Kraichgauer wrote:
JohnPowell wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
JohnPowell wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
JohnPowell wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
JohnPowell wrote:
So telling the truth is "antisemitism"? Why are people endlessly allowed to accuse Russians of crimes with zero evidence? Why are people allowed to accused Muslims of being behind 9/11 when no one has ever been arrested for it? And Muslims are Semites? Talk about a contradiction. Bin Laden was laughably accused of being the chief architect when he was living in a cave and needing dialysis to survive and when they allegedly did catch him they just mowed him down and threw his body in the ocean. Not to mention that the FBI only had him on their most wanted list for a US Embassy bombing in Kenya in 1998.
Bin Laden and his second in command (that doctor with the unpronounceable name) both had admitted they were responsible.
There's more evidence that he denied it.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/interview- ... 9-11/24697There were plenty of Nazis involved with the Holocaust who denied it ever happened, but that hardly makes it so. I'm going to trust Bin Laden as much as I trust them.
But you believed him when you think he said he did it. This proves you have no interest in the truth. I'm done wasting time.
His word he did it, along with all the evidence connecting the 9/11 attack to him. The hijackers were all disciples of Bin Laden, and there's no getting around that.
But if you don't want to argue with me anymore, suit yourself.
His words he didn't. What evidence is that? Were the Israelis arrested with traces of explosives in their van and the Israelis arrested with explosives in their van disciples of this magic dialysis caveman too? There's plenty of getting around "that".
I have no interest in wasting time with people who aren't interested in the truth.
I thought you were through with me.
But if not, I will answer: 9/11, as I recalled, happened when passenger planes crashed into the World Trade Center, destroying them, not with explosives in a van. The hijackers were not the Israeli van drivers, but again Al Qaeda agents.
And Bin Laden
had been on dialysis. But don't forget that his second in command is a doctor, and so could have performed a kidney transplant. And even if not, Bin Laden was a millionaire who had provided his cause with the most up-to-date weapons, making it not outside the realm of possibility that he had had a dialysis machine on hand.
Well you seemed to have changed your tune with the thought of me not talking to you anymore.
There were numerous reports that other explosions were heard in the tower and one of the Israelis was seen in an elevator the day before, the one that had traces of explosives in their van. The explosions in the 3 towers were to make sure they collapsed, as the owner had taken a lease out on the buildings 6 weeks before 9/11 meaning he'd get billions if they were destroyed. He happened to miss work that day too cause his wife made him go to see a dermatologist that morning. Even though he was there for meetings every single morning usually. The hijackers were known about and were just patsies who were funded by Saudi Arabia and Qatar.
Any evidence for the kidney transplant?
_________________
"No one believes more firmly than Comrade Napoleon that all animals are equal. He would be only too happy to let you make your decisions for yourselves. But sometimes you might make the wrong decisions, comrades, and then where should we be?"
17 Dec 2016, 11:28 am
