hey hapaboy, how's about you fuck off for a few hours a day so as not to destroy every single thread on here with your moralistic self aggrandizing bullshit?
Finally !!! ASK QUESTIONS, DEMAND ANSWERS.
- Thread starter total180
- Start date
Is W a member of any secret societies?
How bout this one:
http://www.parascope.com/articles/0997/skullbones.htm
How bout this one:
http://www.parascope.com/articles/0997/skullbones.htm
Nothing more than would satisfy a rational observer weighing the evidence.
Another implied ad hominem.
Like what? Care to give an example?
Most of the 'official version' relies purely on hearsay and the expectation of honesty from elected officials.
The alternative version is woven together by all the factual inconsistencies, omissions and attempts by the 'official version' to gloss over the factual discrepancies on 9/11.
Then you'd lose. Because I'm neither left nor right. When will you send the cheque?
You leave having contributed exactly that with which you started with. Nothing.
My OPINION is based on the weighing of opposing evidence I have personally gathered, heretofore.
It is my opinion, that the Government not only knew the attacks were coming and did nothing to stop it, but also, shepherded the patsies we commonly refer to as the 9/11 hijackers.
Please keep in mind, by 'the Government', we are talking about a very small group of people. Compartmentalization reigns supreme in beaurcratic and military affairs and those 'in the know' can easily and effectively employ the services of 'those outside' without tipping their hand or jeopardizing the execution of their plot.
Shit rolls down.
I could be wrong. I hope to God I am. This is why i qualified my opinion with a conditional - 'probably'.
I am open to any such proof you can muster that would refute and cast doubt on my position.
Until then, you've got nothing but petty insults and hot air.
Patently absurd.
The calls from the flight were just manufactured, I suppose?
These dozens of ordinary citizens were party to some grand scheme or forced to lie at gunpoint by the evil Bush Administration cronies who took them away and......what?
Well, judging from the voice recordings, they all deserve Oscars, don't they?
I leave you to your charade of feigning objectivity.
Oh, don't forget to scour your home for hidden microphones before you go to sleep. The NSA has taken a keen interest in you since I forwarded your posts to them. Perhaps...you're...getting...too....CLOSE!
"The Truth is Out There."
Is there a connection between this skull and bones member, alex brown, and the insider puts?
"Prescott Bush, investment banker and partner in Brown Brothers Harriman, United States Senator from Connecticut, father of George Herbert Walker Bush"
http://www.parascope.com/articles/0997/skullbones.htm
You must be blind then. Lets start with the video.
For starters, can you please explain to me:
1) why the debris field at the Pentagon isn't indicative of a full size commercial airliner crash. No engines. No bodies. No wings or tail sections. Just a little big of twisted aluminum small enough to be confidently carried away by hand.
Where did it all go?
2) How was the structurally weakest part of the airliner (its hollow fuselage) able to reek the most damage to the Pentagon - blasting a hole through, what was it? 34 feet of steel reinforced concrete?
Whereas the structurally strongest/densest part of the plane - the engines - were unable to even shatter the Pentagons outer WINDOWS - a mere 18 ft equidistance from the alleged fuselage hole? LOL!!!
Further, why were these same 16 ton engines - in the case of the WTC - able to smash through the exterior Tower wall -- and then smash out the other side? Yet unable to shatter even the outer windows at the Pentagon upon impact??
3) Why did Pentagon workers claim to smell the residue vapor of high explosive after the alleged plane crash?
4) Why was the Pentagon lawn visibly unscathed despite a commercial airliner having bounced off that lawn at 500 mph and subsequently smashing into the Pentagon in a presumably massive fireball?
You're not as smart as you look.
Compartmentalization enables a handful of top officials to carry out nefarious plans via a network of unsuspecting underlings.
This is how the entire military is run. On a need to know basis.
Subversive orders are rationalized as 'training ops'. Aftermath accountability is explained away by 'fog of war' and 'bureaucratic bungling's'.
Misleading isn't hard when people don't ask questions.
Laughable. Average, everyday people cringe at the thought of being labelled a conspiracist fearing instant disrepute in the eyes of their peers.
IMO, you're out of touch.
I didn't say people had a problem agreeing with me. I said they feared voicing that agreement.
What was the number on that Zogby poll? 53% of New Yorkers believe Government involvement in 9/11?
A big part of this country is beginning to ask hard questions. The other part of this country refuses to ask those questions or accepts the official story 'at face value'.
You're not well read. Most of them were much worse: Stalin, Hitler, Lenin, Mao, Shah of Iran, Saddam, Nero, Thatchers Britain with NRA, countless Monarchs and African dictators have all initiated acts of aggression and murder against their populace to further the countries broader ruling ambitions.
However, many of those did so using the same Machiavellian paradigm (problem - reaction - solution) to dummy their populations into accepting oppressive state control. Its called 'social engineering'.
Truly stupefying. This country is founded on the principle of individual rights and limited Government.
What we have now is just the opposite - empowered Government and vanishing civil rights. And this makes you happy?
Billy down the street. Tom from the Donut shop. Mary with the dildo up her ass. You want me to start naming names??
Peoples hesitation to speak out is rooted in their fear of the social and legal consequence of being brandished a 'conspiracist'.
If there is no collective agreement conspiracists ought to be viewed with disdain, then why do you affix derogatory insults to 'conspiracists' - like moonbat, dumbass, the nsa is coming to get you etc?
You're blind to you're own utterances.
Its socially acceptable to verbally deride an Administration for minor disagreements in policy direction.
Accusing an Administration of state sponsored terror is another declaration all together.
FredBloggs
Guest
lol - hapabitch embarrasses her self again!!!
Possibly. Its six or one half dozen of the other.
On the one hand, you've got totally inexperienced pilots - who can barely land single engine cessnas - careening massive commercial airliners into the WTC with precision accuracy at 500mph - pulling 5+ g's. All without a hitch.
Or you've got faked phone calls. Which incidentally, the CIA has had the technology to do for over 10 years (near perfect voice emulation).
But thats not really the heart of the issue. (But it doesn't surprise me you duck all the legitimate questions and back out upon the first unsubstantiated suggestion.)
The real question of absurdity lies within the whole event itself.
You need to ask yourself, whats more absurd:
A Government allowing a low fatality/high impact attack against itself to secure the future military/economic dominance of the country in perpetuity? (Every oil grab, preemptive strike and military buildup can now be justified by the elusive Emmanuel Goldstien, remember).
Or a Superpower who allegedly presides over the biggest haphazard, mindless fuckup of all time: multitudes of intelligence leads generated by itself and its allies - across different agencies, divisions and countries - ALL converging on the nations NUMBER ONE THREAT and MOST WANTED CRIMINAL (terrorism and Osama Bin Laden) is planning a strike inside the United States using hijacked aircraft, possibly as weapons.
FBI agents are ignored. Allied warnings are grinned at. Joint task force groups talk about their grandmothers homoerotic desires for Barny the scabby milkman. Presidential briefings all the way to the top go completely unheeded.
No investigations authorized. No warnings made public. No military aircraft put on 24 hour alert status. Nothing.
THAT, my friends, is more than just absurd.
It just DOESN'T happen.
They got their cake, and now they're eating it... wake up.
And nothing. If the planes were remote controlled, they all died.
Or, the hardly-capable hijackers deserve honorary aces wings. Take your pick.
And I you, to your reading comprehension skills. Please show me where I endorsed the alternative sept 11th theory you deem 'absurd', as stated above?
There's a plethora of alternative theories surrounding what happened on 9/11.
Just because i count myself among those who support a theory of Government complicity doesn't mean i subscribe to every alternative explanation put on paper.
Next time you respond, please use your head.
Yea, me and the other millions of Americans who are beginning to ask the 'wrong questions'. lol.
Maybe they'll have to take those agents off eavesdropping the 30,000 American calls targeted from that AL Queda laptop 'score' and put them all on us!! ooooooooOOO!!
Dumbass.
When American Airlines Flight 77 hit the Pentagon's exterior wall (WHICH DOZENS OF WITNESSES SAW), Ring E, it created a hole approximately 75 ft. wide, according to the ASCE Pentagon Building Performance Report. The exterior facade collapsed about 20 minutes after impact, but ASCE based its measurements of the original hole on the number of first-floor support columns that were destroyed or damaged. Computer simulations confirmed the findings.
Why wasn't the hole as wide as a 757's 124-ft.-10-in. wingspan? A crashing jet doesn't punch a cartoon-like outline of itself into a reinforced concrete building, says ASCE team member Mete Sozen, a professor of structural engineering at Purdue University. In this case, one wing hit the ground; the other was sheared off by the force of the impact with the Pentagon's load-bearing columns, explains Sozen, who specializes in the behavior of concrete buildings. What was left of the plane flowed into the structure in a state closer to a liquid than a solid mass. "If you expected the entire wing to cut into the building," Sozen tells PM, "it didn't happen."
The tidy hole in Ring C was 12 ft. wide--not 16 ft. ASCE concludes it was made by the jet's landing gear, not by the fuselage.