Jap. Parliament in a truthing craze!

W4d5Y

W4d5Y

Newbie
Joined
Oct 14, 2006
Messages
479
Reaction score
1
~~~JAPANESE PARLIAMENTARIANS ARE IDIOTS AND SHOULD BE GASED IMMEDIATELY~~~

Below is a transcript of testimony in the Japanese Parliament that was broadcast live nationwide on NHK television. The Member of Parliament talking about 911 is Yukihisa Fujita from the Democratic Party of Japan. After the testimony Mr. Fujita says he got lots of phone calls from other members of Parliament thanking him for having the bravery to bring up 911 in Parliament. He also got one death threat.
Click to expand...

You would never ever have expected something like this to occur, would you? ^^
Neither had I.
Never expected to see this on evening news, altogether.

But oh mighty, Truthnews is run by Alex Jones, so we conclude, in presence of physical evidence, that this story must be a scam.
The coverage of this story on other sites like digg or meinenews.org only substantiate that publicly known fact.

source of transcript:
http://benjaminfulford.com/Transcript of Japanese Parliamentary discussion of 911.html
source of transcript w/ documenting youtube-videos:
http://www.truthnews.us/?p=1705

original youtube-source:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AH1UA3ijXug&eurl=http://www.truthnews.us/?p=1705

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=02esZQr-u74&eurl=http://www.truthnews.us/?p=1705

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7t-dZiNE9NI&eurl=http://www.truthnews.us/?p=1705

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wV_WIZ1PDt4&eurl=http://www.truthnews.us/?p=1705

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VaEGhiHhZ1Y&eurl=http://www.truthnews.us/?p=1705
 
I'm not sure what you are talking about, but it probably doesn't make any real sense.
 
Japanese dude thinks 9/11 was a conspiracy. The rational world at large ceases to care.
 
I'll be frank: anybody could slap anything over a video of a Japanese Parlimentarian speaking and I'd have to take your word that was what they were saying.

Even if they were saying that, who gives a ****?
 
Well, it was reported on digg as well. So... I guess that's important.
 
Holy crap, some guy buys into the 9/11 nutjob conspiracies so that proves they are true? Sorry, I refuse to waste my time watching the videos, if there's any scientific evidence contained in those videos I suggest you quote/link it. Otherwise your wasting everyones time and only making yourself look more like an idiot trying to prove something without evidence. Guess work doesn't work very well in the real world. Courts tend not to convict people based on conspiracies. They tend to use a method known as "innocent until proven guilty". That probably doesn't make any sense to you seeing as you lack basic logic and actually buy into that garbage yourself.
 
Stop Posting. God, I Though Portalstormzzzz Was The Last Of Your Kind.
WAIT A SEC. Are you portalstormzzzz???????


Oh, I made a good argument a few years ago. Here's my counter conshpiracee "irrefutable proof"

dbddrzdsr.png

grb.png

zddvdz.gif


kaythanxbye
 
It seems to me Yukihisa Fujita is trying to make a case for a Japanese investigation.
 
Jintor said:
I'll be frank: anybody could slap anything over a video of a Japanese Parlimentarian speaking and I'd have to take your word that was what they were saying.

Even if they were saying that, who gives a ****?
Click to expand...

I knew somebody was going to doubt that.
However, this should remove your concerns:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7t-dZiNE9NI&eurl=http://halflife2.net/forums/showthread.php?t=137761

They actually demonstrate the pentagon graphics we've all seen too many times before from the people who made Loose change.

But still, anybody could slap anything over a video of a japanese parliamentarian speaking and showing conspiracy-theories related illustrations and I'd have to take your word that was that what they were saying and showing.


Also, I believe somebody's capslock must be broken here.
Adding to that, why do post things like "shut the **** up!"?
It doesn't make any sense to me.
At least it's beyond my comprehension in what way this should add to whatever opinion you have on this matter.

Do you have one?
Do you even care?
Well, no, obviously that is the reasonable answer.

Still, you people think sooo limited, only digging into flashes or not flashes...

By showing me three pictures you somehow stumped together in mspaint several years ago, you won't be able to change my take on these sorts of things.

"OH! GIF DATA! RED LINES!!! RANDOM IDIOTISM SPREAD IN LETTERS!!!! CONSPIRACY DISPROVED!! YAY, NOW I CAN EAT SHIT AND WATCH FOX NEWS AGAIN!!!! :D"

Okay, I just somehow lost a page of writing I just did, so I'm gonna summarize what I just wanted to explain to you:

Read crossing the rubicon, it's really worth its price, and I can only say it's priceless.
The book is solely about what motivations were existant for 9/11, and who profited from it (qui bono, anybody? The phrase the roman courts applied to every case they encountered?)
It only briefly mentions the case for controlled demolitions and what devices the attacks actually might have been executed with.

It really departs from the pseudo-physical details that the stereotype conspiracy theorist might argue about to a more sincere investigation with the desire to give a picture of those events that could be used in a court.


And really guys, you are pathetic.
All you do is disprove strawmen-theories, if you even do, ignoring the really hard stuff and being not one inch better than the average, stereotype loose-change creator.

What you, I promise, will never achieve is to find a consens on the question how the hell those 19 arabs ever even managed to get a foot on those planes that does not include some sort of government involvement.

It really does not matter what happened after that, what you have to care about first is how that could have happened, how the hell a government can so blatantly ignore people like Mike Vreeland or the Phoenix FBI-memo.

Everything you have done so far is write **** OFF on issues you can't really, I assume, cope with properly.
You show me three frames from some videos, just like any given conspriacy theorist can, and then I am supposed to believe the government was completely innocent? How is something like that even remotely possible?!


//edit2: I'd also like to introduce you to the possibility that your "debunking" of two single conspiracy theories (namely concerning controlled demolitions) does not by any standard prove your (the government's) views on how the buildings were demolished but simply debunks, if it even does so, strawmen theories.

It's just a conspiracy theory that the hijackers are still alive, for example.
That doesn't prove government complicity.
However, these are the only things you think about.
So, you disprove their logic, you still don't prove the government's innocence, short: WHY THE BLOODY **** I SHOULD BELIEVE THEIR ACCOUNT WAS TRUE?!?!
 
Point?
Thesis, argument, substantiating example?

Do you have anything to employ to counter my opinions?
 
I did, you still have not responded. look at th page previous.
 
why do evil people sound like their taking a big shit when they talk?
 
W4d5Y said:
WHY THE BLOODY **** I SHOULD BELIEVE THEIR ACCOUNT WAS TRUE?!?!
Click to expand...

Because the evidence to the contrary is incredibly weak. Because there is absolutely no motive for the government to lie here except to cover up their half-assed handling of the situation (aka, not detecting the terrorists or shooting down the planes), and because quite frankly I do not see any reasonable evidence to jump to such large, staggeringly improbable conclusions which would involve the US government killing thousands of its own citizens and destroying one of its own military buildings.

Look, the events of that day were confusing, but they do not point towards a conspiracy theory. The most probable (aka, not crazy) theory is:
Terrorist organization fails to destroy world trade center in 1993.

Terrorist organization plans a new plot against the world trade center and other US targets until 2001.

Terrorist organization puts into place a fairly simple plot involving hijacking planes and flying them into buildings.



Their planning was not perfect, resulting in one plane crashing in pennsylvania and another hitting the pentagon when its target should have been the white house or the capitol building.

World Trade Center was destroyed by fire. The collision from the plane stripped the beams bare of their fire-retardant foam coatings, the jet fuel burned at such temperatures as to weaken the frame, causing the building to collapse.

WTC 7 collapses due to fire and other structural damage from the collapse of the other two buildings.

No bombs were planted in any of the buildings. The explosion sounds were merely caused by falling debris, collapsing internal structures, and severe stresses on the building caused by heat.
 
I witnessed the attacks. no esplosions except for the two big behemoths exploding called planes.
 
He's not saying it's a conspiracy, he is saying that there has been very little evidence that it was Al-Quaeda that carried out the attacks, and that there should be an investigation into the source.
 
Bin laden says he did it every time he does a video. Most all terrorists caught proudly clap to the attacks. "Irrefutable Proofz"
 
W4d5Y said:
Still, you people think sooo limited, only digging into flashes or not flashes...

By showing me three pictures you somehow stumped together in mspaint several years ago, you won't be able to change my take on these sorts of things.

It only briefly mentions the case for controlled demolitions and what devices the attacks actually might have been executed with.
Click to expand...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=79sJ1bMR6VQ&feature=related
Watch that video. Examine it. Now watch the 9/11 tower collapse. Notice anything different? THERE WERE NO EXPLOSIONS

And really guys, you are pathetic.
All you do is disprove strawmen-theories
Click to expand...
Because that's all there is to disprove. With arguments such as..."We know GWB was behind the attacks because we can see in this old grainy photo still an object that almost looks like it could be a missle. With arguments like that, it's hard to disprove an overall idea when there really isn't one.

[/quote]
What you, I promise, will never achieve is to find a consens on the question how the hell those 19 arabs ever even managed to get a foot on those planes that does not include some sort of government involvement.[/quote] So Arabs are only allowed on planes when it's government sanctioned? ...Really? Since when?

Everything you have done so far is write **** OFF on issues you can't really, I assume, cope with properly.
Click to expand...
It is hard to cope with the failure of logic it would take to buy into that garbage. It is almost sickening people actually believe that stuff and is honestly scary.

//edit2: I'd also like to introduce you to the possibility that your "debunking" of two single conspiracy theories (namely concerning controlled demolitions) does not by any standard prove your (the government's) views on how the buildings were demolished but simply debunks, if it even does so, strawmen theories.

It's just a conspiracy theory that the hijackers are still alive, for example.
That doesn't prove government complicity.
However, these are the only things you think about.
So, you disprove their logic, you still don't prove the government's innocence, short: WHY THE BLOODY **** I SHOULD BELIEVE THEIR ACCOUNT WAS TRUE?!?!
Click to expand...

So what are you trying to say? Of course the government isn't completely innocent. I am sure somewhere along the line there was some slight warning or something they could have done to prevent this in the past. However if your trying to say the government carried out the attacks then I am sorry for you. I seriously hope you don't ignore the facts. The fact that people like you are still alive is proof enough the government wasn't involved. If the government, especially GWB could carry out the largest cover up job in the history of the world, then they would be able to assasinate some kid on the internet that is revealing their secret. They wouldn't have any problem with it since they had no problem killings 3000 americans already.

Also, do you seriously believe they were able to wire up the whole building without anyone noticing, set off explosions on multiple levels with no visual signs from outside the building, create explosive enclosures that were heat resistant as to not set them off early, find explosives large enough to blow up steel beams so large that is actually requires thermite to cut threw, keep thousands of peoples mouths shut as an operation this large would require thousands if not tens of thousands of people to set up. Not to mention there still hasn't been a leak somewhere. There was no mass purchase of the tools needed to carry this out, no one from the inside has sent an anonymous letter out on the internet or given any hint at all.

Given all that, when we look at the official story which has a plethora of scientific evidence to back it up perfectly, it's obvious which is the logical answer. It might be fun to pretend the government is a killing machine, but it just gets annoying after a while.
 
Gormanmod said:
Bin laden says he did it every time he does a video. Most all terrorists caught proudly clap to the attacks. "Irrefutable Proofz"
Click to expand...

*Ahem*

I, Emporius, claim all responsibilty for the destruction of the Twin Towers. Happy Birthday to me.

Now there is "Irrefutable Proofz" that I did it.
 
noooo, all his henchmen, soldiers, generals, etc, all admit too.


Glirk, that's the EXACT same video I used 2 years ago to counter one of these freaks on 9/11 truth. NICELY DONE MY APPRENTICE.
 
Haha, it does it's job well. I hope they can see the point behind the video. If they are able to analyze old footage and pictures and pull out claims then hopefully they will be able to analyze and compare that video with the WTC collapse as they are seeking the truth, correct? That is what they would want to do if they are really truth seekers.
 
W4d5Y said:
Point?
Thesis, argument, substantiating example?

Do you have anything to employ to counter my opinions?
Click to expand...

No matter how borderline retarded you may be, your opinion is just your opinion. The problem comes when you try and pass off these pathetic ideas as facts.

Please, go back to primary school.
 
W4d5Y said:
By showing me three pictures you somehow stumped together in mspaint several years ago, you won't be able to change my take on these sorts of things.
Click to expand...

I believe herein lies the problem. You assume we care about your opinion, or even want to change it.

Really, we just want you to shut your trap.
 
I find the conspiracy theories an insult to the memories of the thousands that died on that day, as well as an insult to freedom and democracy.






It is in my opinion that conspiracy theorists should be arrested and put into internment camps where their stupidity won't hurt anyone's brains.
 
theotherguy said:
Their planning was not perfect, resulting in one plane crashing in pennsylvania and another hitting the pentagon when its target should have been the white house or the capitol building.

World Trade Center was destroyed by fire. The collision from the plane stripped the beams bare of their fire-retardant foam coatings, the jet fuel burned at such temperatures as to weaken the frame, causing the building to collapse.

WTC 7 collapses due to fire and other structural damage from the collapse of the other two buildings.

No bombs were planted in any of the buildings. The explosion sounds were merely caused by falling debris, collapsing internal structures, and severe stresses on the building caused by heat.
Click to expand...

I've written enough on that topic no to believe any of that crap.
I already told you there's nothing to burn in the cores, so you just contradicted yourself, because you assume fire was the primary damage to the towers' structures despite the absence of such fires in the areas that later were to collapse.
And even if there still had been something to burn in the offices around the hit zone that didn't get incinerated immediately after the plane's impact and managed not to vanish in the following 30/100 minutes, it still account for fire (if there even had been any) damaging the cores, because there is just elevators and stairwells running there, there's nothing inflamable there, nada, njet, zero.

Just elevators and stairwells, AND massive steel collumns, and not just some "hollow steel shaft" as the Kean comission believes.
Tss.

No wonder they always wanted you sheeple to believe the storey trusses were the key to the physical explanation of the collapses.

Flight 93 was shot down, I struggled on the no-plane topic long enough but finally found enough hints to assume that flight 93 actually did crash in Shanksville (hooray!) yet not due to the circumstances the Kean Comission has alleged to be the causes of the plane's crashing.

I've read about the mayor pointing out he knew two people, whose names he didn't want others to know, one of them being a vietnam-vet, having heard a missile and that to his knowledge F-16s were close by.


SHANKSVILLE, Pa. - Ernie Stuhl is the mayor of this tiny farming borough that was so brutally placed on America's psychic map on the morning of Sept. 11, when United Airlines Flight 93 slammed nose-down into the edge of a barren strip-mine moonscape a couple of miles outside of town.

A 77-year-old World War II veteran and retired Dodge dealer, he's certainly no conspiracy theorist.
Click to expand...

Further,
"I know of two people - I will not mention names - that heard a missile," Stuhl said. "They both live very close, within a couple of hundred yards. . .This one fellow's served in Vietnam and he says he's heard them, and he heard one that day." The mayor adds that based on what he knows about that morning, military F-16 fighter jets were "very, very close."
Click to expand...
Now please come up with some lame-ass explanation why that account was fabricated by the mayor of shanksville on the day of the attacks.

The article also sums up indications of a shoot-down having taken place (I already covered the lavatory-guy):

* THE 911 CALL. At 9:58 a.m., roughly eight minutes before impact, a 911 emergency dispatcher in neighboring Westmoreland County took a call from a frantic passenger who said he was locked in the bathroom of Flight 93 and that the plane had been hijacked. The caller said there had been an explosion aboard the plane and there was white smoke. Authorities have never explained the report, and the 911 tape itself was immediately confiscated by the FBI.

* THE DEBRIS FIELD. The reclaimed mine where the plane crashed is composed of very soft soil, and searchers say much of the wreckage was found buried 20-25 feet below the large crater. But despite that, there was also widely scattered debris in the immediate vicinity and further afield. Considerable debris washed up more than two miles away at Indian Lake, and a canceled check and brokerage statement from the plane was found in a deep valley some eight miles away that week.

* THE MYSTERY PLANE. Many people in the Shanksville area, including some interviewed by the Daily News, saw a fast-moving, unmarked small jet fly overhead a very short time after Flight 93 crashed. Several days later, authorities said they believe the plane was a Falcon 20 private jet that was headed to nearby Johnstown but was asked to descend and survey the crash site. Yet officials have never identified the pilot nor explained why he was still airborne roughly 30 minutes after the government ordered all aircraft to land at the closest airport.

* THE ENGINE. While the FBI and other authorities have said the plane was mostly obliterated by the roughly 500 mph impact, they also said an engine - or at least a 1,000-pound piece of one - was found "a considerable distance" from the crater. Stuhl, the Shanksville mayor, said it was found in the woods just west of the crash. That information is intriguing to shoot-down theory proponents, since the heat-seeking, air-to-air Sidewinder missiles aboard an F-16 would likely target one of the Boeing 757's two large engines.

* LOCATION OF F-16S. From Day 1, the government has given conflicting accounts about the exact whereabouts of three North Dakota Air National Guard F-16s, assigned to national air defense, based at Langley Air Force base in Virginia and scrambled at the height of the attacks.

Just a few days after the crash, a federal flight controller told a Nashua, N.H., newspaper that an F-16 was "in hot pursuit" of the hijacked United jet, following so closely that it made 360-degree turns to stay in range. "He must have seen the whole thing," an unnamed aviation official said.
Click to expand...

http://web.archive.org/web/20011119...ntent/daily_news/2001/11/18/local/SHOT15C.htm

Of course 911-myths has an totally logic explanation for the smoke in UA93.
The smoke was.... STEAM!! VAPOUR!!! AEROSOLE BIHYDROGENOXIDE!!!

Anyway...

Fires, 93, ah, building 7?

Okay, building 7, it definatively had some damage and had generators on the lower floors, but I doubt that incinerated fuel or exploding generators could simply slice steal collumns.

If that was true, controlled demolitions wouldn't require precisely timed high-speed explosives distributed all over the building's structure and manually burried inside the collumns.
They'd just spill a few thousand litres of fuel as a relatively slow explosive agent around the lobby and light that up, and there it goes, that lovely building.
Now no matter how badly the south-face of WTC7 was damaged, more than a half of the building still was structurally intact and didn't show any fires.

So sure you can argue that the building was not indestructable (although it was a pretty hefty design, just picture Rudy's bunker on the 23rd floor), I do not oppose that point, it simply is worth mentioning that it appears odd -at last it appears so to me- that the untouched side of the building will collapse almost instantly as the other, way more badly damaged one does.


15357 said:
I find the conspiracy theories an insult to the memories of the thousands that died on that day, as well as an insult to freedom and democracy.

It is in my opinion that conspiracy theorists should be arrested and put into internment camps where their stupidity won't hurt anyone's brains.
Click to expand...

Sally Regenhard is an American activist who has become one of the leading voices for the families of the victims of the September 11 attacks. A long-time resident of Co-op City in The Bronx in New York City who has degrees in behavorial sciences and gerontology and has worked in the nursing home industry for over 20 years, Regenhard became an advocate for skyscraper safety after the death of her 28-year old son, Christian, a probationary firefighter with the New York City Fire Department, who perished after the collapse of the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001.
Click to expand...

Lorie van Auken is a 9/11 widow, one of the "Jersey Girls". Her husband, Kenneth Van Auken, was a bond trader at Cantor Fitzgerald L.P., and worked on the 105th floor of WTC Tower One. Along with three other 9/11 New Jersey widows (Kristen Breitweiser, Mindy Kleinberg and Patty Casazza), Lorie worked to form the 9/11 Commission, despite attempts by The White House to block it.
After the release of the 9/11 Commission Report, Lorie and the other Jersey Girls held a series of press conferences which were highly critical of the Commission. She accused the commissioners of ignoring key evidence which would have demonstrated incompetence in the conduct of government officials, both before and on 9/11.
Click to expand...
[emphasis added]


Patty Casazza is one of the four Jersey Girls. Her husband, John F. Casazza, died on September 11 at age 38. As of 9/11, she was a resident of Colts Neck Township, New Jersey.[1] She currently resides in upstate New York.

On November 3, 2007, at the "9/11: Families, First Responders, & Experts Speak Out Symposium", Patty Casazza revealed that "whistle-blowers" approached the "Jersey Girls" during the 9/11 Commission Hearings in the hopes that they would get the 9/11 Commission to subpoena them. Reason being, they saw what was happening to Sibel Edmonds, and were afraid to come forward. She claims that the information these people possess show that this Government knew the day, the type of attack, and the targets. She also claims the 9/11 Commission promised that each "whistle-blower" would be mentioned in the 9/11 Report. They were not.
Click to expand...
[emphasis added]

Kristen Breitweiser is a lawyer and one of the Jersey Girls, four women from New Jersey who were widowed when their husbands were killed in the September 11, 2001 attacks and subsequently researched the policy and intelligence failures that led up to the attacks. She was instrumental in bringing the 9/11 Commission into existence. She has testified before Congress and has been spoken of as a potential candidate for the United States Senate. Her account is well stated in her book, Wake-Up Call: The Political Education of a 9/11 Widow. C 2006, Breitweiser, Kristen.

Her husband, Ronald Michael Breitweiser, was killed at age 39 in the attacks. He was a senior vice president at Fiduciary Trust International at 2 World Trade Center [1]

Although Breitweister stated that she was a Republican who voted for George W. Bush in 2000, she became an Independent due to her anger over Bush's response to 9/11, and vigorously supported John Kerry in 2004. She continues to be an outspoken critic of the Bush Administration, claiming Bush has not made the United States safer since the attacks, as well as criticizing the war in Iraq. See Wake-Up Call: The Political Education of a 9/11 Widow. C 2006, Breitweiser, Kristen.

Since May 2005 she's been a contributing blogger at The Huffington Post.
Click to expand...


These are members of the 9/11 family steering comitee, which has criticized the kean comission for omission of important information regarding the september 11th attacks, some of which numerous FBI members and other whistleblowers offered.

A list of the whistleblowers, uncovering blatant government incompetence and obstruction of FBI investigations, I am aware of:

-Colleen Rowley (sent a 13-page memo to the head of the FBI, Robert Mueller, on may 21nd of 2002 complaining about the FBI-headquarters' stonewalling of Moussaoui related Fbi-investigations. Mueller immediately classified the document as "secret", however it also was distributed to the Senate intelligence comittee.

-Kenneth Williams, he wrote the famous phoenix memo, and sent it to the FBIHQ on july 10, 2001, requesting, after a 7-year investigation, that flight schools in arizona be monitored because they had muslims taking flight lessons there (Hani Hanjour turned out to be one of them, the guy who flew AA77 -with amazing skill- into the e-ring of the pentagon)
His memo mentioned Bin Laden and alarmed the FBI that possible plane-hijackings and airport security breaches could occur.
Of course the FBI never monitored any flight schools and their clients, allegedly because of lack of resources.

-Mike Vreeland
this story is a lil' big, basically he's the bob lazar of 9/11, the tagline is that he was a government-man and tried allerting the US and Canadian officials of impending attacks while being imprisoned for alleged credit fraud.
There's a document he allegedly wrote prior to 9/11, in which he listed some intelligence information such as possible targets like the world trade center, the pentagon or the sears tower, numerous names (Osama Bin Laden was mentioned) and the phrases "They'll paint me crazy and call me a liar" and "let one happen -stop the rest!"

-Robert Wright, twelve-year FBI veteran.
Congressional News Service, May 30 of 2002:
In a memorandum written 91 days before the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, an FBI agent warned that Americans would die as a result of the bureau's failure to adequately pursue investigations of terrorists living in the country.

FBI Special Agent Robert Wright, Jr., who wrote the memo, led a four-year investigation into terrorist money laundering in the United States.

Wright began crying as he concluded his remarks at a Washington press conference Thursday.

"To the families and victims of September 11th - on behalf of [FBI Special Agents] John Vincent, Barry Carmody, and myself - we're sorry," Wright said before walking out of the room. Vincent and Carmody have also expressed a desire to expose information regarding alleged FBI missteps prior to Sept. 11.

Wright's June 9, 2001 "Mission Statement" memo warned that, "Knowing what I know, I can confidently say that until the investigative responsibilities for terrorism are transferred from the FBI, I will not feel safe.

"The FBI has proven for the past decade it cannot identify and prevent acts of terrorism against the United States and its citizens at home and abroad," he continued. "Even worse, there is virtually no effort on the part of the FBI's International Terrorism Unit to neutralize known and suspected international terrorists living in the United States."

The summary of Wright's attempts to expose the alleged failures of the FBI's anti-terrorism efforts ended with a solemn conclusion.

"Unfortunately, more terrorist attacks against American interests - coupled with the loss of American lives - will have to occur before those in power give this matter the urgent attention it deserves," he wrote.
Click to expand...
[emphasis added]

source:
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewNation.asp?Page=/Nation/archive/200205/NAT20020530d.html


Anyway, you want to imprison widows?
Is that what you want, dude??
Eat shit, man, if you still believe in the government's innocence, it's so implausible.


You cannot "paint me crazy and call me a liar" if I am right, right?
 
W4d5Y said:
Okay, sorry, I have to double post because I excelled the 16.000 character limit :D
Click to expand...

jebus, even I havent done that




anyways, I'll repeat what I always say in these types of topics ...I find it funny that people are so willing to believe a ridiculous conspiracy when a real conspiracy is right in front of their noses: bush used 9/11 as a pretext to invading iraq (FULLSTOP) ...but NOOOOOOO you people have to take the most outlandish theory possible instead of something which is so painfully obvious to anyone who's mentally sound

I think it's because there's too much boring research to sift through, it has none of the pizazz of remotely guided cruise missles disguised as passenger jets or Box-cutter wielding CIA operatives willing to sacrifice themselves for imperialism ..it's almost as if the truth just isnt ridiculous enough for some of you, you have to invent your own theories full of non-bendable steel or controlled demolitions of buildings caught live and fed into every single home in north america
 
New person for the ignore list. Two people in one day, without anyone since '04. Whats going on?
 
-I could just presume for starters that fires definatively did not bring them down. I have a peer reviewed scientific investigation that says otherwise.
 
W4d5Y said:
I already told you there's nothing to burn in the cores
Click to expand...

ARE YOU F***ING KIDDING ME?
motivator5992008ek1.jpg


Seriously wadsy, I can't take anything you say seriosuly at all anymore. BTW since you must be a truth seeker, I suggest you check out http://www.debunking911.com/. It uses facts, sources and logic to debunk the silly conspiracy theories. I suggest you read over that site before you continue posting.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Lizardizzle
3D in yo' room, *****!!
Replies
20
Views
1K
CyberPitz
CyberPitz
joule
The 10 Best "To Catch a Predator" Moments
Replies
26
Views
4K
The Monkey
The Monkey
jverne
google invests in geothermal
Replies
15
Views
1K
Reflex
Reflex
jverne
lets test your ingenuity and creativity...in a zombie outbreak
2
Replies
57
Views
4K
Warbie
Warbie
1
How to play EP1 in L4D & video of gameplay
Replies
5
Views
2K
1nsane
1
Back
Top