In a message dated 8/10/06 9:11:31 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, 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




__,_._,___

Reply via email to