The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
I suppose theres been loads of them throughout the age. But this really sprang too mind because of the way it confirmed my suspicions. I might be wrong yes, but if you actually look at the evidence it adds up. The American Government are thinking of banning this i think, but because of it they've forced the American Government to release the Gas Station Pics where previously they refused. It is interesting so please make your own mind up about it and it would be interesting to hear your views. it is on for 1 hour and a half but trust me its worth it.
Twin Towers Theory
Twin Towers Theory
Page:
Borat wrote:
> Well yeah and things like science, improving ourselves
> intellectually, developing things to help the human race as a
> whole.
Indeed, put those billions used in the war in Iraq to that pesky cancer thing.
> For another, I
> doubt it would take much to convince someone who already hated
> America to take responsibility for something like that.
And as such convince them to hop on a plane for the reason to hijack it and attack America
Anywho good debate, nice to have a debate on the internet that doesn't resort to name calling and stupid stuff. I'm all tired now though, ah well you kept me off the 360. :-D
> Well yeah and things like science, improving ourselves
> intellectually, developing things to help the human race as a
> whole.
Indeed, put those billions used in the war in Iraq to that pesky cancer thing.
> For another, I
> doubt it would take much to convince someone who already hated
> America to take responsibility for something like that.
And as such convince them to hop on a plane for the reason to hijack it and attack America
Anywho good debate, nice to have a debate on the internet that doesn't resort to name calling and stupid stuff. I'm all tired now though, ah well you kept me off the 360. :-D
Kawada wrote:
>
> The American administration has. The American people have shown
> in the approval ratings and by countless huge protests that
> they, like the majority of other nations, do not agree with the
> actions in Iraq or elsewhere.
Yeah, sorry, I meant the administration, I have nothing whatsoever against the people.
> I personally wish they'd actually focus back on America, invest
> money in education, health and all other services and tell the
> rest of the world, ok guys you handle it all and we'll just get
> on with things over here.
Well yeah and things like science, improving ourselves intellectually, developing things to help the human race as a whole.
> Until someone gives me an adequate reason or worthwhile benefit
> for the Administration to do that then i'll keep on believing
> it. Especially as we have a terrorist group claiming
> responsibility for it.
I take any claims like that with a pinch of salt myself. For one thing they can be staged or fabricated. For another, I doubt it would take much to convince someone who already hated America to take responsibility for something like that. Anyway this really is getting into hear say and hypothesising and I have little to back it up.
> Unless, and here's another for the conspiracy nuts, The
> Administration and Al Qaeda are actually in cahoots, the
> Administration run by a religious right nut and Al Qaeda an
> actual anti-muslim faction hoping to cause as much havoc and
> death as possible (which they would semingly have achieved by
> the civil war boiling up in Iraq right now between the different
> muslim groups) Of course they'd then have to cover up all links
> of a relationship and with all the investigative agencies and
> what not around the world that wouldn't be achieveable or be
> incredibly hard to do so.
Well it's something to think about, conspiracy nut or not ;) In Fahrenheit 9/11 there were supposed links between George Bush Senior and wealthy middle eastern associates with links to Bin Laden ...
> But then that's another debate and not one i'm actually
> discussing right now, (though i do agree with you) all i'm
> concerned about is the conspiracy theories around 9/11.
Agreed, slightly off subject, was just having a rant ...
>
> The American administration has. The American people have shown
> in the approval ratings and by countless huge protests that
> they, like the majority of other nations, do not agree with the
> actions in Iraq or elsewhere.
Yeah, sorry, I meant the administration, I have nothing whatsoever against the people.
> I personally wish they'd actually focus back on America, invest
> money in education, health and all other services and tell the
> rest of the world, ok guys you handle it all and we'll just get
> on with things over here.
Well yeah and things like science, improving ourselves intellectually, developing things to help the human race as a whole.
> Until someone gives me an adequate reason or worthwhile benefit
> for the Administration to do that then i'll keep on believing
> it. Especially as we have a terrorist group claiming
> responsibility for it.
I take any claims like that with a pinch of salt myself. For one thing they can be staged or fabricated. For another, I doubt it would take much to convince someone who already hated America to take responsibility for something like that. Anyway this really is getting into hear say and hypothesising and I have little to back it up.
> Unless, and here's another for the conspiracy nuts, The
> Administration and Al Qaeda are actually in cahoots, the
> Administration run by a religious right nut and Al Qaeda an
> actual anti-muslim faction hoping to cause as much havoc and
> death as possible (which they would semingly have achieved by
> the civil war boiling up in Iraq right now between the different
> muslim groups) Of course they'd then have to cover up all links
> of a relationship and with all the investigative agencies and
> what not around the world that wouldn't be achieveable or be
> incredibly hard to do so.
Well it's something to think about, conspiracy nut or not ;) In Fahrenheit 9/11 there were supposed links between George Bush Senior and wealthy middle eastern associates with links to Bin Laden ...
> But then that's another debate and not one i'm actually
> discussing right now, (though i do agree with you) all i'm
> concerned about is the conspiracy theories around 9/11.
Agreed, slightly off subject, was just having a rant ...
Borat wrote:
> You may be right, I don't have all the facts, 9/11 could have
> been just a terrorist attack by muslim extremists ... but what I
> do know 100% is that since 9/11 took place, America has bullied
> smaller nations in the name of security, invaded two of those
> promising to set them free and make them better countries. Both
> of those countries are now warzones tearing themselves to pieces,
> in many ways much worse off than they were beforehand.
The American administration has. The American people have shown in the approval ratings and by countless huge protests that they, like the majority of other nations, do not agree with the actions in Iraq or elsewhere.
I personally wish they'd actually focus back on America, invest money in education, health and all other services and tell the rest of the world, ok guys you handle it all and we'll just get on with things over here.
> Whether they destroyed their own buildings or not, I don't know,
> but I'm not going to dismiss it as a possibility. And I don't
> think you should either, but that's down to you.
Until someone gives me an adequate reason or worthwhile benefit for the Administration to do that then i'll keep on believing it. Especially as we have a terrorist group claiming responsibility for it.
Unless, and here's another for the conspiracy nuts, The Administration and Al Qaeda are actually in cahoots, the Administration run by a religious right nut and Al Qaeda an actual anti-muslim faction hoping to cause as much havoc and death as possible amongst the muslim world (which they would seemingly have achieved by the civil war boiling up in Iraq right now between the different muslim groups) Of course they'd then have to cover up all links of a relationship and with all the investigative agencies and what not around the world that wouldn't be achieveable or be incredibly hard to do so.
> I suppose what I'm getting at with all this is ... who the hell
> are we in the west to tell other nations how to live? And can
> you really blame them for turning against us when we do?
But then that's another debate and not one i'm actually discussing right now, (though i do agree with you) all i'm concerned about is the conspiracy theories around 9/11.
> You may be right, I don't have all the facts, 9/11 could have
> been just a terrorist attack by muslim extremists ... but what I
> do know 100% is that since 9/11 took place, America has bullied
> smaller nations in the name of security, invaded two of those
> promising to set them free and make them better countries. Both
> of those countries are now warzones tearing themselves to pieces,
> in many ways much worse off than they were beforehand.
The American administration has. The American people have shown in the approval ratings and by countless huge protests that they, like the majority of other nations, do not agree with the actions in Iraq or elsewhere.
I personally wish they'd actually focus back on America, invest money in education, health and all other services and tell the rest of the world, ok guys you handle it all and we'll just get on with things over here.
> Whether they destroyed their own buildings or not, I don't know,
> but I'm not going to dismiss it as a possibility. And I don't
> think you should either, but that's down to you.
Until someone gives me an adequate reason or worthwhile benefit for the Administration to do that then i'll keep on believing it. Especially as we have a terrorist group claiming responsibility for it.
Unless, and here's another for the conspiracy nuts, The Administration and Al Qaeda are actually in cahoots, the Administration run by a religious right nut and Al Qaeda an actual anti-muslim faction hoping to cause as much havoc and death as possible amongst the muslim world (which they would seemingly have achieved by the civil war boiling up in Iraq right now between the different muslim groups) Of course they'd then have to cover up all links of a relationship and with all the investigative agencies and what not around the world that wouldn't be achieveable or be incredibly hard to do so.
> I suppose what I'm getting at with all this is ... who the hell
> are we in the west to tell other nations how to live? And can
> you really blame them for turning against us when we do?
But then that's another debate and not one i'm actually discussing right now, (though i do agree with you) all i'm concerned about is the conspiracy theories around 9/11.
You may be right, I don't have all the facts, 9/11 could have been just a terrorist attack by muslim extremists ... but what I do know 100% is that since 9/11 took place, America has bullied smaller nations in the name of security, invaded two of those promising to set them free and make them better countries. Both of those countries are now warzones tearing themselves to pieces, in many ways much worse off than they were beforehand.
I have no doubt this silly crusade will continue, more nations will be forced to bend to Americas will or be attacked ruthlessly. And we are all seemingly powerless to stop it from happening. Racial tension grows around the world, terrorist groups grow stronger as their defiance and resolve becomes stronger. We as citizens of these 'enlightened' nations are losing our rights day by day.
Whether they destroyed their own buildings or not, I don't know, but I'm not going to dismiss it as a possibility. And I don't think you should either, but that's down to you.
I suppose what I'm getting at with all this is ... who the hell are we in the west to tell other nations how to live? And can you really blame them for turning against us when we do?
I have no doubt this silly crusade will continue, more nations will be forced to bend to Americas will or be attacked ruthlessly. And we are all seemingly powerless to stop it from happening. Racial tension grows around the world, terrorist groups grow stronger as their defiance and resolve becomes stronger. We as citizens of these 'enlightened' nations are losing our rights day by day.
Whether they destroyed their own buildings or not, I don't know, but I'm not going to dismiss it as a possibility. And I don't think you should either, but that's down to you.
I suppose what I'm getting at with all this is ... who the hell are we in the west to tell other nations how to live? And can you really blame them for turning against us when we do?
Borat wrote:
> There ARE terrorists everywhere, but I
> prefer to get to the bottom of these issues rather than just
> write people off as terrorists, enemy of the free world. It
> just seems too easy and convenient. I can understand why a lot
> of these 'terrorists' hate Americas government, they have proven
> themselves capable of terrible acts in the past.
Indeed, hatred of the American government and America as a whole, hence a reason to launch an attack on American soil.
> I guess, but then control of the vast oil reserves and control
> of middle eastern nations such as Iraq could well be an
> investment worth wasting human life and resources over.
Like i said before, Bush Administration obviously doesn't care about UN or world approval, could just go in and take control of those middle eastern nations (which they don't actually have anyway so that grand scheme went a bit awry) if they so wished. And yes blah blah the oil we always hear about the oil, don't actually see any videos of it going back to America on tankers or what not but ah well.
> Aye well it's certainly accelerated that process somewhat.
Accelerating that process isn't a reason or anywhere near big enough benefit to obliterate the WTC
> There ARE terrorists everywhere, but I
> prefer to get to the bottom of these issues rather than just
> write people off as terrorists, enemy of the free world. It
> just seems too easy and convenient. I can understand why a lot
> of these 'terrorists' hate Americas government, they have proven
> themselves capable of terrible acts in the past.
Indeed, hatred of the American government and America as a whole, hence a reason to launch an attack on American soil.
> I guess, but then control of the vast oil reserves and control
> of middle eastern nations such as Iraq could well be an
> investment worth wasting human life and resources over.
Like i said before, Bush Administration obviously doesn't care about UN or world approval, could just go in and take control of those middle eastern nations (which they don't actually have anyway so that grand scheme went a bit awry) if they so wished. And yes blah blah the oil we always hear about the oil, don't actually see any videos of it going back to America on tankers or what not but ah well.
> Aye well it's certainly accelerated that process somewhat.
Accelerating that process isn't a reason or anywhere near big enough benefit to obliterate the WTC
Kawada wrote:
> Not the gospel truth but the most sensible truth i have right
> now other than these schmucks making videos on the internet.
Well sensible depends on how far outside the box you're willing to think I guess. I like to stay as open minded as possible and I don't think a lot of the ideas put forward by these 'schmucks' are so unbelievable. There ARE terrorists everywhere, but I prefer to get to the bottom of these issues rather than just write people off as terrorists, enemy of the free world. It just seems too easy and convenient. I can understand why a lot of these 'terrorists' hate Americas government, they have proven themselves capable of terrible acts in the past.
> Well money and power again.
>
> Already had plenty of it, wasted tons of it on the wars, next
> reason please.
I guess, but then control of the vast oil reserves and control of middle eastern nations such as Iraq could well be an investment worth wasting human life and resources over.
> A lot of privacy rights have been and will
> continue to be lost through all this for the average citizen.
> A
> lot of the more intelligent science fiction writers warn of our
> rights being lost in the name of security. The nanny state.
>
> Would have (and already were) being lost before 9/11. Next again
> please
Aye well it's certainly accelerated that process somewhat.
> Not the gospel truth but the most sensible truth i have right
> now other than these schmucks making videos on the internet.
Well sensible depends on how far outside the box you're willing to think I guess. I like to stay as open minded as possible and I don't think a lot of the ideas put forward by these 'schmucks' are so unbelievable. There ARE terrorists everywhere, but I prefer to get to the bottom of these issues rather than just write people off as terrorists, enemy of the free world. It just seems too easy and convenient. I can understand why a lot of these 'terrorists' hate Americas government, they have proven themselves capable of terrible acts in the past.
> Well money and power again.
>
> Already had plenty of it, wasted tons of it on the wars, next
> reason please.
I guess, but then control of the vast oil reserves and control of middle eastern nations such as Iraq could well be an investment worth wasting human life and resources over.
> A lot of privacy rights have been and will
> continue to be lost through all this for the average citizen.
> A
> lot of the more intelligent science fiction writers warn of our
> rights being lost in the name of security. The nanny state.
>
> Would have (and already were) being lost before 9/11. Next again
> please
Aye well it's certainly accelerated that process somewhat.
The money men wouldn't risk the utter uncertainty 9/11 would cause. Doesn't make sense, they prefer stability not crazy situations like that.
Borat wrote:
> That's fair enough, if you're set on that explanation as the
> gospel truth, then I'd have a hard time dissuading you from it
> (though I have been trying I suppose)
Not the gospel truth but the most sensible truth i have right now instead of these schmucks making videos on the internet.
> Well money and power again.
Already had plenty of it, wasted tons of it on the wars, next reason please.
> A lot of privacy rights have been and will
> continue to be lost through all this for the average citizen. A
> lot of the more intelligent science fiction writers warn of our
> rights being lost in the name of security. The nanny state.
Would have (and already were) being lost before 9/11. Next again please
Borat wrote:
> That's fair enough, if you're set on that explanation as the
> gospel truth, then I'd have a hard time dissuading you from it
> (though I have been trying I suppose)
Not the gospel truth but the most sensible truth i have right now instead of these schmucks making videos on the internet.
> Well money and power again.
Already had plenty of it, wasted tons of it on the wars, next reason please.
> A lot of privacy rights have been and will
> continue to be lost through all this for the average citizen. A
> lot of the more intelligent science fiction writers warn of our
> rights being lost in the name of security. The nanny state.
Would have (and already were) being lost before 9/11. Next again please
Kawada wrote:
> Ah one of those "the multi-billion faceless
> corporations" run the governments things eh
Aye, well that's something that's crossed my mind a great deal, not one corporation alone, but many that all are financially tied to the government ... banks are certainly one of the contenders for this. The puppets may change but the big players, the puppetmasters, stay the same. Like I say the government may not have as much power as we're led to believe, they may be subject to control from other sources we don't see.
> A) George Bush Snr still has a lot of influence on todays
> American Government.
>
> Well i have always believed the Iraq war was just Dubya getting
> revenge for daddy.
Yeah, well that's what I meant really. These ideas about assassinating or capturing other world leaders and invading their countries to pilfer their oil reserves, may be years old.
> Well as i've seen no other credible explanation other than out
> there conspiracy theories i'm quite happy to believe the one
> we've got of a Terrorist group trying to cause as much damage
> and human death and suffering as possible against its enemy.
That's fair enough, if you're set on that explanation as the gospel truth, then I'd have a hard time dissuading you from it (though I have been trying I suppose)
> I don't see what worthwhile benefit the administration gets from
> blowing up one of its most famous landmarks in its most famous
> city and causing such a potentially high death toll and manages
> to cover it all up and fool the world
Well money and power again. So much has been done in the name of the War on terror. Invasions of countries, seizing of supposed felons under the pretext of them maybe, kinda, maybe, sorta, considering getting involved in terrorist activity (Guantanamo Bay). A lot of privacy rights have been and will continue to be lost through all this for the average citizen. A lot of the more intelligent science fiction writers warn of our rights being lost in the name of security. The nanny state.
> Ah one of those "the multi-billion faceless
> corporations" run the governments things eh
Aye, well that's something that's crossed my mind a great deal, not one corporation alone, but many that all are financially tied to the government ... banks are certainly one of the contenders for this. The puppets may change but the big players, the puppetmasters, stay the same. Like I say the government may not have as much power as we're led to believe, they may be subject to control from other sources we don't see.
> A) George Bush Snr still has a lot of influence on todays
> American Government.
>
> Well i have always believed the Iraq war was just Dubya getting
> revenge for daddy.
Yeah, well that's what I meant really. These ideas about assassinating or capturing other world leaders and invading their countries to pilfer their oil reserves, may be years old.
> Well as i've seen no other credible explanation other than out
> there conspiracy theories i'm quite happy to believe the one
> we've got of a Terrorist group trying to cause as much damage
> and human death and suffering as possible against its enemy.
That's fair enough, if you're set on that explanation as the gospel truth, then I'd have a hard time dissuading you from it (though I have been trying I suppose)
> I don't see what worthwhile benefit the administration gets from
> blowing up one of its most famous landmarks in its most famous
> city and causing such a potentially high death toll and manages
> to cover it all up and fool the world
Well money and power again. So much has been done in the name of the War on terror. Invasions of countries, seizing of supposed felons under the pretext of them maybe, kinda, maybe, sorta, considering getting involved in terrorist activity (Guantanamo Bay). A lot of privacy rights have been and will continue to be lost through all this for the average citizen. A lot of the more intelligent science fiction writers warn of our rights being lost in the name of security. The nanny state.
Borat wrote:
> It is, but then that doesn't mean it's impossible. I don't
> think the regime is stupid, only him. I don't really believe
> any of the western governments are run by their spokesman (Bush
> or Blair respectively). There are people far, far more
> intelligent and with more forethought than the people they
> choose to represent the country.
Ah one of those "the multi-billion faceless corporations" run the governments things eh
> This could stem from way earlier than that. The original gulf
> war ended badly for America, it's not unreasonable to think that
> :
>
> A) George Bush Snr still has a lot of influence on todays
> American Government.
Well i have always believed the Iraq war was just Dubya getting revenge for daddy.
> Well because I refuse to accept any story fed to me without
> analysing it myself first. We've been fed a story by a very big
> and powerful machine .. the governments of our respective
> countries and the media. I think it's important to question it
> all, especially if there are inconsistencies to the story,
> credible alternative explanations, and an understanding of human
> nature in general. I'm also a firm believer that power and money
> do indeed corrupt and we see examples of this in every day life.
Well as i've seen no other credible explanation other than out there conspiracy theories i'm quite happy to believe the one we've got of a Terrorist group trying to cause as much damage and human death and suffering as possible against its enemy, which seems to get accepted virtually all the other times it happens
I don't see what worthwhile benefit the administration gets from blowing up one of its most famous landmarks in its most famous city and causing such a potentially high death toll and manages to cover it all up and fool the world and to impose more Big Brother on society or to start a war isn't working for me
> There is
> also evidence of such horrific violations of human rights and
> humanity in Americas history. And Englands too, I'm not picking
> at one particular nation. But we are following their lead for
> the most part, wouldn't you say?
A lead born from European ideals.
> It is, but then that doesn't mean it's impossible. I don't
> think the regime is stupid, only him. I don't really believe
> any of the western governments are run by their spokesman (Bush
> or Blair respectively). There are people far, far more
> intelligent and with more forethought than the people they
> choose to represent the country.
Ah one of those "the multi-billion faceless corporations" run the governments things eh
> This could stem from way earlier than that. The original gulf
> war ended badly for America, it's not unreasonable to think that
> :
>
> A) George Bush Snr still has a lot of influence on todays
> American Government.
Well i have always believed the Iraq war was just Dubya getting revenge for daddy.
> Well because I refuse to accept any story fed to me without
> analysing it myself first. We've been fed a story by a very big
> and powerful machine .. the governments of our respective
> countries and the media. I think it's important to question it
> all, especially if there are inconsistencies to the story,
> credible alternative explanations, and an understanding of human
> nature in general. I'm also a firm believer that power and money
> do indeed corrupt and we see examples of this in every day life.
Well as i've seen no other credible explanation other than out there conspiracy theories i'm quite happy to believe the one we've got of a Terrorist group trying to cause as much damage and human death and suffering as possible against its enemy, which seems to get accepted virtually all the other times it happens
I don't see what worthwhile benefit the administration gets from blowing up one of its most famous landmarks in its most famous city and causing such a potentially high death toll and manages to cover it all up and fool the world and to impose more Big Brother on society or to start a war isn't working for me
> There is
> also evidence of such horrific violations of human rights and
> humanity in Americas history. And Englands too, I'm not picking
> at one particular nation. But we are following their lead for
> the most part, wouldn't you say?
A lead born from European ideals.
Kawada wrote:
> So Bush and his Administration have managed to trick most of the
> world with this plot? Not such a dumb incompetent regime after
> all then. They've somehow managed to blow up their own WTC,
> gotten away with it, and gotten the world on their side just so
> they can go and start some wars. Fudge me that's some awesome
> plotting.
It is, but then that doesn't mean it's impossible. I don't think the regime is stupid, only him. I don't really believe any of the western governments are run by their spokesman (Bush or Blair respectively). There are people far, far more intelligent and with more forethought than the people they choose to represent the country.
> Also this came pretty early into Bush' term as President, so are
> you telling me he and his bunch of cronies won election and
> already had this plot on their mind and to get it started.
This could stem from way earlier than that. The original gulf war ended badly for America, it's not unreasonable to think that :
A) George Bush Snr still has a lot of influence on todays American Government.
B) A lot of the behind the scenes 'think tank' advisors/tacticians etc that were around then are still operating now.
> I guess that's all part of the Administration master plot though
> somehow
Well yeah, I do believe that the Prime Minister/President is just a spokesperson for the government, as opposed to the master decision maker. And even if they are the ones making the critical decisions, they are being influenced by important factors such as financial state of the nation and the struggle for power, amongst many others.
> I would hope not, but then all i'm doing is trying to grasp
> exactly how anyone, especially someone as clever as yourself,
> can see 9/11 as anything other than a terrorist attack on a
> nation.
Well because I refuse to accept any story fed to me without analysing it myself first. We've been fed a story by a very big and powerful machine .. the governments of our respective countries and the media. I think it's important to question it all, especially if there are inconsistencies to the story, credible alternative explanations, and an understanding of human nature in general. I'm also a firm believer that power and money do indeed corrupt and we see examples of this in every day life.
> Of course i've long believed if 9/11 happened in any other
> country there wouldn't be anywhere near as much conspiracy
> theory bounding around about it
Perhaps, but then America runs the world right now and we have to question if the way of life it is enforcing around the world is the correct one. In many places it has been a disaster, not least within the country itself in some ways. The finest and most rich country in the world ... you wouldn't think so with the way it treated the flood victims in New Orleans. There is also evidence of such horrific violations of human rights and humanity in Americas history. And Englands too, I'm not picking at one particular nation. But we are following their lead for the most part, wouldn't you say?
> So Bush and his Administration have managed to trick most of the
> world with this plot? Not such a dumb incompetent regime after
> all then. They've somehow managed to blow up their own WTC,
> gotten away with it, and gotten the world on their side just so
> they can go and start some wars. Fudge me that's some awesome
> plotting.
It is, but then that doesn't mean it's impossible. I don't think the regime is stupid, only him. I don't really believe any of the western governments are run by their spokesman (Bush or Blair respectively). There are people far, far more intelligent and with more forethought than the people they choose to represent the country.
> Also this came pretty early into Bush' term as President, so are
> you telling me he and his bunch of cronies won election and
> already had this plot on their mind and to get it started.
This could stem from way earlier than that. The original gulf war ended badly for America, it's not unreasonable to think that :
A) George Bush Snr still has a lot of influence on todays American Government.
B) A lot of the behind the scenes 'think tank' advisors/tacticians etc that were around then are still operating now.
> I guess that's all part of the Administration master plot though
> somehow
Well yeah, I do believe that the Prime Minister/President is just a spokesperson for the government, as opposed to the master decision maker. And even if they are the ones making the critical decisions, they are being influenced by important factors such as financial state of the nation and the struggle for power, amongst many others.
> I would hope not, but then all i'm doing is trying to grasp
> exactly how anyone, especially someone as clever as yourself,
> can see 9/11 as anything other than a terrorist attack on a
> nation.
Well because I refuse to accept any story fed to me without analysing it myself first. We've been fed a story by a very big and powerful machine .. the governments of our respective countries and the media. I think it's important to question it all, especially if there are inconsistencies to the story, credible alternative explanations, and an understanding of human nature in general. I'm also a firm believer that power and money do indeed corrupt and we see examples of this in every day life.
> Of course i've long believed if 9/11 happened in any other
> country there wouldn't be anywhere near as much conspiracy
> theory bounding around about it
Perhaps, but then America runs the world right now and we have to question if the way of life it is enforcing around the world is the correct one. In many places it has been a disaster, not least within the country itself in some ways. The finest and most rich country in the world ... you wouldn't think so with the way it treated the flood victims in New Orleans. There is also evidence of such horrific violations of human rights and humanity in Americas history. And Englands too, I'm not picking at one particular nation. But we are following their lead for the most part, wouldn't you say?
Page: