--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jst...@...> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Nelson" <nelsonriddle2001@>
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Nelson"
> <nelsonriddle2001@>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@>
> wrote:
> > > <snip>
> > > > > You bet. That's what Snopes is for, to give you
> > > > > the straight skinny.
> > > > >
> > > > Just looked up their take on 9-11 pentagon and would observe
> that
> > > > they might get some things right but in this case, they are
> following
> > > > the party line.
> > >
> > > Seems to me the phrase "following the party line"
> > > indicates a pretty clear bias on your part.
> > >
> > > Were you able to find anything *contrafactual* in the
> > > information they presented?
> > >
> > I guess it must be a biased outlook but, I have to
> > wonder where they got their facts from after looking
> > at the pictures of the event. Look up the USS-Liberty-
> > a failed false flag event- the party line or fact
> > sheet seems to be BS in some cases.
>
> "False flag"? Boy, that's not how I'd characterize
> the Liberty controversy. You sure that's the event
> you're thinking of?
>
> And that's a *very* complicated story anyway, with
> strong evidence on both sides--that it was a mistake
> by Israel, on one hand, and that the Israeli attack
> was deliberate, on the other.
>
> In any case, that there have been false-flag
> operations in the past doesn't tell us anything about
> whether 9/11 was one such.
>
The point was, I don't think snopes is a reliable authority from any
of the rulings it has made that I have seen.
A lot of people agree with them which is ok- I don't.
A lot of people think 9/11 was an inside job- I agree with them.
