Charlie Sheen OWNS Barack Obama - MUST READ! - Page 2 - GoFuckYourself.com

american pervert · 09-08-2009, 06:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by baddog

You truthers crack me up.

stuff like this makes me think something is up

http://www.citizeninvestigationteam.com/nsa.html

cykoe6 · 09-08-2009, 08:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by onwebcam

nuts for putting his carrer on the line by pointing out the factual information which shines a light on those wanting to suppress the facts

His career should suffer. Why should regular people subsidize his efforts to undermine and destroy their way of life with his ridiculous and toxic agitprop?

spacedog · 09-08-2009, 08:58 PM

Speaking of 9/11... it's just a few days away.. it's been 8 years.

8 years prior to 9/11 , in Feb, 1993 the WTC was car bombed.

cam_girls · 09-08-2009, 11:20 PM

Show me one newspaper quote where a general or politician said there was a cover up.

pamon · 09-09-2009, 12:18 AM

interesting stuff no matter what side of the aisle you're on.

StickyGreen · 09-09-2009, 12:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cam_girls

Show me one newspaper quote where a general or politician said there was a cover up.

"The man who reads nothing at all is better educated than the man who reads nothing but newspapers."

- Thomas Jefferson

onwebcam · 09-09-2009, 01:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cam_girls

Show me one newspaper quote where a general or politician said there was a cover up.

How about hearing it from one's own mouth.

nico-t · 09-09-2009, 04:09 AM

its very smart marketing for the facts of 9/11.... silly people who don't understand that

Mr Pheer · 09-09-2009, 05:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spacedog

Speaking of 9/11... it's just a few days away.. it's been 8 years.

8 years prior to 9/11 , in Feb, 1993 the WTC was car bombed.

And 8 years before that, also in Feb, the 19th of Feb in 1985 to be exact....

Cherry Coke was introduced in cans and bottles by the Coca-Cola Bottling Company.

TheDoc · 09-09-2009, 05:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scootermuze

It may be fake, but some of the things mentioned could be easy to verify..

If cell phones weren't capable of calls to or from a plane in flight til 2004... and if the plane in question didn't have phones, then those who said they received calls from the plane are fibbin' a bit..

As for Cheney's actions... I wouldn't put anything past that paranoid lunizoid..

Huh? The plane wasn't at 30-40k feet... and I could use my cell phone during flight well before 2004... heck it was before 2000.

BossDVDs · 09-09-2009, 09:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheDoc

Huh? The plane wasn't at 30-40k feet... and I could use my cell phone during flight well before 2004... heck it was before 2000.

Yeah I wasn't too sure about this point either if the claim is within cell range

Martin · 09-09-2009, 09:58 AM

Lets see where this goes.

dyna mo · 09-09-2009, 10:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martin

Lets see where this goes.

BossDVDs · 09-09-2009, 11:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martin

Lets see where this goes.

hotlink

baddog · 09-09-2009, 11:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by onwebcam

How about hearing it from one's own mouth.

Because no wing marks.

So tell me, if it wasn't a plane what was it?

onwebcam · 09-09-2009, 12:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by baddog

Because no wing marks.

So tell me, if it wasn't a plane what was it?

Who knows. One can only assume it was a missile. If you watch the video in post #50 you will hear 3 Pentagon police officers who claim that they saw the plane coming in from a different direction. Similar but different. One of them and he's not the only one who said he saw the plane on the opposite side of the Pentagon. As in it went around or over it. There are even pictures of a plane banking off in the background floating around. (said to be a dooms day plane) The path which is the official story is virtually impossible for a plane of that size to maneuver. The cab driver in that same video was confused as to where his cab actually was. Insisting it was somewhere totally different than said to be by the official story and even by "official" pictures. After confronted with this he admits (when he thinks the camera is off) that it was all a lie. His wife happens to work for the FBI.

onwebcam · 09-09-2009, 12:28 PM

It should also be noted that the section which was hit at the Pentagon was just renovated and mostly empty. The people who had just moved in and/or moving in on that day where those assembled to investigate the 2 trillion in missing military funds. After the incident the investigation never happened.

Makaveli · 09-09-2009, 12:32 PM

I don't know about all this, but I'm keeping an eye on the breaking story on Nano Thermite found in the WTC dust.

dyna mo · 09-09-2009, 12:45 PM

the nano thermite angle has been proven to be false. long time ago.

dyna mo · 09-09-2009, 12:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by onwebcam

It should also be noted that the section which was hit at the Pentagon was just renovated and mostly empty. The people who had just moved in and/or moving in on that day where those assembled to investigate the 2 trillion in missing military funds. After the incident the investigation never happened.

you do know what was renovated right?

i'll tell you-

The renovation program included the following improvements to the building:

* Exterior walls reinforced with steel
* Exterior walls backed with Kevlar
* Blast-resistant windows installed

it was the only portion of the pentagon to have these renovations done at that time. if you believe that the government needs to attack itself to hide 2 trillion in missing funds, there is no point in even conversing with you, your premise makes zero sense.

onwebcam · 09-09-2009, 12:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dyna mo

you do know what was renovated right?

i'll tell you-

The renovation program included the following improvements to the building:

* Exterior walls reinforced with steel
* Exterior walls backed with Kevlar
* Blast-resistant windows installed

hmm sounds like it would take a missile to penetrate something like that and not a plane penetrating all the way through the other side.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dyna mo

it was the only portion of the pentagon to have these renovations done at that time. if you believe that the government needs to attack itself to hide 2 trillion in missing funds, there is no point in even conversing with you, your premise makes zero sense.

Two birds with one stone.

onwebcam · 09-09-2009, 01:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dyna mo

the nano thermite angle has been proven to be false. long time ago.

hmm, is that so. Then why have trace elements been found in pretty much every sample tested?

dyna mo · 09-09-2009, 01:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by onwebcam

hmm sounds like it would take a missile to penetrate something like that and not a plane penetrating all the way through the other side.

Two birds with one stone.

while it may "sound" like it to you, i am going to guess you are not qualified to make a conclusion re: whether or not a plane can do that. fact is, the physics involved in the event are quite sophisticated and 3rd parties (purdue university, for one) completed a highly detailed computer modeling of the event and the results disagree with your conclusion.

the ironic part of your 2 birds comment is that in other threads, you appear to conclude the government couldn't figure out how to get out of a paper bag yet with 9/11 they successfully pull-off the biggest conspiracy in history.

can't have it both ways.

seeandsee · 09-09-2009, 01:06 PM

9 11 is fakeeeeeeeee

dyna mo · 09-09-2009, 01:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by onwebcam

hmm, is that so. Then why have trace elements been found in pretty much every sample tested?

you seem as interested in the event as i am. so instead of me attempting to answer this, i would suggest you to spend a lot more time researching all angles of it. read the 9/11 commission report, read as much as you can, from all sides, it is all more than fascinating. learn about thermite, etc.

since the event happened, i've been more than open to the conspiracy perspective, while the *truthers* don't seem capable of having an open mind or intelligent debate of the facts.

onwebcam · 09-09-2009, 01:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dyna mo

while it may "sound" like it to you, i am going to guess you are not qualified to make a conclusion re: whether or not a plane can do that. fact is, the physics involved in the event are quite sophisticated and 3rd parties (purdue university, for one) completed a highly detailed computer modeling of the event and the results disagree with your conclusion.

And there are many more sophisticated parties who disagree with those theories. Most of those you are referring to are owned and/or funded by those who would benefit from keeping the official story, the official story.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dyna mo

the ironic part of your 2 birds comment is that in other threads, you appear to conclude the government couldn't figure out how to get out of a paper bag yet with 9/11 they successfully pull-off the biggest conspiracy in history.
can't have it both ways.

I conclude that the government is very good at spending money and that they have to come up with more and more new ways to con the general public into funding their addiction. I also conclude that it's much more plausible that elements of the US government as well as other governments are much more capable of pulling it off than some dude in the desert. Whom BTW was last seen publicly in an American hospital in the presence of a CIA handler.

dyna mo · 09-09-2009, 01:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by onwebcam

And there are many more sophisticated parties who disagree with those theories. Most of those you are referring to are owned and/or funded by those who would benefit from keeping the official story, the official story.

I conclude that the government is very good at spending money and that they have to come up with more and more new ways to con the general public into funding their addiction. I also conclude that it's much more plausible that elements of the US government as well as other governments are much more capable of pulling it off than some dude in the desert. Whom BTW was last seen publicly in an American hospital in the presence of a CIA handler.

well, it's nice that you can disagree and not make it personal.

dav3 · 09-09-2009, 02:32 PM

onwebcam · 09-09-2009, 03:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dyna mo

you seem as interested in the event as i am. so instead of me attempting to answer this, i would suggest you to spend a lot more time researching all angles of it. read the 9/11 commission report, read as much as you can, from all sides, it is all more than fascinating. learn about thermite, etc.

I have spent LOADS of time on the matter. For starters as stated by Charlie in his article a large portion of the 9-11 commission panel members have since came out and said it was all for show. The way they debunked the thermite theory was a sham.

in regard to the commission report

115 points of information not acknowledged by the 9-11 commission

http://www.serendipity.li/wot/571-page-lie.htm

Back on the subject of politicians and military

Just small list of Senior Military, Intelligence, and Government Officials who question the official story

Senator Max Cleland
Louis Freeh Director of FBI, 1993-2001
General Albert Stubblebine
Col. Robert Bowman
Raymond L. McGovern – Former Chairman, National Intelligence Estimates, CIA
Francesco Cossiga – President of Italy, 1985-1992
Col. George Nelson
Col. Ronald D. Ray
Rep. Curt Weldon
Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer
Lt. Col. Karen Kwiatkowski
Paul Craig Roberts, PhD – Assistant Secretary of the U.S. Treasury under Ronald Reagan
Catherine Austin Fitts – Assistant Secretary of Housing under George H.W. Bush
Major Scott Ritter
General Leonid Ivashov – Joint Chief of Staff of Russian Armies on 9/11/2001
Mohamed Hassanein Heikal – Former Foreign Minister of Egypt
William Christison – Former National Intelligence Officer and Director of the CIA
Melvin A. Goodman – Senior Analyst, Bureau of Intelligence and Research
Robert Baer – Former CIA Case Officer, Specialist in Middle East

http://www.wanttoknow.info/officials...mmissionreport

StickyGreen · 09-09-2009, 04:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by onwebcam

I have spent LOADS of time on the matter. For starters as stated by Charlie in his article a large portion of the 9-11 commission panel members have since came out and said it was all for show. The way they debunked the thermite theory was a sham.

in regard to the commission report

115 points of information not acknowledged by the 9-11 commission

http://www.serendipity.li/wot/571-page-lie.htm

Back on the subject of politicians and military

Just small list of Senior Military, Intelligence, and Government Officials who question the official story

Senator Max Cleland
Louis Freeh Director of FBI, 1993-2001
General Albert Stubblebine
Col. Robert Bowman
Raymond L. McGovern ? Former Chairman, National Intelligence Estimates, CIA
Francesco Cossiga ? President of Italy, 1985-1992
Col. George Nelson
Col. Ronald D. Ray
Rep. Curt Weldon
Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer
Lt. Col. Karen Kwiatkowski
Paul Craig Roberts, PhD ? Assistant Secretary of the U.S. Treasury under Ronald Reagan
Catherine Austin Fitts ? Assistant Secretary of Housing under George H.W. Bush
Major Scott Ritter
General Leonid Ivashov ? Joint Chief of Staff of Russian Armies on 9/11/2001
Mohamed Hassanein Heikal ? Former Foreign Minister of Egypt
William Christison ? Former National Intelligence Officer and Director of the CIA
Melvin A. Goodman ? Senior Analyst, Bureau of Intelligence and Research
Robert Baer ? Former CIA Case Officer, Specialist in Middle East

http://www.wanttoknow.info/officials...mmissionreport

Dude, I don't think you can ever convince the people on this forum that there is something wrong in the world. None of them think any human beings conspire together secretly to achieve their goals... the concept of conspiring is absolutely ridiculous to them. They don't seem to be able to look at the world from the perspective of someone who is powerful enough and wealthy enough to move and shake events in the world, they only see things from a regular peasant's point of view. Earth to them is a perfect happy utopian planet where the absolute truth about every issue and every person is right out there in the open for them. They believe people with power and authority would never deceive them. They think people with authority are looking out for their wellbeing. There is no way to convince these people that the truth about certain things is purposefully kept from them, there's just no way, I'm sure of it. Let it go, this forum is for talking about porn and stupid shit anyways.

dyna mo · 09-09-2009, 05:41 PM

typical, truther has to make it personal.

so much for having a respectful discussion, regardless of the forum.

SunTzu · 09-09-2009, 06:13 PM

Charlie sure takes himself too seriously, as does the OP.

Scootermuze · 09-09-2009, 07:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by baddog

Because no wing marks.

So tell me, if it wasn't a plane what was it?

If it was a plane, where were the two holes that the 6 ton, partially titanium engines traveling at several hundred mph should have made? .. or any trace of those engines?

The report of them being pulled through the single hole as the wings folded back is a bit extreme don't ya think?

Especially when considering that the engines on a 757 are designed to break away on impact.

BFT3K · 09-09-2009, 07:54 PM

In hindsight the metric system wouldn't have been so bad.

dyna mo · 09-09-2009, 08:05 PM

This photograph of an engine part at the Pentagon crash scene were released as exhibits in the 2006 trial U.S. v. Moussaoui. 1

Several photographs of aircraft parts photographed inside the Pentagon

Scootermuze · 09-09-2009, 08:22 PM

those photos lend even more to the 757 argument..

Just one landing gear piece was ever shown.. parts from just one engine was reported being found.. on the inside..

No evidence of any engine parts on the outside..
Again.. 2, 6 ton engines, traveling at 300+ mph are able to change directions twice (within a few feet) after impact to work their way through a single hole..

At best this says that the breakaway feature failed on both engines.. and the titanium parts burned up at a temperature that has to work hard to melt steel.

and the basic laws in inertia are a myth.

dyna mo · 09-09-2009, 08:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scootermuze

If it was a plane, where were any trace of those engines?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scootermuze

.. parts from just one engine was reported being found..

typical. you cannot have it both ways.

and this is generally how truthers argue the issue. 1st they (you) say one thing, then when proof is shown, it's a quick backtrack or sidetrack.

HerPimp · 09-10-2009, 02:10 AM

Charley has put his balls on the table with that article.

Scootermuze · 09-10-2009, 04:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dyna mo

typical. you cannot have it both ways.

and this is generally how truthers argue the issue. 1st they (you) say one thing, then when proof is shown, it's a quick backtrack or sidetrack.

Nope.. not backtracking..

I'm saying it was no 757 that hit.. Had it been, the engines would have broken loose on impact and would have slammed through the bldg.; creating 2 more holes, or the single hole that was made would have been much larger.. or they would have hit the bldg. and left all sorts of pieces & parts at their impact points. Neither was the case..

As for the proof shown.. I said that it lends more to support the argument against it being a 757.

Think about the size of the hole.. then the size of the plane.. Flying fast enough to allow a 150+ ft. fuselage to disappear completely into the bldg.... through a number of re-enforced walls, but apparently not fast enough for 2, 6 ton engines to leave as much as a mark on the wall..

onwebcam · 09-10-2009, 03:41 PM

A fitting message for my 999 post

BossDVDs · 09-10-2009, 04:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by onwebcam

A fitting message for my 999 post

Bump ... although it's like Kennedy, we all know it was a setup ... now what? Bring people to justice, good luck

uno · 09-10-2009, 04:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by onwebcam

The interview isn't real but the information in the interview is real. The MSM participates in spreading lies and this is nothing but a taste of their own medicine only with the truth. Because it will cause such a controversy Obama will have to read it. He will be put on notice that he is participating in the biggest cover up of all time. Charlie Sheen is putting his career on the line. You should at least respect him in that fact and look into what he has to say.

No he won't and no Charlie Sheen isn't.

cykoe6 · 09-10-2009, 05:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by onwebcam

A fitting message for my 999 post

Agreed. Posting half-witted insane rantings from Prison Planet is quite representative of your contributions here. Nice work.

baddog · 09-10-2009, 05:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by onwebcam

Who knows. One can only assume it was a missile.

Missiles explode don't they? Or are you suggesting this one did not?

theking · 09-10-2009, 06:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cykoe6

Agreed. Posting half-witted insane rantings from Prison Planet is quite representative of your contributions here. Nice work.

I concur.

onwebcam · 09-10-2009, 06:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by baddog

Missiles explode don't they? Or are you suggesting this one did not?

Quite the contrary. I'm suggesting that one did and it penetrated all the way through the other side. Seem much more probable to me over the official story of a plane doing this all the way through the other side of an section of this building which was designed to withstand some serious damage. (even admitted in this thread it was just finished)

It's just like the myth of those building designed to withstand a direct large passenger plane impact falling to the ground in pretty much exactly the same manner. And then you add to that an additional building that wasn't even hit falling the exact same way.

onwebcam · 09-10-2009, 06:31 PM

What exactly came through the other side of the building? Did it penetrate through and just disintegrate? Also pay close attention to the Sheen video posted where the comparison camera shots of the impact and the cab/cop car whatever it is. The excuse is that the camera only had so many frames. But as you can see from the cab shot it has a refresh rate much faster than they would like to make everyone believe.

dyna mo · 09-10-2009, 06:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by baddog

Missiles explode don't they? Or are you suggesting this one did not?

1. exactly.

Quote:

Originally Posted by onwebcam

this picture proves A LOT

2. a missile that, at most, has a 2-3 ft diameter blows a hole in a wall exactly the same size as a 757 fuselage? wrong. forensics proves a hole created is approx the same as the diameter as the projectile that creates the hole.

3. obviously, by the picture, the plane hit at a height where the engines (hanging under the wings) were torn off prior to impact.

4. bodies of plane passengers were forensically identified inside the building.

TurboAngel · 09-10-2009, 06:56 PM

You all are funny.

TurboAngel · 09-10-2009, 06:56 PM

New page?

09-09-2009, 12:18 AM	#55
pamon Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 3,111	interesting stuff no matter what side of the aisle you're on. __________________ Email: [email protected] Skype: davidamodt. / TG: Davidamodt US Adult Content & Porn Writer Project/Sites/Tubes/Reviews & More

09-09-2009, 09:58 AM	#62
Martin "Assassins" Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: At home Posts: 17,277	Lets see where this goes. __________________

09-09-2009, 01:06 PM	#74
seeandsee Check SIG! Industry Role: Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Europe (Skype: gojkoas) Posts: 50,945	9 11 is fakeeeeeeeee __________________ BUY MY SIG - 50$/Year Contact here

09-09-2009, 02:32 PM	#78
dav3 Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 7,348	__________________ Webmasters :: Juicy Ads :: ACWM :: Crak Revenue :: Money Tree

09-09-2009, 06:13 PM	#82
SunTzu Confirmed User Join Date: May 2002 Location: the box Posts: 456	Charlie sure takes himself too seriously, as does the OP. __________________ Gtalk and email :: sd at tabu.com

09-08-2009, 08:58 PM	#53
spacedog Yes that IS me. Bitch. Industry Role: Join Date: Nov 2001 Posts: 14,149	Speaking of 9/11... it's just a few days away.. it's been 8 years. 8 years prior to 9/11 , in Feb, 1993 the WTC was car bombed.

09-08-2009, 11:20 PM	#54
cam_girls So Fucking Banned Industry Role: Join Date: Apr 2009 Posts: 2,968	Show me one newspaper quote where a general or politician said there was a cover up.

09-09-2009, 04:09 AM	#58
nico-t emperor of my world Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: nethalands Posts: 29,903	its very smart marketing for the facts of 9/11.... silly people who don't understand that

09-09-2009, 12:28 PM	#67
onwebcam Fake Nick 1.0 Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Rent free, your head Posts: 27,679	It should also be noted that the section which was hit at the Pentagon was just renovated and mostly empty. The people who had just moved in and/or moving in on that day where those assembled to investigate the 2 trillion in missing military funds. After the incident the investigation never happened.

09-09-2009, 12:32 PM	#68
Makaveli Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Feb 2001 Posts: 1,027	I don't know about all this, but I'm keeping an eye on the breaking story on Nano Thermite found in the WTC dust.

09-09-2009, 12:45 PM	#69
dyna mo The People's Post Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: invisible 7-11 Posts: 65,922	the nano thermite angle has been proven to be false. long time ago.

09-09-2009, 05:41 PM	#81
dyna mo The People's Post Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: invisible 7-11 Posts: 65,922	typical, truther has to make it personal. so much for having a respectful discussion, regardless of the forum.

09-09-2009, 07:54 PM	#84
BFT3K Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Narnia Posts: 10,764	In hindsight the metric system wouldn't have been so bad.

09-09-2009, 08:05 PM	#85
dyna mo The People's Post Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: invisible 7-11 Posts: 65,922	This photograph of an engine part at the Pentagon crash scene were released as exhibits in the 2006 trial U.S. v. Moussaoui. 1 Several photographs of aircraft parts photographed inside the Pentagon

09-09-2009, 08:22 PM	#86
Scootermuze Confirmed User Join Date: Dec 2001 Posts: 4,513	those photos lend even more to the 757 argument.. Just one landing gear piece was ever shown.. parts from just one engine was reported being found.. on the inside.. No evidence of any engine parts on the outside.. Again.. 2, 6 ton engines, traveling at 300+ mph are able to change directions twice (within a few feet) after impact to work their way through a single hole.. At best this says that the breakaway feature failed on both engines.. and the titanium parts burned up at a temperature that has to work hard to melt steel. and the basic laws in inertia are a myth.

09-10-2009, 02:10 AM	#88
HerPimp Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Earth Posts: 1,197	Charley has put his balls on the table with that article. __________________

09-10-2009, 03:41 PM	#90
onwebcam Fake Nick 1.0 Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Rent free, your head Posts: 27,679	A fitting message for my 999 post Last edited by onwebcam; 09-10-2009 at 03:43 PM..

09-10-2009, 06:31 PM	#97
onwebcam Fake Nick 1.0 Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Rent free, your head Posts: 27,679	What exactly came through the other side of the building? Did it penetrate through and just disintegrate? Also pay close attention to the Sheen video posted where the comparison camera shots of the impact and the cab/cop car whatever it is. The excuse is that the camera only had so many frames. But as you can see from the cab shot it has a refresh rate much faster than they would like to make everyone believe. Last edited by onwebcam; 09-10-2009 at 06:34 PM..

09-10-2009, 06:56 PM	#99
TurboAngel H.B.I.C. Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: NC Posts: 30,122	You all are funny.

09-10-2009, 06:56 PM	#100
TurboAngel H.B.I.C. Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: NC Posts: 30,122	New page?