I heard that too...Rockula wrote:All conspiracy theories are dreamt up by the same group of 6 men who work out of a back office near Whitehall.
I swear it's true.....
Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk
Moderator: StanInBlack
I heard that too...Rockula wrote:All conspiracy theories are dreamt up by the same group of 6 men who work out of a back office near Whitehall.
I swear it's true.....
How are The Sensitive Six on this fine Forum ?gjinblack wrote:I heard that too...Rockula wrote:All conspiracy theories are dreamt up by the same group of 6 men who work out of a back office near Whitehall.
I swear it's true.....
Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk
Listen up guys, all joking aside... can any of you recommend the right kinda tin foil for my hat? Please only contact me by 'encrypted-zapray' PM's, we gotta keep this info 'dark'PaulinLondon wrote:How are The Sensitive Six on this fine Forum ?gjinblack wrote:I heard that too...Rockula wrote:All conspiracy theories are dreamt up by the same group of 6 men who work out of a back office near Whitehall.
I swear it's true.....
Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk
Yes, I recall a NASA bloke being interviewed a few years ago on the subject of the moon landings being genuine. His response noted that when you weigh up the complexity of making sure that all those tens of thousands of people who'd have to have been "in" on the cover-up never slip up, or decide to come clean, for the rest of their lives, it's actually far less complex and much cheaper to just build the spacecraft and go to the moon.theraven1979 wrote:Same people who think the moon landings were faked - It would've probably cost more than putting a man on the moon and the repurcussions from the twin towers.
Jim
Worth a watch, especially regarding the collapse of Building 7: http://www.incontrovertible911evidence.co.uk/droopsnoot wrote:Yes, I recall a NASA bloke being interviewed a few years ago on the subject of the moon landings being genuine. His response noted that when you weigh up the complexity of making sure that all those tens of thousands of people who'd have to have been "in" on the cover-up never slip up, or decide to come clean, for the rest of their lives, it's actually far less complex and much cheaper to just build the spacecraft and go to the moon.theraven1979 wrote:Same people who think the moon landings were faked - It would've probably cost more than putting a man on the moon and the repurcussions from the twin towers.
Jim
I actually spent an hour in a pub not long ago, listening to the person behind the bar (university graduate and trainee professional) and a local chap discussing how 9/11 must have been a cover-up on the basis that "buildings don't collapse like that". This chap was, he revealed, an architect, so had knowledge of building techniques. I did wonder, but was wise enough not to get involved, whether he had sufficient specialist knowledge of building skyscrapers with 100+ storeys, or whether he spent most of his time getting planning permission for loft conversions and single-floor extensions. In fact I thought that one of the key factors in designing a tall building to be placed in close proximity to many other tall buildings, such as in the crowded centre of a city, would be for it to collapse in a very controller manner rather than just falling over and taking out the entire neighbourhood.
But not if you wear a suitable tin foil hat and utilise 'ZapRay' (tm) encrypted communications..Ravenette wrote:You are all being monitored....
But the Government coats bacofoil with drugs that make you impotent.Ravenette wrote:Bacofoil being the thickest and best?
That's a really stupid and offensive film.Summer Dreamer wrote:Worth a watch, especially regarding the collapse of Building 7: http://www.incontrovertible911evidence.co.uk/droopsnoot wrote:Yes, I recall a NASA bloke being interviewed a few years ago on the subject of the moon landings being genuine. His response noted that when you weigh up the complexity of making sure that all those tens of thousands of people who'd have to have been "in" on the cover-up never slip up, or decide to come clean, for the rest of their lives, it's actually far less complex and much cheaper to just build the spacecraft and go to the moon.theraven1979 wrote:Same people who think the moon landings were faked - It would've probably cost more than putting a man on the moon and the repurcussions from the twin towers.
Jim
I actually spent an hour in a pub not long ago, listening to the person behind the bar (university graduate and trainee professional) and a local chap discussing how 9/11 must have been a cover-up on the basis that "buildings don't collapse like that". This chap was, he revealed, an architect, so had knowledge of building techniques. I did wonder, but was wise enough not to get involved, whether he had sufficient specialist knowledge of building skyscrapers with 100+ storeys, or whether he spent most of his time getting planning permission for loft conversions and single-floor extensions. In fact I thought that one of the key factors in designing a tall building to be placed in close proximity to many other tall buildings, such as in the crowded centre of a city, would be for it to collapse in a very controller manner rather than just falling over and taking out the entire neighbourhood.
That's correct... BUT, if you place a Femidom (unused, please!) on top of your tin foil hat before use, it's fully protected from those nasty government poisons and "Zap Rays" and will be good to goRockula wrote:But the Government coats bacofoil with drugs that make you impotent.Ravenette wrote:Bacofoil being the thickest and best?
Thanks for your input.cassini wrote: That's a really stupid and offensive film.