"Terrorism" predictions.
#211
Re: "Terrorism" predictions.
If you can't see the similarities between Pearl Harbor, Bay of Tonkin, and 9/11, YOU don't belong in this conversation.
#212
Re: "Terrorism" predictions.
Originally Posted by klyph
If you can't see the similarities between Pearl Harbor, Bay of Tonkin, and 9/11, YOU don't belong in this conversation.
#213
Re: "Terrorism" predictions.
Originally Posted by QikEnuF
Educate me then. And then I will dress up as a professional architect and point out why 9/11 wasn't the government's doing. But I will do it in a funny accent more than likely. There is nothing good about who you are or what you do.
I'll believe the word of a professional more than a layman, but I take everything with a grain of salt.
I'll never trust a man with a accent.
The last sentence is probably correct.
#214
Re: "Terrorism" predictions.
Originally Posted by QikEnuF
Boost, I didn't say I don't question what I am told by the government/others, I think I stated the opposite in my reply actually.
__________________
Best Car Insurance | Auto Protection Today | FREE Trade-In Quote
#215
Re: "Terrorism" predictions.
Whether the guy is a professional architect or not is really not that important. He's not sitting up there saying the government did it or the terrorists did it. He's presenting a huge collaboration of video evidence and facts in a scientific manor. If you buy the arguement of "some law/theory that says unless something specifically prevents an event from happening, it can and will at some point on a long enough time line" as an explanation rather than drawing conclusions from fact, then you're just ignorant.
#216
Re: "Terrorism" predictions.
This is a scientific paper by Dr. Steven Jones regarding his analysis of the WTC collapse, this is by far the best paper i have read on this subject, plenty of pictures and scientific evidence to back up his assertion that a third party investigation is needed, as for the pentagon its hard to argue either way because of the lack of evidence.
http://journalof911studies.com/volum...lyCollapse.pdf
http://journalof911studies.com/volum...lyCollapse.pdf
#217
Re: "Terrorism" predictions.
Originally Posted by signorelli21
3/4 down the page, it shows a demolition crew putting a blast on a pillar in a 45 degree, in a building that they are going to implode (as an example). Then it shows the picture I posted of the 45'd WTC column, and another picture of 3 MORE columns from the WTC all with perfect 45's on them. Oh wait, I don't want to sound like a bad American.
#218
Re: "Terrorism" predictions.
Originally Posted by Dr.Boost
Your reply wasn't exactly clear and to the point of which side of the fence you were on. :1
#219
Re: "Terrorism" predictions.
Why does asking questions make you a bad american?
You know its always interesting that throughout history whenever someone questions what is officially thought of as fact, they are always ridiculed as madmen, like Robert fulton said that he could build a boat that could travel upstream (the steamboat) and it was referred to as "fultons folly" because everyone knew that a boat can't travel upriver, especially without sails.
Galileo was called a heretic for thinking that the sun ( rather than the earth) was at the center of the universe, the church made him recant this theory because it was different from scripture.
Anyway the whole point of the 911 truth movement isn't to really prove that george bush ordered 911 or that the illuminati (spell?) are trying to take over the world, its merely to prove that the original report, known as the "official report" ( when in reality its peices of 3 reports) is very much wrong. The problem is that the majority of people that beleive in the official version of events have never read any of the official reports, and the legitimate scientists that try and explain why these reports are flawed are automatically discredited as being tin foil hat wearers or whatever.
You know its always interesting that throughout history whenever someone questions what is officially thought of as fact, they are always ridiculed as madmen, like Robert fulton said that he could build a boat that could travel upstream (the steamboat) and it was referred to as "fultons folly" because everyone knew that a boat can't travel upriver, especially without sails.
Galileo was called a heretic for thinking that the sun ( rather than the earth) was at the center of the universe, the church made him recant this theory because it was different from scripture.
Anyway the whole point of the 911 truth movement isn't to really prove that george bush ordered 911 or that the illuminati (spell?) are trying to take over the world, its merely to prove that the original report, known as the "official report" ( when in reality its peices of 3 reports) is very much wrong. The problem is that the majority of people that beleive in the official version of events have never read any of the official reports, and the legitimate scientists that try and explain why these reports are flawed are automatically discredited as being tin foil hat wearers or whatever.
#220
Re: "Terrorism" predictions.
space aliens ordered by cheney forced GW to blow up the towers.
prove me wrong, my theory deserves respect. don't step on my 1st amendment rights
prove me wrong, my theory deserves respect. don't step on my 1st amendment rights