Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 101
  1. #61
    Truth's Avatar
    Truth is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Minneapolis, MN
    Age
    54
    Posts
    1,389
    Rep Power
    36

    Re: Every American Should See And Hear What The Rest Of the World Already Knows

    Quote Originally Posted by RamTime
    As I stated earlier i have investigated this for months and I have seen this tape.
    So naturally I hoped that somenoe would make the mistake of bringing up this tape. The support for the current administration escalates when ever they raise the fears of Americans. Funny this tape was released by Washington 4 days before the election. Now I know that common sense is not needed by the sheeple of the country but that tape was phony.
    #1 Bin Laden is left handed however he is writing a note with his right hand in that tape. But you will dismiss that as all perfectly normal since it does not fit your zero proof conspiracy theory of 19 Mulslims with box cutters.
    2. Bin Laden is wearing a gold ring which Islam strictly prohibits
    3. Bin Laden is wearing a watch which is also strictly prohibited by Islam but don't take my word for it.

    I do not remember exactly where in the documentary is so you will have to watch both of them.

    Grab some pop corn.
    http://stlouisrams.net/911/lc1.wmv
    http://stlouisrams.net/911/lc2.wmv

    Hate to keep spoiling your conspiracy theory however until there is proof that Bin Laden did this I have to go with the avalanche of evidence that it was orchestrated by the current Administration.
    Lying and the killing of innocents is also prohibited in Islam. However, that's never stopped Bin Ladin and his minions. Don't mistake the lust for power with the belief in a religion.

    As for 9/11. Is it possible that things were missed in the investigation? Of course. If things were botched, would government agencies be embarassed by those errors? Again, of course. Is it possible that there is some type of cover-up of mistakes? Sure. Is the US government involved in planning and executing an attack on the WTC without anybody leaking anything? VERY UNLIKELY. What would be the point? To enable the US to attack Iraq? Please, If we wanted to attack Iraq, we would have found another reason to do so without creating panic, and crippling the airline industry in the US.

    Maybe this is actually a conspiracy by AvengerRam and his cohorts to take over world banking, the film industry in India, and to place delicatesans on every corner. (Heavy sarcasm)

    By the way, Fat Pang, Zoroastrians, wow, that's pulling one out of your hat. Good on ya mate.
    Last edited by Truth; -01-24-2006 at 07:05 PM.

    That's my story, and I'm sticking to it!!

  2. #62
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is offline Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Age
    46
    Posts
    18,479
    Rep Power
    167

    Re: Every American Should See And Hear What The Rest Of the World Already Knows

    I'm sorry, but this still photo from the tape clearly shows that its the real Osama Bin Laden:



  3. #63
    Truth's Avatar
    Truth is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Minneapolis, MN
    Age
    54
    Posts
    1,389
    Rep Power
    36

    Re: Every American Should See And Hear What The Rest Of the World Already Knows

    Quote Originally Posted by AvengerRam
    I'm sorry, but this still photo from the tape clearly shows that its the real Osama Bin Laden:


    LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL
    That's my story, and I'm sticking to it!!

  4. #64
    RamsFanSam's Avatar
    RamsFanSam is online now Pro Bowl Ram
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Springfield, Missouri, United States
    Age
    51
    Posts
    2,626
    Rep Power
    71

    Re: Every American Should See And Hear What The Rest Of the World Already Knows

    RamTime, I thought I would post this poll result taken from this website http://www.911wasalie.com just to let you know you are NOT the only one who thinks that something stinks.

    They also have videos there you might want to look at.

    Poll Results: Do you believe that the U.S. Government was complicit in 911, and Guilty of the Crime of 911? Vote now!
    Yes, I have no Doubt in my Mind, the USA is Guilty 48.4 % (21955)
    Yes, I think there is High Probability that "elements of the US goverment" committed 9/11... 25.3 % (11466)
    No, 911 was carried out by Usama and his 19 Cave Dwelling Templar Terrorists 12.8 % (5814)
    No. but I do believe the Bush Administration let it happen on purpose 6.9 % (3109)
    I am new to this, and not sure, but it sure doesn't look good for America 6.6 % (2988)


    Total Votes: 45332

  5. #65
    HUbison's Avatar
    HUbison is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Kentucky
    Age
    40
    Posts
    13,532
    Rep Power
    144

    Re: Every American Should See And Hear What The Rest Of the World Already Knows

    Poll Results: Do you believe that the U.S. Government was complicit in 911, and Guilty of the Crime of 911? Vote now!
    Yes, I have no Doubt in my Mind, the USA is Guilty 48.4 % (21955)
    Yes, I think there is High Probability that "elements of the US goverment" committed 9/11... 25.3 % (11466)
    So, on a site dedicated to propogating this theory, there are roughly 33,000 people willing to buy the idea. Out of nearly 300,000,000 Americans.....that is 0.01%.

    So out of every 9000 people there is 1 that buys this. Call me crazy, but that's pretty good odds the 9000 may be right on this one.
    "Before the gates of excellence the high gods have placed sweat; long is the road thereto and rough and steep at first; but when the heights are reached, then there is ease, though grievously hard in the winning." --- Hesiod

  6. #66
    RamsFanSam's Avatar
    RamsFanSam is online now Pro Bowl Ram
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Springfield, Missouri, United States
    Age
    51
    Posts
    2,626
    Rep Power
    71

    Re: Every American Should See And Hear What The Rest Of the World Already Knows

    Quote Originally Posted by HUbison
    So, on a site dedicated to propogating this theory, there are roughly 33,000 people willing to buy the idea. Out of nearly 300,000,000 Americans.....that is 0.01%.

    So out of every 9000 people there is 1 that buys this. Call me crazy, but that's pretty good odds the 9000 may be right on this one.
    You caught ONE thing: It is a site dedicated to the theory. This means most of the people visiting the site would be more likely to have doubts about the official story, and would be more likely to believe that a conspiracy took place.

    One thing you missed - there was no option to vote for "The official story was missing some things, and there may have been one or two unknown people in the US that commited treason by assisting the terrorists" or "Show me the scientific data, from a proven source, and maybe we'll talk".

    The poll was obviously written by a biased person. (Hey, Mister, do you still beat your wife? kind of poll...) I just wanted RT to know that other people do believe in the theory.

  7. #67
    Fat Pang's Avatar
    Fat Pang is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    1,603
    Rep Power
    64

    Re: Every American Should See And Hear What The Rest Of the World Already Knows

    In terms of getting back on track, may I humbly suggest we've been way off it for some time.

    Bin Laden was captured on video tape that has been verified by the BBC talking explicitly about the planning and execution of the attacks.

    AL QAEDA has on several occasions asserted it's responsibility for the attacks both in middle eastern and western media, and furthermore it's intention to do it again.

    If you were to read the book "AL QAEDA" by Jason Burke, you would find that it's not a homogenous organisation along the lines of the FBI or CIA with clear reporting structure and an entrenched hierarchy.

    It's nebulous, it's mobile and it's hard to pin down. Only in this way can it avoid detection and destruction at the hands of western and allied intelligence agencies.

    It also has conatcts with the Uigyur separatists in China (Verified by China, not your heinous mass murdering state department), with Jamaah Islamiya in Indonesia, and with Al mujaharoun in the UK.

    Each cell is meant to be capable of autonomous action. What happened in London 6 months ago is a case in point.

    The whole premise of Jihad as understood by the west is and supposedly practised by Al Qaeda, is according to the Koran, banned. Jihad means 'Struggle' and it's much closely identified with the struggle to maintain your faith in the face of adversity that mass murder.

    Leading Islamic Jurists and scholars have condemned fundamental islam and it's interpretation of Islam as against what is written in the Koran.

    Beheading of prisoners is against the word of God.

    The enforced wearing of the Burqa is against the word of God.

    The killing of innocents is against the word of God.

    I imagine that if this didn't stop Bin Laden from comitting his crimes then the wearing of a watch and a gold ring really is small beer. Find the section of the Koran that implicitly bans it.

  8. #68
    HUbison's Avatar
    HUbison is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Kentucky
    Age
    40
    Posts
    13,532
    Rep Power
    144

    Re: Every American Should See And Hear What The Rest Of the World Already Knows

    Quote Originally Posted by Sam
    Hey, Mister, do you still beat your wife?
    Only when she burns the turkey pot pie........oh no, wait, you were just giving an example. Dang it Sam, now you're just confusing me.
    "Before the gates of excellence the high gods have placed sweat; long is the road thereto and rough and steep at first; but when the heights are reached, then there is ease, though grievously hard in the winning." --- Hesiod

  9. #69
    Fat Pang's Avatar
    Fat Pang is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    1,603
    Rep Power
    64

    Re: Every American Should See And Hear What The Rest Of the World Already Knows

    Quote Originally Posted by HUbison
    up is up, down is down, 1+1=2, the 4th of July is an American holiday celebrated on July 4th (oddly enough).......absolute truths are everywhere. However, in today's post-modern world, nobody wants to hear about "absolute" because if somebody is absolutely right, then opposing viewpoints HAVE to be absolutely wrong.
    We could argue about this HUb, but I'm afraid that if we did some people might misconstrue our disagreement as a conspiracy to alter the fundamental nature of perceived reality...............................LOL

  10. #70
    RamTime Guest

    Re: Every American Should See And Hear What The Rest Of the World Already Knows

    The rhetoric is amazing. Forget opinions on who would do what or who is capable of doing what. Forget about pointing a finger at anyone and just look at the evidence. It seems some of us can not look at the video evidence and stick to it. Since there has been no valid rebuttal of airplanes being absent from the crash site I guess this means that you agree that there were no planes there. If this is true then it also means that we were lied to by our own government on the day of the attacks. Can anyone debate the video evidence without the rhetoric of Islam or terrorists or government? I have put forth an orgy of evidence and the only thing someone has to do is open their eyes and look at it then if they see something that I have missed such as an airplane at an airplane crash site they can point it out. You also have the freedom (at least for now) to find other video or photographic evidence to the contrary however the rebuttal is a constant flow of opinion on how it is impossible for it to be anything except what our government tells us. When your grand kids tell you how utterly foolish you were to see the events unfold and see the evidence right in front of your face and you still let their country be taken over by thugs be sure that you tell them that not everyone was such a passive fool.

  11. #71
    RamTime Guest

    Re: Every American Should See And Hear What The Rest Of the World Already Knows

    Quote Originally Posted by HUbison
    So, on a site dedicated to propogating this theory, there are roughly 33,000 people willing to buy the idea. Out of nearly 300,000,000 Americans.....that is 0.01%.

    So out of every 9000 people there is 1 that buys this. Call me crazy, but that's pretty good odds the 9000 may be right on this one.
    No they are not dedicated to propagating a theory they are dedicated in saving your freedoms,. the same freedoms that have been legislated away one by one ever since this took place. Now Bush is upset with Google because they will not release their search database. Gee since the internet is the only means of the truth coming out I wonder why Bush has suddenly taken such an interest in googles seasch database. FOOOOLS!

  12. #72
    Fat Pang's Avatar
    Fat Pang is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    1,603
    Rep Power
    64

    Re: Every American Should See And Hear What The Rest Of the World Already Knows

    RT, I do not agree with your interpretation of the same video images and said so in an earlier post. Neither do I accept that the planes vaporized or that wreckage wasn't present.

    You deny the involvement of Al Qaeda. So I talk about Islam and terrorists.

    You say your government is to blame. So I Talk about government.

    The opinions expressed in your post are worthy of rebuttal by oppposing opinion.

    And please don't make the mistake of confusing me with a "Good German".

  13. #73
    RamTime Guest

    Re: Every American Should See And Hear What The Rest Of the World Already Knows

    Kathryn Hanson, a former telecommunications engineer who lives in Oakland, Calif., was looking at BBC News online last week when she came across an item about a British politician who had resigned over a reported affair with a "rent boy."

    It was the first time Ms. Hanson had seen the term, so, in search of a definition, she typed it into Google. As Ms. Hanson scrolled through the results, she saw that several of the sites were available only to people over 18. She suddenly had a frightening thought. Would Google have to inform the government that she was looking for a rent boy - a young male prostitute?

    Ms. Hanson, 45, immediately told her boyfriend what she had done. "I told him I'd Googled 'rent boy,' just in case I got whisked off to some Navy prison in the dead of night," she said.

    Ms. Hanson's reaction arose from last week's reports that as part of its effort to uphold an online pornography law, the Justice Department had asked a federal judge to compel Google to turn over records on millions of its users' search queries. Google is resisting the request, but three of its competitors - Yahoo, MSN and America Online - have turned over similar information.

    The government and the cooperating companies say the search queries cannot be traced to their source, and therefore no personal information about users is being given up. But the government's move is one of several recent episodes that have caused some people to think twice about the information they type into a search engine, or the opinions they express in an e-mail message.

    The government has been more aggressive recently in its efforts to obtain data on Internet activity, invoking the fight against terrorism and the prosecution of online crime. A surveillance program in which the National Security Agency intercepted certain international phone calls and e-mail in the United States without court-approved warrants prompted an outcry among civil libertarians. And under the antiterrorism USA Patriot Act, the Justice Department has demanded records on library patrons' Internet use.

    Those actions have put some Internet users on edge, as they confront the complications and contradictions of online life.

    Jim Kowats, 34, a television producer who lives in Washington, has been growing increasingly concerned about the government's data collection efforts. "I'm not a conspiracy theorist, I just feel like it's one step away from ... what's the next step?" Mr. Kowats said. "The government's going to start looking into all this other stuff."

    Until last year, Mr. Kowats worked at the Discovery Channel, and a few years ago, in the course of putting together a documentary on circumcision, he and his colleagues were doing much of the research online. "When you're researching something like that and you look up the word 'circumcision,' you're going to end up with all kinds of pictures of naked children," he said. "And that can be misconstrued."

    "There're so many things you can accidentally fall into when you're surfing on the Internet," he said. "I mean, you can type in almost anything and you're going to end up with something you didn't expect."

    Privacy is an elusive concept, and when it comes to what is considered acceptable, people tend to draw the line at different points on the privacy spectrum.

    Ming-Wai Farrell, 25, who works for a legal industry trade association in Washington, is one of those who draw the line somewhere in the middle. They are willing to part with personal information as long as they get something in return - the convenience of online banking, for example, or useful information from a search engine - and as long as they know what is to be done with the information.

    Yet these same people are sometimes appalled when they learn of wholesale data gathering. Ms. Farrell said she would not be able to live without online banking, electronic bill paying or Google, but she would consider revising her Web activity if she had to question every search term, online donation or purchase.

    "It's scary to think that it may just be a matter of time before Googling will invite an F.B.I. agent to tap your phone or interrogate you," Ms. Farrell said.

    Mike Winkleman, 27, a law student who lives in Miami and, like Ms. Farrell, belongs to the generation of people who came of age with the Internet, said he would like to think that the erosion of his privacy was for "a good cause, like national security or preventing child porn," he said. "But I can't help but feel that for each inch I give, a mile will be taken."

    But Josh Cohen, a financial adviser in Chicago, identifies more closely with a subset of Internet users who see the loss of at least some privacy as the price they pay for being on the Web. Mr. Cohen, 34, said he was willing to accept that tradeoff in the pursuit of national security.

    "We as U.S. citizens have got to start making concessions," he said. "In order for the government to catch people that prey on children, or fight the war on terror, they are going to need the help of the search engines."

    Mr. Cohen said he doubted there would be much compromising of his individual privacy because the amount of data collected by the government was so voluminous. "My rationale tells me that with close to 300 million people in the U.S., and about 45 to 50 percent of households having Internet access, that I don't need to be too concerned with my search engine behavior," he said.

    Susan P. Crawford, a professor at the Cardozo School of Law in New York, agreed that the sheer volume of information obtained by the government was likely to dilute privacy threats.

    "More experienced Internet users would understand that in the mountain of search-related data available in response to a subpoena, it is very unlikely that anything referring to them personally would be revealed," Professor Crawford said.

    She likened one's online activity to walking down the street. "We walk down the street all the time and we can be seen there," she said. "We also move around online, and can be 'seen' to some extent there as well. But we continue to go for walks."

    Nevertheless, last week's court motion is giving some people pause. Sheryl Decker, 47, an information technology manager in Seattle, said she was now thinking twice about what she said in her personal e-mail correspondence. "I have been known to send very unflattering things about our government and our president," Ms. Decker said. "I still do, but I am careful about using certain phrases that I once wouldn't have given a second thought."

    Ms. Decker's caution is being echoed by others. Genny Ballard, 36, a professor of Spanish at Centre College in Danville, Ky., said she had grown more conscious about what she typed into the Google search box. "Each time I put something in, I think about how it could be reconstructed to mean that I have more than an academic curiosity," Ms. Ballard said.

    To be sure, Google is citing a number of reasons for resisting the government's subpoena, including concern about trade secrets and the burden of compliance. While it does not directly assert that surrendering the data would expose personal information, it has told the government that "one can envision scenarios where queries alone could reveal identifying information about a specific Google user, which is another outcome that Google cannot accept."

    Ms. Hanson, who did the "rent boy" search, said that although she was aware that personal information was not being required in the Google case, she remained uneasy.

    She pointed to a continuing interest she has in the Palestinian elections. "If I followed my curiosity and did some Web research, going to Web sites of the parties involved, I would honestly wonder whether someone in my government would someday see my name on a list of people who went to 'terrorist' Web sites," she said.

    Mr. Kowats, the television producer, shares that fear. "Where does it stop?" he said. "What about file sharing? Scalping tickets? Or traveling to Cuba? What if you look up abortion? Who says you can't look up those things? What are the limits? It's the little chipping away. It's a slippery slope."

  14. #74
    RamTime Guest

    Re: Every American Should See And Hear What The Rest Of the World Already Knows

    But we wont play along because hurricane Katrina is not something we want the American people to know anything about. frickin hypocrite

    WASHINGTON, Jan. 24 - The Bush administration, citing the confidentiality of executive branch communications, said Tuesday that it did not plan to turn over certain documents about Hurricane Katrina or make senior White House officials available for sworn testimony before two Congressional committees investigating the storm response.

    The White House this week also formally notified Representative Richard H. Baker, Republican of Louisiana, that it would not support his legislation creating a federally financed reconstruction program for the state that would bail out homeowners and mortgage lenders. Many Louisiana officials consider the bill crucial to recovery, but administration officials said the state would have to use community development money appropriated by Congress.

    The White House's stance on storm-related documents, along with slow or incomplete responses by other agencies, threatens to undermine efforts to identify what went wrong, Democrats on the committees said Tuesday.

    "There has been a near total lack of cooperation that has made it impossible, in my opinion, for us to do the thorough investigation that we have a responsibility to do," Senator Joseph I. Lieberman, Democrat of Connecticut, said at Tuesday's hearing of the Senate committee investigating the response. His spokeswoman said he would ask for a subpoena for documents and testimony if the White House did not comply.

    In response to questions later from a reporter, the deputy White House spokesman, Trent Duffy, said the administration had declined requests to provide testimony by Andrew H. Card Jr., the White House chief of staff; Mr. Card's deputy, Joe Hagin; Frances Fragos Townsend, the domestic security adviser; and her deputy, Ken Rapuano.

    Mr. Duffy said the administration had also declined to provide storm-related e-mail correspondence and other communications involving White House staff members. Mr. Rapuano has given briefings to the committees, but the sessions were closed to the public and were not considered formal testimony.

    "The White House and the administration are cooperating with both the House and Senate," Mr. Duffy said. "But we have also maintained the president's ability to get advice and have conversations with his top advisers that remain confidential."

    Yet even Senator Susan Collins, Republican of Maine, objected when administration officials who were not part of the president's staff said they could not testify about communications with the White House.

    "I completely disagree with that practice," Ms. Collins, chairwoman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, said in an interview Tuesday.

    According to Mr. Lieberman, Michael D. Brown, the former director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, cited such a restriction on Monday, as agency lawyers had advised him not to say whether he had spoken to President Bush or Vice President Dick Cheney or to comment on the substance of any conversations with any other high-level White House officials.

    Nevertheless, both Ms. Collins and Representative Thomas M. Davis III, a Virginia Republican who is leading the House inquiry, said that despite some frustration with the administration's response, they remained confident that the investigations would produce meaningful results.

    Other members of the committees said the executive branch communications were essential because it had become apparent that one of the most significant failures was the apparent lack of complete engagement by the White House and the federal government in the days immediately before and after the storm.

    "When you have a natural disaster, the president needs to be hands-on, and if anyone in his staff gets in the way, he needs to push them away," said Representative Christopher Shays, a Connecticut Republican and member of the House investigating committee. "The response was pathetic."

    Even before the House and Senate investigations began, Democrats called for the appointment of an independent commission, like the one set up after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, to investigate the response to the most costly natural disaster in United States history. The 9/11 Commission, after extensive negotiations, questioned Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney and received sworn testimony from Condoleezza Rice, then the national security adviser.

    "Our fears are turning out to be accurate," Representative Henry A. Waxman, Democrat of California, said Tuesday. "The Bush administration is stonewalling the Congress."

    Mr. Duffy, along with officials from the Departments of Defense and Homeland Security, said that although not every request had been met, the administration had provided an enormous amount of detailed information about nearly every aspect of the federal response to Hurricane Katrina.

    The Department of Defense, for example, has provided 18 officials for testimony, and 57 others have been interviewed by Congressional staff members, said Maj. Paul Swiergosz, a Pentagon spokesman. It has also turned over an estimated 240,000 pages of documents.

    Russ Knocke, a spokesman for the Homeland Security Department, said his agency, which oversees FEMA, had been similarly responsive, providing 60 officials as witnesses and producing 300,000 pages of documents.

    But the White House and other federal agencies have been less helpful, members of the investigating committees said, particularly the Pentagon and Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld, who is the subject of the sole subpoena issued so far.

    "We have been trying - without success - to obtain Secretary Rumsfeld's cooperation for months," Representative Charlie Melancon, Democrat of Louisiana, said in a letter to Representative Davis on Monday. "The situation is not acceptable."

    Mr. Davis, in a written response to Mr. Melancon on Tuesday, said he felt that the Pentagon, after the subpoena, had largely honored the committee's requests.

    The Congressional investigations began in September, shortly after Hurricane Katrina struck the Gulf Coast, flooding New Orleans, devastating much of the rest of the region and causing more than $100 billion in damage.

    Both of the committees are rushing to try to complete their investigations - the House by Feb. 15, and the Senate by the middle of March - in part because of the approaching Atlantic hurricane season, which starts on June 1.

    The separate action this week by the Bush administration to oppose an effort to create what would have been called the Louisiana Recovery Corporation evoked great disappointment among state officials.

    Mr. Baker's bill would have bought out owners of ruined homes, offering them at least 60 percent of their pre-storm equity, while also giving mortgage companies 60 percent of their loans on damaged properties. The bonds needed for the project would have been paid off by selling developers federally acquired land.

    "The Baker bill as a tool was very efficient in terms of helping people sell out, or clear title to the land," said Sean Reilly, a member of the Louisiana Recovery Authority. "We're going to have to go back to the drawing board and do the best with the tools we have."

    Donald E. Powell, the Bush administration's Gulf Coast recovery coordinator, said in a statement that the government was prepared to help victims in other ways.

    "We share the common vision, the common objective of Congressman Baker, to assist uninsured homeowners outside the flood plain," Mr. Powell said.

    Mr. Powell's spokeswoman, D. J. Nordquist, said the administration was open to discussion if the community development money turned out to be insufficient.

  15. #75
    RamTime Guest

    Re: Every American Should See And Hear What The Rest Of the World Already Knows

    Quote Originally Posted by Fat Pang
    RT, I do not agree with your interpretation of the same video images and said so in an earlier post. Neither do I accept that the planes vaporized or that wreckage wasn't present.

    You deny the involvement of Al Qaeda. So I talk about Islam and terrorists.

    You say your government is to blame. So I Talk about government.

    The opinions expressed in your post are worthy of rebuttal by oppposing opinion.

    And please don't make the mistake of confusing me with a "Good German".
    OK Then show me a picture of the wreckage that shows an airplane consistent with a boeing 757 either in shanksville or at the pentagon.

Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •