FAQ   Search   Memberlist   Usergroups   Register   Profile   Log in to check your private messages   Log in 
Top Reasons Indicating an Inside Job
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Next Level Forum Index -> 9/11 HardCorps Specifics Investigation
  ::  Previous topic :: Next topic  
Author Message
DeepLogos



Joined: 01 Jun 2006
Posts: 259
Location: Geostationary orbit around myself, sipping at a cup of DM Tea...

PostPosted: Fri Sep 01, 2006 5:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Gary,

I very much agree with your take on the one or two aspects surrounding 9/11 as "enough" to present to John Doe and Mr. Sceptic, given that one thoroughly backs the 'irrefutable' part of it. I also appreciate you knowledge and input on my preliminary suggestions.

Just a thought; What if as a initial step, to "set the stage", so to speak for people to draw their own conclusions, leave out what happened on 9/11, and to begin with present a few things historically (pre-9/11) and a few things from what happened after 9/11 (and I emphesize to begin with).

There are many dubvious theories as to what happened on that day, and much of this is putting the general public off. What has happened historically and what happened in the wake of 9/11 may represent the proof needed to establish that initial "contact" with the above mentioned John Doe and Mr Skeptic.

What would provide the background: (methodical suggestions only):
Even though the history of Al Quida and intelligence/state involment in terror acts can be established with a great amount of certainty, this seems to be what people just can't get their heads around, and is perhaps one of the main reasons people don't "want" to understand 9/11 as such. (in addition to the psychological factor), so I suggest (as metioned above):

1) The true nature and proof of Osama, Al Quida and the people/ agencies behind him/them.

2) The nature and proof of western intelligence/ state involvment in terror acts and the desire to cover it up (+ the motive for doing this)

What would prove our take on 9/11 based on what happened afterwards:
Focusing on what happened immediately after 9/11 will perhaps prove most fruitful.

1) Removal of evidence from the WTC site/ Pre-scripted highjacker scenario (with no proof or intelligence to support it)

2) The reluctancy to investigate 9/11, Administration's/ Commision's/Media's unwillingness to address certain aspects, the deliberate disemination of questionable and downright wrong info/ lying about it.

Explaning this in the context of why a sole focus on Bush Inc. is not the right way to go about it (all though it does involve them) may also prove useful and also make them understand why this has been such a difficult task to begin with.

Just a suggestion.

Again, thanks for the input.

-DL-

_________________
"I'm pulling the plug on you now, Jmmanuel... I hope your resurrection ship is nearby..."

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
dilbert_g
Guest





PostPosted: Sat Sep 02, 2006 2:19 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

DeepLogos wrote:
Gary,

I very much agree with your take on the one or two aspects surrounding 9/11 as "enough" to present to John Doe and Mr. Sceptic, given that one thoroughly backs the 'irrefutable' part of it. I also appreciate you knowledge and input on my preliminary suggestions.

Just a thought; What if as a initial step, to "set the stage", so to speak for people to draw their own conclusions, leave out what happened on 9/11, and to begin with present a few things historically (pre-9/11) and a few things from what happened after 9/11 (and I emphesize to begin with).

RIGHT.

There are many dubvious theories as to what happened on that day, and much of this is putting the general public off. What has happened historically and what happened in the wake of 9/11 may represent the proof needed to establish that initial "contact" with the above mentioned John Doe and Mr Skeptic.

What would provide the background: (methodical suggestions only):
Even though the history of Al Quida and intelligence/state involment in terror acts can be established with a great amount of certainty, this seems to be what people just can't get their heads around, and is perhaps one of the main reasons people don't "want" to understand 9/11 as such. (in addition to the psychological factor), so I suggest (as metioned above):

1) The true nature and proof of Osama, Al Quida and the people/ agencies behind him/them.

2) The nature and proof of western intelligence/ state involvment in terror acts and the desire to cover it up (+ the motive for doing this)



I FINALLY GOT IT INTO THE FUCKING NUTSHELL (i think). And I think this will answer your question. I like to hit facts bam bam bam.

Motive is "subjective", I'd save that for later. Don't want to get caught there in a philosophical argument. If pressed, I'd say it SEEMS "War on Americans, War on People", PATRIOT Act factually shreds the Bill of Rights and hands unrestricted police powers to govt and their Global Capitalist Pirates. The fact is Brzezinski spelled it out, so there's no need to speculate on motive. Go to Wikipedia, or my site, and read his quotes. But motive comes after, IMO. Say, "forget about WHY for now, we'll get to that later."


My approach to Sept 11 and the GWOT is these few questions ... to start with.
1. Who created Al-Qaeda? Simple, simple question. I just start with this ONE. No one knows. Do you find that people can't get their heads around this question? Print out the interview if you want.

2. Who "nourished" Al-Qaeda? How long? What cost?
3. Who defended Al-Qaeda in court?
4. Who did "catch and release" on an Al-Qaeda operative in the USA? (alt, "Have you ever heard of Ali Mohamed? He was a major terrorist."
(see below)

There are LONG answers to these questions, or short ones.
1. Short answer.
Zbignew Brzezinski. Say it slowly. You were expecting Zebediyah bin Laden bin Bush? Nope. A Polish-ancestry Brit-American. National SECURITY Advisor. Under Jimmy Carter. July 3, 1979. (Tuesday. Easy date to remember ... and painful to think about July 4 and that our *security* specialist created it. shock and awe.) Soviet response on Dec 1979. How do we know? ZBIG SAID SO!

You probably need to know some details so you can refute smartass knee-jerk answers, like "freeing Afghanistan from communism". No, it was to LURE communists IN to Afghanistan. They didn't come til 6 mos later.
Oh here's one more: In 1998, Brz said it was a GREAT idea and he'd do it all over again, and Orrin Hatch also agreed with that (not sure when). I should probably carry Zbig's interview in my pocket.



1. Long addendum.
What is the Tri-Lateral Commission. 300 rich fucks who run the world, who want MORE money and MORE power.
The deeper relation of the Tri-Lateral Commission, the CFR, Rockefeller. Nazi ties. Eugenics. Wall Street, money, their tool the CIA, and everything CIA has done for them in the past (mass murder and terror to destroy democracy) and everything Brz said and wrote about the need for terror to launch global imperialism and control society thru deception and fear. What the TLC is about, it's part of that new NAFTA highway deal, 3 global economic regions. Chinese ports in Mexico or Peru, a highway through Mexico to Kansas City up in to Canada. bye bye republican democracy. Appointees overrule Congress and Parliament on all economic matters and every matter which affects anything economic. etc.


I would never try to explain the WHOLE thing, but I'd tell people to read about it for a week. Read what they did, said, are doing and saying.


2. Short answer.
Five Presidents. Carter of course. Reagan and Bush, Iran-Contra and BCCI were Al-Qaeda ops. Clinton - 1999 Republican Kosovo report, suppressed. (This proves they were an ally and a terror group at the same time.) Nurtured for 20-25 years. Officially 6 billion, unoffiicial est. $20-30 bn. (That burns too.)

LONGER addendum:
Bush?? The Macedonian President said Al-Qaeda men were seen w Pentagon on the ground in summer 2001. Believe it? Fits everything else.

Brzezinski is CURRENTLY working with his NGO in Chechnya which is striving for peace w Al-Qaeda cells. It's a PEACE project. (get it?) Members of ACPC include are former CIA chief, oil company leaders, Amer. Enterprise. (get it? a bunch of peacenik hippies, right?)
(of course THIS current stuff is slightly speculative ... but having p.r.o.o.f. of the rest ... it proves Al-Qaeda IS a USG op, so ... is the CIA really working on peace and love with them in the Caucausus region?)

OOPS, not speculative according to Chossudovsky: (google Osamagate)
And it is confirmed by numerous press reports, eyewitness accounts, photographic evidence as well as official statements by the Macedonian Prime Minister, who has accused the Western military alliance of supporting the terrorists. Moreover, the official Macedonian New Agency (MIA) has pointed to the complicity between Washington's envoy Ambassador James Pardew and the NLA terrorists.

3. Short answer.
James Baker (2003) and Michael Chertoff (1999). Most people know who they are, but you can emphasize. Not "Liberals" or "civil rights" attorneys. The doctor embezzled $6m Medicaid money and apparently gave it to Osama, offshore acct. No logical reason for Chertoff to have taken the case to get the doctor ACQUITTED of all charges, other than supression of ugly paper trails.
Baker is counsel for Saudi Royals, so he's "IT". But Americans don't know that he got Saudis blanket immunity from Discovery -- revealing evidence.

LONGER addendum:
More details about the Chertoff case. Dr. Magdy Elamir. The fact that the details of the case are online, in Bergen County. The fact that Chertoff was running an investigation into terrorism money trails while he covered up a terror money trail (Operation Green Quest).

The fact that Baker was the one who won the Supreme case against Gore.
The history of Baker and the Bush family, going back to Operation 40 and Zapata Petroleum near Cuba. The fact that W worked in his office at age 15, Baker has set up all their oil businesses, including with Saudis and with the Bin Laden family.

(Binladen Contruction is a contractor to the Saudis and to USG, like Halliburton. They do oil wells and pipelines and military installations.)


4. Short answer.
Ali Mohamed. MAJOR Al-Qaeda terrorist. Egyptian Intell. Very close to Osama. Involved in EVERY MAJOR ATTACK and the assassination of Sadat. THEN he came to America and joined the Army. Became Green Beret, and instructor ... while STILL doing Al-Qaeda stuff. Left the Army on his own volition for a month, to fight with Al-Qaeda in Kabul, then returned. Honorable discharge with special commendations for Valor etc. TOTALLY in contact with FBI and CIA. FBI had his phone number in Nairobi. Finally convicted of five counts of conspiracy he pled to .. secret plea agreement. Disappeared from a Federal Prison while awaiting sentencing in 2001.

*(I like this because the story starts on that conspiracy theory website, the US State Dept.)*

People understand you don't "disappear" from Fed Prison. He was Caught and Released. There's more to these stories of course, but I'd rather have folks read them and see links if they want.


LONGER addendum:
I dunno. The fact that he brought Zawahiri to America .. Twice .. as his bodyguard. Name the major attacks, Nairobi, Kenya, USS Cole, Khobar. That some of these had some aspect of foreknowledge (Vinnell base, someone let them in, Cole, Israel supposedly knew). A.M. got a job for a US defense contractor in California too. He helped Osama relocate ... twice, on a C130 with an entourage, big party. That John O Neill was blocked by Clinton AND Bush trying to pry open USS Cole, he "lost" his briefcase "temporarily" at a Florida hotel, was humiliated in the FBI, finally he QUIT, and then died on S11.
More covered by the Israeli intell site, Debkafile (sounds impressive) and on more details on Cooperative research timeline.



What would prove our take on 9/11 based on what happened afterwards:
Focusing on what happened immediately after 9/11 will perhaps prove most fruitful.

1) Removal of evidence from the WTC site/ Pre-scripted highjacker scenario (with no proof or intelligence to support it)

The guy in the ponytail said it best on Martial Law. Guiliani's a prosecutor. He knows a thing or two about preserving a crime scene. People had to sue to stop it. The argument was that computer analysis would suffice, no evidence needed.

Pre-scripted highjacker scenario: I like the term "cokehead playboy jackoffs gambling lapdances Miami-Vice-style hanging with strippers and Mobsters, big time dope dealers .. and Republican-connected criminals". It seems to be at odds with "Islamic Fundamentalist", no?

"Pre-scripted highjacker scenario" may be true, but no impact.

See what I mean?




2) The reluctancy to investigate 9/11, Administration's/ Commision's/Media's unwillingness to address certain aspects, the deliberate disemination of questionable and downright wrong info/ lying about it.

Bush called for NO investigation, because it would impede his War on Terror. I have never got around to mentioning that, but it's on my site. I said "No Shit! Of course it would impede him."

Ben Veniste was Clinton's lawyer and a known mob lawyer who also served Barry Seal. If you can explain who Barry Seal was. Coke trafficker by the TON on C-130s, CIA for about 30 years, tied to Clinton in that Jerry Falwell "Clinton Chronicles" documentary about Mena, Arkansas, but also tied to George Bush Sr. Seal flew with Operation 40, which was tied to JFK assassination. (Do you know how it was tied?) Nuff?

Also Kean owned a company with ties to the Afghanistan pipeline.
Lee Hamilton and John Kerry helped cover up Iran-Contra and I think BCCI too.



Explaning this in the context of why a sole focus on Bush Inc. is not the right way to go about it (all though it does involve them) may also prove useful and also make them understand why this has been such a difficult task to begin with.

See John Kerry above. See Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter above.

Brzezinski is considered a Democrat, even tho he's a switch hitter.

Compared to the Neocons, they don't like him because they think he's TOO CAUTIOUS. They are BOTH playing the same game, but Neocons are just more reckless, and it invites disasters and embarrassments and some *public awareness".

But BOTH approved of Sept 11. They said so, in so many words. If Gore had won, we MIGHT have a draft and 500,000 troops in Iraq, 1 million more rotating. Brz said go for total overwhelming lockdown on Iraq, or don't go at all. But Brz wanted the safer option of bases in Afghanistan and continued decimation of Iraqis by "containment" i.e. genocidal sanctions. Slower imperialism, less messy.




Just a suggestion.

Again, thanks for the input.

-DL-



I'd bring my Laptop or notes if I was doing a lecture (which no activist seems to want). I planned to go into the history of American Labor-strife and the rise of Fascism as a starting point of discussing HISTORY (after the other stuff), vs. Jones starting with Nero in Rome and the power-hungry Illuminati.

Frankly, I think most of the "longer addendum stuff" is unnecessary for a verbal exchange. I've struggled to get it in a nutshell, especially because of time limits on Talk Radio which vary from 4 min (WNIR) to <1 min on most. And MTV attention spans of most people.

As I said, I'd get Northwoods etc. in there at some point if I could. Icing, but good icing.

Wall Street may have funded communism, but they wanted CONTROLLED communism, not Castro, not Chavez. They were willing to murder Americans to destroy Castro, but JFK wouldn't let 'em.
And apparently one faction of the ruling class was very happy with the Soviets. Maybe both factions. After all, they only threatened Russia. They attacked peasants everywhere. The WAR on WORKING PEOPLE and the poor.

It's not rocket science, it's SLAVERY, behind rhetoric, high-tech, and puppet dictatorships.


What gets in depends on how long you have to converse and keep people's attention. I like to cover #1 in about 30 seconds or so, but if someone wants to argue that I can go into details to prove I know my facts.

I mean, I can stroke it if need be, make THEM tell ME how funding Al-Qaeda for 20-25 years makes sense. Do they AGREE with Hatch and Brzezinski that it was a GREAT idea? quote: "You want me to REGRET that?"

If they were still a covert CIA Op in 1997 or 99, after all those terrorist attacks, when do you suppose they stopped being a CIA Op? The day Bush was inaugurated?

As well as, "Why is no one talking about that on TV? Isn't it interesting that US National Security admittedly created Al-Qaeda?"

You can have some fun with that.

I think I can do all 4 in about a minute or two .. or longer. Lately, I do 1 and squeeze in 2. Then I do 4. I say "Al-Qaeda IS an Intelligence an OP." Then 3 very simply if time allows, for icing on the cake.

If they're military, HOW do you explain how they couldn't even defend the Pentagon in a friggin hour and a half?? Did Osama put VALIUM in the coffeepots??

Normal People are usually stunned, shaking their heads, neocons desperately want to rebut but they can't. They can TRY to be skeptical like you're loony, but there's nowhere to go.
It's NOT an opinion.

Or Neocon Military try to change the topic to rebutting "No Plane Hit the Pentagon", which I immediately tell them is the looniest idea I ever heard (if they're testy) or at least that it's very sketchy. But the fact that the alleged pilot was too goofy to be a stunt pilot no matter how easy you make the flight or how skillful you make Hani Hanjour, no friggin way. Prof Pilots may disagree whether it COULD be done, but whether HE could have done it is stupid. He could barely drive a Honda to the store.


How's that??????????????????


Last edited by dilbert_g on Sat Sep 02, 2006 4:40 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
aspectus



Joined: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 164

PostPosted: Sat Sep 02, 2006 3:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

here's my quick feeble attempt

10- internal papers like northwoods etc
9- history of false flag terror
8- the blame put on CIA assets
7- the false war that followed
6- mysterious building 7 collapse, and what was inside that building
5- thermate like spew just before collapse
6- conspicuous suicides ater the fact
5- resignations of top officials after the fact
4- pre-event insider trading
3- immediate disposal of evidence
2- lack of defense against the second strike
1- duh snap the fuck out of it dude, watch the buildings fall

_________________
The larger a society or confederacy, the greater the amalgamation of collective factors - which is typical of every large organization - the more aggravated the moral and spiritual degeneration of the individual. - Carl Gustav Jung
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
macauleym



Joined: 27 Jan 2006
Posts: 124

PostPosted: Sat Sep 02, 2006 6:21 pm    Post subject: The importance of history to undermining the 9/11 myth Reply with quote

After reading DL's and Gary's posts in this thread, I was going to post a reply here, but it turned out rather long and isn't specifically about "top reasons why 9/11 was an inside job", so I posted it as a new topic in 9/11 3i Discussion:

The importance of history to undermining the 9/11 myth

Follow the link if you're interested (it's tangentially related to this thread); otherwise, carry on.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dilbert_g
Guest





PostPosted: Sun Sep 03, 2006 4:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I realized I took the "Top Ten" and changed it, so I APOLOGIZE TO ALL if that was too arrogant of me.

What I mean is, I changed the topic from "Top Ten" to "How to make a case verbally", which I happen to like, but I did not ACK changing the topic somewhat.

(I hope my later 'reduction' to Top Four is more in line with brevity.)
Back to top
Squinn



Joined: 19 Feb 2006
Posts: 19

PostPosted: Tue Sep 05, 2006 5:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Those who benefited from 9/11:

1. Weapons Industry

2. Oil Industry
a. Afghanistan pipeline
b. Iraqi oil wells

3. George W. Bush
a. Family
b. Friends
c. Business partners

4. Insider Traders

5. Insurance Beneficiaries
a. Larry Silverstein
b. Westfield America, Inc.
c. Lloyd Goldman

6. US Government

7. United Nations

8. Israel

9. Media

10. Illuminati
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Continuity



Joined: 16 Jul 2006
Posts: 1716
Location: Municipal Flat Block 18A, Linear North

PostPosted: Tue Sep 05, 2006 6:30 pm    Post subject: Lloyd Goldman Reply with quote

Wasn't familiar with 5(c) Lloyd Goldman - so I Googled him - 1st thing that pops up:
Quote:
A CHRONOLOGY OF STRUGGLE AT 111

Nancy Wells works in her unheated apartment/artist's studio while the walls of adjacent vacant studios are coming down around her, and the hallways fill with plaster dust and exposed electrical wiring from the unsupervised and reckless demolition of her occupied building. Disabled with a broken arm, she is one of the many determined tenant artists resisting the efforts of Jersey City's richest slumlord, New York billionaire real estate speculator Lloyd Goldman, (co-owner of the World Trade Center) to drive them from their studios and demolish the arts center at 111 First Street. They've had to contend with an apparently orchestrated campaign of intimidation and harrassment, including arson, car bashings, and being deprived of heat since Nov.7, 2004.

BRIEF ON 111 FIRST STREET ART BUILDING

The 111 First Street Arts Center is located near the waterfront in Jersey City, just across the Hudson River from the World Trade Center site. Built in the 1860's, the famous P. Lorillard Tobacco Company, once one of the largest of our nation's tobacco manufacturers, is now the 111 Building, a unique brick architectural treasure.

The 111 First Street Building is owned by NY/NJ property owner Lloyd Goldman. Investors Lloyd Goldman and Joseph Cayre joined with developer Larry Silverstein in buying the World Trade Center 99-year lease for $3.2 billion.

Since 1988, the 111 building has been a mixed-use complex. While the majority of tenants are visual artists, the building's roster also includes musicians, composers, filmmakers, crafts people, custom cabinetmakers, art galleries, art-furniture makers, graphic artists, stained-glass artists and artisans, actors, yoga and therapeutic massage studios. This magnetic cultural community is the product of almost two decades of effort by hundreds of professional artists and small-business owners, whose contribution toward the creation of a positive humanistic and human scale identity for Jersey City is now seriously in jeopardy. It's loss would be a tragedy. The tenants at 111 First Street are struggling to make sure that does not happen.
......


Sounds like a *nice* bloke, hunh?

from: http://www.111first.com/news/whatsnew_detail.cfm?id_news=67074995

_________________
The rule for today.
Touch my tail, I shred your hand.
New rule tomorrow.

Cat Haiku
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
dilbert_g
Guest





PostPosted: Wed Sep 06, 2006 4:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'd send him a nasty letter too, but my time is not unlimited.

I'll put it on my list.

Naturally jerks like him would destroy an art community to raze it and build an empty office building.
Back to top
destro
Guest





PostPosted: Wed Sep 06, 2006 8:20 am    Post subject: firefighters or the government Reply with quote

aspectus wrote:
here's my quick feeble attempt

10- internal papers like northwoods etc
9- history of false flag terror
8- the blame put on CIA assets
7- the false war that followed
6- mysterious building 7 collapse, and what was inside that building
5- thermate like spew just before collapse
6- conspicuous suicides ater the fact
5- resignations of top officials after the fact
4- pre-event insider trading
3- immediate disposal of evidence
2- lack of defense against the second strike
1- duh snap the fuck out of it dude, watch the buildings fall


aspectus you forgot to mention the LIES of the EPA and the coverup of the death of nearly a thousand workers down at ground zero. plus all the dogs that died. Plus on a personal note I've always said this, my own bent on 9.11 is; look 343 firefighters died that day, firefighters have instincts about, 'is it safe to enter this burning building?' I just don't believe that every fireman who reported to the scene that day had the wrong instinct, those who went in and those who failed their brothers, NO i dont believe THAT, and that's my beef on 9.11. Maybe its because I had a grandfather that was a volunteer firefighter and im irrational on this point, but if guts count for anything that's my gut.
Your thoughts?
Back to top
dilbert_g
Guest





PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2006 1:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
LIES of the EPA and the coverup of the death of nearly a thousand workers down at ground zero.
plus all the dogs that died.

Plus on a personal note I've always said this, my own bent on 9.11 is; look 343 firefighters died that day, firefighters have instincts about, 'is it safe to enter this burning building?' I just don't believe that every fireman who reported to the scene that day had the wrong instinct, those who went in and those who failed their brothers, NO i dont believe THAT, and that's my beef on 9.11.


Example of a moron post from a seemingly intelligent guy = CIA Fake.

EPA failures/ordering workers back is corruption (or errors), not complicity. It's terrible, but secondary. It does prove that the govt DOES NOT GIVE A SHIT ABOUT PEOPLE, but there is much more positive evidence to show that --- like Gulf of Tonkin --- or like Sept 11 itself.

I saw 911Truth on TV with Scarborough clip. When asked for hard hitting stuff in a brief time, spokeman grinned like a moron and though he did mention ONE fairly-decent point, he switched to complaining about the failure of the Fire Dept radios. Typical.

One is mass murder. The other is incompetence in procurement and budgeting. Morons like that 911Truth spokesperson and Loose Change and Destro regularly mix up strong proof with speculative side issues.

Dogs. Cities like NYC kill probably 1000 dogs a day. OH, that the dogs may have died of RADIATION or other poison. Dust, respiratory collapse. Well, that's SPECULATION. Has anyone had the dogs autopsied?

And though it may be very sad about DOGS, the first area of focus must be the 3000 PEOPLE. Dogs are trained to work, and used in situations where risk to humans could be borne by an animal. Call PETA.

CIA Fakes and morons waste time trying to argue about off-focus side issues and minutae. This causes normal people who are "agnostic" or skeptical about conspiracy theories to roll their eyes.

Firefighters know their job is RISKING THEIR LIVES to save lives. Were they to stay home due to danger? Tapes show they were inside the building and had the fires subdued in the South Tower, when it exploded. That's not on them. If that tape is accurate, they were murdered/sacrificed on the altar of the pre-planned G.W.o.T.

Quote:
Life is only a dream and we are the imagination of ourselves.--- Bill Hicks


I like Bill Hicks' work. He destested morons and he destested the government as a criminal murder machine.
Back to top
Fintan
Site Admin


Joined: 18 Jan 2006
Posts: 8437

PostPosted: Thu Sep 07, 2006 9:25 pm    Post subject: Great Discussion Reply with quote

Well, I suppose that's it a credit to all on the BFN Forum that such an
intelligent discussion of the 9/11 Top Ten Reasons could cover so much
from so many angles in only a couple of forum pages. Wow. Goldmine.

Well worth reading again. Don't miss mccauleym's offtopic. Lots to think
about. I will kick in some opinions and we can draw towards some
conclusions over the weekend.

Thanks again.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
atm



Joined: 16 Apr 2006
Posts: 3861

PostPosted: Sat Sep 09, 2006 8:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Squinn

that was looking like a really good list until you mentioned...

atm
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Next Level Forum Index -> 9/11 HardCorps Specifics Investigation All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next
Page 2 of 10

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

Theme xand created by spleen.