 |
|
 PoliticsForum for discussing local and world politics and issues. All views are welcomed. Let your opinions be heard on current news and politics. All standard guidelines apply to this board, No Flaming, No Taunting, No Foul Language,No sexual innuendos,etc.. As politics can be a volatile subject, please consider how you would feel if your comment were directed toward yourself. Any post deemed to be in violation of guidelines will be deleted or edited without warning or notification. Any continued misbehavior will result in a ban or hidden status, so please play nice!!! *"Moderators are here for a reason. If a moderator (or Global Moderator or Fencer) requests that a discussion on a certain subject to cease - for whatever reason - please respect these wishes. Failure to do so may result in being hidden, or banned." 您未权限在该板张贴消息。只有最低脑兵级别的会员才允许张贴在该板。 状态: 所有人能发表
23. 二月 2009, 07:59:17 题目: Re: The Smoking Gun Bernice: Proof is in the eye of the beholder. The question is, how much evidence, and of what kind, will convince a person of the truth of a particular assertion? It differs. The other question is, upon whom does the burden of proof lie? That also is debatable. To me, for example, the collapse of WTC 7, which displays all the characteristics of a planned implosion (very strong evidence), puts the burden of proof on defenders of the official version of events, to demonstrate how a different theory better accounts for what we observe on video. It is also revealing, to me, that the 9/11 Commission did not so much as mention WTC 7's collapse in its Report. 23. 二月 2009, 08:13:42 题目: Re: The Smoking Gun  The Usurper:WTC7 isn't the whole story of 911. So even if someone was convinced that it was explosives that took that building down, that part of the story alone doesn't go anywhere to explain the rest. 23. 二月 2009, 08:24:51 题目: Re: The Smoking Gun Artful Dodger: I agree with you. That event alone poses unanswered questions, but does not make a case. A proper case is based on cumulative evidence, of many kinds, which must take into account other events of 9/11, events leading up to it, and events following it. It also must explain motive, means & opportunity for the crime alleged. It is this cumulative evidence, so vast if one really looks into it, that convinces me and many others that the official story can't be true, and that the alternative theory must be. 23. 二月 2009, 08:27:11 题目: Re: The Smoking Gun The Usurper: Well, you'll have to wait for my response cuz I'm off to bed. If you make a conspiracy nut of me, I'll sue.  23. 二月 2009, 08:29:20 题目: Re: The Smoking Gun Artful Dodger: lol. You won't get much, I'm broke! Have a good sleep. |
日期和时间
在线的朋友
最喜欢的讨论板
朋友群
每日提示
|
|
Copyright © 2002 - 2024 Filip Rachunek, 版权所有 回顶端 |