Liverpool FC Forum

[LFC2007]

1. Not supported by the vast majority? Whats that got to do with anything? You then mention the "o" word... so because its an "official source" that makes it unquestionable?

You then again mention credibility... Why? Whats not credible about asking questions and suggesting other answers than the ones you are given by the media? How about, maybe, just maybe these people are in area's where some of them have actually seen things that make you want to question something. Does that not occur to you? Does it not occur they become suspicious or they have an "agenda" (if they do) because they may well have seen something to make them have this agenda.

Having read the BBC's report about WTC7 collapsing, do you honestly believe its was purely coincidence and no questions should be asked on how the building was reported collapsed a full 23 minutes before it did, then five minutes before the building actually did collapse, they "lost the transmission" think how often that happens on TV... VERY RARE... then, to top it off, the video's are missing?

And no questions should be asked because the official BBC statement says it was a coincidence and a up?

Please.

2. Prove the evidence is false. Its false in your opinion. No fact, no "official statements" to back it up. You can't be 100% certain the evidence is false, which is why its silly to not only dismiss it, but call others names when they bring it into the arguement.

3. The official review? What exactly is an official review? A person's opinion as to what happened is what. Whether qualified or not, its still opinion. And as I've already said, and will say again, if something is "official" does that mean its not to be questioned?

4. Again, like I said but you're unable to comprehend... Does that make it impossible, unfeasable or whatever other word you want to throw in there? No it doesn't. You're basing you're opinion on the fact something like this "may not" have happened before in this particular country. As I've said, first time for everything. Its not my belief there is a motive, I'm not sure what I believe on the matter. My issue is with the ignorance you dismiss other peoples views. Especially people you don't know, who could well have actually been there.

5. Keep name calling, its all you've got because you had your "answers" completely ripped to shreds with reasonable debate. You've done nothing but repeat yourself in your last post which proves you don't have the answers to any of the questions I asked you.

For you to come into an area you know absoloutely nothing/very little about and start name calling is a bit daft really. At least when I do it, its when people talk about an area in which they firstly, aren't qualified in or secondly, generally know nothing about and fellow general opinion.

1) BANNED STU says: 'You're typical arsewhole dismissive attitude towards everything is clear for everyone to see'

You wonder why I reply with a response clarifying the view of the majority of people?

I mention the 'O' word, absolutely, those who are privvy to the information tend to be able to form the most reliable judgements. They know the facts. At the very least it gives them a greater capacity with which to form a judgement.

If you knew anything about U.S. politics you'd know why I question the credibility of the left wing media.

2) Look at the offical sources, view the reports composed by those privvy to the information, not those who have a speculative eye on the issue.

3) An official review, those who are privvy to all the information available. Of course you should question official sources, however, I will trust those who had access to actual transcripts of flight discussions, those who had access to the black box at the Pentagon, those who had access to DNA records proving that a plane did in fact crash at the Pentagon......Not those who speculate on the basis of comments made by a Dutch engineer who said it looked like a classic 'controlled exploision'.

4) Your issue is with me, like it always has been, no change there. If those speaking in this thread were at the site of the collapses, let it be known. I don't display ignorance on this issue, I am replying to people who accuse the U.S. gov't of killing fellow U.S. citizens. I have every right to respond to what I believe to be utter sh!te.

5) No Stu, that would be your tactic. You specialise in getting banned, coming back, saying you're not posting again and then re-appearing under the pseudonym 'Smeg'.

[112-1077774096]

well anyone who thinks their own government is not involved in orchestrating atrocities against their own people and against other nations in order to gain an advantage is living in cloud cuckoo land.

The fact the CIA funded al qeada and has a good relationship with them speaks volumes in my opinion, and if anyone thinks there is not still some involvement need to think again.

the fact there was no evidence against iraq but they get invaded is laughable. the fact the want bin laded but send a very small amount of troops to Afghanistan to capture him also speaks volumes, the fact that the Bush family have links with the Bin Ladens in business dealing also speak volumes

[LFC2007]

No read what I wrote again ,  I say the fact that I don't believe them doesn't make the possibility of them being true any less, just as if I did believe them that wouldn't make them true.

You believe that there is little evidence to support the theory in your opinion at this moment in time, therefore, the likelihood of it being true must be lessened. The reason you don't believe the theory is down to a lack of evidence, therefore the likelihood MUST be decreased.

It's a clear contradiction.

No its not, what I believe or dont, has no bearing on whether it was in fact a conspiracy or not.


Just because you believe in the possibility of fairies doesn't increase the likelyhood of them existing. You may have seen a toadstool but whether you believe its a fairies chair is up to you.

What I believe is more dependent on what I have read and seen than on actual evidence. So my beliefs have no bearing whatsoever as to what actually took place.

That's not the point, read it again.

[Smeg]

well anyone who thinks their own government is not involved in orchestrating atrocities against their own people and against other nations in order to gain an advantage is living in cloud cuckoo land.

The fact the CIA funded al qeada and has a good relationship with them speaks volumes in my opinion, and if anyone thinks there is not still some involvement need to think again.

the fact there was no evidence against iraq but they get invaded is laughable. the fact the want bin laded but send a very small amount of troops to Afghanistan to capture him also speaks volumes, the fact that the Bush family have links with the Bin Ladens in business dealing also speak volumes

You're talking rubbish. None of thats official. It can't be true...

Or can it?

[Smeg]

On a slight change of subject (9/11 has been done to death)...

What does everyone think about the Roswell incident and Area 51?

[LFC2007]

Well, anyone who thinks an administration with no history of oppressing its own people would suddenly orchestrate mass genocide on its own people indiscriminately is frankly living in cloud cuckoo land.

[112-1077774096]

Well, anyone who thinks an administration with no history of oppressing its own people would suddenly orchestrate mass genocide on its own people indiscriminately is frankly living in cloud cuckoo land.

come up with your own insults please instead of copying mine, i know imitation is the highest form of flattery but...........

[LFC2007]

Well, anyone who thinks an administration with no history of oppressing its own people would suddenly orchestrate mass genocide on its own people indiscriminately is frankly living in cloud cuckoo land.

come up with your own insults please instead of copying mine, i know imitation is the highest form of flattery but...........

It's a very common saying no?

[112-1077774096]

i would hardly call 3000 people mass genocide mate, i went to the killing fields last year, now thats mass genocide

[LFC2007]

i would hardly call 3000 people mass genocide mate, i went to the killing fields last year, now thats mass genocide

It's all relative, I've also been to trenches across Europe, it's horrific, puts things in perspective.

[account deleted by request]

Presumably I am being denied the right to reply, or must do it by pm?

Yet others CONTINUE to ruin the thread


B0llocks

[112-1077774096]

Presumably I am being denied the right to reply, or must do it by pm?

Yet others CONTINUE to ruin the thread


B0llocks

what happened mate

[The Manhattan Project]

And right now all we have are two conflicting theories.

No, we don't.

All the "evidence" you have presented, including photographs have been reasonably debunked and explained.

There is no conflict.

[Emerald Red]

I've created  monster.

[112-1077774096]

All the "evidence" you have presented, including photographs have been reasonably debunked and explained.

as have all the official explanations