egafd.com

Warren, you are a daft twat. You can't gainsay a single thing I have said, so just resort to abuse. I haven't given you a single "conspiracy theory", but documented examples of CIA covert activities which subverted governments and led to the deaths of thousands of innocent people. It's pointless attempting to discuss anything with someone like you.

Sounds snobbish, but I fuckin hate soaps & reality tv shows.

What's the point being working class, scraping a living and being miserable, to then turn on the tv and watch rich actors 'acting' working class, and 'acting' fucking miserable?

If you're bored after work then take up a hobby, learn something...................or argue with people on porn forums! You know......something useful! !grin!

mark wrote:

>>


Exactly - finally we agree on something! And that goes back to what I said before about conspiracy theorists: You can offer up any and as many rational, logical explanations as you want, backed up by as much expert opinion and evidence (actual and anecdotal) as you can find, and STILL they won't believe it.

Why? Quite simply because they WANT to believe it was all one big conspiracy by "our evil leaders".

George Dubya could stand on the White House lawn on a sunny, cloudless July day, point upwards at the heavens, proclaim "The Sky Is Blue" and STILL the CTs would find something wrong with it. They'd probably claim that it was all done with some fancy colour filters or some such, and that the sky isn't really blue at all ("if you look at the local weather just one hour before, you'd see that this could not be possible ...") and why should we believe him?

A slight exaggeration? Perhaps - but not by much.

Most 9/11 conspiracy theories stretch credibility to the limit so much that they can (or at least should be) dismissed out of hand by anyone with half a brain. I will concede though that I have come across a few that at first glance APPEAR to be well researched and "make you wonder".

However, I've yet to come across ONE SINGLE CT that stands up to close scrutiny or - in many cases - even a little bit of basic research.

Those who dismiss the official version of events claim that it's all distortions, half-truths and one big whitewash. Well to conclude (because I'm leaving this thread alone now, the whole fucking thing is an excercise in futility for all concerned really), all I can say is that while there undoubtedly are still questions to be answered (and I've never said otherwise), the consipracy theorists have themselves turned distorting the facts and telling half-truths into an art form.

it was the smurfs I tell ya

>please quote said "abuse"

Try reading what you wrote: no attempt at a discussion, just an attempt at having a pop.

>However, I've yet to come across ONE SINGLE CT that stands up to close scrutiny or - in many cases - even a little bit of basic research.

Does that include the "official version", which is also, by definition, a conspiracy theory? There is no lone gunman in this case, there had to have been a conspiracy, that's the official explanation. How far that conspiracy extended, and who was involved, we do not know.

Still, at least the Americans had a 9/11 Commission, however flawed it might have been. The fact that Tony B. Liar refuses to have any sort of 7/7 inquiry in this country clearly demonstrates the contempt our rulers have for the serfs. We are good for paying their wages, but we can't handle the truth.

Flat_Eric wrote:

> However, I've yet to come across ONE SINGLE CT that stands up
> to close scrutiny or - in many cases - even a little bit of
> basic research.
>

As already pointed out to you now. You do not know the definition of the word "conspiracy theory". Yet you throw the word around so easily.

1) This main support beam from the twin tower core was found at ground zero
How do you explain the v shaped cut and the molten metal on the beam ?
[IMG]http://img96.imageshack.us/img96/1379/240406thermite1qa2.jpg[/IMG]


2) Check out this picture taken shortly after the pentagon attack. check out the pentagon workers
chewing the fat on the pentagon lawn.Dose this look like a scene from a major terrorist attack were there work mates are trapped
and dieing or dose it look like a controlled situation ?
[IMG]http://img133.imageshack.us/img133/443/roll3091bm2.jpg[/IMG]


3) Were told the twin towers collapsed because they were tube structures and once a few floors collapsed this was enough to bring the whole building down.
what about building 7 ?
[IMG]http://img95.imageshack.us/img95/5873/wtc7neverforgetvn1.gif[/IMG]

Looking at the way WTC7 collapses, it does make me wonder why companies pay good money to demolition experts when they want a controlled demolition. Judging by WTC7, these skyscrapers just collapse into their own footprint without any help from controlled explosions or the like. Surely the whole demolition industry isn't a conjob?

Isn't it the case that the official explanation for the collapse of WTC7 is that there is no explanation? The authorities cannot explain why this building, which had not suffered any significant structural damage, collapsed the way it did.