Re: The War on Truthers
[QUOTE=runningman;846046]hahaha.. hick like.
Spoken like a true TO person. What language do they speak up there in toronto now? It sure as hell isn't english or french.
The only difference between Shanghai and Toronto is the CN tower.[/quote]
See? This is what I mean by hick like - your thinly veiled racism that keeps popping up in your posts.
[quote]
You couldn't pay me enough money to move that rat nest. I especially love the rent in TO $1500 for a single bed rat nest apartment... ohh yes you have it great up there....:lol:[/quote]
With you lacking any kind of a degree (because, you know, it would be "giving in to the man"), I'm highly doubting you could afford a place here. So yeah, keep enjoying living in the sticks that's London - I'm sure the next tractor pull or the minor league hockey game is a fascinating night life to enjoy. You know, on the off nights that you and your friends in the Klan decide not to meet up.
[quote]
What credibility does the 9/11 commision have when 6 out of the 10 commissioners don't even believe the story? God I guess every country has its idiots.[/quote]
Doesn't mean that a group of peeps that appoint themselves the name of "Truthers" has any more credibility. It's like choosing which is a better meal - hospital food or airline food. Either case doesn't really do the job
[quote]PS - They didn't call themselves truthers that was propaganda made up by the MSM. They are called 9/11 Truth. just like Birth'ers it is so simple minded folk like yourself can lump them all into one group.[/QUOTE]
9/11 Truth. Holy fuck. That makes all the difference in the world. They're still scrambling for credibility by their name alone and failing large.
I'm all for questioning shit when there's strange circumstances, but when hicks like you come out of the woodwork, insisting that they're "enlightened" and that they're in tune with what's going on, but unable to articulate anything in the way of a counter argument other than "I reject your argument and substitute it for my own reality (please find enclosed random internet link)", it just distorts shit beyond belief. What's to say that your "sources" are any more credible than the sources you're debunking so furiously on a regular basis? What oversights are there to ensure you're getting accurate data and that they're following any kind of actual fact gathering procedures before publishing it?
And seriously. An AM 640 being the source of proof that most believe it's an inside job? El Oh El.