Strictly "Let it Happen on Purpose" discussion

[LA RAM FAN]

Look at the truthtards pretending they've won again! They must have missed where I responded and the author ran away.

So typical of lifelong losers like you two to pretend you've won. Where is your evidence your bullshit isn't a bunch of lies from some pathetic losers? Oh, that's right! You ***** don't HAVE any evidence. We're just suppose to believe known, proven liars like you. I have a hard time imagining just how fucking stupid someone would have to be to believe your bullshit and then 911 inside job posts something and I no longer have to imagine.

as usual,agent parrot can only sling shit in defeat like the monkey he is when he knows he is defeated.How pathetic.

Over 3 thousand posts and zero rep power. Says everything about a retarded piece of shit like you who can't think for himself and is just a sycphant for the other truthtards here. Pretty pathetic. No WONDER nobody likes you! Now go play in traffic like a good kid.

Look at the dumbfuck troll run and hide when he knows he is defeated changing the topic REFUSING to even try and counter it since he knows he cant.as usual,you expose what a coward you are when you your defeated changing the subject and evading it agent.nice. your handlers sure pay you well for the ass beatings you guys constantly get here.man what a true dumbfuck and liar you are,seems last time I checked i had some people on my friends list stupid fuck..you sure get a lot of ass beatings here and constantly exposed as a liar.

 

[JiggsCasey]

"Patriot?" Are you gonna man-up and admit you mis-characterized my "only independent investigation allowed" statement? Or are you hoping to drown out that accountability by way of silent aversion?

LOL.

I can see that you've been on since, and I have no doubt you saw my reply. ... I'm hoping to counter the rest of your spin-tacular post, but if you've officially raised the white flag, I don't see the point.

Admit you were wrong, and we can move forward.

 

[Mr. Jones]

"Patriot?" Are you gonna man-up and admit you mis-characterized my "only independent investigation allowed" statement? Or are you hoping to drown out that accountability by way of silent aversion?

LOL.

I'm hoping to counter the rest of your spin-tacular post, but if you've officially raised the white flag, I don't see the point. Admit you were wrong, and we can move forward.

Probably gotta ask the supervisor what to do next

 

[Patriot911]

"Patriot?" Are you gonna man-up and admit you mis-characterized my "only independent investigation allowed" statement? Or are you hoping to drown out that accountability by way of silent aversion?

LOL.

I can see that you've been on since, and I have no doubt you saw my reply. ... I'm hoping to counter the rest of your spin-tacular post, but if you've officially raised the white flag, I don't see the point.

Admit you were wrong, and we can move forward.

Sorry. I saw your tracks as you ran away from the debate and assumed you were tired of getting your ass kicked. I didn't realize you were actually begging for some kind of affirmation from me! You dumbfucks always pretend there has been no investigation by claiming it wasn't an "independant" investigation. You come up with lameassed excuses like not believing the evidence found to dismiss the investigation. News flash, skippy! You don't get to pick what investigations are "good" and which are "bad". You have to have actual evidence the investigation was fundamentally flawed before you can get another investigation.

So is the fact they found "left behind luggage" is reason enough to ignore the investigation? Surely you have some of that vaunted "court admissible" evidence that proves the luggage was a plant, right? We're not suppose to just take a lying piece of shit like you at your word, are we? Oh, there is that shit word again! Did I offend you? Tough shit.

Still waiting to see a single piece of your massive amounts of court-admissible evidence. You would think you would have posted a piece by now. Or are you still pretending a hit piece by the Times of India against Pakistan somehow proves Cheney knew?

 

[LA RAM FAN]

"Patriot?" Are you gonna man-up and admit you mis-characterized my "only independent investigation allowed" statement? Or are you hoping to drown out that accountability by way of silent aversion?

LOL.

I'm hoping to counter the rest of your spin-tacular post, but if you've officially raised the white flag, I don't see the point. Admit you were wrong, and we can move forward.

Probably gotta ask the supervisor what to do next

you just know thats what PARROT needs to do.

 

[Patriot911]

"Patriot?" Are you gonna man-up and admit you mis-characterized my "only independent investigation allowed" statement? Or are you hoping to drown out that accountability by way of silent aversion?

LOL.

I'm hoping to counter the rest of your spin-tacular post, but if you've officially raised the white flag, I don't see the point. Admit you were wrong, and we can move forward.

Probably gotta ask the supervisor what to do next

you just know thats what PARROT needs to do.

In a way it is very sad and pathetic that the truthtard bowel movement has been reduced to this level of idiocy. Then again, I can't think of a better group of fucking losers for it to happen to.

 

[JiggsCasey]

"Patriot?" Are you gonna man-up and admit you mis-characterized my "only independent investigation allowed" statement? Or are you hoping to drown out that accountability by way of silent aversion?

LOL.

I can see that you've been on since, and I have no doubt you saw my reply. ... I'm hoping to counter the rest of your spin-tacular post, but if you've officially raised the white flag, I don't see the point.

Admit you were wrong, and we can move forward.

Sorry. I saw your tracks as you ran away from the debate and assumed you were tired of getting your ass kicked. I didn't realize you were actually begging for some kind of affirmation from me!

LOL... In other words, "yeah, I fucked that up." ... White flag accepted.

Even when challenged to admit you got my statement wrong, you don't even possess the integrity to acknowledge it.

This is what I'm dealing with here. LOL... What an angry yet disciplined little Bush loyalist.

You dumbfucks always pretend there has been no investigation by claiming it wasn't an "independant" investigation.

No, retard. We claim the FBI and SEC reports were not independent. We acknowledge the Kean Commission was "independent," at least, supposed to have been. Please try and follow along.

Loosen your Cowboy belt, or something. Perhaps it's cutting into your overhanging gut as you type.

You come up with lameassed excuses like not believing the evidence found to dismiss the investigation. News flash, skippy! You don't get to pick what investigations are "good" and which are "bad".

Nor do you.

You have to have actual evidence the investigation was fundamentally flawed before you can get another investigation.

I know you're probably a big Matlock fan, but you do realize that evidence doesn't have to be a tangible object or document taped and sealed in a manilla envelope, yes? Evidence can be a concept. A mere established truth. ... Their lack of due diligence, their pattern of obstruction of justice? Heck, there's perjury from the Joint Chiefs' testimony to the Commission on timeline stuff. That's evidence, champ.

Every word of Colleen Rowley's letter to Robert Mueller questioning the suppression of surveillance. That's evidence. ... Evidence that at least shows that those people on the frontlines of surveillance should have been questioned, under subpoena, and with transcripts. That the money trail should have been followed to its exhausted conclusion... not stop short at ISI officials with known ties to terror before/after 9/11.

So is the fact they found "left behind luggage" is reason enough to ignore the investigation?

No, that laughable angle is merely part of it.

Another part is that your heroes didn't let anyone else examine the painfully convenient documents and other contents found ... stuff that -- allegedly -- spelled out the whoooole plot, like the end of a Scooby Doo mystery. Hooray!

Surely you have some of that vaunted "court admissible" evidence that proves the luggage was a plant, right?

See, this is where you and I come to a fundamental disagreement I guess. To you, state secrecy's "word is bond" To me, it's evidence that should be examined. By all parties.

No matter how deep down the 9/11 rabbit hole we go, the phrase "classified due to matters of national security" can always bail you out of trouble. That's why you remain so smug. You're off the hook. But not by a refutation, instead by a dead end. LOL.

I love when that happens. Because when your team falls back to that final rallying point? You're officially on the run.

Considering the long history of domestic and foreign policy fraud by plutocrats -- on everything from Savings & Loan, to Iran Contra, to Mossadeq, to jackals in South America to Gulf of Tonkin -- they're completely trustworthy, and we should continue to take them at their word, and let them have their secrets. It's for our own good.

We're not suppose to just take a lying piece of shit like you at your word, are we?

LOL. To be clear, between the two of us, only you have been caught red-handed in a bold face lie. Nice try.

Oh, there is that shit word again! Did I offend you? Tough shit.

You threw your own feces as a kid, didn't you? I can tell.

Still waiting to see a single piece of your massive amounts of court-admissible evidence. You would think you would have posted a piece by now. Or are you still pretending a hit piece by the Times of India against Pakistan somehow proves Cheney knew?

Once again, the information emanated from Indian intel, as confirmed by the FBI. The Times of India only reported the matter. Logic dictates to any lucid thinker that if the Times of India was making the claim, and Indian intel went on THEIR word, the FBI would openly dispute it all if untrue. Or the CIA would. Considering no one questioned the Indian intel's findings (I mean besides good little Bush loyaistis like you on random message boards), we can thereby deduce Indian intel is correct and the ISI chief Mahmood Ahmed facilitated the transaction. And that, subsequently, Ahmed was pressured to resign for SOME reason, and was amazingly NEVER apprehended for any kind of recorded testimony.

lawl and stfu

 

[Patriot911]

"Patriot?" Are you gonna man-up and admit you mis-characterized my "only independent investigation allowed" statement? Or are you hoping to drown out that accountability by way of silent aversion?

LOL.

I can see that you've been on since, and I have no doubt you saw my reply. ... I'm hoping to counter the rest of your spin-tacular post, but if you've officially raised the white flag, I don't see the point.

Admit you were wrong, and we can move forward.

Sorry. I saw your tracks as you ran away from the debate and assumed you were tired of getting your ass kicked. I didn't realize you were actually begging for some kind of affirmation from me!

LOL... In other words, "yeah, I fucked that up."

Even when challenged to admit you got my statement wrong, you don't even possess the integrity to acknowledge it.

There was no mistake made. I saw you were dishonestly trying to say independent. I ignored it on purpose.

No, retard. We claim the FBI and SEC reports were not independent. We acknowledge the Kean Commission was "independent," at least, supposed to have been. Please try and follow along.

But wait. I thought you said it was LIHOP. Cheney let it happen on purpose, which means neither the FBI nor the SEC were in on it. That would make them as independent as either the FBI or the SEC.

BTW, how many other criminal investigations do you see run by an independent investigation?

Nor do you.

OK, so we agree. So who does? The DA or a judge can overturn an investigation and demand a new one. So why haven't you gone to a DA or judge with alll this supposed "court-admissible evidence" you still haven't been able to produce?

I know you're probably a big Matlock fan, but you do realize that evidence doesn't have to be a tangible object or document taped and sealed in a manilla envelope, yes? Evidence can be a concept. A mere established truth. ... Their lack of due diligence, their pattern of obstruction of justice? Heck, there's perjury from the Joint Chiefs' testimony to the Commission on timeline stuff. That's evidence, champ.

You OPINION of what went on is STILL not evidence, shithead! Man, the ego on these truthtards! Regardless, the investigation uncovered such obstructions to their satisfaction. The investigation discovered the lies just as investigation should. Lack of due diligence is your opinion, and as worthless as you are.

Every word of Colleen Rowley's letter to Robert Mueller questioning the suppression of surveillance. That's evidence. ... Evidence that at least shows that those people on the frontlines of surveillance should have been questioned, under subpoena, and with transcripts.

Apparently you are completely ignorant of the independent investigation by the office of the Inspector General into the events discussed in Colleen Rowley's letter. What an ignorant fuck! Here it is if you're actually interested in the truth instead of just pushing the bullshit lies.

That the money trail should have been followed to its exhausted conclusion... not stop short at ISI officials with known ties to terror before/after 9/11.

So you use your own lies to justify more lies? Wow. How incredibly dishonest! So did you find ANY reference where the FBI announced the ISI officials were involved? Come on. You made the claim. The FBI would have no reason to suppress this information under your LIHOP theory.

No, that laughable angle is merely part of it.

Another part is that your heroes didn't let anyone else examine the painfully convenient documents and other contents found ... stuff that -- allegedly -- spelled out the whoooole plot, like the end of a Scooby Doo mystery. Hooray!

Well, as usual, dumbfucks like you who lie as easily as breath, are lying again. Nobody else could examine the evidence? You mean the same evidence used to convict Moussaoui? The same evidence you can find online? The same evidence examined by the courts and the defense?

See, this is where you and I come to a fundamental disagreement I guess. To you, state secrecy's "word is bond" To me, it's evidence that should be examined. By all parties.

And it has been, despite your lies to the contrary.

No matter how deep down the 9/11 rabbit hole we go, the phrase "classified due to matters of national security" can always bail you out of trouble. That's why you remain so smug. You're off the hook. But not by a refutation, but by a dead end. LOL.

Yet the evidence was not classified. More lies from you.

I love when that happens. Because when your team falls back to that final rallying point? You're officially on the run.

So to sum up, you have to lie about the evidence being claimed a state's secret in order to whine like a little bitch about it.

LOL. To be clear, between the two of us, only you have been caught red-handed in a bold face lie. Nice try.

Wrong yet again, fucktard. Where is all this court-admissible evidence you claim to have? So far all we've seen is a bullshit story about the ISI which has nothing to do with your LIHOP story.

Oh, there is that shit word again! Did I offend you? Tough shit.

You threw your own feces as a kid, didn't you? I can tell.

Nope. I point and laugh at fucks like you who constantly spout bullshit. I know it when I see it, and every time you post I see it.

Still waiting to see a single piece of your massive amounts of court-admissible evidence. You would think you would have posted a piece by now. Or are you still pretending a hit piece by the Times of India against Pakistan somehow proves Cheney knew?

Once again, the information emanated from Indian intel, as confirmed by the FBI.

ACCORDING TO THE TIMES OF INDIA REPORT. For someone who whines about others supposedly taking the government at their word, why do you take an article that was never followed up and nobody but you lying piece of shit truthtards claim?

The Times of India only reported the matter.

And they are the only original source.

Logic dictates that if the Times of India was the original source, and Indian intel went on THEIR word, the FBI would dispute it if untrue.

Which they have. You see ANY FBI claim that Mahmoud was involved in any way? In fact, do you see any official release from India Intel saying Mahmoud was guilty or presenting their evidence? Or are you just going off unnamed sources from the enemy of the Pakistanis?

Considering no one questioned the Indian intel's findings (I mean besides good little Bush loyaistis like you on random message boards), we can thereby deduce Indian intel is correct and Ahmed facilitated the transaction, was pressured to resign, and was never apprehended for testimony.

So anyone who questions the India Times article is a good little Bushie, and since nobody OTHER than those who questioned the article questioned the article, it must be true! :roll: Is that how you justify your own bullshit as well? Nobody but debunkers question your bullshit, so everyone ELSE automatically agrees with it so it must be true? Pure and utter dishonesty in that policy.

lawl and stfu

Awww. Unfortunately for you, you don't get to order anyone else around no matter how big your ego is.