are also tiresome. that people cant see the huge logical problems with such viewpoints is simply sad.
No people who believe things which the mass media say without facts and proof is simply sad.
quote:
So where did they put the missing plane then? Area 51. That's what I heard. The passengers were taken hostage quickly after landing at Area 51 and their bodies are being used to manufacture oil.
Who's smoking the pot?
If the so called plane (AA77) crashed into the pentagon then the government owes it to the public to release the footage, not some blurry frames leaving more unanswered questions.
If it was AA77 then where is it? Simple yet after 5+ years still nothing.....
hmmmm
xstalkrx
quote:
Originally posted by culorut
No people who believe things which the mass media say without facts and proof is simply sad.
Who's smoking the pot?
If the so called plane (AA77) crashed into the pentagon then the government owes it to the public to release the footage, not some blurry frames leaving more unanswered questions.
If it was AA77 then where is it? Simple yet after 5+ years still nothing.....
hmmmm
obviously you...since you are Canadian.
where was the plane in Pennsylvania? Wasn't one. No traces. The planes were selected with a lot of fuel for a reason.
Can you imagine the kind of theories we would have if there wasn't footage of the twin towers getting hit? I would go insane.
xstalkrx
quote:
Originally posted by shaolin_Z
culorut
Typical.
No facts to back yourself up so attack the individual and not the information.
Trolls,
do
not
feed
them.
pkcRAISTLIN
quote:
Originally posted by shaolin_Z
well, as compelling as that geriatric is :p come on shaolin. PLEASE dont tell me you think a missile hit the 'gon! and if so, you have to tell me where all the people from the flight went, where all the plane wreckage came from, why hundreds of witnesses are wrong when they saw the plane hit, what exactly knocked down the telegraph poles on the approach to the building. you cant possibly hold that old man up as a counter to what hundreds of people saw and investigated!
quote:
Originally posted by culorut
No people who believe things which the mass media say without facts and proof is simply sad.
oh, here we go! typical response from the ignorant conspiracy hack. disagree with someone, gee i MUST have got all my info from the media. idiot. and youre a ing noob anyway so how the would you know what i base my opinions on?
quote:
Originally posted by culorut
Who's smoking the pot?
If the so called plane (AA77) crashed into the pentagon then the government owes it to the public to release the footage, not some blurry frames leaving more unanswered questions.
If it was AA77 then where is it? Simple yet after 5+ years still nothing.....
hmmmm
see, this is why i said goodbye to this thread (i blame you for bringing me back shaolin! :p)
firstly- who says there is ANY other footage of the plane hitting. i mean seriously, thats just your assumption. based on what? does the pentagon routinely have cameras aimed at the approach angle of the plane? we saw the footage of other planes hitting buildings. why the is there some doubt here?
for those of us with actual brains, the fact that theres numerous wreckage parts from the plane and dead bodies from those on the flight is certainly enough to believe a plane hit. again, im amazed at what you people will swallow despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
That's not an argument to say the least. Even assuming it is, why the hell would I want to believe that my own goverment is responsible for the worst terrorist attack on American soil ever? Apparently you don't consider logic to be an important aspect of an argument.
EDIT: Herem you might want to take a look at this before you consider forming an argument:
An ad hominem argument, also known as argumentum ad hominem (Latin: "argument to the person", "argument against the man") consists of replying to an argument by attacking or appealing to the person making the argument, rather than by addressing the substance of the argument. It is most commonly used to refer specifically to the ad hominem abusive, or argumentum ad personam, which consists of criticizing or personally attacking an argument's proponent in an attempt to discredit that argument.
Magnetonium
On a happy note, I won my part of the argument, cementing my fellow TA supporters view of government involvement on 9/11, backed by the fact that government agencies were running terrorist drills first time in years same time same place as terrorist struck. Jackpott!!!
Either way, terrorists did it or not, government agencies worked along with terrorists had a hand in it throwing off the mighty NORAD to believe it was only a terrorist drill, and when they figured out otherwise, it all too late :stongue:
Sunsnail
Umm, so why would the government run terrorist drills at the same time? I'm not exactly sure how that ties into the conspiracy. Can anyone enlighten me?
quote:
Originally posted by Magnetonium
Either way, terrorists did it or not, government agencies worked along with terrorists had a hand in it throwing off the mighty NORAD to believe it was only a terrorist drill, and when they figured out otherwise, it all too late :stongue:
inappropriate laughter there.
pkcRAISTLIN
quote:
Originally posted by shaolin_Z
That's not an argument to say the least. Even assuming it is, why the hell would I want to believe that my own goverment is responsible for the worst terrorist attack on American soil ever? Apparently you don't consider logic to be an important aspect of an argument.
well, i do think youre more easily convinced by things that are negatively related to your government. which is fair enough most of the time coz the US has a sordid history in the world. i just think in this instance you've given them more credit than they are due ;)
pkcRAISTLIN
quote:
Originally posted by Sunsnail
Umm, so why would the government run terrorist drills at the same time? I'm not exactly sure how that ties into the conspiracy. Can anyone enlighten me?
exactly. the argument i believe relates to added "camouflage" to aid the terrorists. or something like that :rolleyes: obviously from people that have never read the NORAD converstaions and exactly how incompetent government departments can be at times.
its funny. if any of these CTers actually ever worked in a department they'd realise how its just not possible for them to pull off something of this scope (with the literally THOUSANDS of things that could go wrong) without getting caught.
xstalkrx
lol...one old man that wasn't at the scene of the CRIME, reviews some CT evidence, puts his own unique CT spin on things, changes all of our perspectives.
The MEDIA in this country is heavily liberal biased. If these CT theories held any water, the media would shove it down our throats.
Sunsnail
quote:
Originally posted by xstalkrx
lol...one old man that wasn't at the scene of the CRIME, reviews some CT evidence, puts his own unique CT spin on things, changes all of our perspectives.
The MEDIA in this country is heavily liberal biased. If these CT theories held any water, the media would shove it down our throats.
I think it's FAIRLY OBVIOUS that Bush and the rest of the Mason/Illuminati/Shape-shifting reptilians are forcing the media not to show this kind of information. They want people to be ignorant!
