Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

The fifth anniversary of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks gives us enough time between when the event occured, and the present day to form an opinion on how the world has changed since then.

Obviously, 9/11 changed the United States, but what has really changed the world has been the erroneous US response to September 11, especially the war in Iraq.

From the 'easily won' war - that still rages - in Afghanistan to the pre-emptive strike against Iraq, the world is now a less safe place than it was 5 years ago.

The Bali bombs, the train attack in Madrid, and the London Underground attacks are the most well documented terrorist acts, but there have been numerous others. These have resulted in the deaths of hundreds - perhaps even thousands - of people.

Then, there's the current loss of life total for 'The War on Terror': the deaths number in the tens of thousands...

Of course, I am fully aware that 'The War on Terror' is the response to 9/11, but my argument is that it is the wrong one. It is also grossly disproportionate. A comparison of the number of civilian deaths shows this to be true.

Then, there is the culture of fear that the US and British governments seek to invoke in subtly(?) convenient moments. Machiavellian? Without a doubt. Add to this the gradual - but continual - erosion of personal freedoms, and the defecit of 'The War on Terror' begins to mirror that of the US' budget!

Another fallacy of the US response is that it somehow believes (publicly, at least) that by bombing all the reproachable countries it will somehow decrease the breeding of terrorists! Hahaha...explain that one to me again! It is precisely this sort of behavior by the US that has been a factor in the creation of the problem in the first place!

Five years ago yesterday was a black day for humanity, yet the US response has made the world even darker today.

Anyway, thoughts?

My thoughts are in level with yours. We are one. Namaste.

....

I do agree with what you say, completely. However, I don't think I necessarily believe 9/11 was a black day for humanity. Perhaps in the way US reacted to it, might have been bad for everyone else, but the actual act was a black day for America, not humanity.

A lot of people have been killed by America's invasion and bombs, yet we don't hold a minute of silence for a single one of those people.

On the rest of the post - I absolutely concur.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
I do agree with what you say, completely. However, I don't think I necessarily believe 9/11 was a black day for humanity. Perhaps in the way US reacted to it, might have been bad for everyone else, but the actual act was a black day for America, not humanity.

A lot of people have been killed by America's invasion and bombs, yet we don't hold a minute of silence for a single one of those people.

That's what I was saying; the 'black day for humanity' on Sept. 11 now encompasses the world as a result of what has followed it. In other words, we have all been affected by Sept. 11 because the US response to it has affected us all.

I totally agree with you Floo. That first post was an excellent diagnosis of the current situation.

Although I believe that you touched upon it, what amazes me is the military action the US has taken to "correct" the problem instead of looking at many of their foreign policies that helped ignite the problems that they are (as is the rest of the world) currently experiencing.

The whole "war on terror" concept is as misguided and as prone to failure as the "war on drugs". You cannot declare war on an ideology. Well I guess you can, cause they have, but it's rather futile.

If the US had of been committed to staying in Afghanistan and rooting out Osama, Al Qaeda and their Taliban cronies the rest of the world would have taken them seriously. The foray into Iraq and the inability to accept their own mistakes that created this global culture of hate and suspicion has only served to escalate the situation, and that kinda worries me a bit.

Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
The fifth anniversary of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks gives us enough time between when the event occured, and the present day to form an opinion on how the world has changed since then.

Obviously, 9/11 changed the United States, but what has really changed the world has been the erroneous US response to September 11, especially the war in Iraq.

From the 'easily won' war - that still rages - in Afghanistan to the pre-emptive strike against Iraq, the world is now a less safe place than it was 5 years ago.

The Bali bombs, the train attack in Madrid, and the London Underground attacks are the most well documented terrorist acts, but there have been numerous others. These have resulted in the deaths of hundreds - perhaps even thousands - of people.

Then, there's the current loss of life total for 'The War on Terror': the deaths number in the tens of thousands...

Of course, I am fully aware that 'The War on Terror' is the response to 9/11, but my argument is that it is the wrong one. It is also grossly disproportionate. A comparison of the number of civilian deaths shows this to be true.

Then, there is the culture of fear that the US and British governments seek to invoke in subtly(?) convenient moments. Machiavellian? Without a doubt. Add to this the gradual - but continual - erosion of personal freedoms, and the defecit of 'The War on Terror' begins to mirror that of the US' budget!

Another fallacy of the US response is that it somehow believes (publicly, at least) that by bombing all the reproachable countries it will somehow decrease the breeding of terrorists! Hahaha...explain that one to me again! It is precisely this sort of behavior by the US that has been a factor in the creation of the problem in the first place!

Five years ago yesterday was a black day for humanity, yet the US response has made the world even darker today.

Anyway, thoughts?

Oh

Originally posted by KharmaDog
Although I believe that you touched upon it, what amazes me is the military action the US has taken to "correct" the problem instead of looking at many of their foreign policies that helped ignite the problems that they are (as is the rest of the world) currently experiencing.

Yeah, but I guess that an alternative action wouldn't have sold many tanks, bombs, war-planes, and oil pipelines...

Originally posted by KharmaDog
If the US had of been committed to staying in Afghanistan and rooting out Osama, Al Qaeda and their Taliban cronies the rest of the world would have taken them seriously. The foray into Iraq and the inability to accept their own mistakes that created this global culture of hate and suspicion has only served to escalate the situation, and that kinda worries me a bit.

I like that you said "a bit".

Everyone takes note of a the secondary cause rather than first cause of what is happening in the world post 9-11. What really trigger this whole change in the world? A few extremeist that took it upon themselves to commit an act of terrorism agaisn't a powerful nation. Even if the War in Iraq is wrong. There was bound to be a reaction. This entire reaction would have been avoid it all completely if those extremeists would have chosen other means than terrorism to make their beliefs public. When people say it's the Americans fault it's just another example of trying to pass GO and collect without rolling the dice.

why does everyone act as if 9/11 was the beginning of something?...it wasn't

while al-qaeda like to pretend that they have some holy duty to drive the infidels from muslim holy land...the fact remains that the members which initiated al-qaeda are former mujahadeen who were trained and armed by the CIA and them forgotten about when the soviet union fell

if we hadn't treated them as disposable pawns back in the 70's and 80's then it's most likely that the ideology and the military knowhow would never have came together as they did

Originally posted by jaden101
why does everyone act as if 9/11 was the beginning of something?...it wasn't


haven't you heard? the u.s. is the center of the universe, and before our soil was invaded by terrorists, it just didnt matter. silly you

Originally posted by PVS
haven't you heard? the u.s. is the center of the universe, and before our soil was invaded by terrorists, it just didnt matter. silly you

doh *slaps self in face*

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
Everyone takes note of a the secondary cause rather than first cause of what is happening in the world post 9-11. What really trigger this whole change in the world?

I suggest you look further back than the occurence of 9/11 and look at all the complexities involved in this issue.

The bombing of the twin towers was not a trigger, it was (in the minds' of the perpitrators) reprisal and the culmination of years of ignorance, arrogance and poor foriegn policy. The fact that it could have been prevented, the fact that many administrations along with Bush's bear some responsibility and the fact that not much has changed in regards to foriegn policy issues makes what happened on 9/11 as horrible today as it did 5 years ago.

I remember watching the TV when the 9/11 happened. I also remember people guessing who did it - there are so many possible suspects, I remember them naming them all.

The matter of the fact is, America made a lot of mistakes in the past. If they haven't got so damn obsessed with the communist...perhaps a lot of things that happened - wouldn't have.

Originally posted by KharmaDog
I suggest you look further back than the occurence of 9/11 and look at all the complexities involved in this issue.

The bombing of the twin towers was not a trigger, it was (in the minds' of the perpitrators) reprisal and the culmination of years of ignorance, arrogance and poor foriegn policy. The fact that it could have been prevented, the fact that many administrations along with Bush's bear some responsibility and the fact that not much has changed in regards to foriegn policy issues makes what happened on 9/11 as horrible today as it did 5 years ago.

I suggest you read my entire post and pay attention to this part:



No matter how far back in history you want to go. They still chose to commit acts of terrorism. They chose to fight. That's the key point. Had they chosen other means I'm sure we would not be in this mess right now.

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
They chose to fight. That's the key point. Had they chosen other means I'm sure we would not be in this mess right now.

I fear for a world that looks at this issue as simply as this.

I keep seeing this word disproportionate used frequently now. It seems to be the PC term for overly aggressive or large amounts of destructive force when used in discussion of conflict and describing damage.

Whats an acceptable amount of loss when putting terrorist acts into the equation?

Originally posted by Soleran
Whats an acceptable amount of loss when putting terrorist acts into the equation?

A good question. I know attacking a country that had nothing to do with it should be considered unacceptable at least.

Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
The fifth anniversary of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks gives us enough time between when the event occured, and the present day to form an opinion on how the world has changed since then.

Obviously, 9/11 changed the United States, but what has really changed the world has been the erroneous US response to September 11, especially the war in Iraq.

From the 'easily won' war - that still rages - in Afghanistan to the pre-emptive strike against Iraq, the world is now a less safe place than it was 5 years ago.

The Bali bombs, the train attack in Madrid, and the London Underground attacks are the most well documented terrorist acts, but there have been numerous others. These have resulted in the deaths of hundreds - perhaps even thousands - of people.

Then, there's the current loss of life total for 'The War on Terror': the deaths number in the tens of thousands...

Of course, I am fully aware that 'The War on Terror' is the response to 9/11, but my argument is that it is the wrong one. It is also grossly disproportionate. A comparison of the number of civilian deaths shows this to be true.

Then, there is the culture of fear that the US and British governments seek to invoke in subtly(?) convenient moments. Machiavellian? Without a doubt. Add to this the gradual - but continual - erosion of personal freedoms, and the defecit of 'The War on Terror' begins to mirror that of the US' budget!

Another fallacy of the US response is that it somehow believes (publicly, at least) that by bombing all the reproachable countries it will somehow decrease the breeding of terrorists! Hahaha...explain that one to me again! It is precisely this sort of behavior by the US that has been a factor in the creation of the problem in the first place!

Five years ago yesterday was a black day for humanity, yet the US response has made the world even darker today.

Anyway, thoughts?

Absolutely.

Every time I read the national news I'm reminded of how many of our service men and women are being killed needlessly. When are Iraq and Afghanistan going to be "liberated?" It's been 5 years now and things have only seemed to have gotten worse. It's bad enough that our soldiers are dying but it's even worse that for every time one of them are killed 10 or so Iragi or Afghani civilians go with them.

Originally posted by Soleran
I keep seeing this word disproportionate used frequently now. It seems to be the PC term for overly aggressive or large amounts of destructive force when used in discussion of conflict and describing damage.

Whats an acceptable amount of loss when putting terrorist acts into the equation?

I agree... It'd be like you poking a grizzly bear with a sharp stick and then crying that the bear used a "disproportionate" amount of force when it mauls you for poking it. Simply put, some people are not happy when one side is a more effective killer and more effective at waging war, doesn't necessarily matter if the losing side is the one who started it.

Originally posted by meep-meep
Absolutely.

Every time I read the national news I'm reminded of how many of our service men and women are being killed needlessly. When are Iraq and Afghanistan going to be "liberated?" It's been 5 years now and things have only seemed to have gotten worse. It's bad enough that our soldiers are dying but it's even worse that for every time one of them are killed 10 or so Iragi or Afghani civilians go with them.

Iraq is a hell hole no doubt and I wouldn't want to be there, but it isn't as bad as one would think only reading one side of the news... I personally have a friend there right now (my best friend of 18 years and he isn't just a grunt in the field), he can vouch that many of these 'horror' stories are highly embellished by the press. Did you know that Iraq took over Military command, that's a positive step right? But you do not see this story in the headlines, why you ask, because 'horror' stories sell more. My advice, read the news from the far left to the far right and everything in between, then sprinkle it with some foreigh news, BBC is my favorite for that.

Well i blame tony blair for the war in iraq . He said it had WMD what a liar he is !

People who do not know a lot about the history of the middle east, or the background regarding relations and policy, are the ones who will blindly accept that Iraq has weapons of mass distruction.

Another thing which bothers me a lot is that Saddam Hussein is demonised over the top. Americans claim he is the monster of the monsters, yet they are the ones who put him into government.

So...what that should indicate is that even if America 'liberate' Iraq and put someone else in power, they are bound to turn nasty, since it seems to follow that trend - Taliban, Saddam Hussein..

we allowed the taliban to take control of afghanistan, just as we will allow fundamentalist nutcases to take control of iraq when our resources are depleted and we inevitably pull out with no goals met (as if there are any goals to meet besides "stay the coarse".) then i fear we will lament the loss of hussein, considering the eventual replacement. get ready for taliban: part 2 electric boogaloo

Originally posted by PVS
get ready for taliban: part 2 electric boogaloo

At least sequels are never usually as good as their predecessors.

godfather 2


i win

ESB.

I win.

I said "usually". You both lose.

Originally posted by PVS
we allowed the taliban to take control of afghanistan, just as we will allow fundamentalist nutcases to take control of iraq when our resources are depleted and we inevitably pull out with no goals met (as if there are any goals to meet besides "stay the coarse".) then i fear we will lament the loss of hussein, considering the eventual replacement. get ready for taliban: part 2 electric boogaloo

Having that in mind it makes you wonder if the middle east will ever sort out.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Having that in mind it makes you wonder if the middle east will ever sort out.

Only way the Middle East will be at peace is(if) when the oil runs out and nobody cares anymore about that region.

Originally posted by Robtard
Only way the Middle East will be at peace is(if) when the oil runs out and nobody cares anymore about that region.

There was strife and conflict in that region long before oil was a commodity and I fear that it may always be that way. As for "that religion"...that religion and every other one has been a tinderbox of conflict, and nothing will change that.

dude...he said "region"

Originally posted by PVS
dude...he said "region"

And that makes me "illiterate tool of the day".








Cut me some slack here, I'm sick as a dog...and my point was a good one.

Originally posted by KharmaDog
And that makes me "illiterate tool of the day".

hands off the trophy...the day is young

Originally posted by KharmaDog
And that makes me "illiterate tool of the day".


Cut me some slack here, I'm sick as a dog...and my point was a good one.

His joke must have gone over my head... A 'region' can be an area of land... So???

Originally posted by Robtard
His joke must have gone over my head... A 'region' can be an area of land... So???

I mistook the word "region" for the word "religion".




Hence the joking.

Originally posted by KharmaDog
I mistook the word "region" for the word "religion".

Hence the joking.

I got it now,my bad, I did not notice the quotes, I thought you were just going on your own thing with the religion aspect of your post.

I will NOT watch any of, nor did watch any of that tragedy.........I will not relive it again.........we must move on.

Originally posted by debbiejo
I will NOT watch any of, nor did watch any of that tragedy.........I will not relive it again.........we must move on.

How does that saying go? 'If you do not remember your past mistakes, you are doomed to repeat them'. Or something like that.

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
Everyone takes note of a the secondary cause rather than first cause of what is happening in the world post 9-11. What really trigger this whole change in the world? A few extremeist that took it upon themselves to commit an act of terrorism agaisn't a powerful nation. Even if the War in Iraq is wrong. There was bound to be a reaction. This entire reaction would have been avoid it all completely if those extremeists would have chosen other means than terrorism to make their beliefs public. When people say it's the Americans fault it's just another example of trying to pass GO and collect without rolling the dice.

Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
Obviously, 9/11 changed the United States, but what has really changed the world has been the erroneous US response to September 11, especially the war in Iraq.

Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
Of course, I am fully aware that 'The War on Terror' is the response to 9/11, but my argument is that it is the wrong one.

Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
Another fallacy of the US response is that it somehow believes (publicly, at least) that by bombing all the reproachable countries it will somehow decrease the breeding of terrorists! Hahaha...explain that one to me again! It is precisely this sort of behavior by the US that has been a factor in the creation of the problem in the first place!


Now to this:

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
No matter how far back in history you want to go. They still chose to commit acts of terrorism. They chose to fight. That's the key point. Had they chosen other means I'm sure we would not be in this mess right now.

It would help if you had a greater understanding of the discussion you are taking part in.

Originally posted by Soleran
Whats an acceptable amount of loss when putting terrorist acts into the equation?

Are you talking about both sides? The US is fighting 'The War on Terror', and the Islamic fundamentalists are fighting the US. I don't see much difference between what the US is doing, and what the other group is doing. They are both creating an atmosphere of terror in the world.

did anyone catch the presedential address on TV last night? pretty boring.

Bush basically just said the war is not over and will not be over until either side is victorious, and if we were to pull out now that the terrorists would follow us. basically just a bunch of bush rabble.

The War on Terror: the stupidest thing.....ever. first of all, at least call it something different. Terror and terrorism isn't a group of ppl you can defeat it's an idea, a philosophy, you can't fight a war on idea or a philosophy........there's terrorism going on here in the US.

the government is using 9/11 as a ploy to get more ppl in the military. i mean, first of all, the raised the max age, lowered the physical and academic requirements, and decided to take advantage of the whole immigration problem by providing an easier path to citizenship for any foreign people who join our military. also their were military recruiteres at my school today......the day after 9/11....coincidence? my friend made signs and hand outs opposing the war and all of that jazz and set up a table right next to the recruiters, but was shut down because he "didn't have a permit..."

yeah, whatever

Originally posted by fruits
did anyone catch the presedential address on TV last night? pretty boring.

Bush basically just said the war is not over and will not be over until either side is victorious, and if we were to pull out now that the terrorists would follow us. basically just a bunch of bush rabble.

The War on Terror: the stupidest thing.....ever. first of all,

First, you forget the war on drugs.

Second, there is no such thing as a war that doesn't end until one side admits defeat. That's kind of the point of war.

Third, how could you miss his address, it was on every basic cable channel in the country? Even people with a coat hanger and tin foil saw it. Which should tell you something.

Originally posted by debbiejo
I will NOT watch any of, nor did watch any of that tragedy.........I will not relive it again.........we must move on.

"Moving on" is a bit much. I watch it repeatedly. I don't get mad...or hate...its an awesome event. I feel I owe a lot to those towers. Maybe its because of my fascination with skyscrapers. I embrace 9-11 as part of American history.

I think it is important to relive it. It was unique...powerful...amazing...beautiful...tragic...and dripping with some of the most powerful symbolism I've ever seen on film.

Really, the sheet magnitude of the event and symbolism is so powerful...its absolutely captivating.

Am I the only one who thinks September 11 is overrated and milked to death to get as much sympathy as possible?

Terrorist have already won their cause in America. they won it the moment Bush introduced Patriot Act, and everyone accepted.

What is the goal of terrorism? It is to scare people through violent acts. I think they have more than done the job.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Terrorist have already won their cause in America. they won it the moment Bush introduced Patriot Act, and everyone accepted.

What is the goal of terrorism? It is to scare people through violent acts. I think they have more than done the job.


Sure they did, however terrorism is an easy job. What was the cost of their acts though?

If there is a war on terror, then surely there are no more terrorists?

A term cannot be used to define the situation, and then rejected in the same instance, can it?

someone predicted 9/11 ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1wer7hlR_MA

Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo

It would help if you had a greater understanding of the discussion you are taking part in.



Oh, you see when I read this:

Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo


Anyway, thoughts?

I thought you were asking for other peoples opinions. But now I see you're just comparing your own opinion and mine and trying to come out on top. If I had known you were doing your typical sarcasm routine I wouldn't even dream of coming here. Once again you waste other peoples time. Cheerios!

Hahaha, it's just that when you're in a discussion, you usually need to come up with something that hasn't already been atteneded to. Otherwise, its a little stale.

Please come back when you've got something. You'll be most welcome!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FU-qfQEGDEg


cnn interviews alex jones

Three thousand people died becasue of the shadow government that runs our world. The American government engineered the whole thing. There were explosives placed throughout the building that caused the building to fall so neatly and allowed for a very quick clean-up to get rid of evidence. The pentagon was a missle and the plane that crashed in the PA was actually loaded with all the passengers and pilots from the other three planes and was then shot down. No one looked into anything because of the emotional toll it took on peoples lives.

If you are asking yourself why go read the patriot act and look at all the actions that have occured because of 9/11, the american people just sit and look dumbfounded.

Rember those that died because they were a sacrifice made by our government to secure and strengthen their power.

Originally posted by Deano
someone predicted 9/11 ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1wer7hlR_MA

how is that a prediction...when he says "like the world trade centre" he is referencing the attacks several years prior

so it's not actually prediction

Please keep the Conspiracy posts to the conpspiracy area. Seriously- keep such things out of here.

its not a conspiracy

Originally posted by nerf warrior
Three thousand people died becasue of the shadow government that runs our world. The American government engineered the whole thing. There were explosives placed throughout the building that caused the building to fall so neatly and allowed for a very quick clean-up to get rid of evidence. The pentagon was a missle and the plane that crashed in the PA was actually loaded with all the passengers and pilots from the other three planes and was then shot down. No one looked into anything because of the emotional toll it took on peoples lives.

If you are asking yourself why go read the patriot act and look at all the actions that have occured because of 9/11, the american people just sit and look dumbfounded.

Rember those that died because they were a sacrifice made by our government to secure and strengthen their power.

This is absolute bullcrap. You don't have facts. Grow up.

neither do you

Not true. I'll give that the Pentagon is interesting...but the Trade center demolition is total crap. People need to shut the heck up about that. There is no evidence supporting controlled demolition or any other mechanism other than the planes and the fires themselves.

I also won't say that the US government didn't have some role in carrying out the attacks.

However, US policies, in essecne created them,

no evidence? there is lots actually.

i know that the whole "ignore them and they'll stop" line is bullshit in most cases, but the only option when dealing with deano. dont acknowledge his conspiracy soap box ranting

conspiracy nuts say it was a military plane that hit the south tower cause it had no windows

http://media.popularmechanics.com/images/0305911-windows-lg.jpg

look...windows

people say it was a missle that hit the pentagon despite hundreds of eye witness testimonies to the contrary...not to mention

http://media.popularmechanics.com/images/0305911-flight77-lg.jpg

plane debris...

infact the whole thing was independantly checked out...including interviews with all the "experts" who said bombs were used etc and who were all either taken out of context or blatently misquoted

Firefighters have made testimony saying they saw flashes of light throughout the building right before they fell.

great post.well done.

when steel melts and buckles, it sparks. on a grand scale such as the wtc collapse, im sure it was quite a light show.

Originally posted by PVS
when steel melts and buckles, it sparks. on a grand scale such as the wtc collapse, im sure it was quite a light show.

steel rarely melts in building fires...this was another conspiracy theorists argument...jet fuel burns at 800 but steel doesn't melt until 1300-1400

pity that steel loses 80% of its strength at about 600 though

Originally posted by debbiejo
I will NOT watch any of, nor did watch any of that tragedy.........I will not relive it again.........we must move on.

the only thing is thats impossible to do if we dont hold the true culprits accountable for their actions.Like Robtard said,history has a tendency to repeat itself especially if no accountability is held for the the true culprits.

Originally posted by jaden101
conspiracy nuts say it was a military plane that hit the south tower cause it had no windows

http://media.popularmechanics.com/images/0305911-windows-lg.jpg

look...windows

people say it was a missle that hit the pentagon despite hundreds of eye witness testimonies to the contrary...not to mention

http://media.popularmechanics.com/images/0305911-flight77-lg.jpg

plane debris...

infact the whole thing was independantly checked out...including interviews with all the "experts" who said bombs were used etc and who were all either taken out of context or blatently misquoted
oh wow, one tiny peice of wreckage. mystery over

Originally posted by nerf warrior
Three thousand people died becasue of the shadow government that runs our world. The American government engineered the whole thing. There were explosives placed throughout the building that caused the building to fall so neatly and allowed for a very quick clean-up to get rid of evidence. The pentagon was a missle and the plane that crashed in the PA was actually loaded with all the passengers and pilots from the other three planes and was then shot down. No one looked into anything because of the emotional toll it took on peoples lives.

If you are asking yourself why go read the patriot act and look at all the actions that have occured because of 9/11, the american people just sit and look dumbfounded.

Rember those that died because they were a sacrifice made by our government to secure and strengthen their power.

great post,well done.

Originally posted by Deano
oh wow, one tiny peice of wreckage. mystery over

well it certainly puts some of the more idiotic claims to rest doesn't it

military planes and missles and other such total horseshit

have a read

http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html

Originally posted by Alliance
This is absolute bullcrap. You don't have facts. Grow up.

no its not bullcrap.you want facts go to the 9-11 thread in the conspiracy there has been many posts there that prove what he is talking about is true which many people here choose to ignore though.He needs to grow up because YOU dont agree with him? wow thats real mature.

Originally posted by Mr Parker
no its not bullcrap.you want facts go to the 9-11 thread in the conspiracy theere has been many posts there that prove what he is talking about is true which many people here choose to ignore though.

I'd be happy to address this issue.

Originally posted by jaden101
well it certainly puts some of the more idiotic claims to rest doesn't it

military planes and missles and other such total horseshit

have a read

http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html

The pentagon is more mysterious. Things do NOT line up with the governemtne story.

However, all the WTC crap is total bs. Planes brought those beauties down.

Originally posted by jaden101
well it certainly puts some of the more idiotic claims to rest doesn't it

military planes and missles and other such total horseshit

have a read

http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html

Dude popular mechanics is a propogation piece for the government,they are the ones that have no facts to back up their claims,THEY are full of horseshit,damn people here need to stop listening to the propogation the government shoves down peoples throats.

if only another plane had hit it...there would have been a ton of camera crews to capture it just like at the WTC

theorists say a missle hit the pentagon...yet their is photographs of plane wreckage on the grass...mmm

i personally dont really see much of a mystery

what i would like to see is al qaeda's reaction to the people who are trying to denounce their handiwork by attributing it to lizards from outer space that secretly control the world

Originally posted by Alliance
The pentagon is more mysterious. Things do NOT line up with the governemtne story.

However, all the WTC crap is total bs. Planes brought those beauties down.

err no explosives brought the buildings down thats obvious.

Originally posted by Deano
oh wow, one tiny peice of wreckage. mystery over

not to mention that jetliners dont look anything like that. thats planted evidence the pentagon people carried on.alos there were severla cameras acoss at the sheridan hotel and a gas station across the street that photograph the pentagan all the time and could have provided pictures of the plane coming in yet the FBI confiscated them immediately.funny if its a plane like they claim that they wont release the film which would clear up the whole mess.

Originally posted by jaden101
if only another plane had hit it...there would have been a ton of camera crews to capture it just like at the WTC

theorists say a missle hit the pentagon...yet their is photographs of plane wreckage on the grass...mmm

i personally dont really see much of a mystery

what i would like to see is al qaeda's reaction to the people who are trying to denounce their handiwork by attributing it to lizards from outer space that secretly control the world

The photos of the building where the jet airliner crashed dont support the governments theory that a jet hit the building.the wall would have the shape of wings going through it.All it has is a circle shaped hole.No signs of the wings which is very mysterious. well I am not one of those people who think lizards from outer space secretly control the world so that doesnt apply to me.the mystery is there because the photos shown hardly prove it was a jet.

Originally posted by Mr Parker
Dude popular mechanics is a propogation piece for the government,they are the ones that have no facts to back up their claims,THEY are full of horseshit,damn people here need to stop listening to the propogation the government shoves down peoples throats.

of course...the government runs everything that doesnt agree with your retarded conspiracy theories dont they

and you obviously didn't read the page because the investigation were carried out by

Ronald Greeley, director of the Space Photography Laboratory at Arizona State University

Fred E. Culick, professor of aeronautics at the California Institute of Technology

Forman Williams, a professor of engineering at the University of California

David Biggs, a structural engineer at Ryan-Biggs Associates and a member of the American Society of Civil Engineers

Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University/Won-Young Kim (senior research scientist)/Arthur Lerner-Lam (associate director)/Mary Tobin (senior science writer)

Mete Sozen, a professor of structural engineering at Purdue University.

Ken Hays, executive vice president of Masonry Arts, the Bessemer, Ala.

Blast expert Allyn E. Kilsheimer CEO of KCE Structural Engineers PC,

Michael K. Hynes, an airline accident expert who investigated the crash of TWA Flight 800 out of New York City in 1996

Wallace Miller, Somerset County coroner (area where flight 93 was shot down)

National Transportation Safety Board investigator Matthew McCormick.

not only this but these person who was named as supposedly shooting down flight 93 Major Rick Gibney, was actually nowhere near the area according to himself and the person who was actually in the plane with him at the time..Ed Jacoby Jr., the director of the New York State Emergency Management Office.

...just like in the road runner cartoons...



the pieces of jet liner do...which i have already posted a picture of

Even if all those people say that,they fail to mention people like steven Jones.A physics professor at Bringham Young university who many physic professors around the country have praised as well for his work in determining that explosives went off in the towers.I used to respect popular mechanics in the past but around the mid 90's all they did was start propogating government lies which continues today.Matter of fact,steven jones has been suspended recently for speaking the truth about 9-11 and the school is having hearings to get him fired.wow some free country this is,cant even have a different view than the governments own.

Originally posted by jaden101
steel rarely melts in building fires...this was another conspiracy theorists argument...jet fuel burns at 800 but steel doesn't melt until 1300-1400

pity that steel loses 80% of its strength at about 600 though

forgive my clumsy description. 'becomes soft from intense heat"....or whatever the proper word is

Originally posted by jaden101
...just like in the road runner cartoons...



the pieces of jet liner do...which i have already posted a picture of

No not just like them,but there would be signs of it.and again those photos as me and deano told you,prove nothing.I can see you cant be reasoned with on this though.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
Please keep the Conspiracy posts to the conpspiracy area. Seriously- keep such things out of here.

Originally posted by jaden101
steel rarely melts in building fires...this was another conspiracy theorists argument...jet fuel burns at 800 but steel doesn't melt until 1300-1400

pity that steel loses 80% of its strength at about 600 though

wrong again.yes jet fuel burns at 800 but the steel doesnt melt till 2500.Its just absolutely ludicrise to buy into that fairy tale that jet fuel caused the buildings to collapse. buildings dont collapse like that due to fire,they crumble down slowly bit by bit,in demolitions though,that is typical for them to come down like that.not to mention it was the first time in history that a skyscraper collapsed due to fire.Planes have hit buildings before in the past but there is no record of any plane causing the buildings to collapse in such fashion that we know of.matter of fact,if you study the film of the towers collapse,you can see that the top portion of the tower is starting to tip over sideways.thats why the explosives were planted to keep it from TIPPING over sideways.

whats the difference between them and him....they actually investigated it...he didn't...

the main evidence for someone saying explosives were used was the testimony of Van Romero, an explosives expert and vice president of the New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology who actually said that it "looked like" explosives may have been used...yet who now agrees the tower collapsed without them...

steven jones also claimed his report was peer reviewed prior to publication...just last week he removed his report prior to an investigation into it

not to mention that the list of high profile people who dont agree with the common account of how the towers collapsed aren't even scientific based experts and thus actually have no knowledge of how it happed from a physics standpoint

steel doesnt have to come even close to melting for it to buckle. so people in general, including myself, use the word "melt" inappropriately. though that may make us incorrect, it certainly doesnt make this whackjob thoery correct...sorry

Originally posted by Mr Parker
wrong again.yes jet fuel burns at 800 but the steel doesnt melt till 2500.Its just absolutely ludicrise to buy into that fairy tale that jet fuel caused the buildings to collapse. buildings dont collapse like that due to fire,they crumble down slowly bit by bit,in demolitions though,that is typical for them to come down like that.not to mention it was the first time in history that a skyscraper collapsed due to fire.Planes have hit buildings before in the past but there is no record of any plane causing the buildings to collapse in such fashion that we know of.matter of fact,if you study the film of the towers collapse,you can see that the top portion of the tower is starting to tip over sideways.thats why the explosives were planted to keep it from TIPPING over sideways.

nice way to put it...one temp in celsius and the other in farenheit...luckily some of use can spot that eh?

and jet fuel actually burns at 800-1500F...and once again for those among us poor in physics...steel loses half its strength at 1100F

not to mention that jet fuel wasn't the only thing burning in the towers

you also say that explosives were used to prevent the building from tipping...yet also say that the building tipped...nice way to contradict your self

theorists also completely forget (conveniently) about the damage to the towers support columns by the plane impact

uh yes they do.And if you would bother to study 9-11 message boards you would know that what eyewitnesses have said doesnt match up to the governments explanation not to mention the firefighters who fought the fires and said they heard explosives going off and have since then been told to shut up and have gone on radio shows saying they have been threatened with death threats to their familys if they dont keep quiet.Did it ever occur to you that Van Romero has changed his testimony because of death threats? I know John Mccain was initially doubting the official version as well but he is now praising and whomping the official version to a hoot now which doesnt surprise me because he is a corrupted politician.He for one ignored complaints by family members and vietnam vets to do something to get vietnam POW'S out and totally blew them off.Now popular mechanics is promoting that S O B since he is going along with the lies.

The mods should either close this thread, or ban the people who have had multiple warnings about discussing conspiracies in the conspracy forum only.

This place is going to sh*t.

Originally posted by Mr Parker
uh yes they do.And if you would bother to study 9-11 message boards you would know that what eyewitnesses have said doesnt match up to the governments explanation not to mention the firefighters who fought the fires and said they heard explosives going off and have since then been told to shut up and have gone on radio shows saying they have been threatened with death threats to their familys if they dont keep quiet.Did it ever occur to you that Van Romero has changed his testimony because of death threats? I know John Mccain was initially doubting the official version as well but he is now praising and whomping the official version to a hoot now which doesnt surprise me because he is a corrupted politician.He for one ignored complaints by family members and vietnam vets to do something to get vietnam POW'S out and totally blew them off.Now popular mechanics is promoting that S O B since he is going along with the lies.

yes because the 9/11 message boards are a better place to find information than scientific studies into it

i have also seen the "documentaries" about supposed firefighters saying they heard explosives...they all have one thing in common...they dont actually have any firefighters saying it...just someone saying that they said it...funny that isn't it

Van Romero's career is in tatters because of his comments...not to mention that he dismissed accusations that he got death threats

what does John Mccain and vietnam have to do with anything?

oh..and in relation to your "wing shaped hole" theory

http://www.cs.purdue.edu/homes/cmh/simulation/phase1/

Originally posted by KharmaDog
The mods should either close this thread, or ban the people who have had multiple warnings about discussing conspiracies in the conspracy forum only.

This place is going to sh*t.

luckily i'm talking science then

Originally posted by jaden101
nice way to put it...one temp in celsius and the other in farenheit...luckily some of use can spot that eh?

and jet fuel actually burns at 800-1500F...and once again for those among us poor in physics...steel loses half its strength at 1100F

not to mention that jet fuel wasn't the only thing burning in the towers

you also say that explosives were used to prevent the building from tipping...yet also say that the building tipped...nice way to contradict your self

theorists also completely forget (conveniently) about the damage to the towers support columns by the plane impact

true jet fuel burns up to 1500 f but AGAIN it would have to approach 2500 to begin to weaken the metal.the top part shows it is tipping on the north tower,well you can see lights of explosives going off in the film in that area as well,which conviently kept it from tipping.even so the fire was NOT enough to cause it to collapse,again no skyscraper had ever collapsed due to fire,AGAIN palnes have hit buildings before,but there its not normal for them to cause the building to collapse like that.is any of this getting through to you? the planes impact was at the top of the towers and yet you buy into that line of B.S that the support columns were damaged by the plane? dude your hopeless,I give up on you.

Originally posted by KharmaDog
The mods should either close this thread, or ban the people who have had multiple warnings about discussing conspiracies in the conspracy forum only.

This place is going to sh*t.

amen....and just fyi you dont have to censor "shit"

Honestly...bring this discussion to the Conspiracy forum.

Originally posted by jaden101
yes because the 9/11 message boards are a better place to find information than scientific studies into it

i have also seen the "documentaries" about supposed firefighters saying they heard explosives...they all have one thing in common...they dont actually have any firefighters saying it...just someone saying that they said it...funny that isn't it

Van Romero's career is in tatters because of his comments...not to mention that he dismissed accusations that he got death threats

what does John Mccain and vietnam have to do with anything?

oh..and in relation to your "wing shaped hole" theory

http://www.cs.purdue.edu/homes/cmh/simulation/phase1/

yes they are a better place because the best work done in government coverups like this one is by independent investigaters,not by people like the 9-11 commission or popular mecahnics,i mention john mccain because popular mechanics praises him and you list popular mechanics as your source.I meant to say that if you look at those 9-11 message boards,they have documents where the firefighters are saying that,again researchers have found that they have been threatened,again they have gone on radi saying that.of course he will dismiss them.i give up,this is going nowhere with you.

Originally posted by Alliance
Honestly...bring this discussion to the Conspiracy forum.

Im all for that.Im not going to discuss it here anymore myself.I was wondering why this was posted here in this section in the first place.

well, the answer to your question lies in....the topic

I will definitely close if the Conspiracy talk does not stop, indeed.

no...it wouldn't...you clearly dont have any clue about physics despite the fact that i have posted the scientific facts about steel and how it is affected by temperature

i've actual investigated fires as part of my forensics studies and questioned leading fire investigators..they all say the same thing...they rarely see melted steel...but regularly see buckled steel because it weakens at a relatively low tempeture compares with the the temp that most domestic and non industrial workplace fires get to



no you cant...you see a lot of dust being ejected from floors as the floors above cascade down...

and would you look at that...there was a hell of a lot of dust

well you can see lights of explosives going off

not to mention the fact the it was predicted that parts of the plane fuselage may have ignited in the fires (the temp was high enough to ignite aluminium) and these burn white hot





obviously you never bothered looking into the design of the WTC before concocting your bizarre theories did you

works like this...the WTC has 2 main support areas...the core and the perimeter columns

the perimeter columns are bound together by the floor braces...the impact destroyed several perimeter columns on 3 sides of the building, much of the central core that supports the vertical loads and removed several floors...thus what bound the rest of the undamaged columns together was missing and so the force of the floors above pushed the perimeter columns out...

heat then weakens remaining steel (as proven before) and the building collapses

i love the fact that people post videos saying "look...explosive coming from the building during collapse" yet most of them come from the sides of the buildings when the main vertical supports are at the centre of the structure and the corner perimeter supports

not to mention that i've witnessed controlled demolition and none of them have ever had the huge outspray of wreckage that you see at the top of the building

controlled implosion???

http://www.public-action.com/911/jmcm/USYDENR/DOCS/wtc_collapse7.jpg

mm...yeah...clearly

not to mention that there wouldn't have been anywhere inconspicuous to plant explosives on the perimeter supports unless you conclude that they were put on the engineering levels which would be contrary to the so called testimonies of firefighters...i'm sure the employees would have noticed the people drilling into the supports and wiring up stick of high explosive...funnily enough...there aren't any eye wintnesses saying that

Yeah yeah, cut it out.

best to just let it go

Originally posted by Ushgarak
Yeah yeah, cut it out.

apologies...i was in the middle of writing it when you posted so didn't see it until after i had posted

http://www.infowars.com/articles/sept11/controlled_demolition_expert_and_wtc_7.htm

i'll leave u with that.

mmm

well?

Originally posted by Deano
well?

well what?...

what do u think

havent you figured out yet that he's a tireless rebutter? just drop it

i obviously cant comment can i?...seeing as i've been told not to

i'm a good little boy after all

yes, and i do see the irony of my post as well. lets just leave it at that and let him have his last word

Originally posted by PVS
havent you figured out yet that he's a tireless rebutter? just drop it

what can you do when you're up against people who think a plane hitting a building will leave a plane shaped hole

i never said the building shud have a plane shaped hole. what different does it make if it was a plane or not. we shud be asking who did it.

i dont want the last word, jaden can clearly have it, if he chooses to answer the question.

Originally posted by Deano


i dont want the last word, jaden can clearly have it, if he chooses to answer the question.

its not a matter of choice is it?...we've been told to lay off the conspiracy talk in this thread but you seem intent on baiting me into it




i never said you did

regardless...you should look up the NIST report (the people who actually investigated the collapse of WTC7

of course i'm sure the response would involve "cover up"

you did it again. now, when he replies again, and he will, just let it go

PM me about it then. simple.

PVS go and burn in heaven

Originally posted by PVS
you did it again. now, when he replies again, and he will, just let it go

cant let idiocy have the last word...it's not fair on the kids...they'll grow up believing it

Originally posted by jaden101
cant let idiocy have the last word...it's not fair on the kids...they'll grow up believing it

just be thankful idiots and liars are not in charge of producing actual 911 documentaries....wait a minute....oh shit

talking of idiots. you gonna be voting for the next president pvs? surely you aint that stupid

oh and it takes a real smart person to believe bin laden did it cos the governent said so. pathetic.

not that it has anything to do with the topic, but yes i will be voting.

bin laden took credit for the wtc attacks. so im inclined to believe it. stupid me.

What's the option/benefit to not voting Deano?

you wont be wasting your vote if you go for the interstellar lizard party

Originally posted by jaden101
you wont be wasting your vote if you go for the interstellar lizard party


yeah, but all they want to do is offer tax cuts to the rich, reject the separation of church and state, and enslave the human race from their flying saucers. plus im not in agreement with their foreign policy.

Originally posted by jaden101
you wont be wasting your vote if you go for the interstellar lizard party

Didn't we defeat them in the series finale in 'V'?

Originally posted by PVS
yeah, but all they want to do is offer tax cuts to the rich, reject the separation of church and state, and enslave the human race from their flying saucers. plus im not in agreement with their foreign policy.



i remember seeing a documentary series about them...it was called V

http://www.geocities.com/reptoid_27/V-Lizard.jpg
http://www.30doradus.org/spaceships/images/v.jpg
http://www.moviezilla.org/images/movies/v8.jpg

they ate birds and stuff...and freddie kruger was one of them

Originally posted by Robtard
Didn't we defeat them in the series finale in 'V'?

dammit. i was too late with the joke

Originally posted by jaden101
dammit. i was too late with the joke

We both posted at 5:10... I only beat you to the punch by meer seconds.

Originally posted by Robtard
We both posted at 5:10... I only beat you to the punch by meer seconds.


those seconds make all the difference...

Originally posted by PVS
not that it has anything to do with the topic, but yes i will be voting.

i dunno why, but i felt anger when i read that idiotic sentence. i feel like crying. what do you think will happen when a new president will come in? seriously. will he or she end earths woes? good luck anyway. i hope the new president acts a bit better then bush. coughtheagendawillbethesamecough



cia bin laden took credit yeh. so it must be true then. stupid stupid me.

http://www.davidicke.com/images/stories/September%202%202006/oscar-bin-laden.jpg

What do you suggest then Deano in lieu of voting?

Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
The fifth anniversary of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks gives us enough time between when the event occured, and the present day to form an opinion on how the world has changed since then.

Obviously, 9/11 changed the United States, but what has really changed the world has been the erroneous US response to September 11, especially the war in Iraq.

From the 'easily won' war - that still rages - in Afghanistan to the pre-emptive strike against Iraq, the world is now a less safe place than it was 5 years ago.

The Bali bombs, the train attack in Madrid, and the London Underground attacks are the most well documented terrorist acts, but there have been numerous others. These have resulted in the deaths of hundreds - perhaps even thousands - of people.

Then, there's the current loss of life total for 'The War on Terror': the deaths number in the tens of thousands...

Of course, I am fully aware that 'The War on Terror' is the response to 9/11, but my argument is that it is the wrong one. It is also grossly disproportionate. A comparison of the number of civilian deaths shows this to be true.

Then, there is the culture of fear that the US and British governments seek to invoke in subtly(?) convenient moments. Machiavellian? Without a doubt. Add to this the gradual - but continual - erosion of personal freedoms, and the defecit of 'The War on Terror' begins to mirror that of the US' budget!

Another fallacy of the US response is that it somehow believes (publicly, at least) that by bombing all the reproachable countries it will somehow decrease the breeding of terrorists! Hahaha...explain that one to me again! It is precisely this sort of behavior by the US that has been a factor in the creation of the problem in the first place!

Five years ago yesterday was a black day for humanity, yet the US response has made the world even darker today.

Anyway, thoughts?

Oooo, what's this? Oh, it's the topic. Nice.

Originally posted by jaden101
why does everyone act as if 9/11 was the beginning of something?...it wasn't

That's the truth, ey. The US government should have taken the embassy bombings in Africa and the USS Cole attack as act of war instead of just "some random towel-head being crazy". They waited until it happened in our own backyard.

And I recently saw a special on The History Channel. In which they said one of the main reasons that Clinton didn't go after Al-Qaeda was because people (namely the Republican party) would've accused him of diverting attention from the Lewinsky scandal. Which was the "real" issue in America at the time.

omfg how is it that recent history is erased in such a manner?
clinton orders air strikes on taliban
republicans and democrats cry "wag the dog"
now....it never happened.

i knew that monica sucked clinton's balls dry, but never thought she could manage to suck everyone's memory dry

Apparently she did.

"Clinton woulda been able to kick some serious ass if it weren't for tubby girl."
-David Letterman

tubgirl was involved as well? nasty

clinton you animal

what will we tell the children though?

Originally posted by PVS
omfg how is it that recent history is erased in such a manner?
clinton orders air strikes on taliban
republicans and democrats cry "wag the dog"
now....it never happened.

i knew that monica sucked clinton's balls dry, but never thought she could manage to suck everyone's memory dry

he also ordered airstrikes on Iraq but that doesn't equate to "doing something" about Saddam Hussein

Here's an excellent article, even if its link to this thread is slightly tenuous:

Bush: poor performance, exemplary packaging.

9/11: The official story simply cannot be true

http://www.davidicke.com/images/stories/September3%202006/liars.jpg


Part 1
Part 2
Part 3

This is an outstanding piece of work

Conspiracy belongs in the conspiracy forum.

Hey great sig Deano.

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
Conspiracy belongs in the conspiracy forum.

its no longer a conspiracy anymore really

only to idiots who cant see past the blinkers

the funny thing about it is they call people who dont believe the official version conspiracy theorists,the funny thing is unlike the kennedy assassination where it was all blamed on ONE person,their version is that 19 arab terrorists were behind it all.you only need more than one person to be involved in a plot for it to be a conspiracy,so since thats THEIR explanation that it was 19 arabs,people like Bush,cheney,rumsfield,rice and others,they are conspiracy theorists as well. Because its THEIR theory that that was who was behind it all.

Originally posted by Mr Parker
the funny thing about it is they call people who dont believe the official version conspiracy theorists,the funny thing is unlike the kennedy assassination where it was all blamed on ONE person,their version is that 19 arab terrorists were behind it all.you only need more than one person to be involved in a plot for it to be a conspiracy,so since thats THEIR explanation that it was 19 arabs,people like Bush,cheney,rumsfield,rice and others,they are conspiracy theorists as well. Because its THEIR theory that that was who was behind it all.

ah ha ha haaaa

http://thinkdrastic.net/journal/wp-content/uploads/2006/03/CountVonCount.jpg

Originally posted by Deano
9/11: The official story simply cannot be true

http://www.davidicke.com/images/stories/September3%202006/liars.jpg


Part 1
Part 2
Part 3

This is an outstanding piece of work

what ya think jaden

Originally posted by jaden101
ah ha ha haaaa

http://thinkdrastic.net/journal/wp-content/uploads/2006/03/CountVonCount.jpg

glad to see that you have stopped being afraid of the truth and stopped living in denial on this issue and find the 9-11 commission explanation as funny as I do.

Originally posted by Deano
what ya think jaden

yeah I would like to know the answer to your question on that as well.

Regardless of pedanticsm over the use of the term 'Conspiracy Theory', it is damn obvious that what is being posted recently here belongs in the Conspiracy theory forum. Keep it in there.

well deano and jaden,why dont you come downstairs to the sept 11th thread in the conspiracy section there and continue the discussion there then?

Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
The fifth anniversary of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks gives us enough time between when the event occured, and the present day to form an opinion on how the world has changed since then.

Obviously, 9/11 changed the United States, but what has really changed the world has been the erroneous US response to September 11, especially the war in Iraq.

From the 'easily won' war - that still rages - in Afghanistan to the pre-emptive strike against Iraq, the world is now a less safe place than it was 5 years ago.

The Bali bombs, the train attack in Madrid, and the London Underground attacks are the most well documented terrorist acts, but there have been numerous others. These have resulted in the deaths of hundreds - perhaps even thousands - of people.

Then, there's the current loss of life total for 'The War on Terror': the deaths number in the tens of thousands...

Of course, I am fully aware that 'The War on Terror' is the response to 9/11, but my argument is that it is the wrong one. It is also grossly disproportionate. A comparison of the number of civilian deaths shows this to be true.

Then, there is the culture of fear that the US and British governments seek to invoke in subtly(?) convenient moments. Machiavellian? Without a doubt. Add to this the gradual - but continual - erosion of personal freedoms, and the defecit of 'The War on Terror' begins to mirror that of the US' budget!

Another fallacy of the US response is that it somehow believes (publicly, at least) that by bombing all the reproachable countries it will somehow decrease the breeding of terrorists! Hahaha...explain that one to me again! It is precisely this sort of behavior by the US that has been a factor in the creation of the problem in the first place!

Five years ago yesterday was a black day for humanity, yet the US response has made the world even darker today.

Anyway, thoughts?
Wow, first off, at least the very beginning of that article is taken straight from Time magazine. I was reading it just the other day. I'll have to go home to see exactly how much of it is taken directly from it, though. Wow.

advice: have proof handy before you call someone a plagiarist

You called me one....................lol

no, i never called you a plagiarist. i called you an idiot. and i am correct