CHARLIE SHEEN AND 9/11

1. 60

   video lostposted 14 years ago

   “1. 60% of the 9/11 commissioners have publicly stated that the government agreed not to tell the truth about 9/11 and that the Pentagon was engaged in deliberate deception about their response to the attack.
   
   2. In August 2006, in the Washington Post, John Farmer, senior council to the 9/11 commission, stated: “I was shocked how different the truth was from the way it was described…
   
   “The (NORAD Air Defense) tapes told a radically different story from what had been told to us and the public for two years….”
   
   3. Commissioner Max Cleland, an ex-Senator from Georgia, resigned, stating: “It is a national scandal. This investigation is now compromised. One of these days we will have to get the full story because the 9/11 issue is so important to America. But this White House wants to cover it up.”
   
   4. Several top commissioners suspected such serious deception that they considered referring the matter to the Justice Department for criminal investigation…”

   replyreport
2. 0

   A Texanposted 14 years ago

   1 Bigfoot has been seen with Granny from the Beverly Hillbillies!
   
   2 Elvis was turned into a vampire at the city morgue in Memphis by a vampire who noticed his heart still beating!
   
   3Obama was born in Kenya!
   
   Some people will believe anything!

   replyreport
   1. 0

      cosetteposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      
      
      (actually that was Jethro

      replyreport
   2. 71

      sunforgedposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      which way is that directed?
      
      You really think any of what was released to the public was real news?
      
      of course there was a coverup!
      
      
      3. But it left him a little odd in the head

      replyreport
      1. 0

         A Texanposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         And he has a taste for cats!

         replyreport
   3. 60

      video lostposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      yeh even evolution which is not yet proved.

      replyreport
      1. 79

         earnestshubposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         Evolution is a done deal, enough empirical evidence to fill a lot of giga drives!
         Religion has no proof at all, and is all sourced from 2 main books that disagree so much it gets back to the killing the non believers game. You reckon there is no proof for evolution? I believe you know less than nothing about the subject other than the religionists loony stuff you quoted before. Go ahead, leave the link. People can judge for themselves. .
         You have to drag your religion in to this hub too.

         replyreport
         1. 60

            video lostposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            where is that empirical evience ??? i think you people have presented it to monkeys LOL
            
            There are thousands of evolutionists themselves who turned their backs from evolution and only one person is enough to refute this theory which is Darwin himself.
            
            Darwin himself made confessions that were later collected in the book Life and Letters of Charles Darwin, edited by his son, Francis Darwin. Most of the letters written by Darwin to close friends or eminent scientists of his time are full of his confessions regarding his theory to full of doubts. Indeed, Darwin even had no qualms about expressing his ignorance of the relevant subjects.

            replyreport
3. 61

   nicompposted 14 years ago

   My mother's dog groomer's tax accountant saw a guy running from the Twin Towers 3 weeks before they collapsed.

   replyreport
4. 62

   Lisa HWposted 14 years ago

   I have no doubt that the public has not been given "the whole truth", because we all know (or should) that the public isn't always given the whole truth.  There are probably all kinds of otherwise innocent people who just didn't do something quite right at their job (architects of the buildings, people who signed off on one thing or another, people working at the airports, people in the government, etc. etc; who, out of not knowing any better may have made some mistake that contributed to what eventually got to happen.  So, I wouldn't be surprised if there are reasons like wanting to shield generally innocent people from possible negligence charges (or something like that).  We don't know that once they "connected those dots" (after the fact) there weren't all kinds of people who could have made better judgments but who - really - would have done better if they knew better.  So, for that kind of reason and whatever other security (or other) reasons there may be, I just automatically assume we haven't been told everything.  I don't know why anyone would be shocked about not having "the whole truth" out.
   
   Having said that, I don't think Charlie Sheen is particularly someone who has established himself as a "pillar of credibility, knowledge, and inside information"; so he can say whatever he feels like saying.  If someone wants to take it seriously that's their business.

   replyreport
   1. 0

      A Texanposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Those are actually great points!

      replyreport
   2. 60

      video lostposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      2. In August 2006, in the Washington Post, John Farmer, senior council to the 9/11 commission, stated: “I was shocked how different the truth was from the way it was described…
      
      The above is clearly not said by Charlie

      replyreport
      1. 62

         Lisa HWposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         I addressed the "above" without regard for who said it or printed it.  Charlie Sheen's name is in the title of this thread, and people have been talking about what he thinks (on radio, online) - which is the only reason I added a remark about him.  In other words, I addressed the "meat" of the issue separately and remarked about Charlie Sheen as part of addressing the title of the post.  I think I pretty much addressed everything (as much as I'm going to address it).  To appear to be attempting to muddy my remarks by implying that I thought Charlie Sheen said "whatever" looks, to me, like trying to muddy the clarity of my response (which I think was both clear and reasonable).
         
         The title of the thread is, "Charlie Sheen and 911".  In view of the fact that stuff other people have said is included here, why bring up Charlie Sheen at all?   

         replyreport
         1. 60

            video lostposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            Because Charlie researched and compiled the scattered information and presented it to you, that's it.

            replyreport
5. 59

   logic,commonsenseposted 14 years ago

   Charlie Sheen has as much credibility as Obama has clues as to how to run a country.

   replyreport
6. 62

   Lisa HWposted 14 years ago

   A Texan, thanks.
   
   logic, commonsense:   .....but that's for a-whole-nother thread.   

   replyreport