Originally Posted by Accyexplorer (Post 1129975)

My main motivation for reading "conspiracy theories" (apart from I like a laugh) is rather selfish (learning purposes).

So you hope to learn by watching heavily and badly edited videos put out by jihadist websites? The sooner you move onto the Beano the better.

I also (as you may of gathered) like to throw my findings into the mix (even if doing so makes me the "idiot").

Yes, I'm afraid it does.

If someone claims an alternative explanation to a official theory, I like to try and see if there's any substance or rationale to it,

Doesn't take long to show it's rubbish.


Now, there is much more at stake here than the video or the attacks and that is the powers that be are going to use it to expand wars, write away more rights and as usual increase surveillance.

17 folk get killed in France, (supposedly)??? over a question of free speech, and the first thing that governments want to do is use that event to take away free speech on the Internet :eek:

With mass murder across Paris and narrowly avoided in Belgium not unnaturally they want to stop mass murderers plotting mass murders on the internet.

The very same governments that expressed no outrage whatsoever as the U.S. military killed hundreds of thousands of civilians in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and elsewhere.

Incorrect by a few 0's- look up the figures for civilian deaths caused by US military action in those countries.

Do you not find it funny that "terrorism" is called "Foreign Policy" when we "the west" do it and "terrorism" for anyone else...actually don't answer that :rolleyes:

Originally Posted by Accyexplorer (Post 1129975)

My main motivation for reading "conspiracy theories"

Originally Posted by Less (Post 1129997)

Be Honest, for once in your life, you read crap then you post crap, only because you think your crap is worth something.

Well you are right, your crap is worth something to you, unfortunately, it's worth nothing to the site or the folk that keep it alive.

So... either improve your post's OR leave the rest of us alone.

Originally Posted by Gordon Booth (Post 1129999)

I don't think that will work, Less.

Too subtle for him.

Originally Posted by Less (Post 1130000)

You have left yourself open to red karma from his alter ego Mr. T

Originally Posted by Less (Post 1130000)

You have left yourself open to red karma from his alter ego Mr. T

Originally Posted by Restless (Post 1130015)

The other one I had was a MR D

Originally Posted by accyman (Post 1130060)

is this accywebbs version of cluedo

i like a good Mr.E


yup i think it was Mr .E in the hall with the candlestick :D

Originally Posted by Gordon Booth (Post 1129985)

Originally Posted by Neil (Post 1130072)

No quote sorry but 20,000 dead civilians are mentioned here in Afghanistan alone

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilia...2%80%93present)

This is a better link showing civilian casualties in recent ish wars including those currently being killed by drone strikes in Pakistan and other places

Civilian casualty ratio - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Originally Posted by Neil (Post 1130072)

No quote sorry but 20,000 dead civilians are mentioned here in Afghanistan alone

Originally Posted by Gordon Booth (Post 1130099)

Neil, I was disputing AccE's statement that 'US forces killed hundred of thousands of civilians'.
But then, you can dispute most of the things he posts!



A bit to read in your attachments but if you look at the figures I think the 20,000 is a total of all civilian deaths including Taliban action.

For instance- Total civilians killed / By Nato and Gov / By insurgent action

2008 / 2118 /823 /1160
2009 /2412 / 596 /1630
2010 /2777 /440 /2080
2011(1st 6 mth) /1462 /207 /1167

Still horrific figures but most of them Afghans killing Afghans. At least the Coalitions forces try not to kill civilians,more than can be said for the Taliban with their suicide bombers, IED's, executions etc.

Sorry, laid it out as a table but it didn't work.

Originally Posted by Accyexplorer (Post 1130101)

Perhaps when you get your lingual out of Less's sphincter you'll be able to comprehend what I was saying in comment :rolleyes:

Originally Posted by Accyexplorer (Post 1130101)

Perhaps when you get your lingual out of Less's sphincter you'll be able to comprehend what I was saying in comment :rolleyes:

Originally Posted by Accyexplorer (Post 1130100)

The retaliation has started:-