Carl Cameron was caught by American patriots

[VoteForRonPaul]

What could be better than a video to describe :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f-SpSka35X8

[sophocles07]

Hmmm....to be honest, though I hate Carl Cameron...the 9/11 truth method of confrontation....not exactly the BEST method of confrontation

[VoteForRonPaul]

Hmmm....to be honest, though I hate Carl Cameron...the 9/11 truth method of confrontation....not exactly the BEST method of confrontation
So what would be the BEST method in your opinion? Buy some air time on FOX :D

[sophocles07]

Not confront FOX reporters on film with viewpoints that alienate most of the American populace from Ron Paul by using his name in connection with conspiracy theories.

[sophocles07]

Why not confront him simply ON THE WAR?

[VoteForRonPaul]

Not confront FOX reporters on film with viewpoints that alienate most of the American populace from Ron Paul by using his name in connection with conspiracy theories.
Actually most of the American populace is not aware of Ron Paul like you might think.

Secondly;Those people are asking for a new investigation and Ron Paul supports a new investigation, is this illegal in the American law? :confused:

Third; What is your definition of a conspiracy theory?

[sophocles07]

Actually most of the American populace is not aware of Ron Paul like you might think.
My statement was not intended to gather this meaning about itself; I mean: MOST of those who SEE THIS will be alienated by said conspiracy theory. Not that most of the American populace knows about this; or that MOST of the American populace will be alienated. That is, my supposition is, and I think absolutely true, that if you showed this at 8 p.m. on a Wednesday night (or whatever the most viewed time slot is) to most of the American populace, it would immediately alienate them from Ron Paul—instead of bringing them together on such obviously horrible policies like the Iraq war, the existence of the IRS and the Federal Reserve, etc.


Secondly;Those people are asking for a new investigation and Ron Paul supports a new investigation, is this illegal in the American law?

I don’t in any way disprove of a new investigation. I also, though, don’t support with fanatic intensity the proposition that 9/11 was the result of American planning. I must add: I don’t put it past the American government to do such a thing; I simply, and this would put me in agreement with Chomsky, don’t see American involvement in the attacks—though I don’t think they actively attempted a defense against them. That is to say, I think Bush, Cheney, &co. were very glad when it happened; it gave them an opportunity to do what they wanted.


Third; What is your definition of a conspiracy theory?

Here’s the OED’s take:


Add: 4. Special Combs. conspiracy theory, the theory that an event or phenomenon occurs as a result of a conspiracy between interested parties; spec. a belief that some covert but influential agency (typically political in motivation and oppressive in intent) is responsible for an unexplained event; so conspiracy theorist.

I think you could extend this to something that is viewed as a conspiracy on the basis of factors that are not necessarily connected—but which could be interpreted as such—that are then placed into a narrative, irrespective of empirical evidence, and then asserted with the fanaticism of the cult member.

[VoteForRonPaul]

Why not confront him simply ON THE WAR?
So this means that you are not protesting on the method of confronting, right?

Well, now you are asking a 9/11 truth group to leave their first mission and confront the war and on the 11th day of every month while 9/11 was the key to all those wars.

[sophocles07]

So this means that you are not protesting on the method of confronting, right?

That is correct.


Well, now you are asking a 9/11 truth group to leave their first mission and confront the war and on the 11th day of every month while 9/11 was the key to all those wars.

I agree 9/11 was key. It’s key to them; it’s also key in general. It is the act which allows them “free reign” over the foreign policy of this country. My point is: the 9/11 “truth” movement acts in assonance to getting Ron Paul elected; it is a near-fanatical expression of discontent. I want measured, but passionate confrontation of the media and every other entity that obstructs LIBERTY.

Do you disagree with this?

[VoteForRonPaul]

......That is, my supposition is, and I think absolutely true, that if you showed this at 8 p.m. on a Wednesday night (or whatever the most viewed time slot is) to most of the American populace, it would immediately alienate them from Ron Paul—instead of bringing them together on such obviously horrible policies like the Iraq war, the existence of the IRS and the Federal Reserve, etc.
Actually that is too funny because do you think if those people confront him on the war or the IRS, their confronting would be broadcasted on a Wednesday night at 8 p.m?

Secondly, And what good the denying of Ron Paul on a national TV in the debate to the involvement of this government into the attacks has brought to him? Did it bring the American populace close to him? And did his talk about the war bring the American populace to him?

Third: Do you think the American populace understand what 9/11 theories are all about?

Fourth: Why you would not suggest that broadcasting such film would bring the American populace to research the 9/11 theories?

Fifth: I watched the confrontation again and I did not see any signs of Ron Paul so did you? I did not even hear his name mentioned.

Sixth: Even if, why would you suggest that this is going to take away the American populace from Ron Paul? Why not the opposite? You are one of the American populace so would you leave Ron Paul if he was to adopt one of the 9/11 theories?



Here’s the OED’s take:

Add: 4. Special Combs. conspiracy theory, the theory that an event or phenomenon occurs as a result of a conspiracy between interested parties; spec. a belief that some covert but influential agency (typically political in motivation and oppressive in intent) is responsible for an unexplained event; so conspiracy theorist.

I think you could extend this to something that is viewed as a conspiracy on the basis of factors that are not necessarily connected—but which could be interpreted as such—that are then placed into a narrative, irrespective of empirical evidence, and then asserted with the fanaticism of the cult member.
According to your definition of conspiracy, I have to believe that Ron Paul is a conspiracy theorist and that anybody who opposes the war and think that Bush lied and demands an investigation in the pre-war period should also be classified as a a conspiracy theorist. Which means that you yourself would end up as a conspiracy theorist.



I simply, and this would put me in agreement with Chomsky, don’t see American involvement in the attacks—though I don’t think they actively attempted a defense against them. That is to say, I think Bush, Cheney, &co. were very glad when it happened; it gave them an opportunity to do what they wanted.
With all due respect but I see this theory rather naive!
Its this kind of theory that a child invents when he gets the dream that his beloved mom might be a killer.
Though I still appreciate the innocence of this child. But for how long this child is going to stay so innocent?

[sophocles07]

Actually that is too funny because do you think if those people confront him on the war or the IRS, their confronting would be broadcasted on a Wednesday night at 8 p.m?
My proposition is completely hypothetical, but based in the idea that others will view t his. No, of course not, I do not think that that would be broadcasted on the evening news; it is antithetical to the positions the COMPANY takes.


Secondly, And what good the denying of Ron Paul on a national TV in the debate to the involvement of this government into the attacks has brought to him? Did it bring the American populace close to him? And did his talk about the war bring the American populace to him?

I think it brought a good number of people to the campaign; of course, without definite numbers, I can’t exactly put forth ideas. But, I would estimate it went over better than would a “9/11 was an inside job” message.

[QUOTE]Third: Do you think the American populace understand what 9/11 theories are all about?

This is a very ambiguous question. You must specify what you mean exactly before I can answer.


Fourth: Why you would not suggest that broadcasting such film would bring the American populace to research the 9/11 theories?

Well, broadcasting it independently would indeed bring research; I don’t see the need in inbroiling a candidate in the controversies involved. That is, IF you want the candidate elected.


Fifth: I watched the confronting again and I did not see any signs of Ron Paul so did you? I did not even hear his name mentioned.

Watch again; he’s mentioned. 7:47 mentioned Ron Paul.


Sixth: Even if, why would you suggest that this is going to take away the American populace from Ron Paul?
Have you ever immediately ejected this into the American populace? The idea, as far as I have discussed it among many, many people, is that it disgusts them. That is not even to say the idea’s wrong: it just works in opposition to Ron Paul’s attempt to get elected.


Why not the opposite? You are one of the American populace so would you leave Ron Paul if he was to adopt one of the 9/11 theories?

I would look at it very carefully (as I already have). It would surprise me; but I would take a “re-look” at the position.” Not to say I’d just “come along.”

[sophocles07]

According to your definition of conspiracy, I have to believe that Ron Paul is a conspiracy theorist and that anybody who opposes the war and think that Bush lied and demands an investigation in the pre-war period should also be classified as a a conspiracy theorist. Which means that you yourself would end up as a conspiracy theorist.

You could say the war was unconnected to the pre-war period or the economic period beforehand...but you’d be wrong. Not a conspiracy.


With all due respect but I see this theory rather naive!
Its this kind of theory that a child invents when he gets the dream that his beloved mom might be a killer.
Though I still appreciate the innocence of this child. But for how long this child is going to stay so innocent?

Expand upon above statements. I don’t understand the viewpoint.

[VoteForRonPaul]

I want measured, but passionate confrontation of the media and every other entity that obstructs LIBERTY.

Do you disagree with this?
Ofcourse I disagree because mentioning the term ''measured'' carry inside it a sort of an obstruction of the concept of LIBERTY itself.
I consider measuring is one the enemies of LIBERTY. The neocons want you to start to measure and count so this way they can steal out of your LIBERTY.

When you start to ask yourself what is appropriate or not appropriate to say then know that the neocon succeed in bringing fear inside your heart. This way they violate your freedom without you even be aware that they are doing it.
When you say that I do not want to say this because this might hurt Ron Paul -although it might be a truth- I as a human being appreciate your sense and care but I also have to warn you that this way you are sacrificing your freedom of speech in order to do this.

If Ron Paul was from this kind of people who like measuring he would not ever be the Ron Paul we know. Ron Paul stayed in darkness for 20 years because he stood for what he believes in without MEASURING and the same reason which forced him into darkness is the same reason which brought him into the light these days.

MEASURING is a sort of evil and because of it alot of people ends up corrupt, look at McCain, Clinton and Obama they all measure.

[VoteForRonPaul]

I think it brought a good number of people to the campaign; of course, without definite numbers, I can’t exactly put forth ideas. But, I would estimate it went over better than would a “9/11 was an inside job” message.
So what is your estimate for the number of American people who believe in the inside job? And do you think all of them voted for Ron Paul?



Well, broadcasting it independently would indeed bring research; I don’t see the need in inbroiling a candidate in the controversies involved. That is, IF you want the candidate elected.

Watch again; he’s mentioned. 7:47 mentioned Ron Paul.
I owe you this one!
But did you listen to what the guy said?
I heard him saying this; he disagrees with me (McCain) philosophically as my candidate Ron Paul disagrees with me too.
What kind of freedom or liberty this would be which you are fighting for if you deny on someone the right to even mention his candidate whom he supports.



Have you ever immediately ejected this into the American populace? The idea, as far as I have discussed it among many, many people, is that it disgusts them. That is not even to say the idea’s wrong: it just works in opposition to Ron Paul’s attempt to get elected.
Dose this mean that if Ron Paul is 9/11 truther he should deny it until he reaches his goal which is the political position which is the presidency in our case?


You could say the war was unconnected to the pre-war period or the economic period beforehand...but you’d be wrong. Not a conspiracy.
Is not connecting oil and expanding the empire(as reasons for the war)to the president of The United States considered a conspiracy theory?



I simply, and this would put me in agreement with Chomsky, don’t see American involvement in the attacks—though I don’t think they actively attempted a defense against them. That is to say, I think Bush, Cheney, &co. were very glad when it happened; it gave them an opportunity to do what they wanted.


With all due respect but I see this theory rather naive!
Its this kind of theory that a child invents when he gets the dream that his beloved mom might be a killer.
Though I still appreciate the innocence of this child. But for how long this child is going to stay so innocent?


Expand upon above statements. I don’t understand the viewpoint.
I will try; Let us say you are the child and America is the family and Bush is the Mom and the victims of 9/11 are your cousins.
When the child hear from some people that his Mom might be the killer of his cousins, he immediately gets this reaction of absolute denial because this innocent child cannot believe that his mom who suppose to be full of love and care can commit such a crime. And therefore if somebody(Chomsky) told him any idea even if it was naive but it supports what he the child wants to believe from inside him, he will immediately embrace this idea because it will give him comfort.

[sophocles07]

Ofcourse I disagree because mentioning the term ''measured'' carry inside it a sort of an obstruction of the concept of LIBERTY itself.
“Measured” is not an obstruction of Liberty; it is RIGHT action, it is correct judgment of reality and acting as required (to accomplish what you want). Unmeasured is having a bunch of taboggined (I have no idea how to spell that) urbanites yell 9/11 “truth” shit at a FOX news stooge.

I consider measuring is one the enemies of LIBERTY. The neocons want you to start to measure and count so this way they can steal out of your LIBERTY.
I don’t even know what that means.

When you say that I do not want to say this because this might hurt Ron Paul -although it might be a truth- I as a human being appreciate your sense and care but I also have to warn you that this way you are sacrificing your freedom of speech in order to do this.
Well, I’m not sacrificing MY freedom of speech, because I don’t believe it—I’m telling obsessives to stop yelling conspiracy theories at camera men. Nazis that support Ron Paul should also stay home.

If Ron Paul was from this kind of people who like measuring he would not ever be the Ron Paul we know. Ron Paul stayed in darkness for 20 years because he stood for what he believes in without MEASURING and the same reason which forced him into darkness is the same reason which brought him into the light these days.

MEASURING is a sort of evil and because of it alot of people ends up corrupt, look at McCain, Clinton and Obama they all measure.

You think McCain, Clinton, and Obama are measured? They are measured only in rhetoric. I mean measure in a much more Greek conception.


So what is your estimate for the number of American people who believe in the inside job? And do you think all of them voted for Ron Paul?

I have no “estimate.” I have no idea if they voted for Ron Paul. These questions are irrelevant.


I owe you this one!
But did you listen to what the guy said?
I heard him saying this; he disagrees with me (McCain) philosophically as my candidate Ron Paul disagrees with me too.
What kind of freedom or liberty this would be which you are fighting for if you deny on someone the right to even mention his candidate whom he supports.

Of course, I’m not talking about being “Free” to express self. I’m saying: if you support Ron Paul, assume the majority of the population are complete morons, and use discretion in dealing with these kinds of situations.


Dose this mean that if Ron Paul is 9/11 truther he should deny it until he reaches his goal which is the political position which is the presidency in our case?

I don’t understand why this question matters, he’s not a “truther” (by the way, these people certainly have designed a tawdry, corny title for themselves.)


s not connecting oil and expanding the empire(as reasons for the war)to the president of The United States considered a conspiracy theory?

Since they are plain as day to all, no.


I will try; Let us say you are the child and America is the family and Bush is the Mom and the victims of 9/11 are your cousins.
When the child hear from some people that his Mom might be the killer of his cousins, he immediately gets this reaction of absolute denial because this innocent child cannot believe that his mom who suppose to be full of love and care can commit such a crime. And therefore if somebody(Chomsky) told him any idea even if it was naive but it supports what he the child wants to believe from inside him, he will immediately embrace this idea because it will give him comfort.

O figurative analogy, you bitch!

[Dr.3D]

What kind of equipment is required to measure stupidity?

[Geronimo]

Outside of what building did this take place?

[Aratus]

keeping in mind the old "stuttering john" interviews done years ago...

[1.] as a group they were more polite than the group around
"stuttering john" or even "stuttering john" himself. the sound track
is amature and jumbled. even so, people make telling points!!!

[2.] even though carl cameron looks impatient and almost bored silly, he does
intelligently answer them to a degree for more than five minutes, and goes into
his "moonies at the airport" mode as he accepts the fliers!!! as it is, its the rare
celebrity who'd let "stuttering john" have that loooong a timewindow access...

[angelatc]

Secondly;Those people are asking for a new investigation and Ron Paul supports a new investigation.



The problem is that Ron Paul does not support a new investigation for the same reasons that the truthers support a new investigation.

The truthers latched onto him, and tried to make their agenda his agenda.

If the truthers could at least pretend that they only want some accountability, then they wouldn't isolate so many mainstream voters.

[Aratus]

in retrospective, given the quality and degree of coverage by FOX and other outlets,
are we forgetting what it takes people to get beyond an obvious bias in coverage???

[VoteForRonPaul]

I simply, and this would put me in agreement with Chomsky, don’t see American involvement in the attacks—though I don’t think they actively attempted a defense against them. That is to say, I think Bush, Cheney, &co. were very glad when it happened; it gave them an opportunity to do what they wanted.


With all due respect but I see this theory rather naive!
Its this kind of theory that a child invents when he gets the dream that his beloved mom might be a killer.
Though I still appreciate the innocence of this child. But for how long this child is going to stay so innocent?


Expand upon above statements. I don’t understand the viewpoint.


I will try; Let us say you are the child and America is the family and Bush is the Mom and the victims of 9/11 are your cousins.
When the child hear from some people that his Mom might be the killer of his cousins, he immediately gets this reaction of absolute denial because this innocent child cannot believe that his mom who suppose to be full of love and care can commit such a crime. And therefore if somebody(Chomsky) told him any idea even if it was naive but it supports what he the child wants to believe from inside him, he will immediately embrace this idea because it will give him comfort.


O figurative analogy, you ****!
You asked for an explanation and I give it to you, so do not come and cry now CHILD!


“Measured” is not an obstruction of Liberty; it is RIGHT action, it is correct judgment of reality and acting as required (to accomplish what you want).

I am telling you that this movement as it started it is going to end on the hands of people like you, people/childern who are willing to sacrifice their principles in order to achieve their goals! And it appears to me that those people are not even worthy of knowledge!