funny, you started this thread with your tail between your legs- prolly for a good reason, like you pissed enough people off recently (while i was away and didn't get to witness it, praise god) with your usual flair. now you're right back to being the tinker bell of the moving train, sprinkling your pixie dust on whoever calls you out.
I actualy started it being a total dick.
But then i changed it in an unsucessful attempt at getting ole binfrog to atleast look at the fucking information.
But he hasn't yet checked it out, and i'm sure you haven't either.
If you had, you may actualy have a question or two.
If I was to smile and I held out my hand
If I opened it now would you not understand?
Yeah.
I saw that when it premiered on DISOVERY CHANNEL.
They had to do the expierement TWICE to attempt a debunking, and the time they did "succeed" they did it with OUT actualy having the explosives in a truck.
Its also a bit of a stretch to say that this so called "debunking" really debunked anything, since all they were doing was measuring the force of a bomb.
It doesn't explain why the government refuses to acknowledge an accomplis, or release tapes showing this man, or explain all the repeated media reports of multiple devices allegedly (by the media) CONFIRMED by the FBI itself ... the appearance of the bomb squad themselves, reports of multiple explosions ... etc.
Are you even willing to admit that something doesnt add up?
And unlike all the close minded talking heads on this board, note that i actually caught this broadcast, in its ENTIRETY when it PREMIERED! As i did with their alleged "debunking" of 911, which was a piece of shit hack job hit piece, btw.
So open-minded THAT!
Again, i don't think ONE person who has responded to me negatively has bothered to even click the link, much less watch minute ONE of it.
:(
I wish you guys would understand that i am, in fact, VERY open minded. If and when i come across a source that actually ADDRESSES THE ISSUES POSED by the "conspiracy theory" crowd adequately, i will MORE than happily post and comment on it with some seriousness.
Until that time i remain highly skeptical of the claimed "official truth" because it fails to address serious discrepancies. SERIOUS descrepancies. So far about the only thing the "official" side has going for it is, "well the event happened so it must be true. Any discrepancies can be disregarded because shit happens."
If I was to smile and I held out my hand
If I opened it now would you not understand?
Yeah.
I saw that when it premiered on DISOVERY CHANNEL.
They had to do the expierement TWICE to attempt a debunking, and the time they did "succeed" they did it with OUT actualy having the explosives in a truck.
Its also a bit of a stretch to say that this so called "debunking" really debunked anything, since all they were doing was measuring the force of a bomb.
It doesn't explain why the government refuses to acknowledge an accomplis, or release tapes showing this man, or explain all the repeated media reports of multiple devices allegedly (by the media) CONFIRMED by the FBI itself ... the appearance of the bomb squad themselves, reports of multiple explosions ... etc.
Are you even willing to admit that something doesnt add up?
And unlike all the close minded talking heads on this board, note that i actually caught this broadcast, in its ENTIRETY when it PREMIERED! As i did with their alleged "debunking" of 911, which was a piece of shit hack job hit piece, btw.
So open-minded THAT!
Again, i don't think ONE person who has responded to me negatively has bothered to even click the link, much less watch minute ONE of it.
:(
I wish you guys would understand that i am, in fact, VERY open minded. If and when i come across a source that actually ADDRESSES THE ISSUES POSED by the "conspiracy theory" crowd adequately, i will MORE than happily post and comment on it with some seriousness.
Until that time i remain highly skeptical of the claimed "official truth" because it fails to address serious discrepancies. SERIOUS descrepancies. So far about the only thing the "official" side has going for it is, "well the event happened so it must be true. Any discrepancies can be disregarded because shit happens."
No I did watch the section of the video you called out and I tend to lean on the side of after an occurence such as that there is mayhem that follows. I think at the time they did think they had multiple bombs after the explosions and I'm sure there were hundreds of scenarios of what happened shortly following the explosion. But in fact they probably weren't multiple bombs and they had items they weren't certain of and they approached them as bombs. Just my opinion on that.
But otherwise I think the video does show that one explosion could have caused the damage which cuts off the conspiracy theory at the root in my opinion. Without there being multiple explosions there is no conspiracy. Again, my opinion.
Seeing visions of falling up somehow.
Pensacola '94 New Orleans '95 Birmingham '98 New Orleans '00 New Orleans '03 Tampa '08 New Orleans '10 - Jazzfest New Orleans '16 - Jazzfest Fenway Park '18 St. Louis '22
No I did watch the section of the video you called out and I tend to lean on the side of after an occurence such as that there is mayhem that follows. I think at the time they did think they had multiple bombs after the explosions and I'm sure there were hundreds of scenarios of what happened shortly following the explosion. But in fact they probably weren't multiple bombs and they had items they weren't certain of and they approached them as bombs. Just my opinion on that.
But otherwise I think the video does show that one explosion could have caused the damage which cuts off the conspiracy theory at the root in my opinion. Without there being multiple explosions there is no conspiracy. Again, my opinion.
Not that i agree with what you've posted, but assuming you are correct on these points,
what about the fellow who is VISIBLE ON VIDEO stepping out of the truck?
I don't know how you explain this because MULTIPLE witnesses claim this man to have been OLIVE SKINNED, "arab", and "middle eastern" ...
Now, the man that the government, at the last minute, added to their prosecution is Terry Nichols. Even if he was accused of being there, he sure doesn't look olive skinned to me.
?
The government has announced that it will not call a single identification
witness from Oklahoma City. The government has declined to do so for a very
good reason--all of them undercut the government's theory of the case;
perhaps none more so than the dramatic story of a young woman who was
trapped in the rubble of the Murrah Building, had to have a leg amputated,
and lost her mother and two children in the bombing. Her sister was also
injured but survived. See D.E. 2191 (Exhibit "Y"). She was first interviewed
by the FBI on May 3, 1995, at the hospital and then again on May 21, 1995.
She was also interviewed by the Defendant and several reporters. Her story
is consistent in all accounts. She stated that she left her home in Oklahoma
City at approximately 7:15 a.m. on the morning of April 19, 1995, to go
to the Social Security Office. She went with her mother, two children,
and her sister. Id.
She recalled standing in the lobby of the Social Security Office in the
Murrah Building near a large window facing Fifth Street when she looked out
the lobby window and saw a Ryder truck pull into a parking place in front of
the building between two cars. After the truck parked, she then observed an
individual exit the passenger side of the Ryder truck and start walking
away. She stated that she observed a side view of the person and described
him as an olive-skinned (he looked also like he was tanned), white male,
wearing a baseball cap with black, clean cut hair, with a slim build and
also wearing jeans and a jacket. She observed the man walking very fast,
heading west, toward Harvey Street. Id.
The next thing she remembered was feeling what she described as electricity
running through her body and then falling into rocks. While she was in the
hospital convalescing from her injuries, the FBI showed her a sketch
consisting of frontal view of a man wearing a hat--John Doe 2. She told the
FBI that the unknown male that she saw looked similar to the man in the
sketch. D.E. 2191 (Exhibit "Y" at 2).
Also read the next passage, labeled "C" where the government claims that McVeigh, under the alias "Robert Klingh", ordered chinese food to his hotel room:
The restaurtant [sic] dispatched a delivery driver, Jeff Davis, to deliver
the order to room # 25 at the Dreamland Motel. Davis has been interviewed
several times by the FBI and has consistently maintained that the person he
delivered the food to was not Timothy McVeigh. See D.E. 2482 at 10, Exhibit
"P." Davis has described the person to whom he delivered the food order as
having hair that was "unkept." Timothy McVeigh, a decorated Gulf War
veteran, keeps his hair short and neat. Davis recalled that the person at
the Dreamland had a very slight overbite. Timothy McVeigh does not have an
overbite. Davis recalled that the person at the Dreamland had a regional
accent, possibly from Oklahoma, Kansas or Missouri. Timothy McVeigh was born
and raised in New York. Davis has stated to the FBI point blank that the
person he saw and heard at the Dreamland Motel four days before the bombing
of the Murrah Building was not Timothy McVeigh. In addition, although the
government contends that Timothy McVeigh occupied room # 25 at the Dreamland
Motel, his fingerprints were not found in the room. D.E. 2482 (Exhibit "GG").
Now we could keep going, but i don't know about you .... when i hear the government say a white man acted alone, then with evidence clearly indicating this to be false, change their story and add another suspect, but the eye witnesses discount the second man as being the one at the scene ... and discount the governments claim the McVeigh was the guy they say was in the room, and fingerprint analysis doesn't show him in the room ... and add that to the rest .... i just get some questions in my head.
?
Oh.
And not that you would even listen to a guy accused by the government because of course that is just silly (right?) but here is what Terry Nichols himself had to say about the bombing, from wikipedia: "Nichols has alleged a high-ranking FBI official was directing Timothy McVeigh in the plot to blow up a government building and might have changed the original target of the attack, according to a new affidavit filed in U.S. District Court in Utah on February 9, 2007."
Now. Remember the FIRST WTC bombing?
FBI agents gave a KNOWN and ADMITTED government informant, "intelligence asset" a parts for a LIVEBOMB which the informant thought was a FAKE bomb for a training exercise. When he questioned the FBI, they told him to shut up and just build the bomb and go plant it.
??? Have you seen THOSE stories ???
It was in national news papers for fucks sake.
How do you explain THAT! ? here it is, you decide, absolute negligence, or utter maleficence?
What IS the FBI good for if it can't stop any of this shit?
If I was to smile and I held out my hand
If I opened it now would you not understand?
Not that i agree with what you've posted, but assuming you are correct on these points,
what about the fellow who is VISIBLE ON VIDEO stepping out of the truck?
I don't know how you explain this because MULTIPLE witnesses claim this man to have been OLIVE SKINNED, "arab", and "middle eastern" ...
Now, the man that the government, at the last minute, added to their prosecution is Terry Nichols. Even if he was accused of being there, he sure doesn't look olive skinned to me.
?
Also read the next passage, labeled "C" where the government claims that McVeigh, under the alias "Robert Klingh", ordered chinese food to his hotel room:
Now we could keep going, but i don't know about you .... when i hear the government say a white man acted alone, then with evidence clearly indicating this to be false, change their story and add another suspect, but the eye witnesses discount the second man as being the one at the scene ... and discount the governments claim the McVeigh was the guy they say was in the room, and fingerprint analysis doesn't show him in the room ... and add that to the rest .... i just get some questions in my head.
?
Oh.
And not that you would even listen to a guy accused by the government because of course that is just silly (right?) but here is what Terry Nichols himself had to say about the bombing, from wikipedia: "Nichols has alleged a high-ranking FBI official was directing Timothy McVeigh in the plot to blow up a government building and might have changed the original target of the attack, according to a new affidavit filed in U.S. District Court in Utah on February 9, 2007."
Now. Remember the FIRST WTC bombing?
FBI agents gave a KNOWN and ADMITTED government informant, "intelligence asset" a parts for a LIVEBOMB which the informant thought was a FAKE bomb for a training exercise. When he questioned the FBI, they told him to shut up and just build the bomb and go plant it.
??? Have you seen THOSE stories ???
It was in national news papers for fucks sake.
How do you explain THAT! ?
You raise some good questions and dont think i am ignoring your post but I would want to research some of the stories before commenting on them. As far as the first WTC bombing comment, I had never heard that one. Again, I will read up on it and see if I can put together an opinion.
Seeing visions of falling up somehow.
Pensacola '94 New Orleans '95 Birmingham '98 New Orleans '00 New Orleans '03 Tampa '08 New Orleans '10 - Jazzfest New Orleans '16 - Jazzfest Fenway Park '18 St. Louis '22
You raise some good questions and dont think i am ignoring your post but I would want to research some of the stories before commenting on them. As far as the first WTC bombing comment, I had never heard that one. Again, I will read up on it and see if I can put together an opinion.
Thanks.
You know, if i EVER got responses like this i wouldn't just revert to being a hostile piece of shit.
But as it were, i used to be perfectly genunie in my requests for INFORMED opinions on this board, but people just started jumping down my throat calling me an idiot.
That alone would have been fine, but it was CLEAR NONE of them ever bothered to even look in to or seriously consider any of the questions posed.
Bottom line, just like Alex Jones, i would LOVE, absolutely LOVE, to believe that this was all absolute bullshit, and that towelheads and biblethumpers blew up these buildings, but it just doesn't add up.
And if anyone geniunely thinks i don't consider both sides, there was a time in 04 where i completely gave up on "911 Truth" because not enough of the pieces tied together correctly, and i openly said\admitted REPEATEDLY (even to my dear pal Roland, i told him point blank!) that i did not any longer believe in things like controlled demolitions or the no-plane pentagon theory specificaly.
Hell, i was once on a big JFK kick and i THOUGHT i had debunked that, but now on BOTH of those i am right back to square one: conspiracy.
IMO, JFK is 100% undeniable.
911 95% probable.
Oklahoma city? meh, i dunno. 50\50% 75-80%?
I dunno.
WTC I ... yeah they new SOMETHING. 75%
So.
?
If I was to smile and I held out my hand
If I opened it now would you not understand?
You know, if i EVER got responses like this i wouldn't just revert to being a hostile piece of shit.
But as it were, i used to be perfectly genunie in my requests for INFORMED opinions on this board, but people just started jumping down my throat calling me an idiot.
That alone would have been fine, but it was CLEAR NONE of them ever bothered to even look in to or seriously consider any of the questions posed.
Bottom line, just like Alex Jones, i would LOVE, absolutely LOVE, to believe that this was all absolute bullshit, and that towelheads and biblethumpers blew up these buildings, but it just doesn't add up.
And if anyone geniunely thinks i don't consider both sides, there was a time in 04 where i completely gave up on "911 Truth" because not enough of the pieces tied together correctly, and i openly said\admitted REPEATEDLY (even to my dear pal Roland, i told him point blank!) that i did not any longer believe in things like controlled demolitions or the no-plane pentagon theory specificaly.
Hell, i was once on a big JFK kick and i THOUGHT i had debunked that, but now on BOTH of those i am right back to square one: conspiracy.
IMO, JFK is 100% undeniable.
911 95% probable.
Oklahoma city? meh, i dunno. 50\50% 75-80%?
I dunno.
WTC I ... yeah they new SOMETHING. 75%
So.
?
Well I will agree with you on one thing, JFK is 100% undeniable. A very good and long read on this topic is the book Ultimate Sacrifice.
Seeing visions of falling up somehow.
Pensacola '94 New Orleans '95 Birmingham '98 New Orleans '00 New Orleans '03 Tampa '08 New Orleans '10 - Jazzfest New Orleans '16 - Jazzfest Fenway Park '18 St. Louis '22
Well I will agree with you on one thing, JFK is 100% undeniable. A very good and long read on this topic is the book Ultimate Sacrifice.
I bought a book, "Reclaiming History", by Vincent Bugliosi, that is 2000 some odd pages long, released late 06 i think, that is supposed to be like the ultimate debunking of JFK.
I got disgusted after 2 or 3 simple index searches failed to turn up ANY mention of several KEY pieces of evidence contradicting the government claim. For instance the names of any of the SS agents involved in the SS Called Off video do not appear in what is (by the authors admission) an overly exhaustive index.
Hmm. :(
But i hear Tom Hanks is making a mini series of it so?
Oh the other thing that pissed me off was that besides distorting claims about the medical evidence made by the "conspiracy theorist", he also uses perversions of logic, like the one i remember when i was skimming the section on the grassy knoll around the 800pg mark ... he started saying that some evidence about there not being someone on the knoll is plain old "common sense" (boy if i had a dollar every time common sense was used to "debunk" conspiracy) ... he says its common sense that if you wanted to kill the president and get away with it you obviously wouldn't place a gunman at ground level where he could be easily seen and photographed. You would put them up high where there are no witnesses.
Of course this just pissed me off to no end, because one of the big sore points for theorists is that there was a lady in dealy plaza across from the knoll who was taking pictures at the time (aimed at the knoll) ... she says she is SURE she would have gotten the knoll suspect on film because she remembers that the sound of a gun actualy caused her to fire the camera off earlier than she intended ... of course, what happend to this film? The entire camera was confiscated by the secret service and never returned. Yeah sure, they told her she would get it back, but she never did.
So, i just love that argument. "yeah you wouldn't put someone on the ground cause they'd get filmed". Well yeah, they probably DID get filmed!
:sigh:
If I was to smile and I held out my hand
If I opened it now would you not understand?
"common sense" and "inherent good" hold very little weight with me. What little weight they do hold goes totaly out the window when the word "politician" gets added to the mix.
To your claim
why did you through in the qualifier, "on its own soil", does that mean you acknowledge that the US Government has repeatedly made it clear they have no problem secretly & subversively murdering tens, hundreds, or thousands of innocents in car bombs, market bombs, massacres, etc ... as long as it is NOT on their soil with "their" citizens?
At what point do these allegedly "inherently good" politicians make the internal moral distinction between killing innocent people in latin america, central america, italy, iran etc etc etc ... and killing its "own" citizens?
Please note also that we are, generally here, NOT speaking about politicians being acused of most of these arangements ... these are spooks! CIA, FBI, high level government operatives, being driven (probably appointed by) and loyal to very elite interests. The "power structure" you see on TV is not the real power structure.
"911 Conspiracy Crap" huh?
What would be the honest explanation for why at least 12 of the 19 hijackers were trained at US bases by US military & intellegence operatives? Here is one "credible" source since god knows you dismiss everything from prisonplanet or infowars as dishonest, even though all of it comes from mainstream news sources anyhow.
Why were the border guards ordered from on high to let these "intelligence assets" in to the country, despite having flagged them as terrorists, but then being told that "terrorist" was their intelligence cover?
Why were the FBI agents who did their jobs and tried to alert the administration to their suspicions about possible terrorist activity involving plains as weapons fired from their jobs? And why were the ones that did the firing and snubbing of the good agents giving cash bonuses and promotions?
?
But at least address how the US could claim 12 of 19 hijackers as intelligence assets, but not somehow be aware they were planning to double cross america in a big way?
??
As for Oklahoma City you should at LEAST be able to explain why the Governments REPEATED assertion was that McVeigh was acting ALONE, and yet the VIDEO CAMERA CLEARLY SHOWS A MAN GETTING OUT OF THE PASSENGER SEAT! Add to that that multiple witnesses identified the passenger as being "arab" or "middle eastern" and you don't start to smell ANYTHING fishy?
What about over a DOZEN media reports saying "multiple devices STILL in the building", "Just CONFIRMED BY THE FBI, there are 2 other devices in the building", they had 2 bomb trucks pull up, and multiple witnesses reporting hearing multiple explosions in the first place, an explosives expert testify that it was a device in the building as well, and a seizmographic signature SHOWING two "explosions"?
And they had 12 cameras they wouldn't release despite multiple FIRs, and ... and ... and ...
have you ALWAYS suffered from diarhea of the mouth, or is it a relatively new affliction? good grief. reading your posts would be a part time job. that is, if i actually read them.
"Ladies and gentlemen, the President of the United States, Barack Obama."
"Obama's main opponent in this election on November 4th (was) not John McCain, it (was) ignorance."~Michael Moore
"i'm feeling kinda righteous right now. with my badass motherfuckin' ukulele!"
~ed, 8/7
have you ALWAYS suffered from diarhea of the mouth, or is it a relatively new affliction? good grief. reading your posts would be a part time job. that is, if i actually read them.
Comments
I actualy started it being a total dick.
But then i changed it in an unsucessful attempt at getting ole binfrog to atleast look at the fucking information.
But he hasn't yet checked it out, and i'm sure you haven't either.
If you had, you may actualy have a question or two.
If I opened it now would you not understand?
Yeah.
I saw that when it premiered on DISOVERY CHANNEL.
They had to do the expierement TWICE to attempt a debunking, and the time they did "succeed" they did it with OUT actualy having the explosives in a truck.
Its also a bit of a stretch to say that this so called "debunking" really debunked anything, since all they were doing was measuring the force of a bomb.
It doesn't explain why the government refuses to acknowledge an accomplis, or release tapes showing this man, or explain all the repeated media reports of multiple devices allegedly (by the media) CONFIRMED by the FBI itself ... the appearance of the bomb squad themselves, reports of multiple explosions ... etc.
Are you even willing to admit that something doesnt add up?
And unlike all the close minded talking heads on this board, note that i actually caught this broadcast, in its ENTIRETY when it PREMIERED! As i did with their alleged "debunking" of 911, which was a piece of shit hack job hit piece, btw.
So open-minded THAT!
Again, i don't think ONE person who has responded to me negatively has bothered to even click the link, much less watch minute ONE of it.
:(
I wish you guys would understand that i am, in fact, VERY open minded. If and when i come across a source that actually ADDRESSES THE ISSUES POSED by the "conspiracy theory" crowd adequately, i will MORE than happily post and comment on it with some seriousness.
Until that time i remain highly skeptical of the claimed "official truth" because it fails to address serious discrepancies. SERIOUS descrepancies. So far about the only thing the "official" side has going for it is, "well the event happened so it must be true. Any discrepancies can be disregarded because shit happens."
If I opened it now would you not understand?
No I did watch the section of the video you called out and I tend to lean on the side of after an occurence such as that there is mayhem that follows. I think at the time they did think they had multiple bombs after the explosions and I'm sure there were hundreds of scenarios of what happened shortly following the explosion. But in fact they probably weren't multiple bombs and they had items they weren't certain of and they approached them as bombs. Just my opinion on that.
But otherwise I think the video does show that one explosion could have caused the damage which cuts off the conspiracy theory at the root in my opinion. Without there being multiple explosions there is no conspiracy. Again, my opinion.
Pensacola '94
New Orleans '95
Birmingham '98
New Orleans '00
New Orleans '03
Tampa '08
New Orleans '10 - Jazzfest
New Orleans '16 - Jazzfest
Fenway Park '18
St. Louis '22
Not that i agree with what you've posted, but assuming you are correct on these points,
what about the fellow who is VISIBLE ON VIDEO stepping out of the truck?
I don't know how you explain this because MULTIPLE witnesses claim this man to have been OLIVE SKINNED, "arab", and "middle eastern" ...
Now, the man that the government, at the last minute, added to their prosecution is Terry Nichols. Even if he was accused of being there, he sure doesn't look olive skinned to me.
?
Here is a good read: here
Also read the next passage, labeled "C" where the government claims that McVeigh, under the alias "Robert Klingh", ordered chinese food to his hotel room:
Now we could keep going, but i don't know about you .... when i hear the government say a white man acted alone, then with evidence clearly indicating this to be false, change their story and add another suspect, but the eye witnesses discount the second man as being the one at the scene ... and discount the governments claim the McVeigh was the guy they say was in the room, and fingerprint analysis doesn't show him in the room ... and add that to the rest .... i just get some questions in my head.
?
Oh.
And not that you would even listen to a guy accused by the government because of course that is just silly (right?) but here is what Terry Nichols himself had to say about the bombing, from wikipedia: "Nichols has alleged a high-ranking FBI official was directing Timothy McVeigh in the plot to blow up a government building and might have changed the original target of the attack, according to a new affidavit filed in U.S. District Court in Utah on February 9, 2007."
Now. Remember the FIRST WTC bombing?
FBI agents gave a KNOWN and ADMITTED government informant, "intelligence asset" a parts for a LIVEBOMB which the informant thought was a FAKE bomb for a training exercise. When he questioned the FBI, they told him to shut up and just build the bomb and go plant it.
??? Have you seen THOSE stories ???
It was in national news papers for fucks sake.
How do you explain THAT! ?
here it is, you decide, absolute negligence, or utter maleficence?
What IS the FBI good for if it can't stop any of this shit?
If I opened it now would you not understand?
You raise some good questions and dont think i am ignoring your post but I would want to research some of the stories before commenting on them. As far as the first WTC bombing comment, I had never heard that one. Again, I will read up on it and see if I can put together an opinion.
Pensacola '94
New Orleans '95
Birmingham '98
New Orleans '00
New Orleans '03
Tampa '08
New Orleans '10 - Jazzfest
New Orleans '16 - Jazzfest
Fenway Park '18
St. Louis '22
Thanks.
You know, if i EVER got responses like this i wouldn't just revert to being a hostile piece of shit.
But as it were, i used to be perfectly genunie in my requests for INFORMED opinions on this board, but people just started jumping down my throat calling me an idiot.
That alone would have been fine, but it was CLEAR NONE of them ever bothered to even look in to or seriously consider any of the questions posed.
Bottom line, just like Alex Jones, i would LOVE, absolutely LOVE, to believe that this was all absolute bullshit, and that towelheads and biblethumpers blew up these buildings, but it just doesn't add up.
And if anyone geniunely thinks i don't consider both sides, there was a time in 04 where i completely gave up on "911 Truth" because not enough of the pieces tied together correctly, and i openly said\admitted REPEATEDLY (even to my dear pal Roland, i told him point blank!) that i did not any longer believe in things like controlled demolitions or the no-plane pentagon theory specificaly.
Hell, i was once on a big JFK kick and i THOUGHT i had debunked that, but now on BOTH of those i am right back to square one: conspiracy.
IMO, JFK is 100% undeniable.
911 95% probable.
Oklahoma city? meh, i dunno. 50\50% 75-80%?
I dunno.
WTC I ... yeah they new SOMETHING. 75%
So.
?
If I opened it now would you not understand?
Well I will agree with you on one thing, JFK is 100% undeniable. A very good and long read on this topic is the book Ultimate Sacrifice.
Pensacola '94
New Orleans '95
Birmingham '98
New Orleans '00
New Orleans '03
Tampa '08
New Orleans '10 - Jazzfest
New Orleans '16 - Jazzfest
Fenway Park '18
St. Louis '22
I bought a book, "Reclaiming History", by Vincent Bugliosi, that is 2000 some odd pages long, released late 06 i think, that is supposed to be like the ultimate debunking of JFK.
I got disgusted after 2 or 3 simple index searches failed to turn up ANY mention of several KEY pieces of evidence contradicting the government claim. For instance the names of any of the SS agents involved in the SS Called Off video do not appear in what is (by the authors admission) an overly exhaustive index.
Hmm. :(
But i hear Tom Hanks is making a mini series of it so?
Oh the other thing that pissed me off was that besides distorting claims about the medical evidence made by the "conspiracy theorist", he also uses perversions of logic, like the one i remember when i was skimming the section on the grassy knoll around the 800pg mark ... he started saying that some evidence about there not being someone on the knoll is plain old "common sense" (boy if i had a dollar every time common sense was used to "debunk" conspiracy) ... he says its common sense that if you wanted to kill the president and get away with it you obviously wouldn't place a gunman at ground level where he could be easily seen and photographed. You would put them up high where there are no witnesses.
Of course this just pissed me off to no end, because one of the big sore points for theorists is that there was a lady in dealy plaza across from the knoll who was taking pictures at the time (aimed at the knoll) ... she says she is SURE she would have gotten the knoll suspect on film because she remembers that the sound of a gun actualy caused her to fire the camera off earlier than she intended ... of course, what happend to this film? The entire camera was confiscated by the secret service and never returned. Yeah sure, they told her she would get it back, but she never did.
So, i just love that argument. "yeah you wouldn't put someone on the ground cause they'd get filmed". Well yeah, they probably DID get filmed!
:sigh:
If I opened it now would you not understand?
and apparently, you see no reason to change horses now! excellent.
"Obama's main opponent in this election on November 4th (was) not John McCain, it (was) ignorance."~Michael Moore
"i'm feeling kinda righteous right now. with my badass motherfuckin' ukulele!"
~ed, 8/7
have you ALWAYS suffered from diarhea of the mouth, or is it a relatively new affliction? good grief. reading your posts would be a part time job. that is, if i actually read them.
"Obama's main opponent in this election on November 4th (was) not John McCain, it (was) ignorance."~Michael Moore
"i'm feeling kinda righteous right now. with my badass motherfuckin' ukulele!"
~ed, 8/7
and works for the CIA...
the guy can type his ass off...
:rolleyes:
If I opened it now would you not understand?
see, i knew you secretly desired me.
in your dreams, darling.
"Obama's main opponent in this election on November 4th (was) not John McCain, it (was) ignorance."~Michael Moore
"i'm feeling kinda righteous right now. with my badass motherfuckin' ukulele!"
~ed, 8/7
You know it.
If I opened it now would you not understand?
—Dorothy Parker
http://img210.imageshack.us/img210/6902/conspiracytheoriesxt6qt8.jpg