That doesn't make sense. All the people in the know would have been aware they were killing thousands of US civilians, and you're suggesting their justification for doing so was to save time bring the towers down later. Your argument makes no sense.
He suggested they knew the planes were going to hit. I pointed out that that would be enough to get the population to support military intervention and he hasn't disagreed with that, he's said they planted bombs to bring down the towers to save time doing it later. So yes, he did.
What? So you're suggesting that they killed thousands of people, got many demolition experts to work on the building in secret (people that they still have to keep quiet today), not to give them reason to go to war, but to save time demolishing the buildings at a later date?
Come on WD, you...
Right, so we can ignore that incident. So you're saying the other two incidents show that they could have arranged 9/11?
You haven't explained the above.
So, Operation Northwoods:
What acts of terrorism against the US were actually proposed?
One thing the US would learn from that, is that the...
Oh ok, you think the US knew months in advance that terrorists were going to fly planes into the towers, so they thought 'I know, let's place explosives there in case the massive passenger jets don't do enough damage'.
If they knew planes were going to hit the towers, why wouldn't that be...
If that's all you thought, there wouldn't be this car crash debate. Are you sure you've not suggested the footage of the planes hitting the towers was faked?
The Gulf of Tonkin incident was between warships, so nothing to do with allowing an attack on their populace. And as far as I can tell, it...
I'm not struggling to cope. You were complaining about the insults people were making towards WD and said it's a mobbing, and I asked what you suggested we all do instead. That's it. I'm not struggling with it.
It's really the CTs I find bonkers, rather than the actual debate. I don't see why I...
Can you explain how any of those are in any way similar to a government deciding to allow the murder of thousands of their own citizens, destruction of their financial trade centre, and the pentagon etc?
Slight exaggeration there. So you're suggestion is that we ignore the CTs, that's your advice?
You make it sound like spending time on this thread is bad for my health or something. I don't mind spending some time here, as others have said, it takes away from the depressing news that we haven't...
That's a lot more plausible. It requires keeping much fewer people quiet and doesn't demand a lack of scientific scrutiny. As such, it won't generally lead to everyone arguing with you, as there can't really be much evidence against the claim.
We do. Governments have more than their share of selfish liars who'll cover things up for their own benefit etc. Although killing several thousand of their own innocent people is probably a bit much, even for them, that doesn't stop me questioning what happened. So I question it, and everything...
So someone posts nonsense about 9/11 being a conspiracy, and acts like we're all sheep believing lies, we're supposed to look in a mirror?
Oh wait, were you trying to make a joke? :tumble:
Needs work.
That does happen, but in the circumstances you can see that one person has been disagreeing with everyone else, so 'us' was a fair point on this occasion.
Thanks, you've just shown one of the usual explosions of things within the building (oil or gas etc) that hasn't resulted in the building coming down. Completely different to when all the explosions go off and a building immediately drops in a controlled demolition.
No it didn't, it clearly wasn't explosives. I've explained this to you before (maybe even this thread), with videos of how buildings really come down with explosives - with really loud explosions and collapsing from the bottom, not the top.
How old are you?