the overall tenor has been pretty homogeneous, please dont waste time on that
1. To take a case to court implicating a multi billion corp and the gov in the cover up of 911 is not something many people would be willing to do
2. YOu may, but people are different.
again, pelase dont make me have to tell u this again
I know I did, as I said, he told me, and I cant remember. This is just my word, and you may treat it is you wish. Come to the next 911 London event, and you can maybe find out more from people who know him better than i
what an odd thing to say. what an odd person you must be. Where have I condoned covering up 3000 deaths?
I have never intimated as to what i would do; I am simply saying that people are different, not controversial outside fascist circles
as above
Oh please, changed his story,.... show me where please
He has implied that they were involved, at least passively and in the cover up. This is pretty huge. They have taken no steps to deny, or even reprimand him. I dont believe you, or anyone else got round to offering a sensible explanation of this
example?
acceptable behaviour for an OTer to a CTer tho?
what the hell are you talking about? Give me one example?
again, another example
What an odd person you are! What the hell are you talking about? I go onto the streets protesting at the deaths of these people, what the hell do you do, other than be complicit in your stupidity? Show me where I have been contemptuous of their deaths
thats because that is normal reaction to people who provide theories without proof is everything else points to the claims being false, everything points to him being a liar
1. he wouldnt take the case to court, he would inform the police, they would investigate his claims, if there was evidence then it would be taken to court by the prosecution, he would only be a bit part player, if there was no evidence then he loses his job at worst,. it would be pretty unrealistic to think he would be the only one to stand by these claims to the police if they were true, others would follow surely?
2. sorry, but in most cases the majority would do something about their dead colleagues, you obviously have not answered whether you would or not, why is this?
you have zero proof that there has ever been a denial by FT or even an official account of this story, this answers some of your later statments
i ask you a question about these deaths and you handwave it with a "ok"
are you calling me a facist? or intimating it? if so you are very far from the truth
read the links already supplied to his claims, they have changed?
show us where he has ever implied that FT were involved in the cover up, if not this again answers some of your later statements
it has been pointed out by others about your contradictory claims
do i use snideness in my replies to you, or rudeness?
you added in the claims about his real name, deflection tactic
as you would say, see above answers about proof
rudeness and snideness again, and you have done nothing because you are doing exactly nothing with your smoking guns, you handwave my question or staments about these deaths with a wave of the hand and an "OK"
i like the claims in the other posts about the 10's of millions who know about the claims, every truther i know makes grandoise claims about the millions that are on the good guys side, yet how many do they get at ground zero on the anniversary?
if you look at members numbers for all the sites involved in the truth or debunking movements, how many members does each have? millions? think again
how many attend the uk meetings out of interest?
