There's a reason why the 9/11 conspiracy theories aren't going away

I have no doubt the universe is teeming with life. As far as intelligent life visiting earth, I doubt we'll ever know, and I only believe in what I can see. There is no doubt people are seeing weird stuff in the sky. Much of it can be explained. However, some of it cannot be explained. I think a lot of what cannot be explained is experimental military craft. That's why a lot of this stuff is spoted so frequently over Nevada and New Mexico, where these high-level clearance bases are located.

 

Aliens may not be what we always thought they were.

Some have suggested that they are spiritual beings...

Anyway, that video is interesting... is this the same type of stuff that Bill Clinton writes about? I mean. You can say that Carroll Quigley is setting up misinformation to try to take down something that he personally thinks isn't good. It would be more convincing if it actually came from an actual ex-president.

 

Well, I've never read anything from Clinton. I don't even know how many books he's written, other than "My Life," which was probably ghostwritten anyway. All I know is that Clinton, like all presidents, is a frontman for the real powers that be. He believes whatever his globalist handlers believe. While I believe Clinton was less of a puppet than Bush is (but certainly no less corrupt), these guys always take orders from their superiors. But they rarely speak the truth when they know the public is listening. Quigley's books were never really intended for the general public, but rather those in more bureaucratic positions. So you're going to find more truth in a book like this than you will in any book written by a president, which is geared towards the public.

Quigley actually admitted in his books that he had no aversion to the agenda. He simply believed it was too important to be kept secret.

 

speaking of the North American Union. Frankly, thats the kind of conspiracy theory I can get behind, because I am ALL for it. Whats the big problemo with that one??

 

Except it's not a conspiracy theory because it's been admitted in their own documents from their own SPP meetings. They call it a North American Community -- which will share common borders and is slated for 2010 -- and have called for a standardized currency called the Amero.

Now as far as "getting behind it," it's easy to get behind something you know nothing about. This is being kept a secret for a reason. It will eliminate national sovereignty and the US Constitution, and it will drastically lower the living standard in the US and Canada. What little power is left in the hand's of the people will be turned over to the autocrats in charge.

 

^Ah just like the EU then


All the EU has done is allowed for more freedom of movement, more pressure being put on countries to meet human rights (and other ethical) standards. Just because it'd remove the *shock* constitution you seem to assume it'd become some demonic force.

A question Rat, if you believe the 'it's been going on for 500 years' stuff. Then you believe the American founding Fathers were Masons right? and if the men behind the curtain have been ruling things for 500 years, surely that means they wrote the constitution and every amendment. Therefore it's evil by association.

 

The EU has erased the national sovereignty from the once sovereign nations of Europe. These countries used to be able to pass their own laws and have their own high courts. Now the passing of laws in the EU merely entails the rubber stamping of pre-written bills drafted up by unelected bureaucrats and autocrats in Brussels and Luxembourg. The once high courts of each respective nation are now overridden by the European Court of Justice. So what we see here is more power and control in the hands of fewer and fewer people, and less accountability for the ones in charge, therefore less of a say for the people in the destiny of themselves and their countries.

 

Is pressuring developed countries to meet the human rights declaration a bad thing?

 

Nope hehe, I meant that the EU was a good thing.

Rat, you are much mistaken, each country is still allowed to pass it's own laws. The EU can just also pass laws. The power is not in the hands of fewer people, because the EU is run by elected delegates from each country using proportional representation, we currently have a few Green Party MEPs.

 

70-80% of the laws are passed at the supranational level.

 

I don't think that's entirely true...

 

That's true, but if you could point out any of those that hint at anything sinister I'd be more than happy.

 

Yeah but doofus even if its mostly empty space, that's more stuff than the completely unfaltering 100 percent genuine empty space in all different directions. I hope in time you'll realise what an idiot you've been.

 

Fuel truck fire causes bridge to collapse.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/04/29/BAGVOPHQU46.DTL

No modern steel frame bridge has ever collapsed as a result of fire. Therefore, the government planted thermite in the bridge and caused its collapse.

.

 

Check out the 4/29 Truth Movement:

http://www.429truth.com/

.

 

I don't know why they focus so much on this bomb-planting theory, actually.


I've done research immediately prior. But I would focus more on what kind of logistical expertise and material conditions you'd need to pull out this attack.

And whether a few people in a cave could do it.

I would also stop blaming THE U.S. GOVERNMENT...that doesn't make sense at all.

The U.S. government is not a contained unified entity. It's an amalgam.

 

But that was an open-air fire with white hot flames shooting hundreds of feet into the air. It wasn't the oxygen-starved smoldering we saw with 9/11, where most the the jet fuel was consumed in the initial fireballs upon impact.

It's stupid to compare a bridge collapse to a building collapse. First of all, the fire that brought down the bridge was acting on a single support truss connected to two pillars. That is a small fraction of the steel that would have been found on any single floor of the WTC.

 

The fires in the WTC were acting on lightweight trusses that were 60 feet long and supported by columns only at their ends. The trusses weakened at elevated temperature, sagged, and pulled in the walls. The photos and videos show the walls of the towers bowing inward gradually as the fires burned until the walls buckled, which started the collapse. The collapse in each tower started with the upper section tilting toward the side that had a bowed-in wall, as expected.

.

 

fire, no fire...

How can the correlation between the military excercises of 9/11 and 7/7 be explained?

Who would have the information to align with those excercises?

This is the "coincidence" that must be examined to determine who was really behind it...

How or why isn't as important as who.

 

Then what destroyed the 47 core columns? And if you want to compare the collapse of a bridge to the collapse of a building, then why didn't the columns supporting the truss of the bridge collapse too, as they did with the WTC?