Official Statement Confirms Detonations on 9/11

#255
#255
Volunteer_Kirby said:
I'm not letting it go just yet. I haven't even begun to discuss 1. the facts with anyone on this forum. They will all be brought up in my 2. next thread, then 3. I'll let you all decide if I'm a "kook".
Click to expand...

1. The "Facts" are not your facts instead they are facts you are presenting from someone else's work which you may or may not competely understand. You have done exactly ZERO of your own research. Have you been to Ground Zero?? Did you go to the Pentagon 2 days after it happened?? Do you have a degree in Industrial Engineering?? Have you interviewed 100's of people to understand more of what happened that day?? You are not an expert on this subject VK. You aren't even a contributor to the research that has taken place. All you are is a user of the information to try and accomplish your own goals and not the goals of what the research is trying to do. Like I said believe what you want, but don't try and pass your Google searching as knowing about what really happened.

2. There will be no next thread because it will be merged into this thread.

3. No one thinks you are a kook for believing what you feel is in your best interest. All we want you to understand is the fact we DON'T believe what you do. So stop trying to convince the people in this forum. I mean really, do you believe you might convince some lost soul this maybe true?? Even if you do convince someone have you figured out how your going to lead them to the promise land?? If we want to research this topic, it will be done on our own time. I have already watched enough documentaries and read enough print that supports both sides that I know what the truth is in my eyes. That truth to me is, a bunch of Muslims whose religion wants World Domination, wanted to cripple not only us but show the world what they are capable of and the horrors they can produce.
 
#256
#256
I could help but laugh while reading your post, g8ter. You had me rolling when you mentioned 'Ground Zero', the Pentagon, Industrial Engineering, and 100's of interviews.

Ever wonder why they call it 'Ground Zero'? Here's the definition. - 1) The point on the surface of the earth or water directly below, directly above, or at which an atomic or hydrogen bomb explodes. :pardon:

Speaking of 'World Domination', don't you ever wonder what ol' Bush means when he says, "New World Order"? Too bad there is nothing 'new' about this. :shhh:
 
#259
#259
Volunteer_Kirby said:
I could help but laugh while reading your post, g8ter. You had me rolling when you mentioned 'Ground Zero', the Pentagon, Industrial Engineering, and 100's of interviews.

Ever wonder why they call it 'Ground Zero'? Here's the definition. - 1) The point on the surface of the earth or water directly below, directly above, or at which an atomic or hydrogen bomb explodes. :pardon:

Speaking of 'World Domination', don't you ever wonder what ol' Bush means when he says, "New World Order"? Too bad there is nothing 'new' about this. :shhh:
Click to expand...

Originally it was called the League of Nations then the United Nations.

Same old crap just repeating itself.

You will learn......


:yes:
 
#260
#260
your wrong gh, I think he's a kook and for that matter I cant believe this has gone on for 13 pages. I wont attack you on the boards like some will Kirby, but I'll say this. Every post that has pointed out to you that you have done little more than : GOOGLE, search, edit, copy, paste, post and then add...'these are my ideas and by the way the sky is falling" are dead on. In college, the big kids learn that is plagerisim. Now, as far as you believing in your conspiracy theory and warped veiw of how the rock spins counter clockwise and all (and yes, thats saracasm, but I believe it's just about that ridiculous) thats great for you. The world needs people to ask questions. The world needs people to go to work, and since the early 60's the world needs extemist from the left to think that EVERYTHING must be the presidents fault and that things happen because the government is out to "get us". Its cool, but post your propaganda and move on. Dont think you are persuading anyone to get in that sinking ship with you. When you get blasted on here, expect it. When people climb on top of the pile, expect, and above all, speak ill of my freaking president again....expect it. Its gonna happen and not many will stand for it. If that doesnt suit you, I hear Cuba is nice in the summer time. Deuces radical left boy.

:mad:
 
#262
#262
I just received word from President Cheney that Kirby's activities are being monitored. Donald Rumsfeld and John Ashcroft are opening a new "re-education camp" near Area 51 specifically for people like Kirby who refuse to accept the administration's version of the truth. It's unconfirmed whether or not Lindy England will be one of the guards.
 
#263
#263
Volunteer_Kirby said:
I'm not letting it go just yet. I haven't even begun to discuss the facts with anyone on this forum. They will all be brought up in my next thread, then I'll let you all decide if I'm a "kook".
Click to expand...

I've never called you a kook. It just seems like a pointless thing to do.
 
#264
#264
His main problem is believing that these things are new and groundbreaking for this generation.

These things have been around forever but we will limit it to the United States.

We could go around and around about government coverups from the beginning of the country.

Also, NWO........ yeah...League of Nations.....United Nations.........European Union........whatever you want to call it.
 
#265
#265
these individuals - consider their experience and credentials - are more than qualified to question the government's account of 9/11 and the 9/11 Commission's findings. 9/11 "conspiracy theorists" are just a bunch of wash-outs and nutjobs? no.

patriots question 9/11
 
#266
#266
All Vol! said:
these individuals - consider their experience and credentials - are more than qualified to question the government's account of 9/11 and the 9/11 Commission's findings. 9/11 "conspiracy theorists" are just a bunch of wash-outs and nutjobs? no.

patriots question 9/11
Click to expand...

There are equal or greater #'s on the side of the "official story". Look at Clark's statement that starts the whole thing out - "we never finished the investigation of 9/11" - hardly a statement indicating he doesn't believe it was AQ or that planes brought down the towers.

Here's one example of why this doesn't change my mind:

Lt. Col. Karen U. Kwiatkowski, PhD, U.S. Air Force (ret) – Former Political-Military Affairs Officer in the Office of the Secretary of Defense. Also served on the staff of the Director of the National Security Agency. 20-year Air Force career. Member adjunct faculty, Political Science Department, James Madison University. Instructor, University of Maryland University College and American Public University System. Author of African Crisis Response Initiative: Past Present and Future (2000) and Expeditionary Air Operations in Africa: Challenges and Solutions (2001).
  • Contributor to 9/11 and American Empire: Intellectuals Speak Out 8/23/06: Account of Lt. Col. Karen Kwiatkowski, Pentagon employee and eyewitness to the events at the Pentagon on 9/11. "I believe the Commission failed to deeply examine the topic at hand, failed to apply scientific rigor to its assessment of events leading up to and including 9/11, failed to produce a believable and unbiased summary of what happened, failed to fully examine why it happened, and even failed to include a set of unanswered questions for future research. ...

    It is as a scientist that I have the most trouble with the official government conspiracy theory, mainly because it does not satisfy the rules of probability or physics. The collapses of the World Trade Center buildings clearly violate the laws of probability and physics. ...

    There was a dearth of visible debris on the relatively unmarked [Pentagon] lawn, where I stood only minutes after the impact. Beyond this strange absence of airliner debris, there was no sign of the kind of damage to the Pentagon structure one would expect from the impact of a large airliner. This visible evidence or lack thereof may also have been apparent to the secretary of defense [Donald Rumsfeld], who in an unfortunate slip of the tongue referred to the aircraft that slammed into the Pentagon as a "missile". ...

    I saw nothing of significance at the point of impact - no airplane metal or cargo debris was blowing on the lawn in front of the damaged building as smoke billowed from within the Pentagon. ... all of us staring at the Pentagon that morning were indeed looking for such debris, but what we expected to see was not evident.

    The same is true with regard to the kind of damage we expected. ... But I did not see this kind of damage. Rather, the facade had a rather small hole, no larger than 20 feet in diameter. Although this facade later collapsed, it remained standing for 30 or 40 minutes, with the roof line remaining relatively straight.

    The scene, in short, was not what I would have expected from a strike by a large jetliner. It was, however, exactly what one would expect if a missile had struck the Pentagon. ...

    More information is certainly needed regarding the events of 9/11 and the events leading up to that terrible day."
Click to expand...

An expert in political science suddenly becomes an expert in physics? I don't doubt her sincerity but question her being used as "evidence" that a plane did not hit the pentagon just because it didn't look that way to her or that she expected to see more debris.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top