Posted on 03/30/2024 8:50:42 AM PDT by reasonisfaith
Lara Logan joined Steve Bannon on The War Room to discuss the collapse of the Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore. Steve Bannon, who served in the US Navy, was also skeptical of the official narrative that was established by daylight yesterday that “it was an accident.”
Steve Bannon asked Lara about her investigation.
(Excerpt) Read more at thegatewaypundit.com ...
Yes, that’s true.
But in their minds, that number symbolizes war.
When the stakes are in the millions of dollars, and in the billions, not only do they train everyone but they have multiple fail safe mechanisms. When the fail safes fail, it was deliberate.
But when you push back against independent thinking and tell everyone to wear blinders, it makes you look like you’re playing on the side of the terrorists.
reasonisfaith wrote: “How many people are still left who believe the nonsense you’re suggesting, and how quickly are they waking up to the lies?”
The only ones who believe terrorists emplaced explosives on the bridge are those who believe the towers were brought down by pre-placed explosives.
Herd mentality has nothing to do with it.
The person in question concluded the black smoke was potentially related to a bridge explosion *when the same video shows that the smoke originated from the ship’s smoke stack*.
Either that indicates a severe deficiency in pattern recognition or short-term memory (in which case his analysis is suspect), or he’s intentionally being a fear-mongering grifter (in which case he should he ignored out of principal).
The devil quotes Scripture too, you know.
Merely asserting that one opposes liars does not therefore mean they therefore do not lie, any more than publicly professing a love for truth means that one always tells the truth.
After all, how many jokes from the Cold War are there about how the official newspaper for the Communist Party of the USSR was literally named *Pravda*?
No, of course the bridge was not destroyed by an act of terrorism.
We know this for a fact because Fed gov said so, about an hour afterwards.
In a couple of years, Fed gov will have finished it’s investigation and they’ll tell us, via the msm, what happened, and we will believe them, won’t we?
OKSooner wrote: “No, of course the bridge was not destroyed by an act of terrorism. We know this for a fact because Fed gov said so, about an hour afterwards.”
Simple logic should tell you that terrorists did not place explosives at the top of the bridge structure. That isn’t how bridges are destroyed.
If you belive the bridge was destroyed by terrorists you have to believe one of these scenarios:
- The ship was manned by terrorists.
- The terrorists remotely siezed control of the ship.
Either defies belief.
“But when you push back against independent thinking and tell everyone to wear blinders, it makes you look like you’re playing on the side of the terrorists.”
Posting “There is a video showing what looks like explosions on the bridge” with no link to any source isn’t “independent thinking”. It’s just rumor mongering, a practice highly popular among irresponsible conspiracy nuts.
When did I, or anyone else, ever assert any such asinine a thing as that?
OKSooner wrote: “When did I, or anyone else, ever assert any such asinine a thing as that?”
(DugwayDuke: “Simple logic should tell you that terrorists did not place explosives at the top of the bridge structure. “
See post number four and others.
Well, sorry. Post number four doesn’t speak for me.
Sorry. I can’t keep track anymore.
You sound unaware of what the word crazy means, and very afraid of independent thinkers.
**************************
What I am afraid of is crazy people like you. Does that metal plate in your head still talk to you?
You’re thinking of someone with a metal plate in their head, not me.
Try to focus on what you’re posting.
The link was in a thread that was taken down for unknown reasons, so I put the link farther down in the thread.
You and the devil cannot do away with truth.
You need to tune that plate to the proper frequency, then you can understand what I’m posting.
Every criminal act is the product of low IQ.
When many in the CIA decided to perpetrate crimes and to cover them up, their minds were acting on low IQ.
This is a fact of reality and it permeates the historical record.
What each agent does with their own history will determine what happens to them.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.