Conspiracy Theory 9/11 - Part 3

What's your opinion regarding the 9/11 attacks?

  • The official story makes the most sense

    Votes: 48 40.7%

  • The attacks were allowed to happen

    Votes: 28 23.7%

  • Inside job by US/shadow Government

    Votes: 42 35.6%
  • Total voters
    118

Remove this Banner Ad

nut said:
I'm really going to watch a video you posted whilst you ignore mine.... please go away troll... you said you would.
Click to expand...

You misunderstood me.

I said I was done with you.

I am.

Watch it, or don’t watch it.

Agree with me, or disagree with me.

I don’t care.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Log in to remove this ad.

nut said:
I can't pretend to know motivations of NIST and the minimal amount of people that were allowed to see the full report.
However NIST did not even explore the possibility of CD. Which makes sense... their job was to create a "story" to go with the official story.

Now can you answer my questions ...
Click to expand...

Here you go Nut.

We had a whole conversation about it.

You conceded and apologized (albeit sarcastically) and agreed not to allege this again.

You just did it again...


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app
 
nut said:
So are you saying Silverstein was all up with demolition terminology? Makes sense?
Click to expand...

On the surface it seems like Silverstein made a call to clear the people out of the building , which was a good call, because it fell down.

If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck.

But on this thread if it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, someone has to provide evidence that it isn't an African Swallow.
 
nut said:
It's evidence that some is trying to control the narative... time difference from London to NY might have led to the utensil up.
"Shitty" evidence that was used in court to win a case for this Man
Click to expand...
"Control the narrative"? That's ridiculous.

If 'they' blew WTC7 up, it would have been reported regardless.

No need to employ dozens of people overseeing every live news broadcast (which was happening in literally every first world country on Earth) .

It wasn't misread. It was a news feed to the BBC from Reuters(BBC explanation) .... amazingly the BBC lost the footage of that story.
Click to expand...
BBC explanation I read (still available online) was the information came from London staff members who were monitoring wires/news feeds and relaying information.

"WTC 7 is about to fall!" became "WTC has fallen". Not too hard to imagine?

Here it is again, I've already posted it ^^^... do you actually watch the links ? Or do you just dismiss everything... close you eyes and pretend things didn't happen???
Click to expand...
Late to the conversation and can't stream vids at the moment- internet is appalling, assuming the weather knocked a wire out, either that or the NWO is purposefully jacking my connection so the truth remains suppressed.

Yep just a coincidence.... that the BBC tried to hide??tape missing and News Anchor couldn't recall...
Click to expand...
Tape missing? So what.
 
Last edited:
All of this also flies in the face of another conspiracy narrative, namely that “only a few people needed to know” about the conspiracy. Thousands didn’t need to be in on it they cry, military compartmentalization!

Now, somehow, the goddamn press, the MSM NO LESS, knew in advance....

The mind boggles.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app
 
SaintsSeptember said:
On the surface it seems like Silverstein made a call to clear the people out of the building , which was a good call, because it fell down.

If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck.

But on this thread if it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, someone has to provide evidence that it isn't an African Swallow.
Click to expand...

Yep ... but when a news reporter reports the building already has collapsed and its standing in the background is it a duck? Or an African swallow?
 
BustedWing said:
All of this also flies in the face of another conspiracy narrative, namely that “only a few people needed to know” about the conspiracy. Thousands didn’t need to be in on it they cry, military compartmentalization!

Now, somehow, the goddamn press, the MSM NO LESS, knew in advance....

The mind boggles.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app
Click to expand...
You've already established how lazy journalism is.
Only one person needs access to punch in a news feed....

Remember how chaotic things are??? You just need to put something out there and the MSM sheep will just go with it. Like the BBC
Very easy to control the narrative when you have news anchors as dumb as the BBC...
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)



It's a long one, but it's worth the effort....Corbett does an excellent job here of exposing Chomsky's fudging & refusals to discuss the facts of 9/11 in any serious way whatsoever, contrary to his usually rigor with regards most things he takes issue with....His evasions & equivocations to do with all things 9/11 point to a concerted denial & role as academic 'gate-keeper' on this issue.....Corbett even goes so far as to suggest that Chomsky's employers are directly implicated in the very industry that necessitates his silence on this issue.....That exposure of the 'Inside job' would mean the very end of his career.

Corbett pulls apart the fickle nature of his historical stance & flat-denials & refusals to discuss the issue.....Chomsky does not come out of this looking at all like a trusted authority, to say the least.....He has clearly been given the once over by the powers that be.

In other words....When it comes to the actual crunch of standing up to be counted in using your voice & position when it matters most....Chomsky is a whipped little cowardly craven piss-ant.

Hard to respect him after this exposure.
 
Mitchell5 said:
Where’s the

The attack was orchestrated by a secret society of human sized lizards

Option
Click to expand...

Gee, we've not heard that one before.....If you have nothing constructive to offer by way of talking points & debate through counter-argument, then why bother preferring up such nonsense?

Go away to the kiddies board on the Bae & the GD.....This board is for thinkers, not fools.
 
Last edited:
Procrastinator35 said:
Gee, we've not heard that one before.....If you have nothing constructive to offer by way of talking points & debate through counter-argument, then why bother preferring up such nonsense.

Go away to the kiddies board on the Bae & the GD.....This board is for thinkers, not fools.
Click to expand...
Watch out for those ad homs :straining:
 
JackOutback said:
Watch out for those ad homs :straining:
Click to expand...

Speaking of which....Anything constructive by way of talking points on 9/11.....Or just here to score cheap points as usual?

Yes....A rhetorical question.....We all know by now that Jack never offers up anything by way of substantive arguments. Other than to defend the status quo by way of smearing, name-calling & sleighing.....In other words, mimicking all the bad habits of the current MSM hegemony.....Sad.
 
Procrastinator35 said:
Speaking of which....Anything constructive by way of talking points on 9/11.....Or just here to score cheap points as usual?

Yes....A rhetorical question.....We all know by now that Jack never offers up anything by way of substantive arguments. Other than to defend the status quo by way of smearing, name-calling & sleighing.....In other words, mimicking all the bad habits of the current MSM hegemony.....Sad.
Click to expand...
I'm just here for the cheap points.

Though I do have a question. Is Chomsky's Manufacturing Consent still to be believed? Are his opinions on US foreign policy where he criticises them still to be believed? Did the powers that be silence him on 9/11, but forget to mention all the other stuff they would probably wish he knocked off?
 
JackOutback said:
I'm just here for the cheap points.

Though I do have a question. Is Chomsky's Manufacturing Consent still to be believed? Are his opinions on US foreign policy where he criticises them still to be believed? Did the powers that be silence him on 9/11, but forget to mention all the other stuff they would probably wish he knocked off?
Click to expand...

This thread is on 9/11.....Try to stay on topic.

If you want to discuss those other topics & Chomsky's opinions on them, then go to the relevant threads.

FWIW....I agree with much of Chomsky's critique of the West, just to appease your fallacious reasoning capacities
 
Procrastinator35 said:
This thread is on 9/11.....Try to stay on topic.

If you want to discuss those other topics & Chomsky's opinions on them, then go to the relevant threads.

FWIW....I agree with much of Chomsky's critique of the West, just to appease your fallacious reasoning capacities
Click to expand...
It's entirely on topic; you said he can't be trusted on 9/11 and that he was a whipped piss-ant, which is an attack on his credibility and a suggestion he has been 'gotten to'. If he hasn't been 'gotten to' on other topics, why would I believe he has on this one?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top