9/11 myths debunked . . .

I don't have a map of the fighters flight path, not sure there is one. But from the commission report we get this:

- Radar data shows the Langley fighters airborne at 9:30

- The heading of the Langley fighters was adjusted to send them to the Baltimore area

- At 9:36 the NEADS mission commander finds they're heading east over the ocean and says to "run them to the White House"

- The fighters head for Washington and are there around 10-ish

So figure it out for yourself on the map.

I need to know where they went first?
maybe it's acceptable but there was a oficial statement that it scrabled them in the other direction.
Okay i see now.
I may agree with you on this.
Why not send them from adrews and have them sent from there?

But let's not forget this is because of the drils.
We need to find out how many drils per month or 2 months are there.
I just find it strange drills of same caracteristics has 911 runing at the same time of the real thing.
And why not take of and crash the plane why go far in to the country and then come back?




[edit on 17-11-2005 by pepsi78]

[edit on 17-11-2005 by pepsi78]

I wrote a rebuttal to their Pentaogn debunk attempt. I think their debunk attempt was laughable. Judge for yourselves...


Did Flight 77 really crash into the Pentagon? Debunking Popular Mechanics

All of your claims have been dealt wtih ad nauseum in Cathearder's thread.

In any case, you present several alternative explanations, but no proof to back them up.

For instance, you say: "The plane parts could have been planted by hand."

Do you have any proof of this? No. that isn't a "debunking" it is just silly speculation.

Originally posted by HowardRoark
All of your claims have been dealt wtih ad nauseum in Cathearder's thread.

In any case, you present several alternative explanations, but no proof to back them up.

For instance, you say: "The plane parts could have been planted by hand."

Do you have any proof of this? No. that isn't a "debunking" it is just silly speculation.

Oh please, CatHerders's debunk attempt is weak sauce in my opinion. I like how he says he'll link the sources to all his pics and then he doesn't even link the sources to his two "smoking gun" inside pics of the engine and landing gear part. We don't even know if they were taken inside the Pentagon for sure. I also like the way he makes it look like a 757 is in the security cam photos by starting out with his green outline to fool your preception into thinking it's an outline of a plane. Why didn't he start his animated gif with an unaltered clip? I know why he didn't. It would have been harder to fool our preception. Plus he even states:

I will repeat, however, that this is terrible evidence...

Now I'll agree with him on that one! Plus the official version says the 757 in that security pic is the "white plume trails". I wish they would get their story straight.

I like his question though of "A 757 fits?" Well yeah, but i can draw an outline on any photo that a 757 can fit in too!

But you are right though, reading through his looooooong debunk attempt is nauseating.

As to your question of do I have any proof the debris was planted, no I don't. But you don't have any proof they weren't planted either. Yes it's speculation, but I do have evidence that add weight that they could have been planted, namely the all sparce debris seen was small enough to plant! I like how all the sparce debris on the outside is unburnt too! Plus it's a military installation with people with topsecerity clearences in an area that was off bounds to most people there because of construction. A miracle that plane not only hit the only section being renovated, but hit the ONLY TWO FLOORS being renovated which were the HARDEST TO HIT!!! Go Hani!

but hit the ONLY TWO FLOORS being renovated

aha! source please?

That explains why the plane was so flyng low. I really find it dificult to believe that the jumbo could be flown so low.

now
if the plane was going so fast it folded (melted) into the building. How on earth did little parts of it end up back out on the lawn? thats what i want to know.

Do any of the sceptics here on the board find it disturbing that the "senior researcher" who put this article out for Popular Mechanics was named Benjamin Chertoff, who is in fact, Michael Cheroff's cousin?

www.prisonplanet.com...

Specifically, the following quote from the article was interesting:

Because the manager of public relations for Popular Mechanics didn't respond to repeated calls from American Free Press, I called Benjamin Chertoff, the magazine's "senior researcher," directly.

Chertoff said he was the "senior researcher" of the piece. When asked if he was related to Michael Chertoff, he said, "I don't know." Clearly uncomfortable about discussing the matter further, he told me that all questions about the article should be put to the publicist ? the one who never answers the phone.

Benjamin's mother in Pelham, New York, however, was more willing to talk. Asked if Benjamin was related to the new Secretary of Homeland Security, Judy said, "Yes, of course, he is a cousin."

Originally posted by Off_The_Street
The sad thing is that this will only convince the real nut-bars that Popular Mechanics is part of the plot, too.

Is it not a little odd that the so called "researcher" who wrote the article for PM lied to an interviewer about being related to the head of Homeland Security? This "researcher", being in his early twenties, was undone when his mother in fact told the interviewer they are cousins.

If you want credible info visit: www.physics911.com

The "debunking" attempt was a joke. An amature attempt at best. Just one example; his argument that the hole in the Pentagon is what one would expect from the dimensions of the 757 is inane. Are we to believe the wings and engines under them somehow 'followed' the fuselage through that hole of 16'x20' ? The engines are 50' apart from each other for one thing..............

One shouldn't be so quick to discount glaring discrepencies.

Originally posted by Garden Spider
Do any of the sceptics here on the board find it disturbing that the "senior researcher" who put this article out for Popular Mechanics was named Benjamin Chertoff, who is in fact, Michael Cheroff's cousin?

There was a thread about PM started when the piece came out.
You may find some interest in them.

From ATS

'Popular Mechanics' & Other CIA Front Organizations

Popular Mechanics 911 debunk workings of a Bush Cabal cover-up!

Popular Mechanics Debunked








[edit on 17/11/2005 by Sauron]

Originally posted by jsd

Originally posted by Off_The_Street
The sad thing is that this will only convince the real nut-bars that Popular Mechanics is part of the plot, too.

One of the most common tactics of proffessional debunkers is to label people "nut jobs" or "nut-bars"(Hmmmmlol). OTS uses that tactic in 99% of his posts.
If we all followed his and his types reasoning, then we wouldn't have anything to question and therefore ATS would dry up.

[edit on 17/11/2005 by ANOK]

Like.. it just kills me to see such a pathetic attempt to draw attention away from the fact that people are starting to question the offical story of 9-11. Anyone who reads this article and figures that it even TOUCHES on the REAL issues surrounding the events of 9-11 has NO IDEA what the real issues of 9-11 are in the first place.


Not to mention this article is filled with straight up lies and distortions of the facts... pointless Roark. Everyone here has heard this crap before.. I don't understand why you think anyone cares what the CIA front publication has to say about some nut on the internet who thinks that bombs were mounted to the wings of the airplanes.


I'm not surprised to see Roark backing up this article, like I've mentioned.. SOME folks on the net have an obvious adjenda here at ATS to make anyone who questions the offical story seem crazy or just stupid. It seems that he has no interest in any of the other topics here at ATS other then 9-11 and defending the offical story (and scarry as hell on top of that, speaking out against anyone who believes in the possibility of a Chemtrail concpiracy - even though the mainstream is finally picking up on it - Roark, I was on the fence about the Chemtrail thing until you came out so hard against it - after that it was kinda obvious that there are some forces at work who are doing everything to ensure that the discussion on the subject is silenced on any public forum). You are a scarry guy to me Roark. Scarry because ... you are too smart to make me believe that you really believe in the offical story. I'm guessing that only about 50% of americans over the age of 25 (when one usually finally wakes up and starts thinking for themselves - hopefully) believe the offical story entirely anymore, and I also think that that is a conservative estimate... while the rest of the world... the rest of the world I believe is QUITE CERTAIN that the US governement had something to do with it at this point. So we're talking about a very small percentage of people Roark, that are dumb enough or misinformed enough to still believe the offical story, and for that matter some of the stupider things about the 9-11 conspiracy theories (no planes, holograms, pods, missles, whatever) ...


.. its not important how or why 9-11 was 'really' pulled off.


THAT IS NOT THE POINT.. pods, scrammbled planes, collapsing buildings and none of the other crap means anything on an offical level.. all that matters is that ON THE WHOLE, the US government story DOES NOT ADD UP PROPERLY. And if it was actually to go to trial would be laughed out of the court room. If many heads of state wanted nothing to do with the US attack on Iraq, it was because MANY HEADS OF STATE and their intel agencies figured out that the US itself was responsible for the WTC attack itself, and suckering everyone in to fighting in Afganistan in the first place. Ever wonder why NO OTHER HEADS OF STATE (presidents, prime ministers etc) talk about 9-11 anymore as a rallying call to fight terrorism? Its because they have all figured out that the attack was faked, and the circumstances of the attack itself were all very suspisious (at the least) ... 911 is a joke, period. The only thing we all have to wait for now is some other country to come out and announce it fully.. that they "Believe there is strong evidence to suggest that the US attacked itself, and used the attack TO MANIPULATE THE UN SECURITY COUNCIL AND THE UN ITSELF to fight a war in Afganistan." - this will happen ... just be patient.

None of you, who disbelieve the offical story have to explain WHY you do not believe the offical story. Its up to the federal government to make a case for why we SHOULD believe the offical story when it already doesn't make any sense.. because AT THE LEAST.. someone screwed up and allowed some planes to be crashed in to buildings.. either intentionally was NOT doing their job, or was impeaded from doing their job to protect their country, or was just incompetent. Concidering the whistle blowers in the FBI who have come out to say that THEY WERE impeaded from investigating the hijackers. AND MOST OF ALL, that NO ONE has been fired or repremanded for screwing up on 9-11.. in fact.. SOME PEOPLE in key positions that day were promoted for dropping the ball (which suggests that in fact they were doing what was expected of them) .. is the MOST suspcious of all. The US spends almost 1 billion a day on defence and they couldn't catch people that they were told by various heads of states around the world and their intellegence agencies that these individuals were going to execute an attack on the US... the White House was thoroughly warned about the attack and who was going to be involved in the attack, and yet, it happened anyways??? This ALONE is enough reason to believe that the White House actually WANTED the attack to take place.. OR to at the LEAST not believe the offical story in general.


SO.. you do NOT need to explain to Roark or anyone else for that matter why you do not believe the offical story. There are MORE THEN ENOUGH PEOPLE NOW WHO DO NOT... people like Roark are in the minority (and besides, like I've said, I honestly do not think he believes the things he writes anyways - in fact, a lot of people on this site don't believe he believes the things he writes.. walks like a duck, talks like a duck, its probablly a frelling duck, Howard) ... and more and more people are finally starting to wake up. This is the reason the rogue CIA element is pulling out "the big guns" now and getting magazines like PopMech to cover up the REAL facts, and make those that have a chance at coming over to the truth (which is that the offical story doesn't make any sence and that) feel stupid for having questions about what happened in the first place.

Its like in the early days of the attack, there wasn't many people talking about the inconsitancies of the story, everyone was still kind of stunned, however... some of us were glued to the TV set and thinking.. "Something is wrong with this picture.. something isn't adding up here.. this whole thing is so way over the top, and looks SO hollywood produced, I can't help but being suspious of what has happened." slowly as the 'offical story' came together it was as easy as reading it to figure out that there were huge problems with it.. plane as day.

To summerise.. it doesn't matter how it REALLY happened. It only matters that the governements story doesn't add up, and that people are OBVIOUSLY trying to discredit others who are talking about the truth of the attack itself. TPTB are getting nervous that their plans are being exposed and falling apart and that people are not buying in to the story anymore. There are just too many problems with it.. if the hijackers were on trial, the case would be thrown out of court.


BTW.. how come no demands were made by the hijackers or the head of the team or something? How come no one came out with a very detailed list of demands and taking credit for the attack either in the days before or after the attack? WHY go through all of the trouble of pulling off an attack like that, and then not make any demands of those you just attacked or scare the world by taking responsiblity and saying that more attacks are on the way (AND DO NOT TELL ME THAT OBL DID DO THIS, HE DID NOT because if he did we would have seen THAT video tape over and over again on 9-12 and 9-13). No one did I figure because the attack HAD SERVED ITS PURPOSE which was to manipulate the world in to a war against the M.E.


Remember, its not about what DID happen on 9-11, its also about what DID NOT happen on 9-11.. like for example.. why did the terrorists hijack the planes so early in the morning, and keep the death toll so low, also hitting the building really high up, instead of down at street level where the devistation and death would have been much much much higher and prevented many more people from escaping the building. Hell, if the even had a clue that the building MIGHT collapse from the attack, then they would want to hit it lower in the buildings support to make it even more unstable.. it just makes sense from a murderous lowlifes perspective.


Its not what happened on 9-11 .. its about the things that did not happen. And even the things that we are told happened, but we are given no proof as to how or why... not even FEMA has a real reason or explanation for why building seven fell... because no one was allowed to examine the crime sceen. Unheard of in a criminal investigation.. the whole thing was evidence and yet it was just picked up and thrown out. This alone REAKS of conspiracy Roark.. THIS IS WHY PEOPLE DO NOT BELIEVE YOU OR THE OFFICAL STORY.. get it through your head that you are fighting a losing battle at this point. People have their own perfectly valid reasons for doubting the offical story of 9-11 at this point.. some have more reasons then others but the fact is that the offical story is not being bought by many people anymore.. so you all resort to desperate measures at this point to trick the last of the stragglers and those that are not smart enough to think about the offical story crittically in the first place (without being prompted by some silly website to do so) to keep some control over the population...


.. honestly though, I don't even know why you bother so much.


What is it Roark.. what drives you man? I just want to know, because IF YOU DO NOT HAVE an adgenda here that I believe is plain to see, then what is it that makes you so determined to convince people of things that they KNOW IN THEIR HEART to be untrue. 3000 people are dead because of this attack Roark... do you REALLY want to help cover up the slaughter of those people for the rest of your life? One day Roark, I know you don't believe it (because of your apparent lack of interest in anything supernatural other then to discredit it) .. but one day you will have to explain to someone about your actions.. perhaps even those that were killed on that day.. they will also want to know why you were so set on covering for those that either failed to do their job that day OR PERHAPS (because it sure looks it based on what has happened SINCE THE ATTACK - remember.. its not JUST the attack itself that bothers people about the offical story.. there are A NUMBER of things that add up to someone NOT buying in to it.. there isn't ONE smoking gun or ONE fact that is going to make everyone see your point of view that the gov story completely fits the facts of that day.. because SO MANY THINGS have either happened or not happened that push a free thinking individual in to disbelieving the offical story) even had a hand in killing them. What is going to be your answer Roark?

What would it take for you to quit parroting the governments line anyways?


What is it going to take to convince you that your efforts to convince others of your point of view is failing miserablely. You haven't (I'm sure, and if you do exist, please speak up so we can help you) changed anyones mind with your 'evidence' so why bother Roark? Seriously!

BTW ROARK! I'm also curious.. are you part of the 35% of people who STILL think that the Bush adminstration is doing a good job? That is a serious minority, you do know that right? If you DO "think" that Bush IS doing a seriously good job at running the country, how do you reach that conclusion? And is this the same brain that you used to decide if the offical story of 9-11 is still valid? If then if you believe he is doing a piss poor job of running the show.. then don't you also think that it is possible that he and his team were never fit to run the country in the first place? Do you not think that this could also mean that they allowed 9-11 to happen in order to raise his approval rating and distract from the stolen election, and just like the new GOP memo says.. "Would bring America together and help us gain some credibility with them." .. I mean if you believe that he is a terrible president LIKE MOST PEOPLE DO ROARK, is it so much of a stretch to think that he might not give a DAMN about murdering 1000s of people in order to maintain his grip on power? What is it that drives you Roark? I'm serious, I want to know.



-VMX

Everyone else, sorry about the length, but this type of stuff has to stop eventually and finally with the BYU proff appearing on MSNBC the other day it seems like someone is finally sending a message to the criminal Bush administration. Why we think that in order to proove that the governements story is false we have to somehow explain how it really happened.. that IS NOT OUR JOB. Its fun to speculate, but in the end it is pointless. All you have to do is say "NO" to the propaganda and think for yourself. That is true freedom. It doesn't even matter if you are right or wrong in the end.. people are wrong about things sometimes, that DOES NOT MATTER.. no one can be right all the time, the point is that you thought for yourself... doing that puts you ahead of a large proportion of the population of the world... hell, some people in SOME countries are not even allowed to do so... so take advanatage of it while you can in your own home country.

.. just drives me nuts...

Originally posted by Vis Mega
Not to mention this article is filled with straight up lies and distortions of the facts.

Like? ? ? ?

Please support your claim.



[edit on 17-11-2005 by HowardRoark]

Let me make it more clear about the pentagon.

The hole area is made out with signatures military coresponders.
Any thing that is not military any thing that does not have a military coresponder will be intercepted if it brakes of course this is not in the hole usa just in the capitol.
So a boeing does not have a military coresponder so it does not have a military signature so how can it enter?
It hapend many times comercial planes broke off route and in a short matter of time they would have jet fighters near their wing.
the area of the capitol is on havy guard by norad's radars they are design
to operate bi signature if it's military they know it and they will let it pass
if it's not it wont pass.
This indicates that the plane was not a comercial air line and that it had a military signature again more flaws show up.

Andrew air force base with fighter jets on the run ways 24/7 fully armed
Brake off from course in wasinton dc and you will see fighters near your wing.




[edit on 17-11-2005 by pepsi78]

Pepsi, here is a picture taken from a private cessena in AUgust 2001.

Notice the Ronald Reagan National Airport in the background?

See the runways?

external image

[edit on 17-11-2005 by HowardRoark]

Mod Edit: Image Size – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 17/11/2005 by Mirthful Me]

I am talking about adrew air force base.
there are jets 24/7 cut the act.
I've seen documentarys on it , they stay there day and night fully aremd on the run way
it is procedure.
I am not talking about small planes.
And you know i am talking about big planes that are capabile of creating
great damage air lines and other biger planes.

And tell me howard why dont you answer some other question feeling uncofortable?
So you like answering only what you like.

Here is the list waiting for you
1 The one's that crashed in to the twin towers flunk their flight classes
2 We got the instructors sayng they flunked (so we can be reasured)
3 President bush giving presidetial directive order stoping fbi agents from investigateing before 911.
4 The bin laden and the bushes are friend and long time parteners.
5 Before 911 troops where massed on the border of afganistan before 911.
6 There is a feema guy saing they aravied a day before the atack for 911.
7 Bush insisting that he saw the first plain crash he didint say it once but twice.
8 hijackers after crashing in to the targets are happy, well and alive.
9 look in the patriot act , there is a milion things that dont make sence like the words NWO.

Why dont you answer them howard?

Why hide behind the bush?

If all the things are debunked we have to see dont we?
I like you to debunk all of them.


[edit on 17-11-2005 by pepsi78]

Originally posted by Vis Mega
Roark, I was on the fence about the Chemtrail thing until you came out so hard against it

Same here, man. And water fluoridation, but I was already pretty convinced of the negativity in that anyway. Just not so much the weather control stuff, until I saw how he was all over that in the exact same way he is 9/11, and then shortly after I saw some radar imagines showing these freaky rows of clouds, straight as a razor and lined up perfectly, right in the path of an oncoming hurricane. And the Congressional bills requesting $$ for research into it, and you know that if a bill like that is brought before Congress, some people somewhere under the US gov have already put some time into it.

Let's not be too careless with Howard though, because if he gets fired they might bring in somebody better.

Just picking, Howard. Maybe.

Originally posted by pepsi78
I am talking about adrew air force base.
there are jets 24/7 cut the act.
I've seen documentarys on it , they stay there day and night fully aremd on the run way
it is procedure.

Sorry, I thought you were implying that any plane over DC would be shot down instantly.

1 The one's that crashed in to the twin towers flunk their flight classes
2 We got the instructors sayng they flunked (so we can be reasured)

If you want to fly for a major airline, then you need a certain level of knowledge about regulations etc.
If you don't care about landing a plane and just want to crash it, then who cares about that?

3 President bush giving presidetial directive order stoping fbi agents from investigateing before 911.

You got some specific proof of that?

4 The bin laden and the bushes are friend and long time parteners.

Dude, the Bin Laden family is friends with the head of every major country. They run the biggest construction company in that part of the world.

5 Before 911 troops where massed on the border of afganistan before 911.

What? Got some proof of that?

6 There is a feema guy saing they aravied a day before the atack for 911.

Has anyone ever produced a shred of proof that he didn't just misspeak? How about a hotel registration, a rental car reservation, anything to back this up? No?

7 Bush insisting that he saw the first plain crash he didint say it once but twice.

He did, so did I. I also saw the second plane hit the tower. The videos were on the news almost instantly.

8 hijackers after crashing in to the targets are happy, well and alive.

Got proof of that? have you talked to them? Hey Look, John Lennon is alive and living in Jersey ! (he had to get away from Yoko! )

[Quote]
9 look in the patriot act , there is a milion things that dont make sence like the words NWO.
What the F are you babbling about?

The whole country was aware. For example, at 9:06 AM the NY Police broadcast:

" 'This was a terrorist attack. Notify the Pentagon.'"
--'Daily News' (New York) 12 September 2001 (2)

Statement :Lt. Col. Vic Warzinski

Air Force Lt. Col. Vic Warzinski, another Pentagon spokesman, [said]: 'The Pentagon was simply not aware that this aircraft was coming our way, and I doubt prior to Tuesday's event, anyone would have expected anything like that here.'"

Betwen the second crash and the pentagon crash there was "a hour"

On 11 September Andrews had two squadrons of fighter jets with the job of protecting the skies over Washington D.C. They failed to do their job. Despite over one hour's advance warning of a terrorist attack in progress, not a single Andrews fighter took off (or scrambled) to protect the city.

"The District of Columbia National Guard maintained fighter planes at Andrews Air Force Base, only about 15 miles [sic!] from the Pentagon, but those planes were not on alert and not deployed."
--'USA TODAY' September 17, 2001 (5)

Standard procedure dictates that jets be notified after six minutes of lost voice contact.

quote by you

If you want to fly for a major airline, then you need a certain level of knowledge about regulations etc.
If you don't care about landing a plane and just want to crash it, then who cares about that?

Dont you understand the flight instructors said they can not fly at all period.
Are you a instructor?

3 President bush giving presidetial directive order stoping fbi agents from investigateing before 911You got some specific proof of that?

I will get your proof it's all over the internet many sites have it .
It is the hole article i'll get it and show it to you

4 The bin laden and the bushes are friend and long time parteners
Dude, the Bin Laden family is friends with the head of every major country. They run the biggest construction company in that part of the world.

Maybe but brother of binladen is involved in to the carleal gorup
The bigest defence and weapons company producer of usa
He is still there involved so is bush and cheyne.

Has anyone ever produced a shred of proof that he didn't just misspeak? How about a hotel registration, a rental car reservation, anything to back this up? No?

I will give you the video with the link just hold on a second

He did, so did I. I also saw the second plane hit the tower. The videos were on the news almost instantly.

You saw the first plane crash in to the wtc live?
Are you surelol:
Bush insists just like you that he saw it he was at the elementry school.
And no it was not live on tv remember it was a surprize no one knew it was coming(only the goverment)

Do u'r homework

Got proof of that? have you talked to them? Hey Look,

This is what you call denny ignorance?
Is this it?
It was on cnn howard everyone knows it.
The fbi admited to it.

What the F are you babbling about?

just open up the patriot act there is the word nwo.



-----------------------------
update

fema spokeman ariveing before
www.prisonplanet.com...

presidential directives W199i

www.jesus-is-savior.com...





[edit on 18-11-2005 by pepsi78]

jsd, you have egregiously misquoted me.

You quote me as saying:

The sad thing is that this will only convince the real nut-bars that Popular Mechanics is part of the plot, too.

That is correct; I said that, and I stand by it.

However, you continue to quote me as saying:

Is it not a little odd that the so called "researcher" who wrote the article for PM lied to an interviewer about being related to the head of Homeland Security? This "researcher", being in his early twenties, was undone when his mother in fact told the interviewer they are cousins.

If you want credible info visit: www.physics911.com

The "debunking" attempt was a joke. An amature [sic] attempt at best. Just one example; his argument that the hole in the Pentagon is what one would expect from the dimensions of the 757 is inane. Are we to believe the wings and engines under them somehow 'followed' the fuselage through that hole of 16'x20' ? The engines are 50' apart from each other for one thing..............

One shouldn't be so quick to discount glaring discrepancies [sic].

I did not say that; indeed, that is the exact opposite of my view.

You quote me as saying that the view that the wings followed the fuselage into the hole is “inane”. I, for one, happen to believe that there is an excellent chance that such a phenomenon could occur

Furthermore, you have me making errors in both spelling and grammar. As someone who believes in both detailed research and careful presentation of my views, including using a spell-checker, attributing such execrable grammar and spelling to me is unconscionable.

I am assuming that you did not do this on purpose; probably, you merely forgot to use the slash-quote code at the end of the first sentence, which is the only statement I made here.

I would appreciate your editing your post to ensure that I am not quoted as saying something which I personally think is incorrect.

*chertoff* cough, cough --nwo family(see aslo, homeland security, for comfy family connections), heir to the throne of yellow journalism, much as the bushes are heirs to nazi sympathizers(dear prescott).
*cia cleanout(firings) of PM staff prior to 911 debunking article(right after chertoff(cough) took over as 'the man' of PM)* phlegm, hork

yeah, okay. nothing to see here. move along.

you will be assimmilated.



[edited for booze effects on 18-11-2005 by billybob]

[edit on 18-11-2005 by billybob]