 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
I wonder if 50 years from now there will be people "9/11 deniers" who
seriously claim there was never a World Trade Center at all, and the whole
collapse was just made up. (As in now we have holocaust deniers, in other
words.)
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
I ordered stamps from Zazzle that read "Place Stamp Here".
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New <dne### [at] san rrcom> wrote:
> I wonder if 50 years from now there will be people "9/11 deniers" who
> seriously claim there was never a World Trade Center at all, and the whole
> collapse was just made up. (As in now we have holocaust deniers, in other
> words.)
> --
> Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
> I ordered stamps from Zazzle that read "Place Stamp Here".
I would be (slightly) surprised if you couldn't find them right now.
cheek.tongue.remove();
-Reactor
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
> I wonder if 50 years from now there will be people "9/11 deniers" who
> seriously claim there was never a World Trade Center at all, and the
> whole collapse was just made up. (As in now we have holocaust deniers,
> in other words.)
We have those *today*, never mind in 50 years time.
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New schrieb:
> I wonder if 50 years from now there will be people "9/11 deniers" who
> seriously claim there was never a World Trade Center at all, and the
> whole collapse was just made up. (As in now we have holocaust deniers,
> in other words.)
There are people who claim that one or two whole centuries of AC history
are nothing but a fabrication - so yes, I guess the emergence of such
claims has to be taken as a given.
Even today, there are plenty of people who never saw the WTC with their
own eyes. And in 50 years' time, there will be plenty of people who will
never even have spent that day in front of the TV, watching the live(?)
broadcasts.
But then again, a CIA conspiracy to start a war by fabricating the
demolishion of a fabricated building doesn't sound half as sinister as
starting a war by really demolishing a real building, with thousands of
real casualties, so I guss the majority of conspiracy theorists will
prefer to take the existence of the WTC for granted, even in 50 yers' time.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> I wonder if 50 years from now there will be people "9/11 deniers" who
> seriously claim there was never a World Trade Center at all, and the
> whole collapse was just made up. (As in now we have holocaust deniers,
> in other words.)
During WWI the Germans blew up the Black Tom ammo dump in
NY harbor, the explosion damaged the statue of liberty and shrapnel
set fires in Jersey City. The blast was so large it registered more than
5.0 on the Richter scale, broke thousands of windows in Manhattan,
and was felt in Philadelphia.
Despite the seriousness of the attack, the reaction at the time was
to scapegoat the management of some munitions companies. It took
more than ten years to exonerate them, by then the war was long
over, and the story was no longer in the news.
It's reasonable to come to the conclusion that misdirection
by scapegoating the innocent is intended to deflect and delay
retribution on the guilty.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> I wonder if 50 years from now there will be people "9/11 deniers" who
> seriously claim there was never a World Trade Center at all, and the whole
> collapse was just made up. (As in now we have holocaust deniers, in other
> words.)
Not necessarily. Nobody is claiming that eg. the Titanic didn't actually
exist, that there was no attack on Pearl Harbor (or that Pearl Harbor didn't
even exist) or that there was no such president as Kennedy or that he wasn't
really murdered.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
> I wonder if 50 years from now there will be people "9/11 deniers" who
> seriously claim there was never a World Trade Center at all, and the
> whole collapse was just made up. (As in now we have holocaust deniers,
> in other words.)
That's like asking if 50 years from now there will be crazy people.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> Not necessarily. Nobody is claiming that eg. the Titanic didn't actually
> exist, that there was no attack on Pearl Harbor (or that Pearl Harbor didn't
> even exist) or that there was no such president as Kennedy or that he wasn't
> really murdered.
Maybe not, but the cake *is* a lie.
--
Tim Cook
http://empyrean.freesitespace.net
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> Darren New wrote:
>> I wonder if 50 years from now there will be people "9/11 deniers" who
>> seriously claim there was never a World Trade Center at all, and the
>> whole collapse was just made up. (As in now we have holocaust deniers,
>> in other words.)
>
> We have those *today*, never mind in 50 years time.
I don't think we have people claiming the buildings were never there to be
knocked down in the first place. We just have people thinking they weren't
knocked down by the people the government says knocked them down.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
I ordered stamps from Zazzle that read "Place Stamp Here".
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
clipka wrote:
> one or two whole centuries of AC history
What's AC history?
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
I ordered stamps from Zazzle that read "Place Stamp Here".
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> clipka wrote:
> > one or two whole centuries of AC history
> What's AC history?
The other side of BC?
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Tim Cook <z99### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> Maybe not, but the cake *is* a lie.
How do you know? Do you have any supporting evidence, other than a madman's
writings on a wall?
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
>> clipka wrote:
>>> one or two whole centuries of AC history
>
>> What's AC history?
>
> The other side of BC?
That was my guess, but we call that "AD" in the USA.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
I ordered stamps from Zazzle that read "Place Stamp Here".
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> Warp wrote:
> > Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> >> clipka wrote:
> >>> one or two whole centuries of AC history
> >
> >> What's AC history?
> >
> > The other side of BC?
> That was my guess, but we call that "AD" in the USA.
I thought "CE" was more politically correct currently. Or is that only in
Europe?
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sat, 12 Sep 2009 17:41:40 +0200, Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
> Tim Cook <z99### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
>> Maybe not, but the cake *is* a lie.
>
> How do you know? Do you have any supporting evidence, other than a
> madman's writings on a wall?
Ironically, there *was* cake at the end.
--
FE
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>>> I wonder if 50 years from now there will be people "9/11 deniers" who
>>> seriously claim there was never a World Trade Center at all, and the
>>> whole collapse was just made up. (As in now we have holocaust
>>> deniers, in other words.)
>>
>> We have those *today*, never mind in 50 years time.
>
> I don't think we have people claiming the buildings were never there to
> be knocked down in the first place. We just have people thinking they
> weren't knocked down by the people the government says knocked them down.
I've seen people claiming that hitting the buildings with a jet plane
wouldn't level them, and that they were actually rigged with explosives.
Crazy stuff like that...
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
>> Warp wrote:
>>> Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
>>>> clipka wrote:
>>>>> one or two whole centuries of AC history
>>>> What's AC history?
>>> The other side of BC?
>
>> That was my guess, but we call that "AD" in the USA.
>
> I thought "CE" was more politically correct currently. Or is that only in
> Europe?
>
No, some try to use that in the US also.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Tim Attwood wrote:
>> I wonder if 50 years from now there will be people "9/11 deniers" who
>> seriously claim there was never a World Trade Center at all, and the
>> whole collapse was just made up. (As in now we have holocaust deniers,
>> in other words.)
>
> During WWI the Germans blew up the Black Tom ammo dump in NY harbor, the
> explosion damaged the statue of liberty and shrapnel set fires in Jersey
> City. The blast was so large it registered more than
> 5.0 on the Richter scale, broke thousands of windows in Manhattan,
> and was felt in Philadelphia.
I have read of the Halifax explosion, but did not know of Black Tom
Island. It was interesting to read on the internet about it.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> I thought "CE" was more politically correct currently. Or is that only in
> Europe?
No, some people use that here too. I've never even heard of someone being
offended by "BCE" and "CE" here, which is kind of odd now that I think of
it. :-)
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
I ordered stamps from Zazzle that read "Place Stamp Here".
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
> Warp wrote:
>> I thought "CE" was more politically correct currently. Or is that
>> only in
>> Europe?
>
> No, some people use that here too. I've never even heard of someone
> being offended by "BCE" and "CE" here, which is kind of odd now that I
> think of it. :-)
>
The use BCE and CE are the result of denial.:)
David
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
>> Warp wrote:
>>> Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
>>>> clipka wrote:
>>>>> one or two whole centuries of AC history
>>>> What's AC history?
>>> The other side of BC?
>
>> That was my guess, but we call that "AD" in the USA.
>
> I thought "CE" was more politically correct currently. Or is that only in
> Europe?
>
No, that's used in scientific journals here in the US. General usage is
still, I believe, AD, but most people don't know what it means anyway.
...Chambers
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
