Thread: What Fox reporter Dick Oliver saw and heard on 9/11 (no plane)

Originally Posted by RtWngaFraud

"Cherry picking"? You mean like "uranium from Africa" and "yellow cake", as was used in the POTUS speech for the planned invasion of Iraq? You know, that country that was behind 9/11?

Who claimed Iraq was behind 9/11?

Originally Posted by RtWngaFraud

"Cherry picking"? You mean like "uranium from Africa" and "yellow cake", as was used in the POTUS speech for the planned invasion of Iraq? You know, that country that was behind 9/11?

Apples and oranges.

try to stick to the topic

Ok we'll list this as one more witness for NO PLANE.

Rebuttal to what?

I asked you to show me the testimony of the witness. I ask you to show me that he agrees with your conclusion. You have failed to do so.

How can you list this person as a witness for no plane without even speaking to them?

Heh.

Seems like Dick Oliver is a bit of a joke in NY circles.

http://www.mediabistro.com/tvspy/tag/dick-oliver

I guess SNL is in on it too.

Originally Posted by Soupnazi

Apples and oranges.

try to stick to the topic

All part of the same rehearsed, staged pie.

Try and use a little forethought on occasion.

Originally Posted by LoneStrSt8

Who claimed Iraq was behind 9/11?

It's the reason (we were told) that we had to invade Iraq by our former head terrorist.

All part of the same rehearsed, staged pie.

This post has nothing to do with Dick Oliver.

Uranium from Africa has nothing to do with Dick Oliver.

Iraq has nothing to do with Dick Oliver.

Originally Posted by Fangbeer

This post has nothing to do with Dick Oliver.

Uranium from Africa has nothing to do with Dick Oliver.

Iraq has nothing to do with Dick Oliver.

My apologies. I didn't mean to bring up uncomfortable points. I'll try and stick to responding to your agenda. Ok?

I can't help asking the obvious (to me) common sense question regarding this kind of claim.

Stepping back a little, if the claim is that there were in fact no places crashing in to the WTC buildings, it poses a huge "why?". The implication is the conspiracy to demolish the buildings under the cover of a fake terrorist attack for insurance money and/or promote war in the Middle East.

If you were making such a plan and had explosives but no planes, why would your fake terrorist attack involve planes striking the building, requiring some kind of massive scheme faking news footage (some live) and private videos and generally convincing the thousands of eye witnesses there was more to what they saw. Why bother with all that hassle? Wouldn't a fake bomb attack be a much more practical method?

Originally Posted by RtWngaFraud

All part of the same rehearsed, staged pie.

Try and use a little forethought on occasion.

No it was not actually.

Even if Bush did exploit 911 to invade Iraq it does not prove 911 was staged in fact you have no evidence it was staged or an inside job.

You've been debunked and taken to task on every thread and proven to be unable to defend your lame argument.

There fore it is apples and oranges to compare use of cherry picked statements concerning 911 and quotes from Bush concerning Iraq.