|
Of course the Russians did it. They're the experts (pg. 2)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| hardcore trancer |
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
no, i just dont believe in the conspiracies that you bang on about. i know all government's are known for their often violent espionage. that's just common knowledge.
|
Yet you dont want to even consider the idea that the U.S Government could have been behind the 911 attacks.:p |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by hardcore trancer
Yet you dont want to even consider the idea that the U.S Government could have been behind the 911 attacks.:p |
i shall consider the idea when im provided with ANY evidence whatsoever to support that theory, and when the truth movement stops their poor science, repetitive fallacies and sometimes outright dishonesty. still waiting... |
|
|
| Omega_M |
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
i shall consider the idea when im provided with ANY evidence whatsoever to support that theory, and when the truth movement stops their poor science, repetitive fallacies and sometimes outright dishonesty. still waiting... |
How about the simulations reconstructed from the flight data recorder of flight 77 by the pilotsfor911truth ? Surely that was thought provoking. |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by Omega_M
How about the simulations developed from the flight data recorder by the pilotsfor911truth association ? Surely that was thought provoking. Have you seen it ? |
yes i have. and yes, it is interesting. but something like this cannot stand up to the counter evidence. you know, bodies, wreckage, the destroyed lightposts on the approach vector, the hundreds of witnesses that saw the plane crash etc. or the very same blackbox they got from the pentagon ;)
has the accuracy of the blackbox been verified? i dont know enough about blackboxes and how accurate they are to make a judgement. i am however pretty good at plain old reading, and hundreds of witnesses cannot be wrong to such a degree. especially those that witnessed the flight passing within metres of their car ;) |
|
|
| hardcore trancer |
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
i shall consider the idea when im provided with ANY evidence whatsoever to support that theory, and when the truth movement stops their poor science, repetitive fallacies and sometimes outright dishonesty. still waiting... |
Just wondering what sort of proof do you have in mind?I mean would you believe it if lets say one day the U.S Government comes out clean and admits it? we both know that will never happen.
I think no matter how much proof is presented people like you will always doubt the evidence. |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by hardcore trancer
Just wondering what sort of proof do you have in mind?I mean would you believe it if lets say one day the U.S Government comes out clean and admits it? we both know that will never happen.
I think no matter how much proof is presented people like you will always doubt the evidence. |
hardcore, i really do appreciate your (often left-field!) opinions on stuff. but this sort of argument goes a little too far for my liking!
its like this: despite their ridiculous opinions to the contrary, there remains NO evidence to support controlled demolition/no pentagon plane, and irrefutable evidence that there was no controlled demolition and a pentagon plane. this is what i care about. until this situation is reversed, then i remain entirely unconvinced.
so yes, my mind is still open to change, but bereft of anything even remotely approaching hard evidence, my opinion shall remain. there's also the small fact that SO many of the theories (asides from making little to no sense) are founded on poor logic, known fallacies and often dishonest research. that's a big thing for me. i dont mind people expressing an opinion, but when its blatantly obvious that they have deliberately manipulated their data, it makes me pretty angry. |
|
|
| hardcore trancer |
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
hardcore, i really do appreciate your (often left-field!) opinions on stuff. but this sort of argument goes a little too far for my liking! |
It is all good I mean you cant like everything in this world right? :p
| quote: | | its like this: despite their ridiculous opinions to the contrary, there remains NO evidence to support controlled demolition/no pentagon plane, and irrefutable evidence that there was no controlled demolition and a pentagon plane. this is what i care about. until this situation is reversed, then i remain entirely unconvinced. |
With something this big, we probably wont know the truth for many years,maybe even not in our life time.
| quote: | | so yes, my mind is still open to change, but bereft of anything even remotely approaching hard evidence, my opinion shall remain. there's also the small fact that SO many of the theories (asides from making little to no sense) are founded on poor logic, known fallacies and often dishonest research. that's a big thing for me. i dont mind people expressing an opinion, but when its blatantly obvious that they have deliberately manipulated their data, it makes me pretty angry. |
Fair enough,at least I know where you are standing on this issue. :) |
|
|
| Magnetonium |
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
i shall consider the idea when im provided with ANY evidence whatsoever to support that theory, and when the truth movement stops their poor science, repetitive fallacies and sometimes outright dishonesty. still waiting... |
I am glad that since you've mentioned this, maybe then you could put this into action and apply it to this Litvinenko case ;-) Plus add cui bono principle. And you'll see who is more likely to have carried out the murder of Litvinenko. Because the proof ... well, if there's such thing in this case, is not pointing towards Russian involvement. Litvinenko was harmless, and the whole chase by Russia is ACTUALLY after Berezovsky, and Litvinenko means nothing to Russia. Litvinenko was just another defector who was disappointed in Putin and who didnt like that his mafia and corrupt bastards were beginning to get their nuts cut off. There were plenty of defectors of higher rank who exposed dangerous materials about Russia during and after Cold War and they are all alive. At least they died of natural causes. So there you go. |
|
|
| Magnetonium |
I have a Russian article on the law. Yes, it is to fight terrorists abroad, and NOT dissidents. Those are separate things. Russia has not assassinated a dissident since 1959. Yes, the 2004 car bombing of Zelimkhan Yandarbiev was done by Russian special forces, who were CAUGHT in Qatar, imprisoned. And there was proof of Russian involvement. I supported that one (it was much cheaper than this 25 million dollar murder of Litvinenko). Zelimkhan Yandarbiev has orchestrated attacks against civilians (BOTH Russian and Chechen) and he rightfully deserved what was coming at him.
The article quotes:
"Much more controversially, the law also defines "those slandering the individual occupying the post of president of the Russian Federation" as extremists. "
Thats bull. Not true, this is taken out of context. Basically the article says that anti-war protesters can be executed? Are you guys that insane? This law applied to TARGET ASSASSINATIONS of terrorists and criminals abroad ... and Litvinenko had nothing on Russians. Nothing. No proof, only speculations that the British media adores. If he had some proof, then it would have surely been exploited by the British media, as Litvinenko has written a book ...
Also, how come Mr Kovtun, a close friend and associate of Lugovoi who was also present in that bar on that day is in critical condition in Moscow hospital with the same symptoms as Litvinenko?? I thought that Lugovoi only put the poison into the drink of ONLY the Litvinenko's tea .... even Lugovoi spent some time in hospital after coming to Russia, serious illness developed as a result of his trip to UK, hmmmm *cough, *cough ...
Interesting timeline that comes in question against the mainline story according to the British media itself, and it becomes obvious that according to the British, Russian "agents" deliberately poisoned themselves and EXPOSED THEMSELVES to radiation in order to poison and kill Litvinenko, and Lugovoi even brought his family over for greater risk ... now that's retarted, I am not buying that. But the timeline has some controversial and questional points that many people have overlooked:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6179074.stm
| quote: |
27 November
Police confirm traces of radioactive polonium-210 have been discovered at two more central London addresses - Grosvenor Street, Mayfair and Down Street in West London.
|
| quote: |
30 November
Home Secretary John Reid tells MPs traces of radioactivity had been discovered in 12 locations, as well as the two British Airways planes.
Mr Reid tells MPs that two Russian aircraft, one of which is currently at Heathrow airport, are also of interest (but no radiation was found).
|
| quote: |
1 December
In the wake of the alleged poisoning of former Russian Prime Minister Yegor Gaidar radiation tests are carried out in the Republic of Ireland.
|
| quote: |
6 December
Radiation is found at the British embassy in Moscow following precautionary tests on the building.
|
| quote: |
7 December
Russia says it is investigating the attempted murder of Dmitry Kovtun, a contact of Mr Litvinenko who met him at the Pine Bar in London's Millennium Hotel on 1 November.
Reports that Mr Kovtun is in a critical condition spark speculation he too may have been poisoned.
|
| quote: |
9 December
Police in Germany say they have found indications of radiation in two properties apparently used by Dmitry Kovtun - the Hamburg flat of his ex-wife, and her mother's home outside the city.
|
| quote: |
10 December
A British detective arrives in Hamburg to be briefed by German police on their investigation into traces of polonium-210 found at various residences.
Four people close to Dmitry Kovtun also test positive for the radioactive substance. They are his ex-wife, her partner and two children.
And in Moscow, British detectives and officials from the Russian Prosecutor General's office reportedly interview ex-KGB bodyguard Andrei Lugovoi, who is currently in hospital. - Lugovoi himself became sick!
|
| quote: |
Mr Scaramella is arrested in Naples, Italy, as part of an investigation into arms trafficking and violating state secrets. (He was also present at the meeting with Lugovoi, Kovtun and Litvinenko). Scotland Yard say the arrest is not connected to the investigation into Mr Litvinenko's death. (HAHAHAHAHA!)
|
| quote: |
5 January
Polonium-210 is detected at another restaurant - the Pescatori in Mayfair, central London - health officials say.
(WTF???????????????????????????)
|
| quote: |
30 January
Mr Lugovoi and Mr Kovtun, both businessmen and former members of the Russian security services, were taken to hospital with suspected radiation poisoning in December.
|
| quote: |
31 January
The BBC's security correspondent Frank Gardner says police sources have told him that the "finger of suspicion" pointed "clearly" at former KGB officer Andrei Lugovoi.
Police say they cannot reveal the contents of the file.
|
|
|
|
| Magnetonium |
Here's what we Russians think:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6909056.stm
Russia wants normal ties with UK
| quote: |
Russia wants to restore normal ties with the UK following tit-for-tat expulsions of diplomats, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov has said.
He said he assumed ties with London were "based on respect for each other's interests and common sense".
|
|
|
|
| George Smiley |
| quote: | Originally posted by Magnetonium
"Much more controversially, the law also defines "those slandering the individual occupying the post of president of the Russian Federation" as extremists. "
Thats bull. Not true, this is taken out of context. Basically the article says that anti-war protesters can be executed? Are you guys that insane? This law applied to TARGET ASSASSINATIONS of terrorists and criminals abroad ... |
I don't speak Russian, or know where to look for a copy of the law. Can you find it and translates the bits that proves the BBC article wrong please? |
|
|
|
|
