Why don't the conspiracy theorists have their OWN investigation?, page 9

privacy

Pages: << 6 7 8 9 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 14 times

reply posted on 25-10-2011 @ 12:17 PM by backinblack

reply to post by GoodOlDave

Here Dave..

damned fool conspiracy web sitedamned fool conspiracy web sitedamned fool conspiracy web sitedamned fool conspiracy web sitedamned fool conspiracy web sitedamned fool conspiracy web sitedamned fool conspiracy web sitedamned fool conspiracy web sitedamned fool conspiracy web sitedamned fool conspiracy web site

Maybe now you can stop spamming us with the same crap line for a while.

reply posted on 25-10-2011 @ 12:23 PM by GoodOlDave

Originally posted by backinblack
Maybe now you can stop spamming us with the same crap line for a while.

...and after all this time, not a single one of you has ever shown why what I'm saying is incorrect. Besides, I would have thought you'd be agreeing with me on this, since there are a lot of damned fool conspiracy web sites that you yourself are disgusted over.

Does Dr. Judy Wood's "lasers from outer space" web site ring a bell?

reply posted on 25-10-2011 @ 01:19 PM by Lostmymarbles

reply to post by GoodOlDave

I have no idea who those people you mentioned are, I just know that people involved with the investigation, whether it was as a witness or as an investigator usually end up dead.

History and especially US history, has shown us that people who get in the way of money and power usually end up 6ft under. Maybe they are all coincidences or maybe not, who knows, just seems a bit odd that there are so many different cases like this.

A few could be coincidence, but more you add the more it looks like a pattern.

reply posted on 25-10-2011 @ 01:23 PM by waypastvne

Originally posted by Lostmymarbles

I have no idea who those people you mentioned are, I just know that people involved with the investigation, whether it was as a witness or as an investigator usually end up dead.

History and especially US history, has shown us that people who get in the way of money and power usually end up 6ft under. Maybe they are all coincidences or maybe not, who knows, just seems a bit odd that there are so many different cases like this.

A few could be coincidence, but more you add the more it looks like a pattern.

History shows us that, eventually everyone ends up dead.

reply posted on 25-10-2011 @ 03:16 PM by GoodOlDave

Originally posted by Lostmymarbles
reply to post by GoodOlDave

I have no idea who those people you mentioned are, I just know that people involved with the investigation, whether it was as a witness or as an investigator usually end up dead.

A few could be coincidence, but more you add the more it looks like a pattern.

It's not a coincidence. The con artists behind these damned fool conspiracy web sites are specifically sniffing out anyone remotely connected to the 9/11 attack who died, for whatever reason and regardless of how long after the 9/11 attack, and they're falsely trying to portray them as something sinister. Heart disease is leading cause of death in people so we can take an educated guess why someone obese like Jennings died, and there was nothing sinister or even mysterious about how Beverley Eckert died- she was killed in a plane crash. Nobody lives forever or are immune to accidents, not even people connected to the 9/11 attack.

This is neither here nor there. The question I posted in the OP is why the conspiracy movement isn't conducting their own investigation, and I don't need to tell you that claiming imaginary boogeymen are going to murder you if you do is a pretty goofy excuse.

reply posted on 25-10-2011 @ 05:05 PM by Joey Canoli

Originally posted by Nutter
reply to post by Joey Canoli

The difference would be I did not drag the issue along. There is a huge difference IMO. And it just goes to show the personalities of those posting IMO.

BTW, I didn't state that Bazant said it anyway. I said "they" meaning the author of the paper.

Wow. So Griff's sock got banned. Too bad, he was about the only decent truther here.

Anyways, the truth of the matter is that the strength and conviction of his argument wasn't enought for him to continue.

If Szadulski's argument would have been correct, then it could have been argued successfully. It wasn't correct, nor was it argued for. Which at least proves that "Nutter" had "some" integrity.

ALthough one wonders why it was brought up in the first place....

Pages: << 6 7 8 9 >> ^^TOP^^