Begging your pardon I did indeed view every one of your links the first time you posted them Catfish.Simply because I do not trust something that the BBC says or something that the Guardian says which I have already informed you is incorrect and you at first agreed with my point now you seem to recant and feel again that Al-Qaeda spelled a certain way means that it was created by the CIA and that Bin Laden used the name later.

You seem to be a believer in the conspiracy theories that surround 9/11 just as they do many other serious events such as the assassination of John F. Kennedy .And when you encounter one that does not agree with a given conspiracy theory you accuse them of not even looking at their sources. Conspiracy theories are just that theories very often based on very loose interpretation of known facts and where there is any chance for the given theory to fit in that is where it is placed.I can see them making that BBC doc right now "Lets see here ok Mitchel we know that some people think that the CIA created Bin Ladens group so lets just say that the CIA had a database on Bin Laden and it was called the database in Arabic"

Why do I have the feeling that you also believe what is said in "Loose Change"?

Let me give an example lets say that I have a conspiracy theory that purple lizard aliens form the planet Kilmzord are in control of our planet.I could easily say that the that Kilmzord lizard men created AQ in order to start a war between the humans in order to weaken them for easier complete take over at a later date.

I do not really believe all those conspiracy theories either, but i found those links interesting. Bin Laden himself did use this name earlier, already before 2000, however it did not refer to an organization - and not to a database, at least not by him.

Newspapers, Fox News and official reports from people heavily involved (FBI whatever). I mean if you want a security check about let's say a reactor, would you give the order to examine and produce this report, to the operating company; would you think you get a realistic evaluation then ?
I would say those conspiracy theories are only possible, because people have been lied to and deceived before, so they will see the dark side at work everywhere. "Just because you are paranoid does not mean they are not after you".

So because the name A-Q does not really mean what those "revisionists" say, the rest is all made up as well ? Possible.

Even if any documentary can be made up (those mentioned originating from Pierre-Henry Bunel or so i think), what are your sources denying researches of a (more or less, ok) credible journalist ?

Greetings,
Catfish

Edit, just reread your post, seems you edited it a bit - i do not know about "Loose change" but will look for what you mean.

Why the Kilmzord lizards of course.:03:

Not to be insulting but my source is common sense and understanding that most any source has it own point of view/agenda you have to understand the varying information coming at you and flowing around the world and analyse it from as neutral a prospective as possible.That is how I can best explain it.

I have googled, and i did not find them !
"Did you mean: Komodo lizards "



Instead i found this:
http://www.2flashgames.com/f/f-Dinos...arch-75344.htm

Ah I see that TLAMstrike 6 is at it again.I bet at this very moment he is time traveling back in time in order to save the previous TLAMStrikes and once they are all in one place at one time they become TLAMStrike Alpha Omega.

I don't know where he has all this free time go off galavanting around on secret missions, I thought he had term papers to work on.

Must be a music major.:hmmm:

TLAMstrike uses body doubles. He has twice as many as Obama, 10 times as many as Churchill.

The body doubles are of course much less powerful than the real TLAMStrike but of course one should never underestimate them.One of TLAMs body doubles was in charge of CIA operations in the USSR during the 1970s.

So this TLAM is the last line of defence and will be called upon when the USA is in really deep trouble.

Markus

And here's me having to use cheap Saddam knock-offs...brought them off the back of a lorry at the Iraq border in 2003 in a closing down special.

Had to grow a moustache, but the price is worth it! :yep:

honestly, I thought most of it was hogwash, but some of it was really thought provoking. especially the part about united 93. t is true, a 757 is a large aircraft...and it was vaporized without a fire AFAIK and no fuel residue found.

The problem with truthers is that expect a plane crash in a field to look like this....

http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/w...ntoCrater0.jpg

A plane is made of thousands of parts. When it impacts nose first with ground it tends to disintegrate into a lot of small unrecognizable parts.

Plus, they duck obvious follow-up questions like...if the plane didn't crash what happened to it?

After that what happened to all the passengers and crew that were aboard?

Why stage a fake crash in a field? Why not at another famous American landmark?

If you want people to think an aircraft was going to crash into the capital and the aircraft that is supposed to have done it is missing along with all the crew and passengers, why not crash it into the capital instead of some anonymous stretch of Pennsylvania? Why not work the this staged emergency up to the hilt with all four planes?

oh im studying to get my A&P I know how many parts there are in a 757, something like 3,000,000 or so if you count rivets. But it's a large plane to just disappear like that. not saying it didn't happen, but the weirdest thing i wonder about is the lack of fuel found

It's my understanding that tons of debris were excavated from crater. I think a lot of the problem is that the aerial pictures of the crater didn't fit most people's idea of what a jet crash looks like with oily smoking wreckage and a vague wrecked aircraft shape. Kind of reminds me of Apollo disbelievers who think the moon landings were fake because the awkward looking lunar module didn't fit their mental picture of what a spaceship looks like.

I would trust the opinion of someone trained in the studying air accidents for the FAA over someone studying A&P I assume this is aviation?:hmmm: could you put in full words what you are studying please? I am pretty sure that is not specifically related to the study of air accidents.At least A friend of mine went to Emery Riddle and studied accident specifically and recvied a BA in it.

Have you seen the FAA investigation reports on this accident to allow you dispute with reputable evidence.Which to satisfy me would be a person with many years experience investigating air accidents.

Also do not forget that this plane struck the ground at a very high rate of speed much higher most likely than any previous crash involving an aircraft of this size.

If one takes into consideration the scattering effects of most air accidents at much lower speeds they tend to scatter wreckage fairly far so it seems logical to me for an aircraft striking the ground at a high rate of speed and diving for the ground (where as in most crashes the crew is trying to avoid this) it makes sense for most of the wreckage to go into the ground.

Of course it is always possible that one of TLAMs doubles might have managed to brain wash me maybe he did and I don't remember it because I am now a manchurian candidate.:hmmm: :D