channel 4 911 programme

[Batch]

I thought News International generally hated the BBC. Hmmm

That's what they want you to think.

Wrap your head in tinfoil before it's too late.

[Phil_S]

The last line of this post is ludicrous all those people who commit attrocities can claim to be as religous as they want but they are not following the scriptures for any religion.  You will find the vast majority of religous people from all religions distance themselves from any fanatics and just want to live peacefully together.

Read the whole sentence. I used the words maybe & Fundamentalists. ie. Someone who says they believe in god but holds extreme views is in my view maybe not such a good person as someone who doesn't believe in god but is not a mudering bastard. Clear enough ?

[ghanimah]

That's what they want you to think.

Wrap your head in tinfoil before it's too late.

I'm a 9/11 truther
I wear a tin foil hat
and when I see conspiracy
I'll always believe in that...

[stfctownenda]

Read the whole sentence. I used the words maybe & Fundamentalists. ie. Someone who says they believe in god but holds extreme views is in my view maybe not such a good person as someone who doesn't believe in god but is not a mudering bastard. Clear enough ?

Thats pretty obvious though isn't it? whether you hold religous beliefs or not if you start killing people you are generally a cunt.  Just seemed a strange statement from you.

[sheepshagger]

I think we all realise that Delta is being a bit daft here....And unfortunately unable to see past the end of his nose, and of course coming across as an arrogant patronising ..........

It is absolutely an irrefutable fact that the US aided Bin Laden in times gone past with money and arms.  This was a time when the US were basically at war with the Russians, and tried to help Bin Laden rid Afganistan of the Ruski's.

Of that there can really be no doubt.

However to take the arguments he makes and try to turn 911 into a conspiracy is beyond the realms of most sane peoples imagination.

It is a fact that the planes hit the towers.  It is also a fact that Bin Laden had been "fortelling" atrocities on a grand scale.

For a "cover up" on this scale it would simply never work.  Too many people would have needed to be involved from a US point of view.  The orders would have needed to come down the chain, lots and lots of people would have needed to have an understanding of what was about to happen.

From the small terror cell that caused these atrocities, there would have been no need for more than a handful of people to know what was happening - namely only those involved, and 1 or 2 "commanders" from above.

There is also little doubt that the BBC can be labelled as being in co-hoots with the government at times, however Murdoch's reach is far and wide and frankly why the hell would he co-operate ?

Even Al-Jazeera acknowleged that the attacks were real, as do foreign states across the world and the Middle East including Lebanon and Jordan.

To try and present the 911 attacks as something more than terrorist attacks seems quite frankly naive at best and downright stupid at worst.

The problem with someone like Delta is that he is trying to ram an opinion down others throats, without any REAL evidence to back the opinion up....

[Phil_S]

Getting back to 9/11.  Several points io would like to make.
The conspiracy theorists are completely wrong.

Based on what, exactly? The reports you saw on UK TV? The BBC work for the govt and the rest either work for corporations (ITV - advertisers) or Ruper fucking Murdoch!

It was a terrible crime committed by fanatics end of.
I saw the plane go into the second tower on TV, not once but a number of times filmed by different people. Don't you think that iof it were not the case that the people of New York would have realised by now. After all they were there & they also would have the least interest in any cover up.

Is anyone actually denying the planes hit the buildings?? Yes A couple of people on this thread actually

Al Queda were responsible I have little doubt. Bin Laden had been on the radar for at least 5-10 years before hand.
Nothing EVER could justify the mass murder of 5,000 innocent people IN ANY RELIGION.

On what facts do you base that statement? Are you not airbrushing history slighly? Do the fucking research instead of repeating what you hear on the radio or see on TV. Bin Laden was installed and funded by the west way before 911. Also, do a bit of digging and find out which aircraft WERE allowed to fly in US airspace right after the towers were hit when to everyone else there was a blanket ban on all flights - civil and private. You may be surprised at the answer.

I'm aware of Bin Ladens History as I said in my original post he was on the radar years before 9/11, & yes the west did have a hand in his installation as you put it. [color=blue]I suppose you think that mass murder can be justified. I don't & you can try to insult me as much as you like but you won't change my opinion on that sir! If Al queda were not resposible why do they claim responsibility... propaganda wise it would make far more sense if it were an American plot to kill their own people for Al Queda to say so. ?[/color]

Afganistan is a war that I believe IS justified. The taliban were allowing Al Queda to set up there as a base/ training camp. It's no co-incidence that virually all the islamic terorists have been to Pakistan/ Afganistan. The Pakistani Govn is fighting them as are the Afgans with OUR support. Don't tell me that the majority of Afganis want the Taliban back.

Fuck me, you must have a Radio 5 Live feed shoved up your nose and right into your brain. This bullshit gets regurgitated until muppets like you repeat it as factual.
I rarely listen to Radio 5. What is bull shit about that statement. ? Ok you can question my belief based upon the facts but the facts are facts not bull shit

What does annoy me intensly is the way our government behave so shoddily towards the armed forces.
I have a theory about Islam though. Basically they are 500 years more recent than christianity,. Christianity committed atrocities in the name of religion on a regular basis for centuries. eg The Spanish Inquisition, Burning People at the stake, etc etc (You could include the Crusades if you want).
I don't know enough about the Muslim religion other than what I read & a relative of mines marriage to a muslim, who went all fundamentalist on her and ended up refusing to work, & screwing up their marriage saying "She couldn't me a muslim wife" because she wouldn't kow tow to his beliefs. (She would hide pork sausages in the freezer). My limited experience though does lead me to conclude that it is an intolerant religion with many different & varying sects (much the same as Christianity until very recently.)
Makes me think that those who don't believe in God are maybe better people than fundamentalists of ANY religion

Nothing like stereotyping and condemning a whole faith / religion based on your limited experience then, eh?

Again you are picking & choosing words from my post. I said fundamentalists of ANY religion. I said my experience WAS limited, & I also compared it to Christianity so in a way condeming two faiths not one.


Now, go get yourself a McDonalds, listen to 5 Live for the rest of the day and then knock one or two out when Paxo makes an appearance on Newsnight tonight.

They don't do Pork kebabs at Mc D's do they ?
Really insults don't make your arguements more valid

[Phil_S]

Thats pretty obvious though isn't it? whether you hold religous beliefs or not if you start killing people you are generally a cunt.  Just seemed a strange statement from you.

Yes pretty obvious to most but maybe not to Deltacline. What i was trying to say, maybe poorly was that all religions seem to at some stage have extremists who try to justify mass murder by saying it is gods work. Better to be an "unbeliever" than a murderer

[nevillew]

Better to be an "unbeliever" than a murderer

Unless you "believe" in not killing people, then there's little difference.