Sierra Posted March 25, 2006 Share Posted March 25, 2006 Sierra, you're misunderstanding the language. It's not an insult, he means that he's surprised (and a bit sarcastic). The American saying has quite another meaning! Yes, you're right Tony. This is the meaning in the US. It's a rude way for a man to tell a woman to shut up. I'm sorry venger for the misunderstanding. If I'm wrong. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. i think you misunderstand, my little american friend. the saying is more like, "bloomin' heck!", or "bugger me!"..."well, blow me down!" do you follow? as for the 911 events, i think you'd have to be more than a little close-minded to ignore the fact that there is 'more than meets the eye' here. watch that video referenced before, and then check my link out... of course, form your own opinions, if you still can, bro:) Yes, thanks. I can still form my own opinions. And close minded, moi? There's close minded, and then there's, as Forrest Gump said, "things that just don't make no sense." This, my little British friend, don't make no sense. I'm not saying my government doesn't lie to me, because I know they do. I'm not saying they're always right, because I know they most assuredly are NOT. I don't believe everything they tell me and I don't like the way they waste my money. And dude, I'm a sistah, not a bro. Thanks Sierra I'm pretty sure that he didn't mean it in the way it would come across in the States, but he was still being sarcastic. I wish more Americans would post on this thread. I said right at the beginning that all these conspiracy theories are bringing nothing but more pain and aggrevation to the families and friends of those involved, but someone told me that actually they want a full investigation to find out what happened. The few people I know who were affected just want to move on with their lives, but can't while people are still dragging this all up and some even going so far as to say that many of the victims are still alive somewhere. That's just insane. I agree Twiglet. I've avoided this thread because I'm really not into the whole conspiracy thing and I resent being likened to an ostrich with my head in the sand because I don't believe. I honestly don't know what some of the conspiracists are thinking. I am fed up with the those who enjoy the freedoms and advantages of being Americans, and then turn around and abuse that same freedom to spit on the rest of us. Does anyone realize how much 9/11 cost my country? Is still costing us, will cost us for years to come? The insurance payouts alone are in the hundreds of millions if not billions of dollars. My daughter's godmother is a flight attendant for United Airlines. They filed for banckruptcy protection (and their stock plummeted) in part because of 9/11. Everyone working for them took a huge pay cut and my good friend was fortunate to have enough seniority so that she didn't lose her job, but quite a few employees were not so fortunate. This subject is just too depressing for me, and the last thing I want to do is get into an argument with someone over it. Sierra Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnbradley Posted March 25, 2006 Share Posted March 25, 2006 Don't be so patronising. People are entitled to believe what they want. That documentary is full of factually incorrect information and coincidences that people want to see as proof. Again, much of it confirms the fact that I do believe the government knew more than they let on, but not that they carried it out. People SAW the plane hit the Pentagon. All that time trying to explain how the front of the plane wouldn't only leave a 16 foot hole, when in fact the front of the plane hit tens of feet away from this, the hole was caused by the landing gear. Parallels drawn with the Athens flight hitting the hill and the amount of wreckage left, well a hill isn't made to be blast proof. soz twiglet, ive had a drink so am probably being a bit antagonistic there... im open to both sides, its just that ive not really seen a strong counter-argument yet to explain all the things in that doc...the popular mechanics refutations linked before offers pretty shallow and skant evidence, tbh. please show me why the docco is full of factually incorrect info...im interested to hear it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SHsheff Posted March 25, 2006 Share Posted March 25, 2006 No, I don't trust George Bush an inch. Or rather, the other politicians that are pulling his strings, he's a bit too dumb to keep secrets. YOU think the president of the world's largest superpower is 'a bit too dumb'? Ooh a sweeping judgement, Twiglet! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markwit Posted March 25, 2006 Share Posted March 25, 2006 please watch this. If only to confirm your own theories. Thanks for that John. I think people are dismissing these ideas too readily. Oh, and my offer to GIVE anyone a copy on DVD is still open. It is a lot clearer than the on-line video. PM me if you want a copy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twiglet Posted March 25, 2006 Share Posted March 25, 2006 soz twiglet, ive had a drink so am probably being a bit antagonistic there... im open to both sides, its just that ive not really seen a strong counter-argument yet to explain all the things in that doc...the popular mechanics refutations linked before offers pretty shallow and skant evidence, tbh. please show me why the docco is full of factually incorrect info...im interested to hear it. From what I've seen so far: The 16 foot hole in the Pentagon, which I've already explained Saying that the WTC only collapsed because of the fire. It collapsed because of the fire AND the structural damage, which none of the other 'similar' examples suffered with the exception of the Empire State Building, which was hit by a fighter jet which is considerably smaller than a commercial airliner. Saying that the WTC was built to withstand the impact of a plane. A Boeing 707 which is considerably smaller than the 767, and if lost would not be travelling at the speed these flights were. Other than that there seems to be plenty of blatant misinterpretation. EDIT: And a horrendous miquote from the coroner re. flight 93, saying that no sign of the passengers was found. By 24th September, 11 bodies had been identified (I don't know how many after that). To present such truly incorrect and distressing information makes me lose respect for the entire documentary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
venger Posted March 25, 2006 Share Posted March 25, 2006 No, I don't trust George Bush an inch. Or rather, the other politicians that are pulling his strings, he's a bit too dumb to keep secrets.: Well it is no secret, people would rather believe the official story rather than the hard facts. Bush said that he had just watched the incedent on TV before going into the classroom of kids in Florida hours before there was known to be any video footage in existance. He said that he had done a bit of flying and this was pilot error. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
venger Posted March 25, 2006 Share Posted March 25, 2006 Sierra, you're misunderstanding the language. It's not an insult, he means that he's surprised (and a bit sarcastic). The American saying has quite another meaning! Thankyou for interpreting that as it was intended, but the fact remains about the official story not being nearly as conclusive as Twilets. Now who is making up stories here and who is trying to stay with facts ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markwit Posted March 25, 2006 Share Posted March 25, 2006 Now who is making up stories here and who is trying to stay with facts ? The problem is Venger, do any of us actually know the facts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bartfarst Posted March 25, 2006 Share Posted March 25, 2006 No, I don't trust George Bush an inch. Or rather, the other politicians that are pulling his strings, he's a bit too dumb to keep secrets. I think they may have had their suspicions about it happening. I don't however, believe for a second that a) There were any explosives deliberately placed in the twin towers b) That a plane didn't hit the Pentagon c) That for some unknown sinister reason WTC7 was deliberately demolished d) That Flight 93 was shot down by fighter planes, or in fact, didn't crash but landed safely at another airport. e) That the entire affair was orchestrated by the American authorities. There is just no way with the number of people involved something like that could be kept secret. Someone will be saying that Tony Blair plotted to blow up the underground trains next Twiglet, if there were such a thing as a Nobel prize for talking sense on the Forum, you'd win it for this. What a shame that so many people remain in fantasy land about this affair - then again, their postings are amusing! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bartfarst Posted March 25, 2006 Share Posted March 25, 2006 Well it is no secret, people would rather believe the official story rather than the hard facts. Bush said that he had just watched the incedent on TV before going into the classroom of kids in Florida hours before there was known to be any video footage in existance. He said that he had done a bit of flying and this was pilot error. Just what are the 'hard facts' other than a number of coincidences quoted in an amateur documentary, virtually none of which can even be confirmed by those of us reading this thread? When did Bush say that he had seen the incident on TV before going into the school classroom? He had indeed done a bit of flying - he was a qualified pilot, having flown fast jets such as F4s during his military service, and pilot error was probably the initial 'best guess' that everybody hoped to be the answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.