Do you believe the story the government agencies are telling us, or do you think there is a more sinister plot line below the surface just waiting for some internet sleuths with too much free time on their hands to uncover? Was it a true structural failure, or was it helped along by a well placed pack of explosives?
i think a sinister plot would have involved the golden gate bridge or something else.
Christ the investigation is not even under way........relaxcryptofcolumbus wrote:
Do you believe the story the government agencies are telling us
Last edited by usmarine2005 (2007-08-03 13:56:42)
Does look like just an accident. This shit happens across the whole world, the US isn't immune to everything.
good callusmarine2005 wrote:
Christ the investigation is not even under way........relaxcryptofcolumbus wrote:
Do you believe the story the government agencies are telling us
soccerMekstizzle wrote:
the US isn't immune to everything.
what country is America gonna blame this time??? lol
spin the wheel of invasion......
spin the wheel of invasion......
Some people are saying bush was behind the bridge collapse. Stfu, wtf would bush care about a bridge over the river?usmarine2005 wrote:
Christ the investigation is not even under way........relaxcryptofcolumbus wrote:
Do you believe the story the government agencies are telling us
we're not really serious here, are we?
I believe we are really serious.GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
we're not really serious here, are we?
This is so serious, Chuck Norris wouldn't know what to do.
Last edited by =NHB=Shadow (2007-08-03 14:03:28)
oh grow upBalok77 wrote:
what country is America gonna blame this time??? lol
spin the wheel of invasion......
yours. unless youre American, then youll get detained for a while before we send you to Iraq.Balok77 wrote:
what country is America gonna blame this time??? lol
spin the wheel of invasion......
I am so serious. On an unserious note, why are they so quick to say it isn't terrorism?GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
we're not really serious here, are we?
They don't want to incite unnecessary fear I guess. As far as I know, that's only been stated by the State government... I trust them more than Bush.cryptofcolumbus wrote:
I am so serious. On an unserious note, why are they so quick to say it isn't terrorism?GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
we're not really serious here, are we?
Loose change was based off of a plane crashing into buildings.
Not of a bridge collapse.
Not of a bridge collapse.
Rather unusual really, but I guess they only do that when it's stupidly obvious terrorists weren't involved.Hurricane wrote:
They don't want to incite unnecessary fear I guess. As far as I know, that's only been stated by the State government... I trust them more than Bush.cryptofcolumbus wrote:
I am so serious. On an unserious note, why are they so quick to say it isn't terrorism?GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
we're not really serious here, are we?
really?Bull3t wrote:
Loose change was based off of a plane crashing into buildings.
Not of a bridge collapse.
I believe the governor had received notice that this bridge was structurally unsound or ailing structurally to begin with. Am I the only one that heard that in the news from this event? My mother-in-law takes that overpass on occaision and says it was somewhat common knowledge that it was in need of serious retrofitting.
But I kinda like the way this thread is going. I'll bet it was the Canadians not wanting all of us moving there to get our free health care!!
But I kinda like the way this thread is going. I'll bet it was the Canadians not wanting all of us moving there to get our free health care!!
Was it a north to south bridge? If so, you might be onto something there. We're getting closer guys, don't get discouraged. The truth will set us free.IRONCHEF wrote:
I believe the governor had received notice that this bridge was structurally unsound or ailing structurally to begin with. Am I the only one that heard that in the news from this event? My mother-in-law takes that overpass on occaision and says it was somewhat common knowledge that it was in need of serious retrofitting.
But I kinda like the way this thread is going. I'll bet it was the Canadians not wanting all of us moving there to get our free health care!!
Ya Rly.cryptofcolumbus wrote:
really?Bull3t wrote:
Loose change was based off of a plane crashing into buildings.
Not of a bridge collapse.
Mekstizzle wrote:
Does look like just an accident. This shit happens across the whole world, the US isn't immune to everything.
Because they aren't going to collapse a bridge just to kill 6 people.cryptofcolumbus wrote:
I am so serious. On an unserious note, why are they so quick to say it isn't terrorism?GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
we're not really serious here, are we?
It'll be alittle more elaborate than that.
Canada? No. That's exactly what MEXICO wants us to believe! Our southern neighbors are just vying for our attention... Canada stands in their way... All they had to do was frame them.cryptofcolumbus wrote:
Was it a north to south bridge? If so, you might be onto something there. We're getting closer guys, don't get discouraged. The truth will set us free.IRONCHEF wrote:
I believe the governor had received notice that this bridge was structurally unsound or ailing structurally to begin with. Am I the only one that heard that in the news from this event? My mother-in-law takes that overpass on occaision and says it was somewhat common knowledge that it was in need of serious retrofitting.
But I kinda like the way this thread is going. I'll bet it was the Canadians not wanting all of us moving there to get our free health care!!
Too transparent.
Pft.. The government didn't plan shit, it was an old shitty bridge, it had no fail safes, so if one part of it broke, the whole thing is coming down, they were in the middle of repairing the piece of shit, they probably should have ripped it down and replaced it long before this happened, but that cost money... but that's too late now, and its probably going to cost them more money then replacing it would cost, and people lost their lives.