|
|
 |
striker |
+ |
Thursday, December 7, 2006 at 11:13 AM Give your wives a pearl necklace today to mark the occasion. It's settled history that F.D.R., who was a front man for behind the scenes globalists, not only allowed the attack by ordering the main radar installation to be "down for maintenance" (when it's scheduled maintenance had been done weeks earlier), but he encouraged it with his blockade of Japan. The globalists wanted the U.S.A. in the war SOOOO bad they would do anything to make it happen. There is literally (LITERALLY) so much evidence of F.D.R.'s foreknowledge of the attack, and his encouraging of it, that disputing it is left to the professional denial queen government loyalists. In typical fashion, a few military leaders at pearl harbor took all the heat while the upper leadership in D.C. got off scot free. My yahoo message board signature: 1. Buy your "scary" looking guns NOW before the dems take over from the incompetent/corrupt/fascist republicans. 2. ► BUILDING 7 IS THE SMOKING GUN testifying of a modern day Pearl Harbor. VIDEO OF THE MAGIC "COLLAPSE" (so OBVIOUSLY from explosives, jeez it falls at the rate of freefall, and perfectly into it's own footprint): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LD06SAf0p9A HOW EVERYONE INITIALLY CONCLUDED IT FELL FROM CONTROLLED DEMOLITION:
http://prisonplanet.tv/articles/september2006/110906controlleddemolition.htm How do 3 tiny fires cause a 47 story building to magically "collapse?" Building 7 is proof that explosives were used, and PROOF of government foreknowledge/participation in 9/11 for political purposes. You CAN'T wire a building in an afternoon, it takes days OR MORE. Not that we NEEDED more proof, but for some strange reason, Larry Silverstein (the WTC leaseholder) admitted (probably without thinking) on a PBS documentary that they decided to "pull" building 7, but he doesn't say WHY they decided to "pull" it. The proof is in the pictures:
http://img105.imageshack.us/img105/1268/blg7threepicsetmj7.jpg http://img146.imageshack.us/img146/7028/wtc7kinkbx1.jpg
http://img146.imageshack.us/img146/9581/pp190104building7cn9.jpg
http://img146.imageshack.us/img146/8314/windsorfirecombozk9.gif
HTTP://WWW.MACpistol.com
http://infowars-shop.stores.yahoo.net/nemalaw9riof.html http://worldaffairsbrief.com/keytopics/threats.html
—striker |
|
|
|
|
Dark Laith |
+ |
Thursday, December 7, 2006 at 12:23 PM Today is also my father's birthday. DOOOOOOM —Dark Laith |
|
|
|
|
striker |
+ |
Thursday, December 7, 2006 at 1:47 PM Do you take him out for a nice japanese dinner? —striker |
|
|
|
|
Dark Laith |
+ |
Thursday, December 7, 2006 at 1:54 PM Nah, sand-niggers consider celebrating birthdays to be blasphemous. And, when they get older, also insulting. —Dark Laith |
|
|
|
|
striker |
+ |
Thursday, December 7, 2006 at 2:47 PM You and your dad are sand-frican-americans?
—striker |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
striker |
+ |
Thursday, December 7, 2006 at 4:00 PM This is a MUST read today [click on pic]: 
—striker |
|
|
|
|
mandeemoo22 |
+ |
Thursday, December 7, 2006 at 4:16 PM It's settled history that F.D.R., who was a front man for behind the scenes globalists, not only allowed the attack by ordering the main radar installation to be "down for maintenance" (when it's scheduled maintenance had been done weeks earlier), but he encouraged it with his blockade of Japan. The globalists wanted the U.S.A. in the war SOOOO bad they would do anything to make it happen. There is literally (LITERALLY) so much evidence of F.D.R.'s foreknowledge of the attack, and his encouraging of it, that disputing it is left to the professional denial queen government loyalists. In typical fashion, a few military leaders at pearl harbor took all the heat while the upper leadership in D.C. got off scot free. Mark the calendar ladies and gentleladies and those with guns. —mandeemoo22 |
|
|
|
|
striker |
+ |
Thursday, December 7, 2006 at 4:20 PM I'll bet you've never heard of the above individual in the above pic. I have a question that's down to your level, how's the scrapbooking going? —striker |
|
|
|
|
mandeemoo22 |
+ |
Thursday, December 7, 2006 at 4:39 PM I do know who that is, but thanks for your concern, sweetheart. I'd answer your question about scrapbooking, but I'm afraid your intelligence isn't quite up to speed for that. —mandeemoo22 |
|
|
|
|
striker |
+ |
Thursday, December 7, 2006 at 4:46 PM <<"I do know who that is, but thanks for your concern, sweetheart" Yea after a man provided the information. Well I don't want to interrupt you painting your nails either. —striker |
|
|
|
|
greymatters |
+ |
Sunday, December 10, 2006 at 2:33 AM Nah, sand-niggers consider celebrating birthdays to be blasphemous. And, when they get older, also insulting. Laith, it's another year closer to your father's death. It's your day to celebrate, on behalf of his impending death. —greymatters |
|
|
|
|
catloaf |
+ |
Sunday, December 10, 2006 at 5:29 AM This is why I love grey so. Accentuate the positive, eliminate the negative. —catloaf |
|
|
|
|
bguirk |
+ |
Sunday, December 10, 2006 at 12:00 PM Striker--resident forum troll, racist, purveryor of misogyny, gun-nut, and now a conspiracy theorist too! What's not to love ladies? —bguirk |
|
|
|
|
striker |
+ |
Monday, December 11, 2006 at 12:10 AM I hate to break your fantasy that government doesn't engage in conspiracy, but even the U.S. senate issued a proclamation several decades ago admitting that F.D.R. withheld information from the military in Hawaii and admitting that the two generals were merely scapegoats. How come in tardville (most of the U.S.), anything that questions government is automatically a "theory" but anything that is an accusation towards an individual is ASSUMED to be true until he's PROVEN innocent? —striker |
|
|
|
|
bguirk |
+ |
Monday, December 11, 2006 at 1:24 AM I hate to break your fantasy that government doesn't engage in conspiracy, A leader pushing a nation into war on less than 100% true pretenses? Shocking. I've never heard of such a thing. I have no doubt the government engages in such practices, but like all half-baked conspiracy buffs you are taking a complicated piece of unsettled and still debated history and presenting it with the blanket simplistic slogan that "FDR knew the attack was coming" in some sort of lame bid to provoke and get attention in an online forum dedicated to a radio show that had its heyday in an era 50 years after said history. Quite pathetic. —bguirk |
|
|
|
|
striker |
+ |
Monday, December 11, 2006 at 1:44 AM Yet you respond and argue. Pathetic indeed (as well as hypocritical). What I mentioned is as settled as it gets. You need to learn some history (30 seconds of nightly news doesn't count). —striker |
|