That this makes hardly any mention of the fact most of the "truthers" don't believe it.
The 9/11 Truth Movement is something I've been following a lot, semi-compulsively, because of having seen the lie on the Shrub's face when he gave his speech that day.
Then they replaced that speech with a different one on his website. when he had gone live, he looked exactly as happy as a junkie who'd waited forever for heroin and gotten it at last. Especially when it got to the part about gettin' the evildoers back and all that war talk. He was LOVING it and had considerable trouble trying to look upset. I stood there in the cafe with the coffee cups in my hand unbelieving my eyes, and thought, that son of a bitch probably hired bin Laden, he's cozy with his folks, his own folks bank with HIS folks and were in Carlyle group together! Of course I dismissed it, since there wasn't any evidence, yet.
Then the evidence started to roll in and I found I was probably right.
But this "Zionist" crap is mostly based on someone having seen a bunch of Israeli art students standing and cheering on the roof of a nearby building when it happened.
The REAL evidence, to me, is the testimony of the former FBI people like translator Sibel Edmonds, and the reports of a special Pentagon anti-terrrorist squad (Able Danger) who had tried to get the terrorist cells surveilled and were told to leave it alone, the fact that Mohammed Atta was supported by a military pilot academy, and didn't act at all like a Muslim, then we have the behaviour of Bush reading "My Pet Goat" that day, no Secret Service around evacuating those kids, who if we were REALLY under attack they could have all been killed if someone tried to get the President...and the warnings people like the Mayor of SF got not to fly, the weird insider trading, it goes on and on and on.
Not important: whether a missile or plane hit the Pentagon. Important: they STILL won't release the confiscated videos.
Not important: whether there was a pod on the bottom of the plane that hit Tower 1. Important: that they demolished WTC7 which had no "huge fire" in it, and oddly enough, DID have a CIA building.
The difference between conspiracy theory and transpiracy research is that the latter comes mostly straight from the source itself.
I think the controlled demolition is important - what bugs me about it was why the neocon coupsters didn't claim THAT was Al-Q's doing too. They insist up down and sideways it was jet fuel. Meanwhile, physics professors do experiments and disprove them.
This Zionist crap on CNN is interesting. It means the momentum of the truthers has grown and it is scaring the bastards who really did this.
And I agree with the guy who said Al-Q doesn't exist. I have a copy of an Air Force training Manual called World in Transition. We found it in a dumpster and saw it was dated 2000. Every Islamic terror group was listed in its Middle East section. NOT ONE WORD - Al-Q did not appear one time in the whole book, Osama Bin Laden's name did, he got one sentence claiming he "works alone".
My theory: they paid him to get some patsies who likely THOUGHT they might be a-jihading, but the weird thing with THAT theory is that the dead hijackers names were from stolen IDs and all matched former CIA employees working in Afghanistan during the war against the Soviet Union in the eighties. So who knows what they were doing.
But one thing is REALLY clear. The conspiracy theory is that this was an outside attack. Watch Loose Change sometime, one of the best films made about this, or Everybody's Gotta Learn Sometime, which is even better because it talks about the Able Danger stuff which is just coming out in the past year or two.
this is why I support preemptive abortion of the mentally deficient soon enough I'm sure scientists will be able to diagnose dumbfuckery and lulz deficiency in the womb
Oh, come on - if the Jews had done it they would have warned their people on the inside. I mean it says so clear as day in the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.
Interesting
Seems like discred attempt...meaning they're scared
The 9/11 Truth Movement is something I've been following a lot, semi-compulsively, because of having seen the lie on the Shrub's face when he gave his speech that day.
Then they replaced that speech with a different one on his website. when he had gone live, he looked exactly as happy as a junkie who'd waited forever for heroin and gotten it at last. Especially when it got to the part about gettin' the evildoers back and all that war talk. He was LOVING it and had considerable trouble trying to look upset. I stood there in the cafe with the coffee cups in my hand unbelieving my eyes, and thought, that son of a bitch probably hired bin Laden, he's cozy with his folks, his own folks bank with HIS folks and were in Carlyle group together! Of course I dismissed it, since there wasn't any evidence, yet.
Then the evidence started to roll in and I found I was probably right.
But this "Zionist" crap is mostly based on someone having seen a bunch of Israeli art students standing and cheering on the roof of a nearby building when it happened.
The REAL evidence, to me, is the testimony of the former FBI people like translator Sibel Edmonds, and the reports of a special Pentagon anti-terrrorist squad (Able Danger) who had tried to get the terrorist cells surveilled and were told to leave it alone, the fact that Mohammed Atta was supported by a military pilot academy, and didn't act at all like a Muslim, then we have the behaviour of Bush reading "My Pet Goat" that day, no Secret Service around evacuating those kids, who if we were REALLY under attack they could have all been killed if someone tried to get the President...and the warnings people like the Mayor of SF got not to fly, the weird insider trading, it goes on and on and on.
Not important: whether a missile or plane hit the Pentagon. Important: they STILL won't release the confiscated videos.
Not important: whether there was a pod on the bottom of the plane that hit Tower 1. Important: that they demolished WTC7 which had no "huge fire" in it, and oddly enough, DID have a CIA building.
The difference between conspiracy theory and transpiracy research is that the latter comes mostly straight from the source itself.
I think the controlled demolition is important - what bugs me about it was why the neocon coupsters didn't claim THAT was Al-Q's doing too. They insist up down and sideways it was jet fuel. Meanwhile, physics professors do experiments and disprove them.
This Zionist crap on CNN is interesting. It means the momentum of the truthers has grown and it is scaring the bastards who really did this.
And I agree with the guy who said Al-Q doesn't exist. I have a copy of an Air Force training Manual called World in Transition. We found it in a dumpster and saw it was dated 2000. Every Islamic terror group was listed in its Middle East section. NOT ONE WORD - Al-Q did not appear one time in the whole book, Osama Bin Laden's name did, he got one sentence claiming he "works alone".
My theory: they paid him to get some patsies who likely THOUGHT they might be a-jihading, but the weird thing with THAT theory is that the dead hijackers names were from stolen IDs and all matched former CIA employees working in Afghanistan during the war against the Soviet Union in the eighties. So who knows what they were doing.
But one thing is REALLY clear. The conspiracy theory is that this was an outside attack. Watch Loose Change sometime, one of the best films made about this, or Everybody's Gotta Learn Sometime, which is even better because it talks about the Able Danger stuff which is just coming out in the past year or two.
soon enough I'm sure scientists will be able to diagnose dumbfuckery and lulz deficiency in the womb