I will address everything you said if you answer that one question.
Printable View
I will address everything you said if you answer that one question.
He left rather than answer my question. WTF is that?
Come on Jon, no one can really hang with the truth of all of this. He shot his wad. What else was there? I don't thik he expected to find you under this stone, all ready to get into it with him. I on the other hand, just get too mad to deal with elitist (expletives) like that. I could FEEL that guy looking down his nose at us. But hey, if his profile is correct, he can be drafted and go die in foreign sands for his murdering dictator.
I think you were right (through IM). One of the first things he said was he's not a "debunker", yet, that's exactly how he acted.
I find all of that rather funny. No I did not run. I went and ate a peanut butter and jelly sandwhich. Talked on the phone a bit. Chatted on msn. I even looked at myspace. I am now back to this forum. Checking on the post to see what was going on. You are very quick to judge. As for your question that I see you have repeated over and over. I did answer it. I said this.
"In reguard to my conclusion I have none." I do not have a conclusion on wether there is a cover up or not. I stated this. I do not know if you simply didn't read or what.
and to augmentor.
"Ah, yet another opinion? Well here's mine. They haven't milked all of the money out of oil, thus will continue as long as they can, because Americans are impotent SHEEP who will not stop them."
This isn't really my opinion. It's simply attempting to explain that creating the biggest cover up in history with risk of getting caught and losing everything including your life for oil when there are many other alternative paths seems rather very unlikely. Not to say there aren't some good reasons out there that would explain all these actions and reasons that would make sense for this administration to do all of this but I do not see the logical reasoning behind it being for oil.
As for the drug issue yes your are definitely correct. The United States government are the ones that bring the drugs into the united states through way of their anal cavity. While at the same time spending millions of tax payer money funding law inforcement that are constantly busting drug trafficers and.....of course they wouldn't have ever thought about making it legal and tax the crap out of it to make more money than anyone could have ever imagined.......................................... ....
If this forum expects me to come here with an open mind then I expect the forum to have an open mind also.
You haven't displayed anything resembling an open mind that I have seen evidence of. So you think the drugs that come here are all keistered?Quote:
As for the drug issue yes your are definitely correct. The United States government are the ones that bring the drugs into the united states through way of their anal cavity. While at the same time spending millions of tax payer money funding law inforcement that are constantly busting drug trafficers and.....of course they wouldn't have ever thought about making it legal and tax the crap out of it to make more money than anyone could have ever imagined.......................................... ....
If this forum expects me to come here with an open mind then I expect the forum to have an open mind also.
And you think they could make more in taxes than they could on asset forfiture? WHere they confiscate cash without charging people with crimes because the cash has the "scent" of drugs on it? The war on drugs is more profitable then they ever could have hoped for. Problem, Reaction, Solution.
"In reguard to my conclusion I have none." I do not have a conclusion on wether there is a cover up or not. I stated this. I do not know if you simply didn't read or what.
Then why don't you read a little bit more, and then come back, and talk to me. I recommend reading the Sibel Edmonds link I gave you.
Risk of getting caught? Really? They DID get caught. But they wont face charges because of people just like you.Quote:
This isn't really my opinion. It's simply attempting to explain that creating the biggest cover up in history with risk of getting caught and losing everything including your life for oil when there are many other alternative paths seems rather very unlikely.
Would you answer ME a question? It is a very simple one. But it has two parts: A: Why did Bush not even want to have an investigation into the biggest act of terrorism in the history of the US?
B: Why did Bush and Cheney refuse to testify seperately and under oath?
You have agenda written all OVER you my friend. If you truly had no conclusion, you would not be in here arguing against a coverup. You would be neutral if what you said were true. All's you have done since you got here is argue against 911 truth. A neutral person would do some homework and come in NEUTRAL, not arguing for the neocon agenda and spinning it as looking at it from ALL angles. Tell us the truth, are you Sean Hannity?Quote:
"In reguard to my conclusion I have none." I do not have a conclusion on wether there is a cover up or not. I stated this. I do not know if you simply didn't read or what.
Boy, those PB&J's are more addictive than crack.