remember that one? Saddam is coming to poison your home! Duct tape it air tight!We all know Saddam flew all those planes and bailed out just in time.
What if he fueled his drones with nano-gas?remember that one? Saddam is coming to poison your home! Duct tape it air tight!
Saddam actually did have drones capable of 500 mile radius flight... you have to wonder why he never hit Israel; they were within reach. USA was not even close.
NIST did not make an independent investigation that came to conclusions...
quite the opposite...
The Federal government put out contracts for bid to NIST; in order to capture the prize money, engineering firms had to give the best explanation for how the fires brought down the towers and WTC7. The conclusion was already set in the contracts... in short, Bush bribed NIST to back up his 09/11 lies and they took the bribes.
No one dared cross Bush, well almost no one, but the 1000 people who did went missing.
So this was the first scientific investigation of the collapse that didn't start with a conclusion. Anyone with a brain knows it was demolition. But politics is the art of lying with a stiff upper lip, eh?
no kidding?You are wasting your time trying to convince me your whackadoodle conspiracy is worthy of any effort on my part.
Okay, let's look at your argument...No, discussing the validity of the primary source the thread is based on is exactly relevant to the thread. In no way shape or form is that thread jacking.
Is that what I said?Okay, let's look at your argument...
what you are saying is the University of Alaska did no such study, that this is all Russian propaganda... correct? Because I've already come across the study when searching Google and YouTube.
So, now do you want to discuss the topic or look for another thread jack?
translation: I was thread jacking all along ... it is all I have here.Is that what I said?
Nope. That is clearly not what I said.
How about you review and get back to me when you figure out the right answer.
Translation: to refute my point you would have to first be able to re state my point accurately.translation: I was thread jacking all along ... it is all I have here.
If you ever want to discuss the thread topic, let me know.
Wow, you are slow.By the way.
Discussing the primary source a thread was based on is NEVER thread jacking.
It's a logic thing.
Discussing the use of questionable sources is always valid.Wow, you are slow.
debating the source questions whether the story is authentic.
this is a simple search....
Univ of Alaska confirms 9/11 collapse of Bldg 7 was controlled demolition (Link)
Okay so the story is authentic. Now do you want to discuss the content of the story?
What do you want a gold star for making a valid point? I'm giving you a gold star.Discussing the use of questionable sources is always valid.