Thread: Zero Evidence that 9/11 Was an Inside Job

Originally Posted by DDave

Agreed.

And also how their credentials make them experts on the subject they are addressing.

David Ray Griffin is a retired American professor of philosophy of religion and theology. That makes him an expert on the events of 9/11 exactly how I'm not sure, but he certainly is cited a lot.

Why was the head of the 9/11 Commission a "jew"?

Originally Posted by DDave

Agreed.

And also how their credentials make them experts on the subject they are addressing.

David Ray Griffin is a retired American professor of philosophy of religion and theology. That makes him an expert on the events of 9/11 exactly how I'm not sure, but he certainly is cited a lot.

Silly "jewish" girls, you so funny. Why does a person have to be an expert on anything to notice that all those who occupied major gatekeeping positions on 9/11 were "jews"? If the guy who wrote the article didn't document that pretty thoroughly - and he's far from the first - tell us where he's wrong.

And I don't want to hear that typical "jewish" "strategy" of innuendo.

I notice all the "jews" veered away from addressing my article.

Originally Posted by 9/11 was an inside job

what cracks me up about the OCTA'S logic is they say you tube videos have no credibility even though many show credible experts testimony experienced in explosives like foreman talking about the explosions.thats why they wont wacth them and try unsuccessully to redicule them EVERY TIME.ever notice that? hee hee. only what Bush and Cheney say is credible to them.lol.

Yeah, Woogs could have been on the 9/11 Commission. He's good at pooh poohing evidence. (And, girlfriends, testimony is evidence.)

Originally Posted by DDave

I'm not questioning the assertions that there were explosions. If the firefighters on the video say they heard explosions, I certainly believe they heard explosions. If other witnesses said they heard explosions, I believe them as well.

But hearing explosions is proof of nothing more than hearing explosions. It is not proof of bombs or controlled demolition.

Why did the other buildings come down as easily as if it was a demolition but Bldg 7 had to be forcibly brought down?

"But there is no evidence of direct government involvement in the attacks."

You mean the heads of several government agencies can be involved in something, yet there's still no government involvement? How does that work? In detail please.

Originally Posted by 9/11 was an inside job

Priceless,I love it,all you lone nut theorists did EXACTLY what I knew you would do.You evaded the evidence and facts.It never fails,lone nut theorists do that EVERYTIME,you all ran off with your tail between your legs AFTER I asked you to address the facts i brought up and the evidence in these videos on this third post of mine here .

Zero Evidence that 9/11 Was an Inside Job

Must be embarrassing to be you guys that you are all so predictable.lol.

one of you even ADMITTED that you dont watch videos that has an opposing view to your pathetic ramblings.great job,you just proved that all of you just like I have said a hundred times on this thread,wouldnt even last one minute against a first grader in a debating contest.NONE of you dared to address the evidence and facts in those videos because your too afraid to look at it since you know you have nothing to back up your ramblings with.great job,thanks for proving in spades the truth scares you and you cant deal with it.

Im outta here,when I debate with someone,i like to do it with someone open minded who doesnt run off and refuse to address points and then change the subject because they are too close minded and in denial and refuse to look at the evidence.I dont debate with people whos debating skills wouldnt even last one minute against a first grader.

Like someone else said before,even a grade school graduate can see that 9/11 and JFK were inside jobs.hee hee hee.priceless,thanks for proving to everybody here at this site you two have no debating skills whatsoever.lol. Im outta here.

Tell me what you don't agree with in this article: http://tinyurl.com/JewsAmericasWorstEnemies

I didn't realize Mel Gibson had an account here.

Originally Posted by Serfin' USA

Basically. We could design government to be more accountable, but unfortunately, we haven't been very successful with that so far.

The best way to do that is to de-fund all the useless government give-away programs first. Then start looking at each government entity to see if it is worth the $$$$ we are flushing down the drain. GW/AGW research grants come to mind. PP is another. In California the useless CARB (Calif. Air Resources Board). We could do without the EPA too. So much money for absolutely nothing.

Originally Posted by RPA1

The best way to do that is to de-fund all the useless government give-away programs first. Then start looking at each government entity to see if it is worth the $$$$ we are flushing down the drain. GW/AGW research grants come to mind. PP is another. In California the useless CARB (Calif. Air Resources Board). We could do without the EPA too. So much money for absolutely nothing.

I can't support ending the EPA. I'm sure we could still reform it, but environmental standards are necessary and aren't really feasible via private mechanisms.

Like any philosophy, libertarianism has rational limits.