• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

An Independent Investigation of 9/11 And The War On Terrorism

abso

New member
Joined
Jun 16, 2010
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
Location
Egypt
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed, second it is violently opposed, and third, it is accepted as self-evident."
Arthur Schopenhauer, Philosopher, 1788-1860



OPENING STATEMENT

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, the ancient Greek philosopher Socrates taught his students that the pursuit of truth can only begin once they start to question and analyze every belief that they ever held dear. If a certain belief passes the tests of evidence, deduction, and logic, it should be kept. If it doesn't, the belief should not only be discarded, but the thinker must also then question why he was led to believe the erroneous information in the first place. Not surprisingly, this type of teaching didn't sit well with the ruling elite of Greece. Many political leaders throughout history have always sought to mislead the thinking of the masses. Socrates was tried for "subversion" and for "corrupting the youth". He was then forced to take his own life by drinking poison. It's never easy being an independent thinker! Today, our ruling government/media complex doesn't kill people for pursuing the truth about the world (at least not yet!) They simply label them as "extremists" or "paranoid", destroying careers and reputations in the process. For many, that's a fate even worse than drinking poison hemlock! Every news story you are about to review in this comprehensive research paper is true and easily verifiable.

This investigation represents 10 months of careful study, research, analysis, source verification and logical deduction. Every event and quote presented here is 100% accurate. There are over 190 detailed footnotes which I encourage, no, urge, readers to explore and verify for themselves. The Internet version of this paper will allow users to obtain instant verification for each and every footnote by clicking on the footnotes/links. Others can obtain easy verification by entering the key search words (provided at the end of the paper) into the Yahoo or Google.com search engines. Due to the fact that well organized efforts are under way to suppress these facts, some of these news links are mysteriously disappearing even as we speak. Fortunately, this information has all been transcribed by many web users and is has therefore been preserved from the censors. These footnote searches will take you directly to the news sites of many well known established media organizations throughout the world as well as opening up doors to a world of knowledge and information that has been concealed from you. With just a little common sense and a few clicks of a mouse, Google and Yahoo now enable anyone with an ounce of curiosity to become a Sherlock Holmes.

This is no opinion piece. Rather it is a collection of buried, but undeniable facts, events, and quotes which, when assembled in one place, will state their own conclusions. In putting together this research in a logical and sequential format, great care was taken to confirm and double confirm every piece of information. Any and all questionable data which could not be independently verified to this author's satisfaction was discarded. Taken individually, each story, quote and event may not amount to a full case. But when taken collectively, this mountain of facts should hammer home the truth to even the most skeptical reader. There are of course those who have fallen under the hypnotic spell of the TV talking-heads and "experts" whom they worship as authority figures. Unaccustomed to thinking for themselves, no amount of truth can sway them from their preconceived prejudices. They will even deny that which they see with their own eyes.[/QUOTE]
SeanBryson.Com Stranger Than Fiction An Independent Investigation of 911 And War On Terrorism

Moderator's Warning:
Edited - Fair-Use violation.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

abso

New member
Joined
Jun 16, 2010
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
Location
Egypt
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
just another small part of the article, go to the link to read more: "as the writer said, every info mentioned, can be verified by just using google, so dont tell me that this is fantasy"

Moderator's Warning:
Edited - Fair-Use violation
 
Last edited by a moderator:

BmanMcfly

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 3, 2008
Messages
12,761
Reaction score
2,321
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I don't really disagree with this guys articles... but I do gotta question why he's focused so hard on the israeli involvement.

I view it more like a hydra, there are 5 heads all seeming to do their own thing, while they all share the same body. They are all equally involved, even if on different 'squares' of the global chessboard.
 

mike2810

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
22,894
Reaction score
7,980
Location
arizona
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
"This investigation represents 10 months of careful study, research, analysis, source verification and logical deduction. Every event and quote presented here is 100% accurate. " T
That does not mean the data is not misrepresented or misused by the author. IMO, Just another rant peice.
BM, it is sites like this that causes me to not give much creedance to the movement.
 

usda select

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
930
Reaction score
158
Political Leaning
Independent
"This investigation represents 10 months of careful study, research, analysis, source verification and logical deduction. Every event and quote presented here is 100% accurate. " T
That does not mean the data is not misrepresented or misused by the author. IMO, Just another rant peice.
BM, it is sites like this that causes me to not give much creedance to the movement.
There seems to be ONLY sites like this one on the side of the movement though, is that not the case?
 

mike2810

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
22,894
Reaction score
7,980
Location
arizona
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
There seems to be ONLY sites like this one on the side of the movement though, is that not the case?
You are most likely correct. It has been awhile since I went digging into 9/11 theories. If I recall some were not so radical (format/content).
 

BmanMcfly

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 3, 2008
Messages
12,761
Reaction score
2,321
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
"This investigation represents 10 months of careful study, research, analysis, source verification and logical deduction. Every event and quote presented here is 100% accurate. " T
That does not mean the data is not misrepresented or misused by the author. IMO, Just another rant peice.
BM, it is sites like this that causes me to not give much creedance to the movement.
Well, here's a problem with that logic though, it attempts to place a leader over what is for all intents and purposes a leaderless movement. It's like with 'we are change' (which is NOTHING to do with 9-11 on it's face, but is intricately connected at it's origins to 9-11), whose manifesto is simple "be the change you want to see in the world". It is a leaderless organization of individual activists that go around and confront the known corrupt politicians and call them out on their corruption, among other efforts. Similarly with 9-11 truth, what has ended up is that there are a variety of individuals who have come across varying levels of evidence that happens to oppose the official versions findings, while some won't even go so far in stating their conclusions.

Like our friend that authored the sourced article... While I wouldn't go as far as to call him anti-semitic, as he goes to lengths to define his position in that sense, but he's lost in the sense that the 90+% of his focus rests on Israeli involvement... there are numerous ways that you can prove a level of israeli involvement on 9-11... Mossad agents that were arrested that day went on an israeli talk show and ADMITTED they were there to "document the event". Even with that additional information, it doesn't address the other situations that were going on that day... things that even as an israeli-al-quaida operation alone doesn't make sense.

All that to say, that to attribute this one individuals position as the position of 9-11 truth as a whole is as fallacious as saying that a priest molested a boy therefore all priests are child molesters.

Now, that said as well, for the most part 9-11 truthers do have a majority of their beliefs based in the concrete evidence that has come out, and so to ask their account of what happened will be fairly similar, with differences based more on the content of the evidence that they have taken into consideration then anything else.
 

UtahBill

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
18,265
Reaction score
6,648
Location
Utah
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
One would think that "independent" would imply "unbiased"......
 

BmanMcfly

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 3, 2008
Messages
12,761
Reaction score
2,321
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
You are most likely correct. It has been awhile since I went digging into 9/11 theories. If I recall some were not so radical (format/content).
If you're going to do that, you'd have to consider the evidence that they are taking into account... like with the OP's article it's based majoritarily on israeli news sources, so his findings are scewed to that effect. With ae911truth, it's mainly dealing with the engineering aspects, with firefighters it's mostly dealing with the fire, the countdown (prior to WTC7), the treatment of the 9-11 heroes (who were called 'ambulance seekers' for wanting help for their illnesses), pilots for 911 truth are mostly concerned with the near impossible flightpath from the flight recorders of the plane that hit the pentagon, and the difficulty of accurately hitting the wtc towers, etc.

But then, when there's a convention for 9-11 truth where a wide variety of experts came in to give their perspectives, the science, etc... that goes on for 2 days finally when the media shows up who do they seek out for interviews ??? The LOOSE CHANGE guys... the ones that can be labelled (libelled) as the LEAST trustworthy of the whole lot... The media was simply NOT INTERESTED in interviewing experts... preferring instead the easy targets of the non-experts in the crowd.

USDA - Once again you utterly fail in your arguments... especially from your previous admissions that you won't even open a source dealing with 9-11 truth.
 

BmanMcfly

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 3, 2008
Messages
12,761
Reaction score
2,321
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
One would think that "independent" would imply "unbiased"......
Let me guess, this 'bias' is that they go in with the belief that 'government is bad' and so seek out evidence to prove that case?

Take insider trading, there are a number of criteria involved in determining insider trades :
1 - Timing : 3 days prior to 9-11
2 - Specificity : ONLY the airlines that had planes hijacked, the reinsurance company covering the WTC complex, Raytheon who got a huge contract for weapons going to afghanistan, etc
3 - Volume : With the airlines was 60 and 90X the volume of trades (dealing with the airlines)

OR, you could look at the SEC which defines insider trading as any securities transaction made when the person behind the trade is aware of nonpublic material information, and is hence violating his or her duty to maintain confidentiality of such knowledge. Well, the second part doesn't necessarily apply, because of the timing, specificity and volume of the pre-911 trades it's safe to assume that the person behind these trades was aware of non-public material information, as for his duty to maintain confidentiality of that knowledge, depends on who that individual is, and where he was working at the time of the trades (or how he came across that information). Meanwhile the commission report glosses this insider trading as innocent because the individual responsible for 95% of those trades "has no conceivable ties to al-quaida", although they never did name that individual... though this has come out since.

Sorry... got a little carried away.
 

UtahBill

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
18,265
Reaction score
6,648
Location
Utah
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Sorry... got a little carried away.
Well, duh ! or "that ship has sailed", or "umm, we pretty much knew that some time ago. :2razz:
How do the inmates type on a keyboard while wearing straightjackets?:2wave:
 

BmanMcfly

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 3, 2008
Messages
12,761
Reaction score
2,321
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Well, duh ! or "that ship has sailed", or "umm, we pretty much knew that some time ago. :2razz:
How do the inmates type on a keyboard while wearing straightjackets?:2wave:
Ok... fine... I'm crazy, now, explain to me where my analysis is flawed in that last post rather then this simple non-answer to the points raised.

Look, if someone comes up and tells me 'the world is flat'... I don't just tell the person that he's crazy, I explain, "no that's crazy because..." and then illustrate the ways in which it's self-evident that the world is not flat. So, are you saying that UNDER THOSE FACTUAL circumstances THAT IS ADDRESSED IN THE OFFICIAL VERSION, that it's crazy that under the circumstances previously illustrated that "no conceiveable ties to alquaida" is even close to an explanation as to how this individual came across this information?? The fact that this individual NEVER cashed on in those 'bets' is the ONLY reason why this didn't become an FBI investigation, BTW. It was mainstream news that the FBI said they would look at anyone who made ANY illigitmate money off 9-11... so, by not cashing in on the money, is it unreasonable to suggest that doing this in such a conspicuous way as to evade investigation MIGHT be an implication of guilt that is worth a deeper conclusion then that "has no conceivable ties to al-quaida" that the official version makes of that evidence???

Ok, remember, I'm slow and a bit crazy, so remember to explain how come this is a flawed conclusion to draw from the FACTS. I honestly only disagree with the official account on a few very specific details... the ones that are undeniably flawed, either in that it contradicts what was seen on film, or because it defies all logical consideration, or deals with undeclared flawed assumptions that are required for the conditions to be met as suggested by the NIST report.


BTW - I will not simply 'chill out' or some sort of other copout non-answer... I don't WANT to be a 'truther'... I WANT to believe the official version. I really do... I just cannot accept the official account because nobody wants to deal with my very specific issues.
 
Last edited:

usda select

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
930
Reaction score
158
Political Leaning
Independent
Ok... fine... I'm crazy, now, explain to me where my analysis is flawed in that last post rather then this simple non-answer to the points raised.

Look, if someone comes up and tells me 'the world is flat'... I don't just tell the person that he's crazy, I explain, "no that's crazy because..." and then illustrate the ways in which it's self-evident that the world is not flat. So, are you saying that UNDER THOSE FACTUAL circumstances THAT IS ADDRESSED IN THE OFFICIAL VERSION, that it's crazy that under the circumstances previously illustrated that "no conceiveable ties to alquaida" is even close to an explanation as to how this individual came across this information?? The fact that this individual NEVER cashed on in those 'bets' is the ONLY reason why this didn't become an FBI investigation, BTW. It was mainstream news that the FBI said they would look at anyone who made ANY illigitmate money off 9-11... so, by not cashing in on the money, is it unreasonable to suggest that doing this in such a conspicuous way as to evade investigation MIGHT be an implication of guilt that is worth a deeper conclusion then that "has no conceivable ties to al-quaida" that the official version makes of that evidence???

Ok, remember, I'm slow and a bit crazy, so remember to explain how come this is a flawed conclusion to draw from the FACTS. I honestly only disagree with the official account on a few very specific details... the ones that are undeniably flawed, either in that it contradicts what was seen on film, or because it defies all logical consideration, or deals with undeclared flawed assumptions that are required for the conditions to be met as suggested by the NIST report.


BTW - I will not simply 'chill out' or some sort of other copout non-answer... I don't WANT to be a 'truther'... I WANT to believe the official version. I really do... I just cannot accept the official account because nobody wants to deal with my very specific issues.
Well, you told the truth twice; I must be rubbing off.
 

BmanMcfly

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 3, 2008
Messages
12,761
Reaction score
2,321
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
USDA - Of course you had to chime in... I bet you were so happy to see me say that I'm crazy... "HA! He said it... I GOT HIM." Like the rest of my post that you in all likelyhood (based on previous conversations) completely glossed over like it doesn't matter...

You must be like those people that go to the keg to only eat the steamed veggies that they put next to the steak, and just throw out the steak.

Once I read your post I'm gonna laugh SO HARD when I see some sort of smug one liner


EDIT : BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!.
 
Last edited:

usda select

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
930
Reaction score
158
Political Leaning
Independent
USDA - Of course you had to chime in... I bet you were so happy to see me say that I'm crazy... "HA! He said it... I GOT HIM." Like the rest of my post that you in all likelyhood (based on previous conversations) completely glossed over like it doesn't matter...

You must be like those people that go to the keg to only eat the steamed veggies that they put next to the steak, and just throw out the steak.

Once I read your post I'm gonna laugh SO HARD when I see some sort of smug one liner


EDIT : BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!.
Personally I think "crazy" is a bit too vague. Chemically unbalanced to the point of being delusional, incoherent, and basically an ashole is more on the money.

Delusional--Example (the "truth" movement is now an anti-tax movement)
Incoherent--Example (the legacy media is dying and if it prints the truth about 9/11, it will be killed)
Ashole--Example (you pick 'em)

The first step is admitting you have a problem though and you seem to be there. I"m not sure what steak has to do with it but then again, why would you start making sense now.
 

BmanMcfly

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 3, 2008
Messages
12,761
Reaction score
2,321
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Personally I think "crazy" is a bit too vague. Chemically unbalanced to the point of being delusional, incoherent, and basically an ashole is more on the money.
You should have told me you were a PhD in psychiatry... no, I'm not legitimately crazy, unbalanced, suffering any mental condition, I was making the point that the attempt is to call me crazy to avoid the argument... like usual you jumped on the predictable, so I laughed.

Delusional--Example (the "truth" movement is now an anti-tax movement)
More accurately I was pointing out that like how anti-globalist protesters became the organisers of many 9-11truth marches, and how 9-11 truth protestors were among the first to make 'tea part' / anti-tax protests... before glenn beck stepped in.

Incoherent--Example (the legacy media is dying and if it prints the truth about 9/11, it will be killed)
No, I pointed out how media is 95+% controlled market share by 5 conglomerates, who are in bed with a wide variety of interests, and so they'll keep stories silent in order to protect their friends, even if it means they are a dying enterprise because they don't represent 'informing the people' as much as they are interested in protecting their friends. Don't worry, if media companies go bankrupt Obama will just nationalize them.

Ashole--Example (you pick 'em)
I know....I never said I wasn't... but I did also say that someone who refuses to read sources but makes determinations about them without reading is at the very least a fool. Someone who defends an issue without even understanding key elements of the position being defeded is arrogantly foolish. So much so that any attempt to enlighten is a wasted effort.

The first step is admitting you have a problem though and you seem to be there. I"m not sure what steak has to do with it but then again, why would you start making sense now.
I'm sorry that analogies are too far out there... I was saying that you don't deal with issues, you pick some minutae that you can criticize as though that creates a valid argument... it's childish to say the least...

Better luck next time...
 

usda select

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
930
Reaction score
158
Political Leaning
Independent
You should have told me you were a PhD in psychiatry... no, I'm not legitimately crazy, unbalanced, suffering any mental condition, I was making the point that the attempt is to call me crazy to avoid the argument... like usual you jumped on the predictable, so I laughed.
Actually, I don't avoid any arguments; as you have seemed to have done on the other thread. But gee, you said you were ignoring me about a month ago but have posted something like 30 times directly to me since so we all know you have a very casual relationship with the truth and being a "man" of your word.

More accurately I was pointing out that like how anti-globalist protesters became the organisers of many 9-11truth marches, and how 9-11 truth protestors were among the first to make 'tea part' / anti-tax protests... before glenn beck stepped in.
Yeah okay...were you guys protesting immigration a few years ago? Nuke proliferation? Hands off Cuba? 'Nam? You may as well try to take credit for all of them since you're lying about some of them. Its entirely likely that fewer than 5 percent of the "protesters" ever have to cut a check on April 15. I know you haven't.

No, I pointed out how media is 95+% controlled market share by 5 conglomerates, who are in bed with a wide variety of interests, and so they'll keep stories silent in order to protect their friends, even if it means they are a dying enterprise because they don't represent 'informing the people' as much as they are interested in protecting their friends. Don't worry, if media companies go bankrupt Obama will just nationalize them.
Yet somehow this last weekend, BP bought a minute of ad time on the US Open final round. A major ad buy. Yet NBC News has lambasted them in commentary after commentary all month for their handling of the oil spill clean up. Amazingly, they are funding the same company that is being relentlessly hard on them. Just goes to show yet again you haven't got a ****ing clue of what you're talking about. Over and above that example...conglomerates rarely let one of their businesses die...thats how they become conglomerates dumbass.

I know....I never said I wasn't... but I did also say that someone who refuses to read sources but makes determinations about them without reading is at the very least a fool. Someone who defends an issue without even understanding key elements of the position being defeded is arrogantly foolish. So much so that any attempt to enlighten is a wasted effort.
Like you bother to hear the other side of any argument. If you did...

you'd source wild claims such as a military command center at ground zero before 9/11. Show us the quote.
you'd source wild claims such as we knew what the targets were on 9/11. Show us the quote.
you'd source wild claims claims such as the police dressing up like protesters. Show us the quote.

Now obviously, you're going to go to a whacko website if you bother to back up what you say because no source with any reliability, pedigree, or fact checking will make such crazy assed claims. Either that or you'll reference a home page as you did in the past with no reference to the specific webpages. A classic ploy of the uneducated and mal-informed such as yourself.


I'm sorry that analogies are too far out there... I was saying that you don't deal with issues, you pick some minutae that you can criticize as though that creates a valid argument... it's childish to say the least...

Better luck next time...
Asking you to source your material isn't childish, it is what any jury would ask. Which is why you guys will never go anywhere near a court room.

Oh, I know, I know, you'll claim that the whole thing is rigged and you won't be able to get a Federal Judge to rule anything other than the "company line". Yet you didn't notice that a federal judge overturned a Presidental directive today. Did you asswipe?

I think you're the best think to happen to the status quo since you are such an irresponsible and dishonest agent of "change".
 

abso

New member
Joined
Jun 16, 2010
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
Location
Egypt
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Sorry for not taking any part in the discussion since i posted the article, but i had exams...

anyway, since i got lost between the replies, and i really didnt understand the discussion, i cant see any discussion about the investigation itself, just people talking about if we should read it or not....

so, anyone actually read it yet or not ?
 

abso

New member
Joined
Jun 16, 2010
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
Location
Egypt
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
"This investigation represents 10 months of careful study, research, analysis, source verification and logical deduction. Every event and quote presented here is 100% accurate. " T
That does not mean the data is not misrepresented or misused by the author. IMO, Just another rant peice.
BM, it is sites like this that causes me to not give much creedance to the movement.
read it, then find something wrong about it, then come and say if you can find some lies in it, but dont just say that it can be misrepresented, i never said that its total truth, i just posted it here, so that everyone can read it, then say his opinion about it, but no need for predetermined judgement, judge only after you read.
 

abso

New member
Joined
Jun 16, 2010
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
Location
Egypt
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Someone who refuses to read sources but makes determinations about them without reading is at the very least a fool. Someone who defends an issue without even understanding key elements of the position being defended is arrogantly foolish. So much so that any attempt to enlighten is a wasted effort.
I do agree with you, i am not here to ask or force people to believe me, i just want them to read what i have to present, then make judgements and debate with me, but i dont like predetermined judgements which is based on feelings.
 

mike2810

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
22,894
Reaction score
7,980
Location
arizona
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
read it, then find something wrong about it, then come and say if you can find some lies in it, but dont just say that it can be misrepresented, i never said that its total truth, i just posted it here, so that everyone can read it, then say his opinion about it, but no need for predetermined judgement, judge only after you read.
That is not my job. As I have said in other posts, it is nearly impossilbe to disprove a negative. example ( Prove to me beyond a shadow of doubt that their is no afterlife or afterlife, take your pick). In other threads the Mossad connection has been discussed.
 

abso

New member
Joined
Jun 16, 2010
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
Location
Egypt
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
That is not my job. As I have said in other posts, it is nearly impossilbe to disprove a negative. example ( Prove to me beyond a shadow of doubt that their is no afterlife or afterlife, take your pick). In other threads the Mossad connection has been discussed.
none said its your job, its ur choice to take a part in the discussion or not, so if you want to be a part of it, then you would read it, and say if its true or not, thats all, but none is forcing you to discuss anything
 

mike2810

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
22,894
Reaction score
7,980
Location
arizona
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
none said its your job, its ur choice to take a part in the discussion or not, so if you want to be a part of it, then you would read it, and say if its true or not, thats all, but none is forcing you to discuss anything
Noticed you really didn't make a comment on your OP. So what is your take on it? You posted it.
My orginal statement stands. I think it has some facts, with lots of opinions.
 

abso

New member
Joined
Jun 16, 2010
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
Location
Egypt
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Noticed you really didn't make a comment on your OP. So what is your take on it? You posted it.
My orginal statement stands. I think it has some facts, with lots of opinions.
any comment that i will make, will be opposed, so i am just leaving it for you guys to read it, and when someone have any comment about it, i will be ready to reply and discuss, and i dont claim that this investigation is all true, i never claimed that, i am just saying, that we should read it, then decide ourselfs instead of judging without reading, am i right ?
 

usda select

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 6, 2010
Messages
930
Reaction score
158
Political Leaning
Independent
any comment that i will make, will be opposed, so i am just leaving it for you guys to read it, and when someone have any comment about it, i will be ready to reply and discuss, and i dont claim that this investigation is all true, i never claimed that, i am just saying, that we should read it, then decide ourselfs instead of judging without reading, am i right ?
What parts do you think are not true?
 
Top Bottom