--- In [email protected], Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

---snip---
> >
> >No , you missed it. "my point"  was had the terrorist been 
successful  you 
> >would have been demanding another investigation as to how this 
could happen,  as 
> >you just did, see above. As for me, I thought the official 911 
investigation  
> >was simply  a political circus. And no I don't think this is a 
setup  but I'm 
> >sure you are going to wish it were.
> >
> No, you are *assuming* why I want an independent 9-11 
investigation.  I 
> think the "official story" is a cover-up and 9-11 was an inside 
job and 
> a failed false flag operation.  That's why I don't trust this 
alert 
> especially due to it's timing.
>
But, aren't you both assuming that neither of you is assuming 
the "official" 9-11 investigation was, in reality, carried out under 
the assumption (or at least the assumption of the two of you) that 
the "official story" was NOT actually an inside job (assuming  of 
course that you have agreed to assume the recent alert was (at least 
I assume it was) an "official" official alert, which is true 
regardless of whether or not the independent alert was or was not an 
inside job? You both would agree with this, I assume?






To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!' 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 


Reply via email to