Oh Goodie! ... More on 911 (inside job) :)

GrowRebel · Aug 9, 2009

CrackerJax said:
15 questions 9/11 truthers now need to answer

Just reading this crap you can tell it's bullshit, especially the questions ... they either have nothing to do with 911 or it's a question that would have to be address to the people that did it.
But one good video that they think helps their case, but it only shows they are full of shit. It's an excellent debate between Richard Gage ... and a debunker Mark Roberts ... he has information ... but you can tell he's blowing it out his ass. It's in two parts almost an hour total, but it goes by real fast. I highly recommend it. :hump:

Hardfire ARCHITECTS & ENGINEERS FOR 9/11 TRUTH / GAGE / ROBERTS / 1ST

Hardfire ARCHITECTS & ENGINEERS FOR 9/11 TRUTH / GAGE / ROBERTS / 2ND

Keenly · Aug 10, 2009

what... huh? said:

clap for that all you want, but one day there wont be anyone left to stand up to the big brother

whats going to happen then?

what... huh? · Aug 10, 2009

GrowRebel said:
What the fuck are you talking about? This is at the PENTAGON not the WTC. Did you even bother to look at the video enough to comprehend? If you had watch longer than 30 sec. you would have know that.

My god you are slow... the first clip is at WTC in new york. The camera pans off of the guy who "saw there was no second plane" to the new york city streetscape full of ash and people walking around dazed. There are no street corridors next to the pentagon. The second clip is about the pentagon. The third clip is about the flight in Pennsylvania.
Watch your own video.

GrowRebel said:
the video give further evidence to the same issue ... you don't like it too bad.

There were plenty of experience pilots in the videos that explained things just fine. I also made sure I gave their rank and names. I don't need your wife.

Where? What pilots?

GrowRebel said:
Yeah and you can actually watch the videos I provide you.

Then I wish you fucking would... because that first clip is IN NEW YORK... jackass.

GrowRebel said:
Do they now? Link source? I like to see it.

I PROVIDED THE FUCKING LINK YOU LOON!!!
http://www.ntsb.gov/info/AAL77_fdr.pdf

GrowRebel said:
Why were there no plane parts at the pentagon lawn until later on? You still haven't answered the question about what the pilot said. What about that?

According to YOU they weren't there till later on. Obviously they were there. I have no idea what you are talking about... what pilot... what did he say? You are ambiguous as hell.

GrowRebel said:
Yeah by the same folks that are lying to us about this whole thing ... and we are expected to believe them?

Seriously? Are you mildly retarded? I didn't ask you to believe it. Your guy says NOBODY IN THE INVESTIGATION EVEN CLAIMS TO POSITIVELY IDENTIFIES 77. NTSB, who is part of the investigation, claims to positively identify 77. Do you understand? Do you get it? You understand that NTSB's claim does not have to be accurate in order for your guys claim to be wrong?

GrowRebel said:
Has nothing to do with the Pentagon ... nothing landed there.

You are. You are mildly retarded. I can't argue with you.

GrowRebel said:
My belief? Is it my "belief" that witness didn't have to testify under oath? No ... it's a fact ... Is it my belief that the commission disregarded evidence ... no ... it's a fact ... it my belief that the pentagon confiscated 86 cameras around the site ... no it's a fact. It's it my belief that a 757 can't do the maneuvers it did on 911 at the pentagon ... no ... it's a fact stated by several experience pilots. You just like to claim there are my belief so your bogus argument might appear valid. They don't

It is not a fact, even if it were stated by an experienced pilot... it would be their opinion... which is opposed by almost every other pilot on the planet. I, for instance, am an experienced pilot, and I disagree. That is my opinion. See how it works?

GrowRebel said:
You mean that part you didn't provide a link to? Mind if I take a look? Don't think you will mind posting a link since it will prove your point.

http://www.ntsb.gov/info/AAL77_fdr.pdf

GrowRebel said:
No not really ... from what I see this is only for radio failure ... not terrorist attacks. So you haven't. And it doesn't really say what year it was put out either ... I would like to know that too.

"If any ONE of those THREE things goes wrong, they intercept." Are you really this dense?

GrowRebel said:
Sorry don't buy that ... he wasn't the only one ... and I'm not going to take someone with no experience over several people with experience.

You provided one person who claims to have experience. Not several people... and I just showed you the FAA proceedures on NORDO.

You are too stupid to argue with. It isn't worth my time. You cannot understand simple concepts. You are a dishonest retarded time vampire. I am going back to ignoring you.

what... huh? · Aug 10, 2009

Keenly said:
clap for that all you want, but one day there wont be anyone left to stand up to the big brother

whats going to happen then?

I am not arguing for big brother.

I gave you the plausible conspiracy... which I believe. Go back to p105.

GrowRebel · Aug 10, 2009

what... huh? said:
My god you are slow... the first clip is at WTC in new york. The camera pans off of the guy who "saw there was no second plane" to the new york city streetscape full of ash and people walking around dazed. There are no street corridors next to the pentagon. The second clip is about the pentagon. The third clip is about the flight in Pennsylvania.
Watch your own video.

You are the one that is slow ... I said I wasn't talking about NY ... I was talking about the pentagon ... and in that clip that you claim to have watched ... when at the pentagon the reporter states he sees NO EVIDENCE OF A PLANE CRASH. What part of that your delusional mind doesn't get?

what... huh? said:
Where? What pilots?

Right fucking here ... part 6 post 1072
This part talks about NORAD ... a pilot was order to fly out and check out the damage ... very last part of 5 beginning of 6.
:10 statement made by another "loony" can't make out the whole name looks like a Lt. Col Karen something.
"No airplane metal or cargo debris was blowing on the lawn what we expected to see was not evident."but I guess they are loonies too.

what... huh? said:
Then I wish you fucking would... because that first clip is IN NEW YORK... jackass.

I wasn't talking about that part dumbass.

what... huh? said:
I PROVIDED THE FUCKING LINK YOU LOON!!!
http://www.ntsb.gov/info/AAL77_fdr.pdf

Oh yeah ... my bad ... I did see this ... but it still doesn't prove there was a plane at the pentagon. The government has lie about a lot of things ... this could be another one.

what... huh? said:
According to YOU they weren't there till later on. Obviously they were there. I have no idea what you are talking about... what pilot... what did he say? You are ambiguous as hell.

No ... according to the video on page 107 post 1062 part 5 ... I posted parts started showing up later according to the video ... and you still can't explain why those reporters at the pentagon site in the video didn't see any plane debris nor did the pilot.

what... huh? said:
Seriously? Are you mildly retarded?

Are you?

what... huh? said:
I didn't ask you to believe it. Your guy says NOBODY IN THE INVESTIGATION EVEN CLAIMS TO POSITIVELY IDENTIFIES 77. NTSB, who is part of the investigation, claims to positively identify 77.

They didn't they merely claim that it was ... if they really wanted to positively identify 77 they would have release those videos from those 86 cameras. The would have been up front and open about everything but the were not. So the government is merely stating it without giving any proof of it what so ever ... we are expected to take them at their word ... and I don't, because there are far too many unanswered questions, that they refuse to address.

what... huh? said:
Do you understand? Do you get it? You understand that NTSB's claim does not have to be accurate in order for your guys claim to be wrong?

Why not?

what... huh? said:
You are. You are mildly retarded. I can't argue with you.

That's because you really have nothing to argue with ... no matter what you present there are still plenty of unanswered questions.

what... huh? said:
It is not a fact, even if it were stated by an experienced pilot...

Not one several ... their names are listed in the posts.

what... huh? said:
it would be their opinion... which is opposed by almost every other pilot on the planet.

Oh really ... well then it should be no trouble for you to get their names and statements now would it.

what... huh? said:
I, for instance, am an experienced pilot, and I disagree. That is my opinion. See how it works?

Yeah ... right ... suddenly you are an experience pilot ... bwaa ha ha ha.

what... huh? said:
"If any ONE of those THREE things goes wrong, they intercept." Are you really this dense?

Yet all three took place and no planes ... why? You still haven't proven that fighters can't intercept after a certain speed ... You still haven't posted what the protocol for military fighters were on that day, and you still haven't explain why the pentagon didn't fire on the "plane" with their defense system.

what... huh? said:
You provided one person who claims to have experience. Not several people... and I just showed you the FAA proceedures on NORDO.

I provided the page and post number where I have the pilots, if you are too stupid to read it ... that's not my problem. I don't see any date with those procedures or anything that refers to a hijacking or attack. So no cookies for you.

what... huh? said:
You are too stupid to argue with.

No I'm too smart to let you get away with bullshit that has nothing to do with 911 ... It's not my problem that you can't handle it.

what... huh? said:
It isn't worth my time. You cannot understand simple concepts.

You are the one that can't understand simple concepts. 911 was an inside job. Case close. You are never a waste of my time ... I like making you and other like you look stupid. :mrgreen:

what... huh? said:
You are a dishonest retarded time vampire. I am going back to ignoring you.

And you are a person that gets pissed when you can't win an argument. Poor baby. :eyesmoke:

hanimmal · Aug 10, 2009

What I think.

I think Sibel Edmonds is the key to the real answer... but I don't think she knows it.

I think the government sponsored terrorism. I think we used Al-Qaeda to do dirty things. I think 9/11 was a punch in the nose. The hand that feeds was bitten.

Al-Queda works pretty much like a franchise. I think we were able to effect black ops terrorism by proxy of Al-Qaeda. I think we were naive enough to believe we could manipulate them to do our bidding, and the open hatred for the US served as a perfect cover to shield rebuke from China and Russia for what we were having them do. I do not believe we were complicit in the attack against us... I believe it was a platform for Al-Qaeda to launch to superstardom, get worldwide legitimacy, and expand the organization.

Clinton let UBL go 3 times. There had to be a reason.

I believe we had ties... I believe we were playing with fire... and got burned.

As I said from the beginning... I am not a yes man. I just don't see our government being competent enough to pull something that big, that detailed off. We can't keep a secret to save our lives. Literally.

That does seem perfectly logical to me.

what... huh? · Aug 10, 2009

what... huh? said:
You think it is more likely that they used three planes and one missile... because... ahhh fuck becauses... It is more likely to you that they used three planes and one missile and that is what they are hiding? Why use an ICBM on a sunny day in front of hundreds of witnesses? The pentagon is a busy place. I295 loops around the front side, 1 block from an international airport... it is a stupid idea.

Or is it more likely that they are hiding their associations with a terrorist network out doing our dirty work against the 2nd and 3rd most powerful nations on earth, and got double crossed? What are the chances that the perfect cover of a common enemy does more good for us? What if...

What if we DO negotiate with terrorists?

What if we provide them intel, and equipment, and western thinking? I firmly believe a guy in a cave came up with smashing airplanes into buildings. It is pretty fucking basic. Do I think that a guy came up with the idea of guerrilla franchise? That is western thinking. Run your own cell. Recruit angry disenfranchised youth. Give them purpose... be your own boss, call the shots... free agency... THAT is America baby. What if we used all that psyop shit to try and manipulate these franchise cells into doing our bidding, while making them believe they were doing it for their own ideology? We feed you detailed info on who to hit, when and how... we provide you cover, cross chatter, and materials and training... and you don't hit us. We buy, you fly.

Of course we couldn't really let them spread like wildfire... we would have to contain them. Maybe they caught us... containing. Maybe that is why we were drilling these scenarios... because we knew SOMETHING was coming. We were drilling all kinds of shit that month... chem, bio, hijacking... we had a lot of credible threats... and STILL couldn't stop it. That is why you suppress the info... because we knew it was coming and couldn't do shit about it. It shows how weak an open society really is. We freak out, and bad guys gain morale. For us it had to be a total shock... no other way to handle it.

Enough conjecture. My point is... this seem much more believable to me. That is how our government works in the dark places... we do nasty, through others, far away from cameras. We use small groups who know as little as possible, and aren't likely to piece it together. We don't do "the big show". We work in shadows, in small numbers, in foreign places.

More of my thoughts on the subject.

hanimmal · Aug 10, 2009

Yeah I agree with all of that. That type of thing has always been going on, isn't that just an extension of Black ops?

I am not very learned on military, so can only really look at things and see if the pieces fit.

But I do see where someone might take this, by connecting this with releasing of the two reporters that were stupid (too cocky) enough to go into N Korea as negotiating. But dealing with off book terrorist activities, is not the same as talking with people to get a peaceful solution.

I think that we need to evolve past this war culture that we have.

I am a pacifist, but I practice brazilian jiu-jitsu, mau thai, and was a collegate wrestler my first go at school. I am all for being prepared for any situation, but it doesn't mean that I need to pick a fight everytime I am at a bar if someone looks at me wrong, or even if they advance on me.

But everything that you have said seems perfectly reasonable. And your insight as a pilot gives you a much better look at how things actually work.

This is the difference between KNOWING because you have been in their shoes and done the real research , and KNOWING because you have seen a couple youtube clips and read some blogs.

what... huh? · Aug 10, 2009

I learned to fly due to circumstance. My ex and I were together since we were 16. I went to the school she went to flight training at. She was a certified flight instructor for almost a decade earning enough jet time to get on with the airlines. Our friends were pilots, instructors, ATC and airport admins... I have flown props, jets, helicopters... I never had any interest in flying. It was just opportunity based. 20 years with a pilot will do that.

For the record, I am a shitty pilot. (that would be WHY I was in restricted DC airspace over the whitehouse.)

But I know an awful lot. I studied with her... I quizzed her... piloting was a part of our every day lives and dominated most discussions. I don't want to come across as superpilot. I am not. But I know regs and aeronautics pat.

GrowRebel · Aug 10, 2009

hanimmal said:
That does seem perfectly logical to me.

Except for one key point ... I posted this way back on page 17 post 161 ...
http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/fakealqaeda.html?q=fakealqaeda.htmlhttp://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/fakealqaeda.html?q=fakealqaeda.html [FONT=&quot][URL="http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/fakealqaeda.html"]Fake Al Qaeda[/FONT][/url]

... and let's not forget this one ... I posted on page 103 post 1029 and page 106 post 1059
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r-hYorNi0nABBC now admits al qaeda never existedhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r-hYorNi0nA
[youtube]r-hYorNi0nA[/youtube]

hanimmal · Aug 10, 2009

I learned to fly due to circumstance. My ex and I were together since we were 16. I went to the school she went to flight training at. She was a certified flight instructor for almost a decade earning enough jet time to get on with the airlines. Our friends were pilots, instructors, ATC and airport admins... I have flown props, jets, helicopters... I never had any interest in flying. It was just opportunity based. 20 years with a pilot will do that.

For the record, I am a shitty pilot. (that would be WHY I was in restricted DC airspace over the whitehouse.)

But I know an awful lot. I studied with her... I quizzed her... piloting was a part of our every day lives and dominated most discussions. I don't want to come across as superpilot. I am not. But I know regs and aeronautics pat.

No I get it, my fiance' is a pharmacist, and I did the same when she was writing papers, studying ect. So I have some insight on the medical system and how drug administration works. But it does not mean that I am even close to her with that knowledge.

And the same with my going to school for economics. I have a very large base of information in it, but I am nowhere close to where I will be in ten years from now.

But the insight that we have is from a different place than just reading blogs, or biased books. You can sniff the bullshit a mile away, and pick out the buzzwords and know how they are manipulating things.

GrowRebel · Aug 10, 2009

hanimmal said:
This is the difference between KNOWING because you have been in their shoes and done the real research , and KNOWING because you have seen a couple youtube clips and read some blogs.

Oh really ... are you saying I have to be a pilot to know what really happen on 911, or that the pilots I cited are less valid because they are on a video clip? I've done more than read some blogs and look at a couple of youtube clips. This thread proves that. :-|

hanimmal · Aug 10, 2009

What is in a name?

This is not something that matters much to me. I don't think that we should be fighting these bullshit wars. If we want to not get attacked we should win the peoples hearts and minds by helping them out of their huts, with schooling and hospitals. Instead of blowing them up. I think that if a government is attacking you, then yes go to war. But you cannot win a war against a country due to nutjobs.

The 'face' that we placed on terrorism is a joke. These people are not super humans.

Oh really ... are you saying I have to be a pilot to know what really happen on 911, or that the pilots I cited are less valid because they are on a video clip? I've done more than read some blogs and look at a couple of youtube clips. This thread proves that.

No that was more about conspiracy theories in general. If you just keep looking at information that talks about this side or that side, then you would fall into that catagory.

Now if you decided to actually study and learn how to pilot without anything regarding 9/11 for or against, then formulate a decision then you would not. Try to learn the process before your put ideals into it.

The problem is people try to 'learn' with in the back of their mind always saying nope that's wrong, and never actually LEARN. That is the difference between KNOWING, and KNOWING.

Edit: and if I don't have time to actually learn what the proper way to understand what the actual information is, I will always let my decision fall on the specialists that have nothing to gain or lose from a unbiased opinion based on facts.

I will always put more faith into a scientists hands than a blogger/talking head.

what... huh? · Aug 10, 2009

Quick story...

4th of July 2000... we decided to take a plane up to watch the fireworks from the air and take some shots (sounds fun right?). We got clearance to run a holding pattern over unrestricted space in DC/VA. She was fooling with the camera etc, when I changed vectors according to my mapping/waypoint. Suddenly NEADS breaks in over the com and says "(tailsign), you are in restricted airspace deviate to vector xxxx or you will be shot down."

"copy"

She took the helm. That was the last time I was allowed to fly over DC.

Pictures turned out shit too. I will email her for them so I can post.

GrowRebel · Aug 10, 2009

hanimmal said:
What is in a name?

What do you mean?

hanimmal said:
This is not something that matters much to me.

It matter to me ... a horrible crime took place on 911 over 3000 innocent people were murder ... tens of thousands of Afghans and Iraqis have been murdered ... people are being tortured, and held indefinitely,with no charges against them, and the people responsible are walking free still murdering people. It is my duty as an American to speak out against it.

hanimmal said:
I don't think that we should be fighting these bullshit wars.

I agree ... and 911 was use to start illegal wars. That's why the truth must become generally known. Starting illegal wars based on lies and a false flag attack may not bother you, but it bugs the shit out of me and I will not sit by and do nothing.

hanimmal said:
If we want to not get attacked we should win the peoples hearts and minds by helping them out of their huts, with schooling and hospitals.

There is no money in that for the elite ... war is big business and they will continue to stage false flag attacks so they can have a perpetual war. That's why it is so important to speak out and let those assholes in Washington know they are criminals.

hanimmal said:
Instead of blowing them up. I think that if a government is attacking you, then yes go to war. But you cannot win a war against a country due to nutjobs.

What do you mean by that?

hanimmal said:
The 'face' that we placed on terrorism is a joke. These people are not super humans.

I agree with the joke part ... but what do you mean not super humans? :confused:

CrackerJax · Aug 10, 2009

jrh72582 said:
Wow - take a gander at what you wrote. You assume ALL Arabs took delight in 9/11, basically calling all Muslims terrorists and suggest that ALL Muslims worldwide have 'very very few victories', which is horribly pretentious.

So tell me, why do you think so negatively of Arabs? Are you this prejudiced in other areas of your life? Hmmmm.....

No response?

I think your response is more ILLUMINATING.....

I said, I think the Arabs believe that Al Queda pulled off 9/11 (and they most certainly did)

You (I'm assuming) carefully read that post and came back with "You assume ALL Arabs took delight in 9/11".

You are injecting things into your response that don't match up. Concentrate a bit.

GrowRebel said:
Just reading this crap you can tell it's bullshit, especially the questions ... they either have nothing to do with 911 or it's a question that would have to be address to the people that did it.
But one good video that they think helps their case, but it only shows they are full of shit. It's an excellent debate between Richard Gage ... and a debunker Mark Roberts ... he has information ... but you can tell he's blowing it out his ass. It's in two parts almost an hour total, but it goes by real fast. I highly recommend it.
Hardfire ARCHITECTS & ENGINEERS FOR 9/11 TRUTH / GAGE / ROBERTS / 1ST

Hardfire ARCHITECTS & ENGINEERS FOR 9/11 TRUTH / GAGE / ROBERTS / 2ND

This proves the point of my post. NOTICE HOW GROW REBEL QUICKLY DEFLECTS AWAY......... he doesn't have a ready made propaganda video to answer the questions.....so by his "logic", they must be garbage.....since he can't answer them and he knows everything true about 9/11. It's now his identity.... :roll:

pathetic

Grow Rebel doesn't have a premade video explaining the relevant questions.... they haven't been made yet.

He is awaiting further propaganda orders I suppose. :lol:

The questions reveals some DEEP flaws in the "truthers", who are quite unwilling to believe that Arabs can pull off a terrorist plot.

I dare say if some "right wing nut jobs" came out with a similar story about a minority group being "unable" to pull off a plot....they'd be called racist. So what does that make the "truthers" who refuse to believe that Arabs pulled off 9/11?

Heck. I'll repost the questions for you again if you wish. I'm sure you have been scrambling ever since trying to assemble a "new" truth.

This is a direct product of our failing schools folks. Lightweight interpretive skills and a copy/paste mentality.

GrowRebel · Aug 10, 2009

hanimmal said:
No that was more about conspiracy theories in general. If you just keep looking at information that talks about this side or that side, then you would fall into that catagory.

I do look at both sides ... you can see that I have both sides posted in this thread ... there is an excellent video I just posted of a debate from both sides. You can decided who is the more valid.

hanimmal said:
Now if you decided to actually study and learn how to pilot without anything regarding 9/11 for or against, then formulate a decision then you would not. Try to learn the process before your put ideals into it.

How can I disregard 911 when that is what this discussion is all about?

hanimmal said:
The problem is people try to 'learn' with in the back of their mind always saying nope that's wrong, and never actually LEARN. That is the difference between KNOWING, and KNOWING.

That's not the case with 911 ... there is far too much evidence and unanswered questions to say ... nope that's wrong.

hanimmal said:
Edit: and if I don't have time to actually learn what the proper way to understand what the actual information is, I will always let my decision fall on the specialists that have nothing to gain or lose from a unbiased opinion based on facts.

Been there done that ... this thread is full of testimonies from specialists that have nothing to gain or lose giving an unbiased opinion base on undeniable scientific facts.

hanimmal said:
I will always put more faith into a scientists hands than a blogger/talking head.

So do I ... and I've posted it too.

GrowRebel · Aug 10, 2009

CrackerJax said:
This proves the point of my post.

Grow Rebel doesn't have a premade video explaining the relevant questions.... they haven't been made yet.

Don't have to ... any anyone has to do is read it and see he is full of shit. Just like you. I see where you get your mind set from

CrackerJax said:
He is awaiting further propaganda orders I suppose.

bwaa ha ha ha ... look who's talking about propaganda! Bwaa ha ha ha ... too funny!

CrackerJax said:
The questions reveals some DEEP flaws in the "truthers", who are quite unwilling to believe that Arabs can pull off a terrorist plot.

Bullshit ...he ask questions that has nothing to do with what happen ... I can see how an idiot like you would think they do.

CrackerJax said:
I dare say if some "right wing nut jobs" came out with a similar story about a minority group being "unable" to pull off a plot....they'd be called racist. So what does that make the "truthers" who refuse to believe that Arabs pulled off 9/11?

Oh so now we are racist because we don't buy the government bullshit ... what an ass you are.

CrackerJax said:
Heck. I'll repost the questions for you again if you wish. I'm sure you have been scrambling ever since trying to assemble a "new" truth.

I've already responded to the questions ... if you don't like my answer ... to fucking bad.

CrackerJax said:
This is a direct product of our failing schools folks. Lightweight interpretive skills and a copy/paste mentality.

Said the jackass who continues to blow shit out her ass.kiss-ass

hanimmal · Aug 10, 2009

What do you mean?

I mean if these groups of people that blow up the embassies, or twin towers, or the uss (ship no clue the name right now) are what they are, does what they are called really matter?

It matter to me ... a horrible crime took place on 911 over 3000 innocent people were murder ... tens of thousands of Afghans and Iraqis have been murdered ... people are being tortured, and held indefinitely,with no charges against them, and the people responsible are walking free still murdering people. It is my duty as an American to speak out against it.

I mean what we call them doesn't matter to me. I have no problem with thinking that it is a way to drive people in america ("Us") against a "Them". So the rest of what you said is out of context. I have big issues with everything that is being done in the name of getting "Them".

I agree ... and 911 was use to start illegal wars. That's why the truth must become generally known. Starting illegal wars based on lies and a false flag attack may not bother you, but it bugs the shit out of me and I will not sit by and do nothing.

Again I agree here, but if you meant that the truth is the conspiracy that the government planned 9/11 then you will lose me. I have not read much throughout this thread, but that seems to be what a lot are implying. I will follow What... Huhs logic on this one since he is using knowledge that seems that it is firsthand.

There is no money in that for the elite ... war is big business and they will continue to stage false flag attacks so they can have a perpetual war. That's why it is so important to speak out and let those assholes in Washington know they are criminals.

Again we agree. These constant wars are going to get more future Americans killed, and not just by people over there. I have seen a lot of hate generated towards middle eastern people over here by people that consider themselves "True Americans".

What do you mean by that?

I mean that we cannot invade a country and kill a million people based on the actions of a few people that did a terrorist attack (even worse is invading a country and blaming it on people that are not even living there). We need to work with those governments and get the actual people that did this, and not invade a country based off of it.

The world was united with us after 9/11, we alienated them with our actions.

I agree with the joke part ... but what do you mean not super humans?

That they are not Dr. Evil sitting in the middle of a volcano with unlimited intel and funds, and super evil fish with lasers.

If we cut off the people (The populations of these countries) hating us by improving their quality of life and helping them to understand the free market and how it can help them out, they will not be as willing to house the criminals. But instead we keep them in fear and they are not trusting anyone.

Quick story...

4th of July 2000... we decided to take a plane up to watch the fireworks from the air and take some shots (sounds fun right?). We got clearance to run a holding pattern over unrestricted space in DC/VA. She was fooling with the camera etc, when I changed vectors according to my mapping/waypoint. Suddenly NEADS breaks in over the com and says "(tailsign), you are in restricted airspace deviate to vector xxxx or you will be shot down."

"copy"

She took the helm. That was the last time I was allowed to fly over DC.

Pictures turned out shit too. I will email her for them so I can post.

That is a hilarious story.

CrackerJax · Aug 10, 2009

HAHAHA!!! Can't answer the questions I take it??? Thought so!!!

This concludes the BS broadcast folks........ without being able to answer ALL of the 15 questions to satisfaction, any one of them makes the 9/11 conspiracy fall apart.

It's only for the mediocre of mind. I will leave you to that mediocrity Grow Rebel, since you cannot prove your case.

You look like a fundamentalist Christian.... You really really do!

Oh Goodie! ... More on 911 (inside job) :)

Well-Known Member

Keenly

Guest

Active Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member