Yanks

What has happened to the Americans in this debate? Chewing on Tobacco whilst scratching there fats arses no doubt..

We just prefer to let everyone think we are idiots instead of opening our mouths and confirming it.

good awnser

Just remember fishy, History is written by the victor. As for most historical cases, the US was the winner

gotta admit this thread has opened my mind

bobc36 wrote:

Just remember fishy, History is written by the victor. As for most historical cases, the US was the winner

That must be why we have more history then you

So thats why Man. United has more history than City?

OOOOOOH

bobc36 wrote:

So thats why Man. United has more history than City?

Depends what you mean by history.. Trophies don't mean history.. We was shit and i never thought i'd see us win anything so that feeling of winning something rare and unexpected is more special.. Something dirty munich glory hunting cunts will never understand.. Oh and i was there

Our histories more eventful i.e. we're the only team to of won the league one year and get relegated the next! we're the only team to of got relegated 2 times in a row then immediately after get promoted twice in a row! We're the only team to of scored and concede over 100 goals in a season, we're the only team to score 100 goals and get relegated! Also only club ever to be relegated with a positive goal difference.. We also hold the highest ever English home attendance record and United highest even attendance was at our ground! To name a fraction..

NxtLvl-DS- wrote:

bobc36 wrote:

So thats why Man. United has more history than City?

Depends what you mean by history.. Trophies don't mean history.. We was shit and i never thought i'd see us win anything so that feeling of winning something rare and unexpected is more special.. Something dirty munich glory hunting cunts will never understand.. Oh and i was there

Our histories more eventful i.e. we're the only team to of won the league one year and get relegated the next! we're the only team to of got relegated 2 times in a row then immediately after get promoted twice in a row! We're the only team to of scored and concede over 100 goals in a season, we're the only team to score 100 goals and get relegated! Also only club ever to be relegated with a positive goal difference.. We also hold the highest ever English home attendance record and United highest even attendance was at our ground! To name a fraction..

Seems like my argument is already written. All you have to do is substitute the football facts for America facts and its done.

This brings me back to my original argument where you said "thats why we have more history than you" I then pointed out your favorite team vs. their arch-rival to use your "victories" argument. Now it has you backpedaling to come up with excuses as to why history isnt determined by "victories"

I'm just messing with you now Lee. We dont need any horse porn so that you can validate your argument.

someone said horse porn?!

bobc36 wrote:

NxtLvl-DS- wrote:

bobc36 wrote:

So thats why Man. United has more history than City?

Depends what you mean by history.. Trophies don't mean history.. We was shit and i never thought i'd see us win anything so that feeling of winning something rare and unexpected is more special.. Something dirty munich glory hunting cunts will never understand.. Oh and i was there

Our histories more eventful i.e. we're the only team to of won the league one year and get relegated the next! we're the only team to of got relegated 2 times in a row then immediately after get promoted twice in a row! We're the only team to of scored and concede over 100 goals in a season, we're the only team to score 100 goals and get relegated! Also only club ever to be relegated with a positive goal difference.. We also hold the highest ever English home attendance record and United highest even attendance was at our ground! To name a fraction..

Seems like my argument is already written. All you have to do is substitute the football facts for America facts and its done.

This brings me back to my original argument where you said "thats why we have more history than you" I then pointed out your favorite team vs. their arch-rival to use your "victories" argument. Now it has you backpedaling to come up with excuses as to why history isnt determined by "victories"

I'm just messing with you now Lee. We dont need any horse porn so that you can validate your argument.

Your country is only a baby its not been around near as long as ours.. Think theres still houses here that are older then USA!

and our castle's and shit

NxtLvl-DS- wrote:

That must be why we have more history then you

NxtLvl-DS- wrote:

Your country is only a baby its not been around near as long as ours.. Think theres still houses here that are older then USA!

^^^ points out the obvious

DeadFishy~DS~ wrote:

and our castle's and shit

I like the castles, but you can keep your shit. We have plenty of our own to deal with

I think they're monitoring this thread

Yes, we landed on the moon. BUT..they saw alot more there than NASA wanted to show us Earthlings. So, that's where the fucked up and anomalous photos come into play. Stuff is edited out (poorly) and lighting inconsistencies where they had to cover up the structures up there.

There are structures on Mars as well. We might even be from there, you fucking martians.

Oh ffs here we go again.

My access to this site is not blocked at work anymore for some reason. Now that is a conspiracy!

Is it any coincidence that when this thread came about Mr Armstrong has died? This is entirely accessible to the powers that be..

But yeah back to E-11 as i have to refer to it as they may well be watching, there are many inconsistencies. Observing the footage you find several pieces of evidence backing an inside job. The way in which the towers collapse being a very strange for a start, where the impact from the plane is made the structural weakness would be on one side of the building. If the towers where to collapse (which theoretically they shouldn't of collapsed off such a small impact) the towers would not of fell the way they did. Its very strange the way in which they fell, almost like a controller explosion was carried out in demolition fashion. Also the "3rd tower - WTC7" apparently collapsed due to fire even tho that has never happened before fell in the exact same fashion despite minor damage from the falling towers, for this to happen the four main building supports would need to be destroyed simultaneously..

Don't you find it very convenient that the towers where being innocently filmed during the first plane crash? Good timing aye? And there was no live footage, well there wouldn't be would there because in was a surprise attack (despite the hijacked plane being tracked). So if there's no live coverage why did Mr Bush say he saw the first plane hit the tower? Maybe a mistake, though 3 months later he slipped up again he said saw the first plane hit the towers again "i saw the first plane hit on tv and i thought, what a terrible pilot".. But there was NO television coverage of the first plane hitting the tower.

Also the fact Mr Bushes felt the need to comment on 9-11 conspiracies to dismiss them only makes me more suspicious.

Then there's the Pentagon with no Boeing 757 remains found.. Also the hole made in the pentagon was too small for that of an impact of a Boeing 757 and there was no internal fire damage unlike the trade towers..

I could go on a lot further you only have to watch the tons of videos on youtube for evidence..

Not to disrespect those who was lost but there's questions that need answering..

And we know why America would stage such an event don't we? Or would you like me to explain the value of Afghanistan?

I can bend spoons with my mind

there is no spoon