For those who support the war on terror

[Balzerismo]

you have nothing to go on except by what you heard from some one or some where and your own logic.. The firefighters who died because a building fell on them (some how defying the laws of physics) and their friends and fellow FF's heard explosives in the towers and SAW destruction in the basement minuets after it was hit... They almost had the fire put out.

Who stands to profit?

Arms Market
Big business
Oil Companies

who do these people affiliate themselves with?

No need to go on really..


You don't want to believe it because its such a terrible act of genocide and you don't want to think another human being could have had for-knowledge and could've prevented it... Another human being like you.

 

[cronicc3]

British teacher faces lashes in Sudan after class teddy bear is named 'Muhammad' - Times Online
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/15/us/15gitmo.html
IRIN Middle East | Middle East | Iraq | IRAQ: Appalling conditions of women prisoners disputed | Other | News Item
C4RPME.org: Christians in the Middle East
CNN.com - Shiite-Sunni violence reported near Baghdad - Apr 16, 2005

your telling me america's the nazi n their not? and all not fox for u even tho their all harvard, yail n etc. graduates and haf both left wing and right wing on almost each show or atleast bring in a opposite politcal member of the host for a debate.

 

[Your Grandfather]

Now that the Australians have a new leader and he has announced by the middle of next year_there will only be the coalition of one_he is pulling the Aussie troops out of Iraq.

Question is = Do you think Faux Noise will have live coverage of the terrorists swimming to Australia following them home?

 

[Chrisuperfly]

Read my post above. #4 and 5 took structural damage and were on fire and did not fall. No other building in history has fell because of fire. It has nothing to do with Bush, he's just a puppet.

No other building in History has fallen because of fire.......ever been to Chicago?

 

[natrone23]

By the way I am in no way saying that 911 was a inside job and the conspirciy theorists accusations have been debunked many times such... pop mechanics ect, but do I beleive and plenty of evidence supports that the bush adminstration used 911 as an excuse to attack iraq ie, trying to link Iraq with terrorism (which was bogus) ...BUT my point is here I feel I have to correct some points i read in previous posts........The CIA defintly suported the Afgahinstan Mujadeen in their fight against the Russian, They did in fact supply them with stinger missiles which were used to shoot down many russian aircraft but mostly helicoptors, the earlier poster mentioned about a video of first stinger shot, he is right I believe it was Ronald Regan himself who requested that a video be made of the first stinger shot so he could verify it himself....The majority of the support that CIA gave to the afgan fighters were indirect....They supplied the Pakistani intell force with large amounts of money for the sole pupose of purchasing weapons and then suppling them to the fighters in Afgan....By the way I don't think this info is top secret anymore....and the CIA fully admits they did this in 1980's and several former operators that particapated in it in the 80's and high up in the CIA have gave many interviews disclosing these facts, In fact they have been on a few history channel programs about the Taliban ect.......very similar to what Iran is doing in Iraq today....so if you come on here and say that previous post was wrong and then mock him...you need to get your facts right because you obviously have no idea what you are talking about....hey but if you don't trust me look it up...you might feel stupid

 

[natrone23]

My last post pertains to MAY

 

[may]

%THis may be your most rediculous post yet, Capt Kirk,~LOL~. I suppose you think the moon landings were faked also.

I just responded to your post using a bit of your own technique.

You stated that the US gave chinese AK 47s to afghanistan and I asked for proof.
I also told you that the chinese don't make AK 47s and what you were talking about would be the type 56.

If you remember I asked [Except for missiles prove that the US gave any arms to afghanistan.]

You also stated that the US had given billions to help in the war against Iran and that saddam had also gotten a few gifts from the warmongering USA before invading Kuwait.
I asked for proof of this.

The only point of rebuttal to my post made by you was [if the US didn't give them the AK 47s then who did.]
The fact is the AK 47 were supplyed by the soviets, as they were the ones who make them.

You avoided all of my points and acted as if I were arguing over the stingers.

So I posted a bit like you, although I did it in a funny way.

I really don't care if you believe my posts or not, Anyway who said that there had to be proof to any of this. Isn't this an opinion forum, Politics is all bullshit anyway.

Unlike you I have a high regard for the truth and when I bullshit it will be in a funny way, or at lest to me.

Either you agree with me or you don't, I don't care. If you disagree with such disdain, Maybe you should supply the proof.

I think you can see the proof of my disdain for bullshit offered as fact.

Do you really wish me to prove disdain for what you post?

I believe the CIA is capabale of all sorts of inhuman things, they have been doing those things for years. If you disagree, then the burden of proof is on you.

You refuse to give proof of what you state and yet you burden ME with proving negatives covering years and the whole world. You don't ask much do you.

How do you expect me to uncover those clandestine records anyway, freedom of information act? Believe me, they hide their most heinous crimes against humanity.

Do you really think the CIA giving stingers to afghanistan is one of the CIAs most heinous crimes against humanity? And that they are hiding this tape for this reason?

I've seen the tape 6 or 7 times, as you say its been on tv and I can say that the CIA didn't do a very good job of hiding it.

As I said in the first post I made in our debate; Give proof that the US gave any arms to afghanistan except for the stingers?

Give proof that the US gave billions to saddam to help fight iran?

Give proof that the US gave a few gifts to saddam before he invaded Kuwait?

You can't give proof because it didn't happen and theres not any proof.

 

[may]

Haven't you noticed I've been ignoring all your posts?

I think you ignore all facts, so its just your way.

I don't mind debating, but I can't debate with an idiot. I didn't read any of what you just wrote, step aside and let VI or Wavels or somebody argue your point.

What a twirp. You invite me to debate then you ignore me? Call me an idiot and tell me to step aside?
What kind of a stupid little ass are you? I should retort to all your posts.

 

[may]

By the way I am in no way saying that 911 was a inside job and the conspirciy theorists accusations have been debunked many times such... pop mechanics ect, but do I beleive and plenty of evidence supports that the bush adminstration used 911 as an excuse to attack iraq ie, trying to link Iraq with terrorism (which was bogus) ...BUT my point is here I feel I have to correct some points i read in previous posts........The CIA defintly suported the Afgahinstan Mujadeen in their fight against the Russian, They did in fact supply them with stinger missiles which were used to shoot down many russian aircraft but mostly helicoptors, the earlier poster mentioned about a video of first stinger shot, he is right I believe it was Ronald Regan himself who requested that a video be made of the first stinger shot so he could verify it himself....The majority of the support that CIA gave to the afgan fighters were indirect....They supplied the Pakistani intell force with large amounts of money for the sole pupose of purchasing weapons and then suppling them to the fighters in Afgan....By the way I don't think this info is top secret anymore....and the CIA fully admits they did this in 1980's and several former operators that particapated in it in the 80's and high up in the CIA have gave many interviews disclosing these facts, In fact they have been on a few history channel programs about the Taliban ect.......very similar to what Iran is doing in Iraq today....so if you come on here and say that previous post was wrong and then mock him...you need to get your facts right because you obviously have no idea what you are talking about....hey but if you don't trust me look it up...you might feel stupid

If you had read what was said by me in the first post you may understand or not..
You are the one that needs to get your facts right.
If you really think that you know more than I do on this, than you are most sure to be wrong.
If you push me on this than YOU will be made to feel stupid.......

 

[justin2937]

Just a general response:

Those buildings fell from the fire. I graduated in 2006 with an engineering degree, and you can bet your ass we studied the towers falling and peoples' conspiracy. We also did the math to disprove the theories.

And as for the theories about the 20's and 100's and whatever else having a secret message in it; if the government was behind this stealth operation, why in god's name would they give us hints? This isn't a fucking Saturday morning cartoon, the bad guys don't give you clues and riddles as to their next heist.

As far as I'm concerned, the only aspect of 9/11 that is remotely debatable is the crashing of Flight 93, and whether it was shot down or the passengers crashed it themselves. Honestly, it doesn't really matter. American's did what they had to do for the greater cause, and the end result would be the same either way. And I prefer to think that those people willingly sacrificed themselves rather than a pilot pulling a trigger.

 

[medicineman]

Your sayin this with a straight face,~LOL~:

The only point of rebuttal to my post made by you was [if the US didn't give them the AK 47s then who did.]
The fact is the AK 47 were supplyed by the soviets, as they were the ones who make them.

The chinese AKs may have been made in 56 or any other year for that matter as that is basically what the # behind the AK means and yes the chinese did make AKs along with many other soviet block countries, in fact they make them in Brazil now also. So you think the Soviets armed the Afghans so they could attack them and take over their country, Genious, pure genious. And now you admit the CIA did give stingers to the Afghans, what a dipshit you are. You must have graduated from an uneducated school, the one for fools. I have an AK made in Bulgaria, one of the best ones made as the reciever is forged not stamped like the cheap chinese made ones.

 

[justin2937]

The chinese AKs may have been made in 56 or any other year for that matter as that is basically what the # behind the AK means

I'm pretty sure you're wrong on this. The only AK's I can think of are the 47 and 74, two completely different guns.

 

[natrone23]

Now MAY you requrie others to cite their sources as if they are writing research papers.....but you make statements about the world trade center building 7 ect. in your previous post you do not cite any of your sources, by your own requirement one must have to cite everything that is stated, or it is a false statement....if I say George Bush is the prez of the U.S will you require me to provide proof of my statement. Why didn't you provide proof of your statements on building 7 for people who might not know what you are talking about? My guess is that it takes time to cite sources for every statement you make, am I correct?

 

[natrone23]

MAY~If you had read what was said by me in the first post you may understand or not..
You are the one that needs to get your facts right.
If you really think that you know more than I do on this, than you are most sure to be wrong.
If you push me on this than YOU will be made to feel stupid

Which of my alleged facts are you saying are false? If I'm wrong I would like to know so I don't continue to make false statements

 

[medicineman]

I'm pretty sure you're wrong on this. The only AK's I can think of are the 47 and 74, two completely different guns.

The 47 of AK47 was the year the gun was first manufactured. Many AKs have been made from that time to this, they may not be calld by their year of manufacture as in AK48, Ak49 etc,and this is what I was refering to in my post to May. I have no clue whether the chinese made AK was made in 56 or 68. Most all basic AKs have the same operational mechanisms. The one I have is actually an SK as It has no full auto switch, it also has no date of manufacture So this is a very stupid arguement over a couple of numbers.

I believe you may be right, a model 74 may have been an improvement on the model 47 and thus the nomenclature change. I believe they have been inproving little nuances with the rifle from day one, but the original is still one of the best combat rifles in history, My AK will shoot a 8 inch group at 300 Yards, My 7MM remington magnum, will do a little better, but not much, the AK is one fine weapon and if I had to go to fight and could only take one gun, it would definently be the AK.

 

[natrone23]

The funny thing about conspiracy theorists is that when you clearly refute their claims with sources of experts and even clearly independent expertise....they will always come back with " You believe the(insert said expert or experts) their in on the conspiracy too,,,O my god you believe them your a sheep".......Like Pop mechanics was is on 9-11. The conspiracy just keeps getting larger and larger....basically anybody who refutes their claims with real evidence is either a liar or a sheep.......The sheep are the ones who believe a few 18 year olds who make a movie in their basement....who by the way only ask questions with out any evidence of the answers

 

[moon47usaco]

YES YES all for the war... =] Woooo hooo go anarchists...

OOPS i though this was the "War OF Terror" thread... My bad... =P

:lol

 

[may]

Your sayin this with a straight face,~LOL~:

Try reading it for the first time as you din't seem to before. Would you like to pull it up and show me?

AS I SAID!
The only point of rebuttal to my post made by you was [if the US didn't give them the AK 47s then who did.]

All the rest was just bullshit to cover what you said and my posting about it. What you were doing was just an act. I don't think your that dumb. Are you?

The chinese AKs may have been made in 56 or any other year for that matter as that is basically what the # behind the AK means and yes the chinese did make AKs along with many other soviet block countries, in fact they make them in Brazil now also. So you think the Soviets armed the Afghans so they could attack them and take over their country, Genious, pure genious. And now you admit the CIA did give stingers to the Afghans, what a dipshit you are. You must have graduated from an uneducated school, the one for fools. I have an AK made in Bulgaria, one of the best ones made as the reciever is forged not stamped like the cheap chinese made ones.

Read what I said about the stingers, dumb ass.and try not to be quite so stupid.

The chinese don't make AK 47s.

Prove the US gave billions to saddam for the iran war.

Prove the US gave gifts to saddam before he invaded kuwait.
This is what I called you on and you have yet to reply to this, you just seem to come up with nonsence.

 

[Lacy]

A scary thought. I was gonna ask a question but didn't not to.

 

[may]

Now MAY you requrie others to cite their sources as if they are writing research papers.....but you make statements about the world trade center building 7 ect. in your previous post you do not cite any of your sources, by your own requirement one must have to cite everything that is stated, or it is a false statement....if I say George Bush is the prez of the U.S will you require me to provide proof of my statement. Why didn't you provide proof of your statements on building 7 for people who might not know what you are talking about? My guess is that it takes time to cite sources for every statement you make, am I correct?

If i'm wrong about something speak up. As for my sources I saw it on TV like everyone else.I haven't had the need to look up anything. It is what it is. Anyone thinking that explosives were used couldn't tell the difference of a primary from the primer.