venger Posted April 1, 2006 Share Posted April 1, 2006 No, but he has definately denied his involvement in a public interview. How often does he get blamed for this sort of thing then ? "The U.S. government has consistently blamed me for being behind every occasion its enemies attack it." "I would like to assure the world that I did not plan the recent attacks, which seems to have been planned by people for personal reasons," "I have been living in the Islamic emirate of Afghanistan and following its leaders' rules. The current leader does not allow me to exercise such operations," ~ Osama Bin Laden Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
artisan Posted April 1, 2006 Share Posted April 1, 2006 Al Queda were responsible for the attacks, bin Laden does not have to declare his personal responsibility,as he is only the director. This is like saying the allies did not bomb Dresden as Churchill was not flying a bomber There also seems to be some confusion by some people as to who was responsible for the demolition of the towers. They were attacked in a terrorist attack by Al Qaeda, no mistake. They were demolished in a controlled explosion by the authorities, no mistake. Any one who says otherwise is ignoring the evidence and fooling themselves Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnbradley Posted April 1, 2006 Share Posted April 1, 2006 good stuff!! totally walloped these sheeple in this one...since joining in on this thread i have learnt a great deal more about the subject. i have also noticed that their aguments have been getting worse and worse, and ours actually improving in content and detail. the 911 cover story is a nonsense. its official:) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bartfarst Posted April 1, 2006 Share Posted April 1, 2006 Al Queda were responsible for the attacks, bin Laden does not have to declare his personal responsibility,as he is only the director. This is like saying the allies did not bomb Dresden as Churchill was not flying a bomber There also seems to be some confusion by some people as to who was responsible for the demolition of the towers. They were attacked in a terrorist attack by Al Qaeda, no mistake. They were demolished in a controlled explosion by the authorities, no mistake. Any one who says otherwise is ignoring the evidence and fooling themselves Are you actually trying to tell us that the floors which collapsed did so not through a combination of impact damage from a 150 ton jet and fire softening the steel, but due to demolition explosives? Aside from the video footage showing no evidence whatsoever of high explosive shockwaves, which would have been impossible to hide, do you not think that setting explosive charges in the middle of a 800-1000 degree fire is a bit of a tricky task? Or getting tons of explosive up those floors while everybody else was running down? Or actually getting hold of tons of explosives, in the middle of New York city, in time to get them to the towers, let alone up them? How about the days it would take to set the charges to bring about a controlled explosion? "They were demolished in a controlled explosion by the authorities, no mistake "- sorry, very big mistake indeed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twiglet Posted April 1, 2006 Share Posted April 1, 2006 good stuff!! totally walloped these sheeple in this one...since joining in on this thread i have learnt a great deal more about the subject. i have also noticed that their aguments have been getting worse and worse, and ours actually improving in content and detail. the 911 cover story is a nonsense. its official:) You must be joking. The only arguments that have been getting worse and worse are for the conspiracy. There is no solid evidence to back up any of the claims. Lots of ideas and theories, but no SOLID proof. I've just given up because its going round in circles now. I've stated evidence for the official explanation but am just rebuffed with more theories, no-one can discount the real proof. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bartfarst Posted April 1, 2006 Share Posted April 1, 2006 You must be joking. The only arguments that have been getting worse and worse are for the conspiracy. There is no solid evidence to back up any of the claims. Lots of ideas and theories, but no SOLID proof. I've just given up because its going round in circles now. I've stated evidence for the official explanation but am just rebuffed with more theories, no-one can discount the real proof. I left it alone for a few days, and was amazed to come back and find people still claiming ever more bizarre fantasies about a conspiracy. It just beggers belief. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Longcol Posted April 1, 2006 Share Posted April 1, 2006 Al Queda were responsible for the attacks, bin Laden does not have to declare his personal responsibility,as he is only the director. This is like saying the allies did not bomb Dresden as Churchill was not flying a bomber There also seems to be some confusion by some people as to who was responsible for the demolition of the towers. They were attacked in a terrorist attack by Al Qaeda, no mistake. They were demolished in a controlled explosion by the authorities, no mistake. Any one who says otherwise is ignoring the evidence and fooling themselves So if the controlled explosion theory is correct I think it would be safe therefore to assume that numerous skyscrapers built post 1970's have explosives already in place for controlled explosions should the need arise. Somehow I think somebody somewhere would have found out about this before now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Longcol Posted April 1, 2006 Share Posted April 1, 2006 I left it alone for a few days, and was amazed to come back and find people still claiming ever more bizarre fantasies about a conspiracy. It just beggers belief. Agree. Somebody will be claiming it was predicted by Nostradamus before long. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bartfarst Posted April 1, 2006 Share Posted April 1, 2006 Agree. Somebody will be claiming it was predicted by Nostradamus before long. Rest assured that if you jumble up the words in one of Shakespear's plays in just the right way, you'll be able to find a series of terrifyingly coincidental words that predict the attacks. The same probably appies to most copies of Viz. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnbradley Posted April 1, 2006 Share Posted April 1, 2006 twiggy, your last posts have been speculative to the point of embarrasment, tony wouldnt answer my questions, bartfast has been too busy playing banjo, and meanwhile, the venger boys:hihi: have been tearing you lot a new asshole. i left this post alone cos we nobbled you lot. i guess this wont ever die. and GOOD STUFF!!! it needs to continue for sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.