[quote="SAMBA]

When people argue about 9/11 being done so as the U.S could go into Iraq- I mean no one would plan that the Americans would be as stupid to invade a completly seperate country not involved in the 911 attacks ( Even though in actual fact they were)[/quote]

I don't think a lot of Americans know that Afghanistan and Iraq are two completly different places. They just assume, "Afghanistan, Iraq, tomatoe tamatoe. What do I care? Did you see who Paris is sleeping with?" Most are more concerned with what color panties (if any) Britney Spears or Paris Hilton are wearing. A lot of Americans are dumb as fuck.

if you look closely at these photos you mention, there is an open book sitting on a little stand, that is in PERFECT condition, teetering on the edge of the hole. no sign of burns.

Hmm...I don't think this helps the 9/11 Truthers cause. Just like the folks that talk about energy weapons being used in the attacks. The fringe makes the rest look bad because they're all lumped together.

LOL- this guy sounds pretty uninformed.

He is a holocaust denier also and now by the sounds of it a 911 denier, I mean I dont think I have ever heard anyone suggest that 3000 people didnt die in the buildings. What a donut!

Its worth noting the BBC are not the most reputable and unbiased news outlet out there, is there any other coverage from different media outlets?

Valied point about NORAD though, ill have to send him an email, show him about WTC 7 and the molten steel- he would love that shit.

Also Castro made a speech about it last year, in which he detailed a lot more of the suspicious facts and real edivence and made a much stronger case that it was a inside job- that got no media coverage.

No press coverage. They did give him coverage when Ahmadinejad came here and spoke at a university, when he said there were no gay people in Iran. It's interesting, too, since Iran offered their condolences fairly quickly after 9/11, and even wanted to assist with Afghanistan. That was before the blasted "axis of evil" comments were made and the hardliners took over. US missed a golden opportunity and even may have been able to prevent the backing Iran gives to insurgents in Iraq. Hindsight is 20/20.

I love the president of Iran!
He's mental-mental chicken oriental!!!
I like any one who manages to run a country and maintain such an astounding level of sheer insanity.

I know that this sort of view won't be celebrated, but he keeps the news interesting on those slow news days.

I strongly suspect that there are millions of Iranians who can't stand Ahmadenijad and who yearn for the day when that country will be free of Islamofascist dictatorship.

What he doesnt go around announcing is that his country has the second highest number of sex change operations- the first being Thailand.

Oh yeah, no doubt, I say that from a position of safety and luxury.
Also within the context of him existing.
He's there, I'm just trying to make the best of him.

Far be it from me to defend the creep. Part of why I hate him is because I've known so many good Persian people, who are nothing like some of the crazed stereotypes we get in the media (and who unfortunately do exist.)

As for the gay thing, I think his comment may have been (intentionally?) taken out of context. It's possible that what he meant was not "there are no homosexuals in Iran" but rather "we don't have openly 'gay' people like you do," if that makes sense. Still, mock away ... he's a dangerous loser.

Your probably right- although we should learn the lessons of Iraq and just say

"Our own countrys are fucked up enough, lets worry about ourselves first, Iran is the Iranian peoples problem."

I agree in principle but the problem is that Ahmadenijad has openly threatened neighboring nations with destruction (Israel) or invasion (Iraq,) so he's perceived as being a threat well beyond Iran's borders. Also, a more democratic, less theocratic Iran would have the potential to be a most excellent nation, and a great ally for numerous western nations. But I'm getting way off track here, if the subject is 9/11 conspiracy theories.

So on 9/11, why did Dan Rather say that bit about explosives experts going in WTC7 before it collapsed, only to never mention it again?

Yeah totally, and also Larry Silverstiens comments-

Larry Silverstien aquired the lease for the WTC site 6 months before 911 and took out an extra special insurance policy to cover terrorist attacks. He has made roughly 7 billiion ( note sure of the exact figure) in insurance claims so far and sucessfully managed to argue that the destruction of the 3 buildings on the site actually counted as 3 different seperate terrorist incidents, so claimed 3 times as much.

Also- he susposedly had breakfast every day at the roof of the world resturant ( at the top of the towers) but his driver that he was driving him there on 9/11 until he got a mysterious phone call then told his driver not to take him there.

Apperently on one history channel documentary about the new 'liberty tower' only 1 year after 911 he admitted that wtc7 was a controlled demolition- although no one has a copy of this tape.

Although there was another PBS documentary where he said about building 7-

" There had already been such an extraordinary loss of life that day, we decided that the smartest thing to do was to pull it, so we pulled and watched and the building came down."

( Pull it is demolition jargon to demolish a building)

Now, he was confronted about this later and corrected his comments and said he was talking about pulling out the fire fighters in the building.

I never really though much of this as edivence of anything and even though his comments do sound like he had had the building demolished- I though you would never get it to stand up in court until you examin the facts and realise that there were no fire fighter teams inside the building! Then it starts holding water in my opinion.

Finally there is a guy who worked for Silverstien, who was in the WTC7 building ( I forget his name, but will find out if anyone is interested) who says there were explosios going off inside the building he even got blown through a wall- this was before the twin towers collapsed and there for before WTC7 sustained the damage and fire that was suspose to have bought it down. ( symetrically and at freefall speed)

A few more interesting facts and points for yall.

what does this mean? im not sure what the connotation of 'mental-mental chicken oriental' is, but i imagine it might be in better taste to just say 'nuts'.



this topic has the potential to stir up emotions and get out of hand, so far everyone has been behaving very well and treating each other with respect. please keep that up if the debate continues. thanks!

It's actually common Cockney rhyming slang, Josh.

Where are we with "oriental", these days? I grew up with "oriental" is ok for inanimate things, but not for people. I guess you can still go into any restaurant and find "oriental chicken" on the menu. Sorry...just thinking out loud.

I think that 'mental-mental chicken oriental' is several levels above nuts to be honest.
As I said, I was pretty sure that it wasn't going to be a view shared by anyone really, I just think that any leader of any country who is as mad as he is an endless source of amusement. The fact that he happens to be a member of the "axis of evil" adds to the sensitivity issue is undeniable.
He is nothing more than a puppet to the imam's who run Iran. In reality, I don't think he is actually a threat of any sort because he has no control. It is the people behind him. He is effectively a propaganda prop and cover (non conspiratorial) for the clergy.
This isn't really the thread for this element of the discussion and I apoligise for upsetting any one. It was meant as a light-hearted comment, I certainly haven't got pictures of him beside my bed.

Josh, its only said as it rhymes with mental. Not used in a negative tone.

I prefer the term Radio Rental myself

Ive got a pony in my sky rocket so im going down the battle cruiser, then when I get home im gonna go up the apples and show my missus my fraggle rock.

You had me up until Fraggle Rock! Though I can imagine....

Now, if you'd said "outings and festivals", I'd have understood...

cool, just checking. folks can get pretty touchy on the internets, just trying to make sure this thread doesnt get messy.

carry on!

ALOT of this stuff if not all is in the video i posted earlier. if you think about EVERYTHING involved, it is all way too much to be called a coincidence...

Thats the main thing really- the sheer ammount of shit.

How much of this stuff can a rational person write of as 'just coincindence' before it becomes their own blind faith and denial?

i think the problem is that right after the attacks the media called anyone who even THOUGHT we were wrong to go over there let alone talked about it a traitor or crazy. that led to a basic zero tolerance when it came to questioning or talking about the bizarre events. and now after the steam has cooled a little bit and some of this is being brought up in the mainstream, theres a huge majority of people who will automatically discard it as either false or unpatriotic...