
and look at them, they arent sliced they are snapped
is it supposed to be significant in some other way?
*adds DrJ to bulk order of uber-mouse*
i will email you when ive completed the order, im expecting this to be very popular - 40% discount for orders over 100 *crosses fingers*
no, they are 'cut'. using thermite.
metal twists and bends but generally doesn't split and melt in the process of splitting.
cutting of steel girders using thermite, which burns at ~2500 oC, at an angle to induce and inward fall of the building being brought down.
read up, don't soak it up.
What if the video is fake propaganda?
what if the propaganda supplied through mainstream media is fake?
tis worth watching Zeitgeist. skip the first section about religion if you want but the second two parts are worth watching.....
Alpin, why don't you read kimbers website? Its very interesting, plausible and factually appears to be accurate, whereas the photo you have posted is at best inconclusive, and at worst a deliberate attempt to make some sort of capital out of a tragedy of epic proportions.
alpin
no, they are 'cut'. using thermite.metal twists and bends but generally doesn't split and melt in the process of splitting.
cutting of steel girders using thermite, which burns at ~2500 oC, at an angle to induce and inward fall of the building being brought down.
read up, don't soak it up.
How many stories were the WTCs? How thick was the concrete around the steel? How much thermite would have been needed to rig each building? How many men would it take? Why didn't the thousands of people working in those busy offices notice people turning the building into swiss cheese and wiring charges everywhere? Or were the people who died also in on it?
Perhaps someone tele-ported the thermite into the building?
Allied to the point that GNARGNAR has made, they don't just cut the girders to make a building collapse, they actually wire them together so that the weight of the building pulls itself down after the intital charges destabilise it. Its an extremely difficult process which requires months of planning followed by months of preparation, not to mention big bulky sweaty types with spanners and wire cables wandering about all over the building. Generally they will have to remove floors to facilitate what they do.
[url= http://science.howstuffworks.com/building-implosion1.htm ]Think about it![/url]
[i]It goes back decades and is very complex. We armed and supported the Muhajadeen (sp) to fight against the Soviets. In western powers I include ( perhaps wrongly) them. so you have the soviet invasion, the arming of the muhadjadeen, the invasion by UK and USA[/i]
I remember this, it was the plot to Rambo III - no seriously it was!
People will believe anything - some people still believe in god FFS. Im not surprised people belive these daft conspiricy theories. It seems the more daft the more people believe.
Sometimes it requires a bit of effort and intelligence to figure out the facts and science - sadly this is too much for most people, so they believe the lies that suit them, rather than the truth, which may be inconvienent or difficult to swallow.
How about this for an explanation... when they realised that they could not save the people within the towers they deliberately brought them down with controlled charges to prevent them toppling onto other nearby buildings and causing further loss of life.
Likewise "the fourth plane", the one that came down in Pennsylvania, was shot down to protect from further losses.
Killing a few to save many doesn't go down well with most people so these unpalatable explanations are not offered.
How's that? Can I have my tinfoil hat now? 🙂
[i]cutting of steel girders using thermite, which burns at ~2500 oC, at an angle to induce and inward fall of the building being brought down.
read up, don't soak it up.[/i]
well, like you i have no idea how thermite is or is not used in the demolition industry
and lo, it turns out that in the cleanup operation thermite was used, after the towers fell....
[url=
shouldnt stoop to your level here is some non peer reviewed video[/url]
or prehaps the buildings were closed (which they were) several days prior to the 11th as part of a maintenence check. during this all video cameras were down and no-one outside of the maintenence company was allowed into the building.
there is a lot of information out there. some of it put there by normal joe public who are unsatisfied at the answers given by the authorities, who have gone to great lengths to try and unravel pieces of information that do not, in their eyes, add up. and it isn't the average joe, such as you and me. there are people previously employed within government that do not believe the 'official' line.
then there is information supplied by the authorities. generally this is the information that they want you to believe. the information in the newspaper you read. what you are told by those people on tv.
if something is repeated often enough - threat from terrorism for example or the idea that there is an all seeing, all knowing being in the sky that has the power to carry unleash the power of nature, heal the sick, know what we are thinking, answer prayers and created the world on which we are living - it is taken as gospel, or truth.
there are organisations out there way more powerful than you or I.
orchastrated events can change peoples ideas, the course of history.
read up about the Bush family. evre since the 1900 they have been involved with dodgy dealings. GWB (great?) grandfather was a friend of Rockefella and helped set up the modern US (and global) banking system which has had it's interests in wars ever since its inaugaration.
or prehaps the buildings were closed
Or perhaps the wicked witch waved her magic wand and made it all happen overnight even though the building was still occupied 24 hours day even when maintenance shuts down a floor at a time for those really big jobs like removing High Alumina Cement Beams for example.
Get a grip man listen to yourself!
alpin im a scientist
show me some decent peer reviewed data and ill take a look
fact is every engineering journal ive looked with a wtc article in it says yeah the planes flew into it they caught fire and it made them collapse
its not rocket science, infact its metalurgical science, structural engineering and physics,
none of which you are an expert in leave it to the people who are
the problem is you are only getting your information from............... where exactly??
"Britain did, it could be argued, need it's own 9-11. And it got one."
Can't believe you let Rudeidiotboy write the above and not pull him up on it. He would say it's not him that would argued it but then go on to do just that. He's an apologist to murder and a hipocrite.
Not one mention of that poor lass, treated in sutch a shameful way. Shame on you Rudeboy!
He's an apologist to murder and a hipocrite.
Things are really starting to liven up on this thread.
But don't stop now lads ............ what you got to say for yourself RudeBoy ?
No one has applied Occam's razor to the argument...or RudeBoys throat which is amazing.
Considering the governments record in keeping secrets / cover-ups I think something might have leaked a while ago and NOT just some nut-job vids on youtube.
Oh and if the Lizard People / Illuminate are running the world WTF did they pick this bunch of loosers for world leaders?
SSP
No one has applied Occam's razor to the argument
I considered it a while ago, but reckoned the concept would fly so far over Rudeboy's head he wouldn't even get a number 4.
if something is repeated often enough - threat from terrorism for example or the idea that there is an all seeing, all knowing being in the sky that has the power to carry unleash the power of nature, heal the sick, know what we are thinking, answer prayers and created the world on which we are living - it is taken as gospel, or truth.
...or a conspiracy theory!
It seems strange that it's possible to organise a demolition job like this and keep all the hundreds of people involved from leaking anything, yet be careless enough to let people take pictures of where you've cut the beams.
[i]It seems strange that it's possible to organise a demolition job like this and keep all the hundreds of people involved from leaking anything, yet be careless enough to let people take pictures of where you've cut the beams. [/i]
That's the argument that conspiracy theorists never seem to take into account! The Government/Administration can't even keep the details of MP's expenses/a blowjob in the Oval Office a secret, how on earth does anyone think that a Government could organise such an event then keep it secret forever after?! You'd have thought they'd have left the dossier/laptop on a train by now...
But don't stop now lads ............ what you got to say for yourself RudeBoy ?
Well, it seems I don't have to say owt, as everyone seems to know me better than I know myself.
Odd, seeing as I don't think I've met any of my 'adversaries' from this thread....
And apparently, I'm an 'apologist for murder', yet someone wants to take a razor to my throat! Nice. Brave words from a Big Man.
Don't worry, Grizzly. As I said; water off a duck's back.
[img] 
[/img]
[i]And apparently, I'm an 'apologist for murder', yet someone wants to take a razor to my throat! Nice. Brave words from a Big Man.[/i]
chrism wins for correctly predicting that the Occam's Razor argument would be WAY above Rudeboy's head! Well done that man. 🙂
No one has applied Occam's razor to the argument...or RudeBoys throat which is amazing.
Now, I'm sure SSP din't actually really mean someone should take a razor (Occamms, Boccam's or Chockams or anyone else's) to me throat, but that he meant I should be silenced, in some way.
Occam's Razor: That the simplest of explanations is more likey to be correct, than more complex ones. And that extraneous information, and more convoluted arguments should be 'cut away'. So, in this context, involving complex theories of other possibilities should not be considered.
Bollox.
I think the reality of this thread, is that several people have blindly accepted the official line, which does indeed appear to be reinforced with 'facts', and the report is indeed a very professional and carefully constructed piece. Then, someone comes along with ideas that threaten their faith in one explanation, and suggests that they might actually have been wrong, in going along with what they were initially told. This then has the effect of making those people angry; that they were somehow not intelligent enough to see beyond the official story, and that they were not objective and open-minded enough to question the explanation given.
Their reaction is then to try and defend their own convictions, by attempting to discredit others. Yet when challenged themselves, they flounder; unable to actually vocalise their own opinions, as the only ones they have have been put there by others. Angry, that they somehow lacked the ability to think for themselves, they lash out at those they perceive to have this ability, often resorting to attempts to make others look stupid.
Like I say, I can't actually be bothered with the actual argument any more, as myself and Alpin have attempted to provide 'evidence' requested, yet it seems people have conveniently ignored this, and carried on with their own little tirades against us.
Come on folks; you really don't have to accept what you're told. You can think for yourselves. It does take a little bit more effort, sure, but it's far more personally rewarding.
This is just a pointless argument on tinternet. Meanwhile, torture, famine, disease, poverty, war, death all continue. What are we all doing about that?
i still can't see whether the fact that it was 2 terrorist (or 2 US air force pilots or a whole farm of metal eating invisible termite) that got the building down as to do with the public slashing of the girl.
Nuttcase have always exited, in religions or society. And rather than try to find idiotic proof or counter proof or anything against the conspiration theories, maybe people should do their best to help those in need or try to divert as many people as possible from religion or at least extremists...
Odd, seeing as I don't think I've met any of my 'adversaries' from this thread....
The thing is rudeboy, we are not your adversaries we people who find your point of view at time incorrect (and troubling), your attempt to prove yourself right all the time undermines any credability you may have, it also makes you look immature. Comments you have made on this thread have been disgusting eg "Britain did, it could be argued, need it's own 9-11. And it got one."
Short eating offer still holds Rudy, any one piece will do, evidence, (irrefutable) in support of your supposition. So far everything I've seen actually disproves it more than prove it, especially the photographic bit.
Looks like he's cleared of to another thread, this hole has got to big. Pity really.
Comments you have made on this thread have been disgusting
To you, because you jolly well have not read what I've written, propply.
Time for a bit of music...
[url=
Your Mind...[/url]
"Britain did, it could be argued, need it's own 9-11. And it got one."
Well you wrote it so you defend it. It seems to me that you support murder.
In a forlorn attempt to close this off…
The reason, Rudy, that you can’t produce any irrefutable evidence is quite simply that there isn’t any.
Now before you go off on that “well you produce evidence” trip, my side of the argument a) Has b) Doesn’t have to, as it is not us making the preposterous suggestion.
So please either fess up and admit defeat, or alternatively provide said evidence, I’m sure the world will laud you greatly if you can do so, especially now Obama is in power.
In the meantime I’ll be there with you, constantly offering to eat my shorts, which I publicly promise to do, without Salt and Pepper or any sauce, when you do.
PS : The Princess Di thing…… 4 people in a car, car hits solid object at high speed. The only one wearing a seat belt survives shocker!
Ok, seeing as how you're finding it difficult to think for yourself:
In order to introduce further restrictions on freedom of movement, democratic rights, and civil liberties, the government would need to instill a sense of fear, in the population, in order that new laws could go through relatively unchallenged. To be able to generate the required amount of fear and paranoia, there would need to be a genuine 'threat' of terrorism, and terrorist attack. Without some real, tangible proof that this threat was 'real', it is unlikely that new laws would be able to go through unchallenged.
And a genuine attack would be a good excuse to implement 'emergency powers', in govenrnment and policing.
The Powers That Be want everyone docile, and easily controllable. So that no-one can challenge their position of power.
This is why I say that Britain 'needed' it's own 9-11.
And if you want to think me an apologist for murder; all those of you defending the 'official story' of the US government, surrounding 9-11, well, maybe you should take a good look at yourselves.
The reason, Rudy, that you can’t produce any irrefutable evidence is quite simply that there isn’t any.Now before you go off on that “well you produce evidence” trip, my side of the argument a) Has b) Doesn’t have to, as it is not us making the preposterous suggestion.
So, you don't have to produce ANY evidence to PROVE the 9-11 attacks were definitely the work of 'terrorists', and that the US govt had absolutely no part to play? Right.
Someone commits a murder, you need to prove they did it, right? So, you'd need evidence.
Where's the evidence that 'terrorists' alone perpetrated the attacks? Hmm? Oh, sorry, I forgot; must be those charred passports, eh?
And myself and Alpin have provided links to evidence of a controlled demolition of the three towers in NYC. If you choose to ignore it, then that's your call, but you can't then accuse someone else of not playing the game.
Ask yourself this: Why are so many American citizens unsatisfied with the official explanation of what really happened? People with nothing to gain, but the Truth?
The main mode of combat of you sheep seems to be to shout louder than others, to drown out their voices. Not working.
Thanks for the reply and your perfect example of how to dance on the head of a pin.
"Britain did, it could be argued, need it's own 9-11. And it got one."
Could still do with you saying how sorry you are for pushing such a view.
mt, as you're obviously struggling, can I recommend something a bit more manageable?
[img] 
[/img]
There you go. Have fun!
"Britain did, it could be argued, need it's own 9-11. And it got one."
RudeBoy - that remark is truly beyond contempt
I'm beginning to think that being flogged by the Taliban is preferable to reading Rudy's sh1te.
It's an uncomfortable thought, is not it?
Even more unsettling, is the idea that our wonderful, democratically elected government could possibly be capable of such an atrocity.
And the attempts to discredit my opinions, with suggestions that I am cruel and heartless, clearly show that you have no idea of who I am. Get over yourselves, with your righteous sanctimony.
Rudy: Spewing out unsupported and scurrulous accusations is not evidence. It simply makes you look daft I'm afraid....... rather like I will if you can manage to make me eat my shorts!
Go on have a go at it.... I dare you
Thanks for the advice the rudeboy, I'll give that one ago. Is there a conspiracy edition?
"Britain did, it could be argued, need it's own 9-11. And it got one."
Frustratting isn't when people don't agree with you.
Frustratting isn't when people don't agree with you.
Not really. Part of being able to have an honest, open and intelligent (!) debate is that opposing views can actually help reinforce and consolidate your own.
I'm quite happy for others to disagree. At least it proves we live in a Society where we are free to have our own opinions.
But can't open and intelligent debate change views? Your sort of debate is about winning, for a guy that says open your mind a lot yours is pretty closed.
"Britain did, it could be argued, need it's own 9-11. And it got one."
At least it proves we live in a Society where we are free to have our own opinions.
Bingo! By jove I think he's got it at long last!!
Just wondering like...
Rudy... is there any evidence that could/would convince you that it wasn't a conspiracy?
In other words, what would it take to make you believe the official line?
G "he's got it at long last" Wishful thinking I suspect.
is there any evidence that could/would convince you that it wasn't a conspiracy?
Well, where is it?
No no Rudy, you are missing the point of the question... would it ever be possible to convince you that it wasn't a conspiracy? And to do that, what would the sort of evidence be that would be required?
Yes, I am open minded enough to accept the possibility that the official story could be correct; I just don't believe it is. Too much points towards it being flawed.
Lots of stuffs to read [url= http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20041221155307646 ]here[/url].
Some of it very, very inertesting indeed.
*unsubscribes RSS reader
Rude Boy said:
myself and Alpin have provided links to evidence of a controlled demolition of the three towers in NYC. If you choose to ignore it, then that's your call, but you can't then accuse someone else of not playing the game.
Sorry mate, I didn’t think you were actually serious about these.
http://www.reviewjournal.com/lvrj_home/2001/Sep-16-Sun-2001/news/17011253.html
A faulty link apparently to a newspaper website reporting the finding of a passport that might be linked to a hijhacker, which incidentally also reports the discovery of the bound body of a flight attendant. Proves nowt.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=821
A link to the another website which clearly isn’t an authoritative journal either. Proves Nowt
http://www.ae911truth.org/announce/4
A link to a “Truth” campaign website which again proves nowt.
A link to another website which conclusively proved on inspection that people do bullshit to create the conspiracy illusion.
So simply put, apart from some dodgy websites which prove absolutely nothing, you’ve posted no evidence whatsoever. So blatantly so that I hardly bothered to respond to it. However, as you are dumb enough to see that as evidence that’s my rebuttal of it. Its self evidently garbage.
http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20041221155307646
Another "Truth" campaign website. Tell me please how a biased fairy story online is anything other than deeply suspect?? Please
Just as a matter of interest Rudy, you don't respond to those emails about winning a lottery you haven't entered/a relative you haven't got leaving you a fortune.... do you??
Like I said, G-Man; you believe what you want to believe. If you don't want to actually read what is presented to you, and follow links to other information, then that's your choice. But if you don't, then you have no right to dismiss the information/ideas held therin.
You've gone to greater lengths to express your opinion about how you feel myself and Alpin are wrong, than you have in [b]proving[/b] it was the work of terrorists. You claim you don't need to. Ok then, by the same token, do we have to prove it was not?
See, you can prove it was indeed the work of terrorists operating independently no more than the US Government can! So, why, I ask, should anyone believe your story? All you've done, to support your argument, is link to the official report. Which does not in any way actually prove, irrefutably, the claims made within. As I have said several times now.
And I think it was about this point yesterday, that I got bored. I'm bored again, because all we are doing is repeating stuff from yesterday. pointless.
One good thing that has come out of it; I've now read a lot more stuff on the events, and am even more convinced that the official story is indeed a sham. So, thanks for that!
And I suspect that deep down, some of you who claim I am wrong, are beginning to have your own doubts about what you yourselves thought was the 'truth'...
It's ok, you can think for yourselves! It may be scary at first, but it gets easier, over time.
3 - 0 ! 8)
So what do you think about this girl getting her arse royally spanked then Rudy?
🙄