if you don't have an open mind---don't bother considering this persuasive info.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ue-MLMnlTzY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PoZEuj1VPv0
Printable View
if you don't have an open mind---don't bother considering this persuasive info.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ue-MLMnlTzY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PoZEuj1VPv0
It is also sort of disturbing to think how easy it is to trick human beings. We all just assume that what we see is real. I just cannot believe people still believe the official story. It blows my mind.
It is a subject that I should investigate a lot more as it all seems to have been too perfect. Was American homeland security really as lax as that? There are also so many factors that really just do not add up. It is ironic that the leading terrorist state was subject to the most dramatic terrorist gesture. It's hard to imagine that the architect could have been anyone other than the terrorist masterminds themselves. I am not saying it was definitely the US, but it is infinitely more plausible than being the work of Bin Laden.
http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m5...crj3o7_250.jpg
miles, the US had no Department of Homeland Security pre 9/11
Of course there was homeland security. Billions of dollars is spent on the military and supposedly the Pentagon was the most protected building in the world. I don't even think I can sit on the fence on this. Half of the so called hijackers were alive and well after the event. There was no evidence of a pasenger plane hitting the Pentagon. The third tower collapsed exactly like a controlled demolition. The phone calls to loved ones were impossible. Looking at how US elites act around the world, it is no surprise that they would kill their own in an attempt to control yet more regions.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k6pEZf8P_RE
Watched a documentary on this where they took some skeptics and most with a brain believed it did happen. You lot are nutters.
I think Eric Cartman said it bestQuote:
Originally Posted by Master
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VyrlcoKRjn0
Is it the one in post 4 mate?Quote:
Originally Posted by Master
I dont get it Brock, Im not watching the vids I havent the time this morning.
But is someone suggesting there were not planes involved?
People filmed planes on all sorts of devices from all angles and all distances. Planes hit those buildings.
As for the title heading Id say ;the ones that hit the towers (they melted and disintegrated in a fireball and the fat content alone in those people would have added to the fuel, theres nothing left but bone and very little of that.
Dont know about the other sites though.
There's no reasoning with the "truthers" Andre, none whatsoever. brockton probably also believes in the contrail theory as well.
Im sure the government had a clue something big was about to go down though Lyle, they already had a visiting team of some national emergency crew right there for some reason by memory.:-\
So its the same as the Holocaust then? All the films must have been made by the same people who falsified all the films of the Jews being lined up on trench edges and shot and any bone fragments found must be made by the same team that falsified all the skeletal remains they dug up too :rolleyes:.
Maybe there were some charges already in the buildings :-\ who knows it would be a good security idea considering the countries wealth is ran from right there (you go under attack from another country the buildings drop to stop the enemy getting all your business contacts and fucking you up later too).You know at a stretch, thats quite feasible.
To kill your own to create an excuse for war doesnt sound right when you add up whats to made out of that particular enemy, it just doesnt add up,I think they are smarter than that.But I do think they knew or had a real close idea about it.
Why would anyone want to fake it?
What did they gain? Financial turmoil, mass body count, a reason to start a war?
If you stare hard enough at a cloud, sometimes you can see pictures, not because they are there, but because you want to see them.
never mind that... what about this :o
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XesDygYTmWo
;D;D;D;D
Hitler didnt have holographic technology. Those planes were missiles disguised as holograms. They have electron-pulse weapons now that are so advanced we would shitThe underside of the 2nd plane clearly has 3 missiles attached to itThat is NOT a commercial flight and many eyewitnesses including airport employees who service these jets witnessed the incoming plane and said NO WAY was that a commercial flight---police and even some military personnel all said there were no windows or markings on the plane. Look closely at these photos:
Image Detail for - ... beneath the fuselage during flight. (The missile object is circled
Image Detail for - ... could accountfor the shape of the streaks on the South Tower plane
http://images.search.yahoo.com/image...mb=oa9mwQjBGpS
Image Detail for - 11 Review: ERROR: 'A Pod Was Attached to the South Tower Plane'
Image Detail for - New photo of flight 175. observe the bulge on the left side of the ...
Holograms?!?! HAHAHAHA
I think the proof they wernt passenger jets lies in the fact that the terrorists who were on board didnt empty the toilets over Brooklyn on the way out to Manhattan.;D
How did those men (on record and witnessed and taught by private flight instructors) who took all those flight lessons for a year before on public airfields, learn to fly a hologram? ;DAre these same men now innocent cab drivers out at the same airports?:-\
Does the fact Camels being called "Ships of the desert have anything to do with Arabian seamen?:-\
Will Powdered toast man save the day?:o
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GLNlhZJJU-E
Holograms were in Transformers so they must be true. :cool:Quote:
Originally Posted by El Kabong
The way 3D hologram technology operates is by creating the illusion of three-dimensional imagery. A light source is projected onto another holographic beam or onto the surface of an object and scattered. A second light illuminates the object to create interference between both sources. Essentially, the two light sources interact with each other and cause diffraction, which appears as a 3D image.Quote:
Originally Posted by MasterHolograms were in Transformers so they must be true. :cool:Quote:
Originally Posted by El Kabong
@Andre those pilots failed their air licenses at a shitty flight school in Yuma, Arizona. How the hell could they have evaded all security at all those airports, then hijacked all 4 planes using only boxcutters, then known how to fly the planes which were already flying en route to california, then shut off all transponders and fly the planes which were already 30 thousand feet high and reverse the planes and fly back and hit the WTC and Pentagon like threading the eye of a needle? No way--this was an inside job for sure--or atleast the usa knew it was happening and laid back. If they ALLOWED it to happen then they would have the excuse to invade Iraq which was stupid but americans being so stupid didnt question WHAT DID IRAQ HAVE TO DO WITH 9-11 IF THE OFFICIAL STORY WAS THAT AFGHANISTAN-BASED BIN LADEN WAS BEHIND IT??
I dont think so mate.
The Us dont need to make up excuses to go in anywhere they just do it anyway and if they make shit up the public believe them anyway.
Reason for Iraq was warheads and suspected nuclear arms being stored (none there):p who'd have guessed.
Now Afgan was for certain a direct invasion going after the culprits behind 9/11.
there is nothing to gain on the ground or through business going into Afghanistan.
In my mind, people are getting mixed up with the real false reasons for the Iraq invasion and getting the two theaters crossed up,the conspiracy theorists and many of the public.
Even though Saddam supported some terrorists and other movements against America Your goverment didnt need to kill off large numbers of the public to justify going in there;
So logically why would they do it over some backwards desolate shit hole like Afgan where the costs outweight everything and there are no returns,not even in the future rebuilding contracts as occurs in more modern places with large flattened cities?
There just isnt a reason. The terrorism is real / was real, thats the only reason to go in there.
The reason is another strategic point of influence. If America wanted Bin Laden they had the opportunity to hand over evidence to the Taliban who were willing to negotiate. They dismissed it and instead invaded. Is it really a sensible strategy to invade an entire nation in the hunt for a handful of wanted men? Most of the time negotiation would suffice and eventually you saw a different method for getting rid of Bin Laden anyway. Invading a country to capture a few terrorists is insane. If there are other motives then it starts to make more sense.
What other motives? Other than to smash all of Alqueda once and for all?Quote:
Originally Posted by Gandalf
The place is good for nothing isnt it?
To control the region. India is growing rapidly and China is to the east. America needs to keep a strong hold on the region. To be in Afghanistan would be another addition to the countless bases spread throughout the world.Quote:
Originally Posted by AndreWhat other motives? Other than to smash all of Alqueda once and for all?Quote:
Originally Posted by Gandalf
The place is good for nothing isnt it?
Not sure thats their priority, India is nucked and hates Pakistan and visa versa they seem to keep each other at bay though.
These are the two most populated countries and both are growing in power. China is considerably ahead, but India is developing. Economically China is there and is a threat. America knows it needs a hold in the region and Afghanistan was the weakest option to invade. This century is all about China and how America attempts to mitigate the threat. History tells us it won't be very pretty.Quote:
Originally Posted by Andre
Over half the bombing runs made in Iraq this go'round originated from Missouri.... pfffft control of the region. Miles your delusions about American military strategy are grotesque yet hilarious at the same timeQuote:
Originally Posted by GandalfTo control the region. India is growing rapidly and China is to the east. America needs to keep a strong hold on the region. To be in Afghanistan would be another addition to the countless bases spread throughout the world.Quote:
Originally Posted by AndreWhat other motives? Other than to smash all of Alqueda once and for all?Quote:
Originally Posted by Gandalf
The place is good for nothing isnt it?
We are talking about Afghanistan, Lyle. We are not talking about bombings nor anything of that ilk either. I'm glad you find it amusing.Quote:
Originally Posted by El KabongOver half the bombing runs made in Iraq this go'round originated from Missouri.... pfffft control of the region. Miles your delusions about American military strategy are grotesque yet hilarious at the same timeQuote:
Originally Posted by GandalfTo control the region. India is growing rapidly and China is to the east. America needs to keep a strong hold on the region. To be in Afghanistan would be another addition to the countless bases spread throughout the world.Quote:
Originally Posted by AndreWhat other motives? Other than to smash all of Alqueda once and for all?Quote:
Originally Posted by Gandalf
The place is good for nothing isnt it?
Hey more faux global strategy by Miles. Anyway, the Taliban being predominantly Pashtuns follow a moral code called Pashtunwali. UBL and AQ had asked for hospitality and asylum years before. The Pashtun's code means they could never ever hand over AQ. The Taliban's responses on negotiations is classic middle-eastern/sw asia. They are always willing to talk and "god willing" anything is possible. They will shake your hand and nod but if you hear "god willing" or in'shaa Allah your are probably just being placated particularly if the conversation is held in a group. Now the strict ethical code would probably been enough but to make sure AQ was sound and safe UBL and his senior advisors married into Mullah Omars family. To top it all off AQ successfully assassinated Ahmad Shah Massoud, Mullah Omar's biggest enemy and last hold out from Taliban rule the day before 9/11. The Afghan conflict could have been handled much better but the Taliban was never going to hand over UBL.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gandalf
@Andre yes---all that charade not only for going into Iraq but also to put in place the whole Big Brother Control State that they put in all over the US TSA illegal check points Viper Squads warrantless wiretaps spying illegal courts kangaroo vcourts suspension of Habeus Corpus the destruction of Posse Comitatus the illegal detention of human beings held without trial of even without charges for 13 years in secret prisons run by the CIA etc.... Homeland Security you name it---NDAA Guantanamo Obamas right to assassinate ANY american citizen if they even are perceived to be a threat to america illegal drone strikes in myriad countries---9-11 was to set up the entire Control Grid first in the US then abroad---not just for stealing oil.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gandalf
andre all that is why they did that to justify their stranglehold on the world.
66% of NATO troops in Afghanistan are harvesting and controlling the opium trade. That is literally hundrerds of billions a year.Quote:
Originally Posted by AndreWhat other motives? Other than to smash all of Alqueda once and for all?Quote:
Originally Posted by Gandalf
The place is good for nothing isnt it?
Can you back this claim up with a source?Quote:
Originally Posted by brocktonblockbust66% of NATO troops in Afghanistan are harvesting and controlling the opium trade. That is literally hundrerds of billions a year.Quote:
Originally Posted by AndreWhat other motives? Other than to smash all of Alqueda once and for all?Quote:
Originally Posted by Gandalf
The place is good for nothing isnt it?
"Ummmm...well Alex Jones said!"
So we invaded Afghan for the drugs and because its a great place to own. Still makes no sense that in order to do that we would fabricate a few plane crashes and kill some of our own people.
Still makes no sense. Eventually nearly all NATO presence will have gone, it's hardly an invasion when we leave again.
;D Can I buy a pound or two? I got a head ache.:rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by VictorCharlieCan you back this claim up with a source?Quote:
Originally Posted by brocktonblockbust66% of NATO troops in Afghanistan are harvesting and controlling the opium trade. That is literally hundrerds of billions a year.Quote:
Originally Posted by AndreWhat other motives? Other than to smash all of Alqueda once and for all?Quote:
Originally Posted by Gandalf
The place is good for nothing isnt it?
Brock; the States is run by people (family groups) behind and in support of the government who also run banking and the markets of the world as well as the people through law and government thats proven.They do conspire to control all you and everything you use thats correct 100%.Other goverments and dictatorships are a threat to that so they take you to war against them in the name of freedom (which you havent really got over there). It is just another thing they sell to you,for votes and future control.
But the conspiracy theorists dont do themselves, or their cause any favors in blaming everything onto them; including 911 and even the weather (which some do think they control in totality which is utter crap.
We do control it to a degree and can even seed clouds and make it rain, we do it here too.
But conspiracy people take everything to the last point and so they are seen as being ridiculous by many.
Then the real point as mentioned above is lost to your cause, because people think you are all nuts and group you all together as such, even though some are onto some real issues.
They dont control the weather either btw.
If they controlled the weather, why allow the hurricanes to devastate themselves and cost themselves billions? Why not do that to Iraq iran and afganistan they are all there in the same place in a line. It doesnt happen cause they cant do it. They would otherwise.