By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Interesting stuff, makes you wonder what else might not be what it seems!.
"Stan work hard, could score goals in the air, and was complete team player. He headed balls off the line, and he had so much skill, balance, finesse and amazing touch. His mobility, that electrifying burst of 30 yards was exciting to watch"...Don Shanks.
0
Did we really land on the moon? on 11:10 - Dec 14 with 1783 views
Did we really land on the moon? on 11:17 - Dec 14 by klr
If this was or indeed is the case, then why is there no credible evidence of it happening whatsoever ?
Why would anyone want to believe it happened ?
The story put out is not credible hence why The 9/11 "attack" on The Pentagon has & is being quietly erased from the history books, botched job.
I don't want to believe it happened.
I had a Prime Minister in Washington on that day who (imo) shat himself that he might have been under this and consequently committed to GWb's particular witch hunt.
Amazes me that posters on here will on the one hand refuse to entertain the idea that their material conditions are manifestly the result of systemic exploitation - an idea that has moutains of empirical data to support it - but will on the other hand discuss conspiracy theories at length for which there are limited evidence.
I guess this is what Freud would call 'displacement'? You kind of know you're being fcked, but rather than face up to the horrible truth, displace those feelings on to entertaining conspiracy theories?
0
Did we really land on the moon? on 11:34 - Dec 14 with 1739 views
Did we really land on the moon? on 11:32 - Dec 14 by FDC
Amazes me that posters on here will on the one hand refuse to entertain the idea that their material conditions are manifestly the result of systemic exploitation - an idea that has moutains of empirical data to support it - but will on the other hand discuss conspiracy theories at length for which there are limited evidence.
I guess this is what Freud would call 'displacement'? You kind of know you're being fcked, but rather than face up to the horrible truth, displace those feelings on to entertaining conspiracy theories?
Did we really land on the moon? on 11:28 - Dec 14 by TheBlob
The wondeful thing about brain dead conspiracy theorists is you can call everyone else moronic without offering one iota of contradictory evidence.
That pretty much sums it up. No one can find one shred of evidence that a missile hit the Pentagon, or come up with anyone who fired it, or why anyone would have fired it. But because a passenger jet wasn't caught on CCTV it must have been a missile?
All evidence points to the fact a plane (AA77) went missing on that day with over 50 people on board. The passenger manifest is readily available in public records. No one who believes a plane wasn't involved can say where those people disappeared to. And no one can say why, 10 years on, families and friends of these people that aren't really dead turn up to memorial services at the Pentagon.
But that's the best thing about conspiracies. You don't have to have any evidence.
0
Did we really land on the moon? on 11:59 - Dec 14 with 1987 views
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
