conspiracy theories

[THE SKULLS]

---

naa kay punto Doc. mura same side ta anbi nga isyu.
he really was a critic.
once you are a critical thinker, daghan ka matamakan. same sad na nga isyu sa mga journalist nga gipangpatay. basta mahilig motuki-tuki.

[THE SKULLS]

his songs helped stop the Vietnam war. Dako'g alkanse ang mga General adto.

[Sand Man]

... once you are a critical thinker, daghan ka matamakan. same sad na nga isyu sa mga journalist nga gipangpatay....

So are you saying.... ?

his songs helped stop the Vietnam war. Dako'g alkanse ang mga General adto.

I'm not sure I follow you. The war did not "stop".

Here's a summary of roughly how it went down: Answers.com - Why did the US lose the Vietnam War

[Soul Doctor]

So are you saying.... ?




I'm not sure I follow you. The war did not "stop".

Here's a summary of roughly how it went down: Answers.com - Why did the US lose the Vietnam War

It was the billions in military supplies that was lost in the vietnam war.
But, on the other side, the same secret group (The Bilderberg Group) gained billions in that war.
That is why they killed, JFK Robert Kennedy and John Lennon. The three were there to stop them from making more money out of the Vietnam War.

[SPRINGFIELD_XD_40]

with all those office buildings in that tower.
You can not find a pencil, a chair, a table, a desk.
they even found bone fragments.
everything is turned to debris and dust.

If everything is turned to debris then its a telltale sign of impact instead of an explosion because in explosion , you see shattered pieces and these are what you call debris .

the biggest debris the firefighter found is a keypad from a telephone, 3 inches wide.
its a tell tale sign of an exploded building.
Read,read,read.
Lies,lies,lies.

The biggest ? And is that a suggestion that its an explosion ? Earlier reply of yours are suggesting of dust . You cant just say READ three times of the contents are LIES . At least READ from what is CONSIDERED as RELIABLE SOURCES .

at least raw videos dont lie.
id rather watch videos than read your fictional reports.

Lol DOK ... is that gonna be another one bites the dust ? Does your RAW VIDEO covers the planted explosives and its sequence and simultaneous explosions ?

he just want you to know he witnessed a live demolition thats all. just like rodsky flew his plane.
that would somehow seems to win the argument.

Wrong ... it doesnt actually take a CHEMICAL ENGINEER to figure out that what I said was something about for sarcastic purposes . Your buddy SKULLS here is suggesting that I should witness a BUILDING being DEMOLISHED but how can he do say such thing when in fact he himself havent seen one in his life . So whats the point ?

For the record , I saw the demolition of the infamous FLAMINGO , a casino in Las Vegas . Now is it about winning ? Say you won in an argument because you are packed with crazy CONSPIRACY THEORY LIES na dili pa gyud imohang opinions , does it cover up the TRUTH and REALITY ? Dok ... act your age when you discuss something .

@SKULLS ...

i better watch the recorded, naay daghan angle.

Thats an alibi . Murag true sad ka da .

I haven't seen any building demolition. kadto lang demolition sa Carreta ako nasaksihan kay usa ko sa ni-apil ug barikada adto. aw, building demolition man diay ghisgutan. unsa man kalahi-an sa recorded ug live na demolition spring?

Nothing gets more RAW than see it live . Kay para ni DOK , RAW man daw gyud ang kamatuoran sa basta video . Lol .

All I meant was to compare a bldg demolition to what happened @ the WTC.
And the answer was,"".. Olrayts!!!

That would be out of context to start with . Its hard for me to compare since I am not an EXPERT on these matters . Just like you and DOK . Are you guys EXPERTS on these matters ? Dont even say YES because I am gonna bitch slap both of you .

[Sand Man]

It was the billions in military supplies that was lost in the vietnam war.
But, on the other side, the same secret group (The Bilderberg Group) gained billions in that war.
That is why they killed, JFK Robert Kennedy and John Lennon. The three were there to stop them from making more money out of the Vietnam War.

Question: What role did the Vietnam War play in the FBI Lennon investigation?

Answer: John Lennon and his fellow Beatles had been outspoken opponents of the Vietnam War since June 30, 1966, when the group spoke out very briefly against the war, and war in general, during a Tokyo press conference. This was in direct opposition of manager Brian Epstein, who preferred that his boys shun controversy. By 1969, Epstein was dead (accidental drug overdose), the Beatles were well on their way to dissolution, and John's involvement with Yoko Ono had led him to become ever more active in political dissent.

One staged event was the "Bed-In," a seriocomic stunt where the couple decided to stay in their bed at Room 1742 in Montreal, Canada's Queen Elizabeth Hotel in protest of the war. When asked by a reporter what the point of the demonstration was, Lennon responded, "We're just saying give peace a chance." Liking the phrase, Lennon decided to write a song around it, renting a tape recorder and taping an all-star singalong of the new song on May 31, 1969. It was an instant hit and became the anthem of the antiwar movement; during The Moratorium to End the War in Vietnam, a multi-city demonstration that took place on October 15, 1969, protestors sang this song. The Nixon Administration was well aware of Lennon's influence in the antiwar movement, and also aware that, in the political climate of the time, being antiwar meant being against the President.

source

[Sand Man]

It was the billions in military supplies that was lost in the vietnam war.
But, on the other side, the same secret group (The Bilderberg Group) gained billions in that war.
That is why they killed, JFK Robert Kennedy and John Lennon. The three were there to stop them from making more money out of the Vietnam War.

From what I can read in this article, JFK wasn't against the Vietnam War. In fact, I think he felt obligated to see it through -- right up to the time he lost confidence in Diem, that is.

John Fitzgerald Kennedy was a fervent believer in containing communism. In his first speech on becoming president, Kennedy made it clear that he would continue the policy of the former President, Dwight Eisenhower, and support the government of Diem in South Vietnam. Kennedy also made it plain that he supported the ‘Domino Theory’ and he was convinced that if South Vietnam fell to communism, then other states in the region would as a consequence. This Kennedy was not prepared to contemplate.

Kennedy received conflicting advice with regards to Vietnam. Charles De Gaulle warned Kennedy that Vietnam and warfare in Vietnam would trap America in a “bottomless military and political swamp”. This was based on the experience the French had at Dien Bien Phu, which left a sizeable psychological scar of French foreign policy for some years. However, Kennedy had more daily contact with ‘hawks’ in Washington DC who believed that American forces would be far better equipped and prepared for conflict in Vietnam than the French had been. They believed that just a small increase in US support for Diem would ensure success in Vietnam. The ‘hawks’ in particular were strong supporters in the ‘Domino Theory’.

Also Kennedy had to show just exactly what he meant when he said that America should:

“Pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend…to assure the survival and success of liberty ”.

In 1961, Kennedy agreed that America should finance an increase in the size of the South Vietnamese Army from 150,000 to 170,000. He also agreed that an extra 1000 US military advisors should be sent to South Vietnam to help train the South Vietnamese Army. Both of these decisions were not made public as they broke the agreements made at the 1954 Geneva Agreement.

It was during Kennedy’s presidency that the ‘Strategic Hamlet’ programme was introduced. This failed badly and almost certainly drove a number of South Vietnamese peasants into supporting the North Vietnamese communists. This forcible moving of peasants into secure compounds was supported by Diem and did a great deal to further the opposition to him in the South. American television reporters relayed to the US public that ‘Strategic Hamlet’ destroyed decades, if not hundreds, of years of village life in the South and that the process might only take half-a-day. Here was a super-power effectively orchestrating the forced removal of peasants by the South Vietnamese Army who were not asked if they wanted to move. To those who knew about US involvement in Vietnam and were opposed to it, ‘Strategic Hamlet’ provided them with an excellent propaganda opportunity.

Kennedy was informed about the anger of the South Vietnamese peasants and was shocked to learn that membership of the NLF had increased, according to US Intelligence, by 300% in a two year time span – the years when ‘Strategic Hamlet’ was in operation. Kennedy’s response was to send more military advisors to Vietnam so that by the end of 1962 there were 12,000 of these advisors in South Vietnam. As well as sending more advisors to South Vietnam, Kennedy also sent 300 helicopters with US pilots. They were told to avoid military combat at all costs but this became all but impossible to fulfil.

Kennedy’s presidency also saw the response to the Diem government by some Buddhist monks. On June 11th 1963, Thich Quang Duc, a Buddhist monk, committed suicide on a busy Saigon road by being burned to death. Other Buddhist monks followed his example in August 1963. Television reported these events throughout the world. A member of Diem’s government said:

“Let them burn, and we shall clap our hands.”

Another member of Diem’s government was heard to say that he would be happy to provide Buddhist monks with petrol.

Kennedy became convinced that Diem could never unite South Vietnam and he agreed that the CIA should initiate a programme to overthrow him. A CIA operative, Lucien Conein, provided some South Vietnamese generals with $40,000 to overthrow Diem with the added guarantee that the US would not protect the South Vietnam leader. Diem was overthrown and killed in November 1963. Kennedy was assassinated three weeks later.

source

[SPRINGFIELD_XD_40]

@ DOK ...

Are you saying the TRUTH now based from your thorough research or is it still a CONSPIRACY THEORY ?

Just wondering lang .

[Sand Man]

It was the billions in military supplies that was lost in the vietnam war.
But, on the other side, the same secret group (The Bilderberg Group) gained billions in that war.
That is why they killed, JFK Robert Kennedy and John Lennon. The three were there to stop them from making more money out of the Vietnam War.

... and Robert Kennedy was JFK's closest confidant. Read this portion of an interview and tell me if JFK had any intention of pulling out of Vietnam:

Martin:
All right. At the beginning we seemed to have our lines crossed. I mean, the majority leader in the Senate, Mansfield, was saying this was not an American war, and he didn't think it was--that our--it should be--not, not--should not be an American war. He didn't think our heavy commitment there was justified. How'd you feel about it; how'd the president feel about it; and at what point did we get our lines straightened out?

R. Kennedy:
Well, I don't think that . . .

Martin:
Did I make myself clear?

R. Kennedy:
No, I don't think that fact, Senator Mansfield or somebody in the Senate takes a position, necessarily means .. .

Martin:
Well, he was majority leader.

R. Kennedy:
Yeah, but, you know, he's frequently taken that, those, that line or that position on some of these matters. I don't think that the fact he has an independent view from the executive branch of the government, particularly in Southeast Asia, indicates that the lines aren't straight. I, no, I just, I think every. . . . I, the president felt that the. . . . He had a strong, overwhelming reason for being in Vietnam and that we should win the war in Vietnam.

Martin:
What was the overwhelming reason?

R. Kennedy:
Just the loss of all of Southeast Asia if you lost Vietnam. I think everybody was quite clear that the rest of Southeast Asia would fall.

Martin:
What if it did?

R. Kennedy:
Just have profound effects as far as our position throughout the world, and our position in a rather vital part of the world. Also, it would affect what happened in India, of course, which in turn has an effect on the Middle East. Just, it would have, everybody felt, a very adverse effect. It would have an effect on Indonesia, hundred million population. All of these countries would be affected by the fall of Vietnam to the Communists, particularly as we had made such a fuss in the United States both under President Eisenhower and President Kennedy about the preservation of the integrity of Vietnam.

Martin:
There was never any consideration given to pulling out?

R. Kennedy:
No.

Martin:
But the same time, no disposition to go in all . . .

R. Kennedy:
No . . .

Source

[pinoy_09]

a jet liner is made of aluminum alloy. aluminum is a "soft" metal.
the sturdier frames is not strong enough to cut through beams.
in fact, the impact only caused to cut only 3 posts on that floor.

but to think that impact alone can cause pancaking is ridiculous.

and you added the jet fuel?
jet fuel burns in minutes.
it would not even get to the core beams which were wrapped in thick concrete.
its the core beams that has to give first before the building collapse.
but the core beams are untouched by the jetliner fuels.

to melt that steel beam you need 2000-2500 degrees F.
On open air, the jet fuel can only burn up to 800-1200 degrees F.
Can you get what I'm saying?

at that condition, the jet fuel could never melt a steel beam 4 inches thick.
not when it is encased in thick concrete. it would never get in the concrete even just to touch the metal beam.... much more melt it.

"...I am not persuaded by the assumption that much documentation and other evidence has been uncovered. To determine that, we'd have to investigate the alleged evidence. Take, say, the physical evidence. There are ways to assess that: submit it to specialists -- of whom there are thousands -- who have the requisite background in civil-mechanical engineering, materials science, building construction, etc., for review and analysis; and one cannot gain the required knowledge by surfing the internet. In fact, that's been done, by the professional association of civil engineers."

-Noam Chomsky