Jim Corr is a legend for having the courage to present a completely alternative view

curiousn

Jim Corr went on The Last Word this evening expressing his belief that the official version of 911 doesn't make sense. A lot of people texted in agreeing with his point of view, a lot of people texted to say he should stick to the music.

Before you knock him watch the Google video "911 Mysteries" and THEN DECIDE FOR YOURSELF. But don't just knock the whole notion without seeing a second side of the story.

http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=911+mysteries&sitesearch=#

Fair play to you Jim, I applaud you for having the courage to present some information so far from what most people believe that you know it's going to get you ridiculed. Politicians and those in the mainstream media don't have 1/100th of his courage.

johnny_ultimate

That you, Jim?

Honestly though, it seems like a crazy conspiracy theory. Alternative, yes. But that a coherent opinion does not make. Its excessive scaremongering, and I'd want more proof than a google video before I go listening to his conspiracys.

sink

Tin foil hat stuff if you ask me. And does this belong the the EU forum?

johnny_ultimate

sink wrote: »

Tin foil hat stuff if you ask me. And doed this belong the the EU forum?

Admittedly, Jim Corr was discussing Lisbon and the EU in relation to a New World Order...

mike65

The OP is a spammer.

I said spammer.

Mike.

R0C0

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Honestly though, it seems like a crazy conspiracy theory. Alternative, yes. But that a coherent opinion does not make. Its excessive scaremongering, and I'd want more proof than a google video before I go listening to his conspiracys.

Yeah, two planes knock 3 buildings.
Most of the supposed highjackers found alive.
Not one single bit of footage from the pentagon showing the plane hitting it.
World Trade Centre Building 7 completely ommited from official Commision report.
Coroner stating he had no bodies to deal with in pensylvania, and a distinct lack of plane wreckage there.
Firefighters and people in the buildings reporting internal explosions.
Buildings falling at the speed of gravity, perfectly into their own footprint, with no resistance.
Visible demolition squibs (explosions) in virtually all 9/11 footage (Easily visible in Slow mo).
The first and only steel structured buildings in history to fall due to fire, despite others burning hotter, and for longer.
Thermite(Used in professional demolitions) being found all over ground zero.
People suffering from intake of Pulverized concrete, impossible if they just collapsed.
Aeroplane Black boxes found, but then lost.
All steel, evidence in the biggest crime scene in history, pivotal in determining the reason for the collapse, was illegally and rapidly destroyed immediately following 9/11.
Insider trading before 9/11. Must be psychics.
Billion dollar insurance policy taken out before the demolition.
The US Air defence stand down.
Wargames, being carried out, on 9/11, playing out scenerio's of a plane being flown into the Pentagon, and a major air disaster in New York, lead to confusion amongst air defense as to whether the attacks are real or not.
The Bush/Bin laden business connections.
Bush snr was at a business meeting with Osama Bin Ladens brothers on 9/11
The CIA funded and armed Al Qaeda, the supposed perpetrators.
US and UK force deployments to Afghanistan already in place on Sept 9th.
"No one could have imagined flying planes into buildings" is the official line from the American Government. Yet they themselves propose it in the Operation Northwoods papers.
The LONG LONG list of admitted, officially available to read about, false flag operations carried out by the CIA!
I could just go on and on and on etc

Yeah.. in fairness, the official 9/11 story insults the intelligence of a 8 year old, but anyone who questions it is a conspiracy theorist loon! You don't have to watch a google video for your information mate, there are literally thousands of pages of official Government documents that more than throw the whole thing up in the air. For god sake, commisioners walked out of the official investigation wanting to testify against it before congress, but were gagged.

Nuttzz

Jim sounded like he did too many drugs during his music career and had too much time to spend after it...

Sherifu

Jim'll Fix It.

curiousn

You're seeing first hand the reason why these things can easily be covered up. The non-official view is so far removed from what people could easily believe that 99% of people will call anyone who questions it a nutter, no matter how much evidence they have.

Just call someone a "conspiracy theorist" and they'll be instantly discredited and chastised in the media, while nobody bothers to really examine the evidence. This exactly what we're seeing played out in the media and message boards.

It's difficult to say whether it was deliberately orchastrated or just let happen, but the evidence against the offical story and government cover up (no official investigation etc..) is just too hard to ignore.

Franko73

I think Jim took a big risk in going on national radio with his views and the sun this morning has him on the front page.

Regardless of if it is conspiricy nonsense or hidden fact, I think it is important that people are aware of what is going on behind the scenes. As Vincent Browne point out yesterday the Lisbon treaty document is completely unreadable to the normal Joe Soap so we dont even know what we are voting for or against and hence the scaremongering and lies are put forward by our wonderful leaders who have admitted they have not even read it!

Good man Jim, I happen to think there is something else going on behind the scenes, I dont know if its a 911 coverup and all that but the new world order thing is very interesting and the more you research it the creepier it becomes. You must be objective though and ask yourself what info is correct and factual and what is nonsense.

Fair play Jim, maybe we should all hook up and talk about this, bring your sisters!

Franko73

a good example is the film 'loose change' which blew a lot of people away (free to download and worth a watch) and then 'f**k loose change' came out which provided an alternative to each point made in the original.

I recommend you look at both, fascinating how info can be presented from both sides.....

Remember Hilter burnt the Reichstag in order to convince the German people the commies were coming!!!

flo8s967qjh0nd

Looooooooooper!!!!


Jim Corr quotes an "Article 2 Protocol 6" in the Charter of fundamental rights saying that "A state may make provisions in its law for the death penalty in respect to acts committed in time of war or in imminent threat of war".

The only place this protocol exists is in Jim's pretty messed up head.

He just made this up. NO basis in fact what so ever.
(view the text of the charter here: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/JOHtml.do?uri=OJ%3AC%3A2007%3A303%3ASOM%3AEN%3AHTML)

If anything he said was true; why would he need to make something up??

Somebody needs to have a word with him and suggest he makes another album....too much time on his hands.

Here's the audio from his chat with Matt Cooper. Please listen to it, I'd hate to think people thought I was bashing Jim Corr for no good reason. Even the most hardened No-voter could not take this guy seriously.
http://www.zshare.net/audio/12824423c7ed4c4f/

the_fat_mile

the interveiw was posted to youtube last night for anyone that wants a listen.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=gMTJS4wnmF8

It was incredible stuff

MoominPapa

Chelsea Early Rugby wrote: »

The only place this protocol exists is in Jim's pretty messed up head.
He just made this up. NO basis in fact what so ever.

In fairness to him he just got his articles and protocols mixed up
http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/EN/Treaties/Html/114.htm

Not in fairness to him these articles were agreed 25 years ago but because its news to Jim Corr he needs to warn the rest of us. Have to say best audio entertainment I've ever got from the Corrs

KERPAL

R0C0 wrote: »

Yeah, two planes knock 3 buildings.
Most of the supposed highjackers found alive.
Not one single bit of footage from the pentagon showing the plane hitting it.
World Trade Centre Building 7 completely ommited from official Commision report.
Coroner stating he had no bodies to deal with in pensylvania, and a distinct lack of plane wreckage there.
Firefighters and people in the buildings reporting internal explosions.
Buildings falling at the speed of gravity, perfectly into their own footprint, with no resistance.
Visible demolition squibs (explosions) in virtually all 9/11 footage (Easily visible in Slow mo).
The first and only steel structured buildings in history to fall due to fire, despite others burning hotter, and for longer.
Thermite(Used in professional demolitions) being found all over ground zero.
People suffering from intake of Pulverized concrete, impossible if they just collapsed.
Aeroplane Black boxes found, but then lost.
All steel, evidence in the biggest crime scene in history, pivotal in determining the reason for the collapse, was illegally and rapidly destroyed immediately following 9/11.
Insider trading before 9/11. Must be psychics.
Billion dollar insurance policy taken out before the demolition.
The US Air defence stand down.
Wargames, being carried out, on 9/11, playing out scenerio's of a plane being flown into the Pentagon, and a major air disaster in New York, lead to confusion amongst air defense as to whether the attacks are real or not.
The Bush/Bin laden business connections.
Bush snr was at a business meeting with Osama Bin Ladens brothers on 9/11
The CIA funded and armed Al Qaeda, the supposed perpetrators.
US and UK force deployments to Afghanistan already in place on Sept 9th.
"No one could have imagined flying planes into buildings" is the official line from the American Government. Yet they themselves propose it in the Operation Northwoods papers.
The LONG LONG list of admitted, officially available to read about, false flag operations carried out by the CIA!
I could just go on and on and on etc

Yeah.. in fairness, the official 9/11 story insults the intelligence of a 8 year old, but anyone who questions it is a conspiracy theorist loon! You don't have to watch a google video for your information mate, there are literally thousands of pages of official Government documents that more than throw the whole thing up in the air. For god sake, commisioners walked out of the official investigation wanting to testify against it before congress, but were gagged.

Sigh another victim of the youtube revolution

sink

Does anyone else find it ironic that there is another completely contradictory and equally implausible conspiracy theory making the rounds? That Libertas founder Declan Ganley has deep links with the American intelligence community and is being funded by them to usurp the EU federation because of the threats it poses to American dominance of Europe. I bet the sort of confused people that believe either are likely to believe both even with their glaring contradictions.

KERPAL

Jim Corr, another victim of the youtube revolution.

Sad, sad, sad, sad, sad man

humanji

I've also noticed that I've never seen Declan Ganley and Jim Corr in the same place at the same time! Maybe they're the same person?

Moriarty

Moved to conspiracy theories.

/boggles

skelliser

jim also forgot to mention protocol 13 of the European convention on human rights "Protocol No. 13 to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, concerning the abolition of the death penalty in all circumstances"

http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/en/Treaties/Html/187.htm

which was ratified in 2002.

R0C0

KERPAL wrote: »

Sigh another victim of the youtube revolution

I don't even know how to respond to this... its that moronic. Go watch RTÉ or something!

KERPAL

R0C0 wrote: »

I don't even know how to respond to this... its that moronic. Go watch RTÉ or something!

I just think its a disgrace that you have the cheek to question 9/11. Its not a matter for conspiracies, a few thousand people died, it was Osama Bin Laden and his cohorts, there is no denying it, yes the usa might have withheld information to save face a bit, but there is not a chance that a conspiracy of that magnitude would be concocted by any organisation. The benefits of 9/11 to USA are unclear, there were none.

R0C0

KERPAL wrote: »

I just think its a disgrace that you have the cheek to question 9/11. Its not a matter for conspiracies, a few thousand people died, it was Osama Bin Laden and his cohorts, there is no denying it, yes the usa might have withheld information to save face a bit, but there is not a chance that a conspiracy of that magnitude would be concocted by any organisation. The benefits of 9/11 to USA are unclear, there were none.

Your mother didn't breast feed you did she?

JJ6000

R0C0 wrote: »

Yeah, two planes knock 3 buildings.
Most of the supposed highjackers found alive.
Not one single bit of footage from the pentagon showing the plane hitting it.
World Trade Centre Building 7 completely ommited from official Commision report.
Coroner stating he had no bodies to deal with in pensylvania, and a distinct lack of plane wreckage there.
Firefighters and people in the buildings reporting internal explosions.
Buildings falling at the speed of gravity, perfectly into their own footprint, with no resistance.
Visible demolition squibs (explosions) in virtually all 9/11 footage (Easily visible in Slow mo).
The first and only steel structured buildings in history to fall due to fire, despite others burning hotter, and for longer.
Thermite(Used in professional demolitions) being found all over ground zero.
People suffering from intake of Pulverized concrete, impossible if they just collapsed.
Aeroplane Black boxes found, but then lost.
All steel, evidence in the biggest crime scene in history, pivotal in determining the reason for the collapse, was illegally and rapidly destroyed immediately following 9/11.
Insider trading before 9/11. Must be psychics.
Billion dollar insurance policy taken out before the demolition.
The US Air defence stand down.
Wargames, being carried out, on 9/11, playing out scenerio's of a plane being flown into the Pentagon, and a major air disaster in New York, lead to confusion amongst air defense as to whether the attacks are real or not.
The Bush/Bin laden business connections.
Bush snr was at a business meeting with Osama Bin Ladens brothers on 9/11
The CIA funded and armed Al Qaeda, the supposed perpetrators.
US and UK force deployments to Afghanistan already in place on Sept 9th.
"No one could have imagined flying planes into buildings" is the official line from the American Government. Yet they themselves propose it in the Operation Northwoods papers.
The LONG LONG list of admitted, officially available to read about, false flag operations carried out by the CIA!
I could just go on and on and on etc

Yeah.. in fairness, the official 9/11 story insults the intelligence of a 8 year old, but anyone who questions it is a conspiracy theorist loon! You don't have to watch a google video for your information mate, there are literally thousands of pages of official Government documents that more than throw the whole thing up in the air. For god sake, commisioners walked out of the official investigation wanting to testify against it before congress, but were gagged.

Why dont you refer to my response to this ridiculous post in the after hourse forum.

Your theory is ludicrous and has been proven to be absolutley false.

Conspiracy theorists rarely look into anything other than what will fit their theory. They see what they wnt to see.

JJ6000

Please also explain this:

If the US govt carried out 9/11 then why do Al Qaeda consistently claim responsibility for it??

Do the conspiracy nuts think that both sides are lieing?? Do they think that Al Qaeda is in on the conspiracy with the US Govt??

R0C0

JJ6000 wrote: »

Please also explain this:

If the US govt carried out 9/11 then why do Al Qaeda consistently claim responsibility for it??

Do the conspiracy nuts think that both sides are lieing?? Do they think that Al Qaeda is in on the conspiracy with the US Govt??

Where did Al Qaeda come from? Who armed and funded them?

KERPAL

R0C0 wrote: »

Your mother didn't breast feed you did she?

Cant believe im actually posting in the 9/11 didnt happen forum.
Get a grip, get a life, you have been manipulated by youtube, admit it, be a man.

Nick_oliveri

KERPAL wrote: »

The benefits of 9/11 to USA are unclear, there were none.

Dude. Pretext for the Invasion of two countries/unending war on terrorjism/ suspension of prisoners rights/torture(waterboarding, others?)/scaremongering/ extraordinary renditions/Guantanamo/Unknown Civilian casualties in both Iraq and Afghan (when did we stop caring about that now..) /wiretaps....surely more

The above is how the US Administration has benefited or leeched from 9/11, these are facts without the need for a grand conspiracy. To say there were none is just baseless.

Whether they may have caused the event to happen or had anything got to do with it is another persons long, drawn out, unending and pointless internet bitchfight.

KERPAL

Nick_oliveri wrote: »

Dude. Pretext for the Invasion of two countries/unending war on terrorjism/ suspension of prisoners rights/torture(waterboarding, others?)/scaremongering/ extraordinary renditions/Guantanamo/Unknown Civilian casualties in both Iraq and Afghan (when did we stop caring about that now..) /wiretaps....surely more

Fair point, Not exactly benefits, although apart from civilian casualties, the others have all had a positive effect in our safety imho.

Kernel

KERPAL wrote: »

I just think its a disgrace that you have the cheek to question 9/11. Its not a matter for conspiracies, a few thousand people died, it was Osama Bin Laden and his cohorts, there is no denying it, yes the usa might have withheld information to save face a bit, but there is not a chance that a conspiracy of that magnitude would be concocted by any organisation. The benefits of 9/11 to USA are unclear, there were none.

The cheek to question?!? It's of utmost importance that people question. Or are we to blindly swallow the words of our leaders? :rolleyes: As for the benefits, it's already been answered by Nick.

And, +1, Jim is a legend. Might wake up a few more people.

Nick_oliveri

KERPAL wrote: »

Fair point, Not exactly benefits, although apart from civilian casualties, the others have all had a positive effect in our safety imho.

And where would be the proof of this? Whos safety? The Americans? Tourists?

Its amazing how quickly we all became tagets of terrorism that could strike at any time any place specifically after that day. Its as if terrorjism never existed before this. You have a better chance of being molested by harold shipman than being a terrrorism victim. Although that depends largely on your definition of terror.

I might draw comparison to invading someones country with a baffling motive and killing their civilians with terror. But thats just me. Who cares about the dead right? Collaterral damage and all that. Hi ho.

curiousn

Matt Cooper was reading out more comments from listeners today.

Matt said that a structural engineer from Cork wrote in to say that there's no way a skyscraper like that could be expected to withstand the impact of a large jet plan. From his engineering experience he dismissed the whole theory.

On this matter, a more important expert opinion is that of Frank A. DeMartini, Manager of WTC Construction, who built the towers. Here he is on camera (in January 2001) explaining that the towers were designed to take the impact of multiple aircraft strikes (jets larger than the one which actually hit them)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bDGInaB0eQM

However, I've no doubt many listeners were swayed by the opinion of the structural engineer from Cork.

Ciaran500

curiousn wrote: »

On this matter, a more important expert opinion is that of Frank A. DeMartini, Manager of WTC Construction, who built the towers. Here he is on camera (in January 2001) explaining that the towers were designed to take the impact of multiple aircraft strikes (jets larger than the one which actually hit them)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bDGInaB0eQM

http://www.scienceinafrica.co.za/2004/march/wtc.htm
Leslie Robinson designed his towers to withstand being hit by a 707. But the scenario of his design was very different from what happened on September 11th : He envisaged a 707 lost in fog looking for the airport, low on fuel at the end of its flight, with a pilot not daring to go faster than the stalling speed of 280 km per hour under such dangerous conditions.

Very different scenario to 911.

curiousn

Ciaran500, I take your point about speed and fuel on a single plane.

However each tower was designed to survive "multiple impacts"

Ciaran500

curiousn wrote: »

However each tower was designed to survive "multiple impacts"

Designed for one 707, in the video he said it "probably" could sustain multiple hits.

curiousn

Ciaran500,

yes or no, have you watched the full video 911 Mysteries?

Saint Ruth

curiousn wrote: »

Matt Cooper was reading out more comments from listeners today.

Matt said that a structural engineer from Cork wrote in to say that there's no way a skyscraper like that could be expected to withstand the impact of a large jet plan. From his engineering experience he dismissed the whole theory.
...
However, I've no doubt many listeners were swayed by the opinion of the structural engineer from Cork.

No. Someone who claimed to be a "structural engineer from Cork" (yeah, that city of skyscrapers) said that.

And yeah, I've no doubt that many stupid people were swayed by the opinion of someone they never met and whose credentials and experience they didn't validate...

Why? Because they WANT to believe...it's easy to persude someone who WANTS to believe what your saynig...as Lenin said, "Useful Idiots"...

Saint Ruth

Nick_oliveri wrote: »

Dude. Pretext for the Invasion of two countries/unending war on terrorjism/ suspension of prisoners rights/torture(waterboarding, others?)/scaremongering/ extraordinary renditions/Guantanamo/Unknown Civilian casualties in both Iraq and Afghan (when did we stop caring about that now..) /wiretaps....surely more.

Yeah, so they do this and blame a country (Afganistan) with as a pretext to invade a country with nothing but sand and mountains??
Considering they were so expert in arranging this conspiracy, isn't it strange they didn't have Saddam as the bad guy instead of Binners?

I can see it now. Bush is there "You know what I'd like! Civilian casualties in Afghanistan! That'd be great!"

KERPAL

Saint Ruth wrote: »

Yeah, so they do this and blame a country (Afganistan) with as a pretext to invade a country with nothing but sand and mountains??
Considering they were so expert in arranging this conspiracy, isn't it strange they didn't have Saddam as the bad guy instead of Binners?

I can see it now. Bush is there "You know what I'd like! Civilian casualties in Afghanistan! That'd be great!"

Excellent point.

Ciaran500

curiousn wrote: »

Ciaran500,

yes or no, have you watched the full video 911 Mysteries?

Nope I've seen enough CT videos over the years to be sick of them, they never stand up to property scrutiny. They're very selective with the information they give you and make extraordinary claims with minimal evidence.

bonkey

curiousn wrote: »

However each tower was designed to survive "multiple impacts"

Both towers did withstand the impacts, which were at levels far greater than the buildings were (possibly) designed to handle.

No-one credible has ever claimed that impact alone caused the buildings to fail....and anyone involved in the design has only ever said that it was impact that the buildings were designed to withstand. In case you think they may have meant impact and resultant fires, I would point out that back then they didn't have the computer-power or the mathematical models to model the resultant fires, so its an absolute impossibility that they could have been designed to withstand them.

Hell, modelling the fires that did ensue took the most complex model of its type ever built, using more computer power than anyone had ever used in such modelling before.....so the suggestion that this level of analysis was done in the design over 40 years ago would be nothing short of lunatic.

Nick_oliveri

Saint Ruth wrote: »

Yeah, so they do this and blame a country (Afganistan) with as a pretext to invade a country with nothing but sand and mountains??
Considering they were so expert in arranging this conspiracy, isn't it strange they didn't have Saddam as the bad guy instead of Binners?

I can see it now. Bush is there "You know what I'd like! Civilian casualties in Afghanistan! That'd be great!"

Well, i may be taking your post wrong (ive only just got up!) but i never said anyone was expert in creating the conspiracy. Im just naming the benefits the administration has reaped "post 9/11" in response to KERPAL's post claiming the opposite.

Even the words "post 9/11" matter here. "Post 9/11" there was a large campaign of scaremongering in the media. Sky News joined in too.After repeating the videos of the day for two weeks straight, when it was deemed innapropriate that the media should continue showing these videos, it became a large terror scaremongering campaign.

They lapped it up claiming that there was more to come. A strike at any time any place. Terror alert orange. So much so that the word "terrorist" lost most of its meaning.

You dont have to be complicit in "teh conspiracy" to reap the benefits. Either way, complicit or not, its still disgraceful to reap the benefits. Like everyone owed them something. Remember when French Fries became Freedom Fries? A good example of the "With us or against us" Statement.

Iraq lacks steadfast motive, i myself cannot believe the Oil motive anymore. It doesnt make sense that they would dress up a dossier claiming there were mobile chemical weapons labs or even the British with thier 45 minute attack thing.

That was an International conspiracy against Iraq. Be Saddam a wanker (understatement? yes!) or not, he wasnt worth the death and carnage that ensued. Its amazing in this day and age that intellegence services can completly and utterly feck up everything, dress it up and get away with it. Meanwhile theres innocent people dying for this.

Excuse my spelling.

Kernel

Saint Ruth wrote: »

Yeah, so they do this and blame a country (Afganistan) with as a pretext to invade a country with nothing but sand and mountains??
Considering they were so expert in arranging this conspiracy, isn't it strange they didn't have Saddam as the bad guy instead of Binners?

I can see it now. Bush is there "You know what I'd like! Civilian casualties in Afghanistan! That'd be great!"

Well, apart from mountains and sand, they also have oil and huge gas reserves. not to mention an area of strategic importance.

http://english.people.com.cn/200610/12/eng20061012_311246.html

Why have Saddam as the bad guy, when you can have some shadowy lad who can't be located and whose 'organisation' cannot be defeated and thus provide a nice patsy for a long term agenda.

JJ6000

R0C0 wrote: »

Where did Al Qaeda come from? Who armed and funded them?

Are you asking me because you dont know?

Anyways, they were formed around 1989 as the soviets withdrew from afghanistan.
Who funded them?? I dont know.....
It was not the US however. THey may have funded the Mujahideen when Afgh was occupied by the soviets, but AQ never received a single cent from the US govt.
THey also did not arm AQ.....they armed the Mujahideen during the soviet occupation.

The Mujahideen are/were absolutley not the same thing as AQ so any argument that the US armed/funded AQ is totally redundant.

po0k

Sherifu wrote: »

Jim'll Fix It.

Post of the Month

BigglesMcGee

JJ6000 wrote: »

Why dont you refer to my response to this ridiculous post in the after hourse forum.

Your theory is ludicrous and has been proven to be absolutley false.

Conspiracy theorists rarely look into anything other than what will fit their theory. They see what they wnt to see.

Well said and completly true. Whats the link? id like to read it.

BigglesMcGee

Kernel wrote: »

The cheek to question?!? It's of utmost importance that people question. Or are we to blindly swallow the words of our leaders? :rolleyes: As for the benefits, it's already been answered by Nick.

And, +1, Jim is a legend. Might wake up a few more people.

No, we are to blindly follow the words on youtube

Kernel

BigglesMcGee wrote: »

No, we are to blindly follow the words on youtube

Blindly follow anything at your own peril.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

keep an open mind, but not so open that your brain falls out.

wise words, relevant too.

grenache

Jim Corr was only saying what a lot of people already believe to be true - that 9/11 was the biggest cover-up in history. Very little of the US governments ''official findings'' makes sense. How on earth could anyone ever believe a word that is spouted by the Bush administration and previous American admins....the very people who claim to defend democracy and freedom and yet fully backed muderous tyrants such as Pinochet and Batista.

The only conspiracy theory is the US Governments pathetic explanation of the events on 9/11!

bonkey

grenache wrote: »

Very little of the US governments ''official findings'' makes sense.

Tell you what...lets put this to the test.

Pick one thing in the official findings that doesn't make sense. Don't post a list of your top 10. Don't post a link to some video.

Pick one thing that you are absolutely, positively certain does not make sense.

If you want to, explain why it makes no sense. If you don't want to go to that effort...that's fine, too. The important thing is that you post something that you are 100% certain cannot be sensibly explained and that you limit yourself to one thing.

I'm willing to bet here and now that no matter what you post, it will either turn out to be an inaccurate statement, or there will be a sensible explanation for it (although I accept that you mightn't accept that explanation). That, or that you will be unable to pick one thing, or you won't take up the challenge at all.

The only conspiracy theory is the US Governments pathetic explanation of the events on 9/11!

Yes, yes. People have been saying that since before there was an explanation.

Seriously...just one thing. It can't be that hard.