|
The Arrivals: The Foundation of the Anti-Christ (pg. 40)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Comrade Stalin |
| quote: | Originally posted by Claude Hughes
Don't hold your breath.
Comrade is so focused on CD. Unless we prove otherwise GWB is innocent :haha: |
What the are you rambling on about? What's this infatuation you have with Bush? |
|
|
| culorut |
| quote: | Originally posted by Claude Hughes
Don't hold your breath.
Comrade is so focused on CD. Unless we prove otherwise GWB is innocent :haha: |
I'm not, there are more then a couple of trolls who are blue in the face right now though from littering this thread as usual.
Must have something to do with them pretending to be impartial. |
|
|
| Comrade Stalin |
| quote: | Originally posted by culorut
If the self proclaimed scholars would put their money where their mouth is maybe the rest of us uneducated folks wouldn't think they're just another idiot taking up valuable space. |
How about you guys bring a criminal case to send the conspirators to prison? Oh that's right, because you'd be laughed at by the judge, jury, and even the bailiff. You guys can't even get published in a reputable academic journal! No wonder you hate academia! :haha: |
|
|
| culorut |
| quote: | Originally posted by Comrade Stalin
How about you guys bring a criminal case to send the conspirators to prison? Oh that's right, because you'd be laughed at by the judge, jury, and even the bailiff. You guys can't even get published in an reputable academic journal! No wonder you hate academia! :haha: |
That's the problem, you think that bull put out with the governments seal of approval actually holds any merit.
Need a tissue? |
|
|
| Comrade Stalin |
| quote: | Originally posted by culorut
I'm not, there are more then a couple of trolls who are blue in the face right now though from littering this thread as usual.
Must have something to do with them pretending to be impartial. |
All I/we ask is:
1) Forensic evidence that can be presented in court
2) An investigation that leads to the people who supposedly did it in prison.
This is what I think when you talk about impartiality. :haha: :haha: :haha: :haha: :haha: |
|
|
| thesauce23 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Comrade Stalin
an reputable academic journal |
| quote: | Originally posted by Comrade Stalin
:haha: |
|
|
|
| Goebbel Goebbel |
| colurut, where did you get your GED from? |
|
|
| Comrade Stalin |
| quote: | Originally posted by culorut
That's the problem, you think that bull put out with the governments seal of approval actually holds any merit.
Need a tissue? |
It's peer-reviewed research and findings; something you lack. The burden is on you prove your retarded ass story. As of yet, nothing you present, is anything close to the standard of truth required in a court of law or a reputable academic journal...:rolleyes: |
|
|
| thesauce23 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Comrade Stalin
|
just out of sheer curiosity(and no badmouthing or anything), what prompted your name? it's quite interesting. |
|
|
| richard raiban |
| quote: | Originally posted by richard raiban
The last few pages have been focused on "controlled demolition". A few of you are saying there is "no real hard evidence" that controlled demolition was used. Ok, lets take that aspect and put that a side for a moment. Let's assume that the building came crashing down because of the impact of both planes.
Having said that, do the usual suspects in this thread who are arguing "there is no evidence that CD was used" believe that the BUSH Administration are completely innocent and had "absolutely no involvement in the events that took place on 9/11?" I am really curious. Are you guys saying that the Bush Administration has clean hands in all of this? |
| quote: | Originally posted by Claude Hughes
I havent really talked much about the events of 9/11 and my views. I came on here primarily to stomp on that troll PKC however, I am on the side of those who believe there is more to 9/11 than what the Bush Administration and all it's affiliates claim. There is nothing that anyone can say to change my views, period.
Nobody other than Moral Hazard answered Richard's question.
Everyone here was so adamant in proving "CD" were not used and based their final conclusion that the US Government (Bush and his clowns) were innocent. The usual suspects haven't shown their faces here to answer that 1 simple question.
Interesting. |
| quote: | Originally posted by basilisk
Claude, no one cares. Richard's reasonable inquiry is lost in a sea of nonsense that you have gone to great lengths to perpetuate.
This is pretty much where I am at.
Perhaps the controlled demolition policy would like to clarify whether it was only WTC 7 that was rigged... or WTC 1 and 2 as well? How about those planes, were they hijacked by the US government? Did a plane hit the Pentagon? I mean, you guys post Youtube videos and point out strange anomalies about dead guys talking about unexplained explosions but I still have no idea what you all think really happened on 9/11 except that it wasn't the "official story"... so, illuminate the rest of us. |
That doesn't answer anything. | quote: | Originally posted by Comrade Stalin
Yea, and ing Roosevelt must have let Pearl Harbor happen on purpose too right!? :rolleyes: It's called negligence dude. The NSA refusing to cooperate with the FBI, etc. There is zero forensic evidence for a controlled demolition, PERIOD. And until any one of you can come up with that evidence, and publish your findings in a genuinely peer-reviewed publication, you have nothing to stand on. Let's cut the "I'm just asking questions" bull, and just admit you believe by some superhuman feat, a bunch of black ops guys set many tonnes of explosives in 3 different high rise buildings, wired them, undetected, with no whistle-blowers, no forensic evidence, no plot line, no names, and not to mention a huge jet liner crashed head on into the building. 's sake, are you people that ing thick? |
You are so absorbed in that one aspect to defend your case its shocking. I said i would be willing to put aside the "CD" argument yet you are still defending the whole argument on that one point.
That's funny!!
| quote: | Originally posted by Claude Hughes
Seems like you read the same handbook. I know it's difficult but just try and answer that 1 simple question. |
That too is funny!! | quote: | Originally posted by colonelcrisp
show me where i stated that i think that the bush administration are innocent in 9/11. do i believe they were directly responsible? no, i don't give them that much credit. however i do tend to believe that they were grossly negligent in their assessment and handling of pre warnings and threat indicators.
as moral has said it quite eloquently, there as a great difference between incompetence and intention. It is my opinion that the US government and its agencies showed great incompetence in the events leading up to and following closely after 9/11.
As for all the arguments that 9/11 was staged to bring the nation into a unjustified war? i don't think that was anything more than opportunism and knee jerk reaction to the events of 9/11. were those decisions founded on proper evidence? probably not..... it was inevitable that at least one country was going to get bombed off the face of the map over the 9/11 events. |
Do you think that the perhaps they were negligent purposely so that they "could" go to war since we all know how war driven the Bush clan is. Let's speculate here. Had the Bush Administration acted promptly and efficiently to prevent the attacks [which all of you are saying they didn't] then there would have been NO WAR correct? "Terrorists" are apprehended a lot of times before attacks take place. If the Bush Administration did everything at all costs to prevent that then there would be "no war on terror" however, is it difficult to believe that perhaps they let this one "slide" purposely so that they can use it to their advantage to go to war and carry out their evil sinister plan? you don't need to have a PHD to draw that conclusion. Sometimes you have to connect the dots yourself to draw the real conclusion because the world is so corrupt that its almost insulting to think that they wouldnt conceive such a heinous act.
| quote: | Originally posted by Comrade Stalin
It's pretty clear you don't give two s about scientific truth. It's ok, we all know you're just as ing stupid as culorut. Two words. Forensic evidence. Why don't you look it up? Oh, nevermind, no matter how illogical your idiotic conpiratorial views are shown to be, you'll still religiously believe in it, no matter what.
Again, there is zero forensic evidence for a controlled demolition, PERIOD. And until any one of you can come up with that evidence, and publish your findings in a genuinely peer-reviewed publication, you have nothing to stand on. |
Here we go again with the CD :rolleyes:
| quote: | Originally posted by Claude Hughes
:haha:
Thanks George W Bush Jr |
That's golden!
| quote: | Originally posted by Comrade Stalin
It's peer-reviewed research and findings; something you lack. The burden is on you prove your retarded ass story. As of yet, nothing you present, is anything close to the standard of truth required in a court of law or a reputable academic journal...:rolleyes: |
Brutal. |
|
|
| Claude Hughes |
| quote: | Originally posted by thesauce23
just out of sheer curiosity(and no badmouthing or anything), what prompted your name? it's quite interesting. |
It should be change to George W Bush Jr |
|
|
| culorut |
| quote: | Originally posted by Claude Hughes
It should be change to George W Bush Jr |
Different name, same idiot. |
|
|
|
|
