Alex Jones on MSNBC again

[0zzy]

9/11 was an inside job, yadda yadda.

funny though cause i was on the computer and had the tv on practically mute and then I had the sudden urge to turn up the tv and, there he was, 9/11 was an inside job. Chris Mathews and the grin like "ahaha oh not again" and more people seemed to be booing this time then last.

just thought i'd tell yall.

[rpfan2008]

http://img221.imageshack.us/img221/9251/4podsyc4.jpg


Its there. You can see it with your own
eyes. And in my professional opinion,
there was a pod attached to the bottom
of that aircraft.

And therefore it was not United Airlines
Flight 175.


BEWARE !! Disturbing graphic images

originally posted here: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?p=1634824#post1634824

[0zzy]

what's that have anything to do with anything? I was just mentioning the bizarre tactics Jones does to spread the movement.

[rpfan2008]

OK my bad

but what do you think about the 'pods' anyway?

[thehighwaymanq]

Anybody have a link to that interview?

[0zzy]

OK my bad

but what do you think about the 'pods' anyway?

I am not going to subscribe to the theories, I'll continue to understand the cause and support independent research, but I'm not going to go over the details. Life is too short :[.

[max]

9/11 was an inside job, yadda yadda.

.

"yadda? yadda? yadda?"

9/11 WAS an inside job. Thats not a theory...IT"S A PROVEN FACT!

Open your eyes... www.911truthvirus.com

[pacelli]

9/11 WAS an inside job. Thats not a theory...IT"S A PROVEN FACT!


Oh wonderful! You've finally found a quote from one of the 'inside' conspirators! Time to start naming names. Since you've declared that it is a "PROVEN FACT", then clearly you can name one of the conspirators and provide the quotation which proves their factual involvement in the events of 9/11.

[dannno]

Oh wonderful! You've finally found a quote from one of the 'inside' conspirators! Time to start naming names. Since you've declared that it is a "PROVEN FACT", then clearly you can name one of the conspirators and provide the quotation which proves their factual involvement in the events of 9/11.

You're right, none of the conspirators have come forward.. gee, what was I thinking all this time?


Alright, time to pack up and go home guys.. :rolleyes:

[dannno]

I am not going to subscribe to the theories, I'll continue to understand the cause and support independent research, but I'm not going to go over the details. Life is too short :[.

You don't have to subsribe to theories, but what you can do is look at the photos taken of the airplanes and notice that they look nothing like the bottom of an actual Boeing aircraft. From there, you can contend that the official story of commercial airliners flying into the towers may be false. From there you can spend a few hours of research and verify that there are in fact many irreconcilable problems with the official story.

Since 9/11 has been the basis for our entire mess of a foreign policy, and those who were likely behind the attacks are still in control of our government, you'd think it would be important to really get to the bottom of something like this?

[UnReconstructed]

I feel this 911 truth movement may be a tool to keep people bogged down. I don't accept the official story but I'm not going to my chain wrapped around the axle for it.

[0zzy]

"yadda? yadda? yadda?"

9/11 WAS an inside job. Thats not a theory...IT"S A PROVEN FACT!

Open your eyes... www.911truthvirus.com

Yadda yadda yadda is like etc etc etc. I wasn't saying it wasn't, or it was. My eyes are open, I even have glasses!


You don't have to subsribe to theories, but what you can do is look at the photos taken of the airplanes and notice that they look nothing like the bottom of an actual Boeing aircraft. From there, you can contend that the official story of commercial airliners flying into the towers may be false. From there you can spend a few hours of research and verify that there are in fact many irreconcilable problems with the official story.

Since 9/11 has been the basis for our entire mess of a foreign policy, and those who were likely behind the attacks are still in control of our government, you'd think it would be important to really get to the bottom of something like this?

I don't think it's important either way to believe it was an inside job or not. The foreign policy is what I am more concerned with. Interventionism leads to blowback, that is something I am more a believer in. This is all a result of WW1, to WW2, to Cold War, to all these other wars. Knowing that they wanted to go to Iraq when they first took office is something I am more concerned with, and the fact that they would use a tragedy like 9/11 to proceed with their agenda. To me, that is pretty bad.

[pacelli]

You're right, none of the conspirators have come forward.. gee, what was I thinking all this time?


Alright, time to pack up and go home guys.. :rolleyes:

I don't know what you are thinking, except for your sarcastic reaction.

He posted that 9/11 as an inside job is a "PROVEN FACT".

I support a new investigation, but when people make absurd claims that do not match the appropriate definitions, or available evidence, it detracts from the overall message of 9/11 truth.

[VoteForRonPaul]

Yadda yadda yadda is like etc etc etc. I wasn't saying it wasn't, or it was. My eyes are open, I even have glasses!



I don't think it's important either way to believe it was an inside job or not. The foreign policy is what I am more concerned with. Interventionism leads to blowback, that is something I am more a believer in. This is all a result of WW1, to WW2, to Cold War, to all these other wars. Knowing that they wanted to go to Iraq when they first took office is something I am more concerned with, and the fact that they would use a tragedy like 9/11 to proceed with their agenda. To me, that is pretty bad. What exactly you mean by bad? Is it the action of using tragedy like 9/11 to proceed with their agenda? Or is it the idea itself that it was an inside job?

If the criminals will go away with a crime the size of 9/11 then forget about all those terms interventionism, constitution, foreign policy, sound money, liberty and etc......................... PERIOD! And wait for another 9/11 or pearl harbor and who knows maybe New York and Washington will be the next Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
I think the problem is a problem of awareness of the Top priorities and for alot of people and I am totally honored to be one of them 9/11 is number One!

[0zzy]

What exactly you mean by bad? Is it the action of using tragedy like 9/11 to proceed with their agenda? Or is it the idea itself that it was an inside job?

If the criminals will go away with a crime the size of 9/11 then forget about all those terms interventionism, constitution, foreign policy, sound money, liberty and etc......................... PERIOD! And wait for another 9/11 or pearl harbor and who knows maybe New York and Washington will be the next Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
I think the problem is a problem of awareness of the Top priorities and for alot of people and I am totally honored to be one of them 9/11 is number One!

Well, I think you are wrong.

Just an opinion.

The #1 priority is not 9/11 truth, to me at least, but the ideas Paul has been espousing over the campaign. You won't will hearts and minds like Alex Jones yelling at people and making noise over broadcast saying 9/11 was an inside job.

[VoteForRonPaul]

What exactly you mean by bad? Is it the action of using tragedy like 9/11 to proceed with their agenda? Or is it the idea itself that it was an inside job?
Well thank you for ignoring my question!



If the criminals will go away with a crime the size of 9/11 then forget about all those terms interventionism, constitution, foreign policy, sound money, liberty and etc......................... PERIOD! And wait for another 9/11 or pearl harbor and who knows maybe New York and Washington will be the next Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
I think the problem is a problem of awareness of the Top priorities and for alot of people and I am totally honored to be one of them 9/11 is number One!
Well thank you for ignoring my question!


Well, I think you are wrong.
Then you better wait for another 9/11 or pearl harbor and who knows maybe New York and Washington will be the next Hiroshima and Nagasaki.




The #1 priority is not 9/11 truth, to me at least, but the ideas Paul has been espousing over the campaign.
If your mother brother, sister or child were killed at that day, would you still be saying what you are saying today? Would you ask and demand for immediate justice? Or would you let the criminals get away while you are waiting on the foreign policy to be fixed and the Gold slandered to be restored?



You won't will hearts and minds like Alex Jones yelling at people and making noise over broadcast saying 9/11 was an inside job.
As there are people yell and scream to deliver their message there are also scholars who work in silence and behind them an army of supporters who are working day and night for you and for me to bring truth out before the years and the memory can bury it.

[LibertyOfOne]

The photos are so low res you can't tell shit. Looks like a lens flare anyways.

[0zzy]

Then you better wait for another 9/11 or pearl harbor and who knows maybe New York and Washington will be the next Hiroshima and Nagasaki.



If your mother brother, sister or child were killed at that day, would you still be saying what you are saying today? Would you ask and demand for immediate justice? Or would you let the criminals get away while you are waiting on the foreign policy to be fixed and the Gold slandered to be restored?


As there are people yell and scream to deliver their message there are also scholars who work in silence and behind them an army of supporters who are working day and night for you and for me to bring truth out before the years and the memory can bury it.

1) You are saying they caused Pearl Harbor now too? ...okay.
2) My brother nor mother was killed that day, so the idea is baseless.
3) He needs to work on his marketing skills still.

In fact, the whole 9/11 truth does. Find out the truth, fine! Go ahead! But don't expect to be elected to office. Why is it bad to understand the cause but not live the cause? Is that not enough for you?

[Flash]

so does anyone have the video of alex jones on msnbc again?

[V-rod]

1) You are saying they caused Pearl Harbor now too? ...okay.
2) My brother nor mother was killed that day, so the idea is baseless.
3) He needs to work on his marketing skills still.

In fact, the whole 9/11 truth does. Find out the truth, fine! Go ahead! But don't expect to be elected to office. Why is it bad to understand the cause but not live the cause? Is that not enough for you?


Simple, there is no profit in being a calm, logical, and sensible activist. Alex Jones is not the "patriot" many here espouse him to be. He makes quite a bit of cash selling all his merchandise and advertising revenue on radio. He has been a hothead ever since he got on air as a young man, he wanted to be the radical version of Rush Limbaugh. He will turn heaven and earth over to find a fault with anything in order to get ratings, I remember few years ago he was trying his darnedest for two hours to imply that old Barbara Bush was a very capable cold blooded killer. BARBARA BUSH!

He is a wealthy cult leader of his own design.

[Conza88]

so does anyone have the video of alex jones on msnbc again?

http://www.infowars.com/?p=4221

HILARIOUS.!!! Alex Jones is a hero.

[James Madison]

"yadda? yadda? yadda?"

9/11 WAS an inside job. Thats not a theory...IT"S A PROVEN FACT!

Open your eyes... www.911truthvirus.com

+1

[phixion]

http://www.infowars.com/?p=4221

HILARIOUS.!!! Alex Jones is a hero.

Alex is incredible.

Funny stuff.

Pete

[VoteForRonPaul]

1) You are saying they caused Pearl Harbor now too? ...okay.
What I am truly saying is that for sure they killed 200,000 people instantly in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. So Pearl Harbor is too easy job to do compared to this big one.



2) My brother nor mother was killed that day, so the idea is baseless.

Well, they have killed my brothers, sisters my mothers and fathers at that day maybe not the biological ones but I will never feel rest until the criminals are prosecuted!



3) He needs to work on his marketing skills still.
Are you talking about Alex? You might be true but what also true is that he is appealing to alot of people. Its like watching the WWE , Do you like watching the WWE? I do not like it but it has a wide base of fans. Should we ignore them? No. And for me Alex Johns play the role of a WWE star in this movement. Also remember that his website is ranking among the first 5 thousands website most visited in America which exceeds even Ron Paul popularity on the internet. You cannot ignore that!



In fact, the whole 9/11 truth does. Find out the truth, fine! Go ahead! But don't expect to be elected to office. Why is it bad to understand the cause but not live the cause? Is that not enough for you?
Not sure if I understand your questions right. Nobody is talking about election here and the movement is not looking for electing people to office. The goal is so clear RE INVESTIGATE 9/11.

But I still cannot take out the possibility of getting elected if you embrace the truth. But I think the most important thing is educating at least some of the already elected people.

Have you ever heard about Senator Karen Johnson? Please watch this video for her speaking http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3lgEpaLVjgo

[revolutionary8]

http://www.infowars.com/?p=4221

HILARIOUS.!!! Alex Jones is a hero.

Cackle snort. :D

How could our government NOT know what was going down? Rudy Gi9l1an1 said that he KNEW the towers were going to fall "in 10 to 15 minutes". How did he know? It was an Inside job. Why didn't he get on the bull horn and tell everyone to get the hell out of there? Inside Job.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e1KRFvk8lcc

[0zzy]

My main point is, I agree with a new investigation, but I don't feel the need to tell everyone about all these things. I want to spend my time reading and working for the liberty movement without getting involved with this as much as others. Re-investigate it.

[revolutionary8]

My main point is, I agree with a new investigation, but I don't feel the need to tell everyone about all these things. I want to spend my time reading and working for the liberty movement without getting involved with this as much as others. Re-investigate it.
911 motivates some people. The liberty movement motivates other people. You have real fire when you have a combination of the two.
Never Forget.

[PatriotOne]

I don't think it's important either way to believe it was an inside job or not. The foreign policy is what I am more concerned with.

Since our foriegn policy includes performing false flag operations in America to give them the excuse of bombing the crap out of foreign countries you should be concerned with 9/11 and future 9/11's. Until the people of this country understand that this is what is going on they will always think we are under attack from the "terrorists" and think our wars are justified.

Naturally the common people don't want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor in America, nor in Germany. That is understood. But after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.

Hermann Goering, 1946

These people in power do not have loyalties to America. Their loyalties are with the New World Order and don't give a shit about Americans. In fact, they are out to destroy America so they can form the North American Union (and in the future further consolidate until all powers are in the hands of One World Government). Americans are nothing more than cannon fodder for them.

Exposing 9/11 for what it really is, is the only thing that is going to change the course of future events by exposing the whole shell game and the families (such as the Rothchilds, et. al), who are behind it.

Otherwise, when these same people nuke, say Los Angeles, and blame it on the, say, Russia, Americans won't be so blindly stupid and go fight a war in the interest of One World Government. They will know who the real enemy is. Fool us once, shame on them, fool us twice, shame on us.

[PatriotOne]

My main point is, I agree with a new investigation, but I don't feel the need to tell everyone about all these things. I want to spend my time reading and working for the liberty movement without getting involved with this as much as others. Re-investigate it.

I respect you for your intellectual pursuit of understanding. I wish everyone had the time to educate themselves in these matters....but they don't. What everyone does has the time to do is learn the truth about 9/11 because it is a relatively short education anfd gets a person toi the same mind set as yours very quickly. It's the "Liberty for Dummies" course :p.

[travisAlbert]

Why would our government blame Al Queda for the attacks, if they really had ambitions for Iraq? How did they keep their murderous plan so secret? Nixon could not even get away with watergate. Did not Osama bin Laden have a motive to carry out such terror attacks? I have seen a lot of the 9/11 truth stuff, and I'll admit that WTC-7 is very fishy, but scientists have trouble enough observing all of the factors involved in a controlled experiment, this was random and there could have been so many factors involved that cannot be observed by a simple video clip.

[Gadsden Flag]

Why do 9/11 truth morons love Ron Paul so much?
Go away.

[ClayTrainor]

Why do 9/11 truth morons love Ron Paul so much?
Go away.

Maybe because the "morons" understand that Ron Paul has very similar interests as the truthers. You, Gadsden Flag are probably have a very similary political philosophy as truthers have, you just disagree on 911.

Ron Paul understands the NWO, truthers understand the NWO, i believe you probably understand at least little about the NWO.

It's about fighting the NWO, not about calling truthers morons and telling them to leave.

[rpfan2008]

Why would our government blame Al Queda for the attacks, if they really had ambitions for Iraq? How did they keep their murderous plan so secret? Nixon could not even get away with watergate. Did not Osama bin Laden have a motive to carry out such terror attacks? I have seen a lot of the 9/11 truth stuff, and I'll admit that WTC-7 is very fishy, but scientists have trouble enough observing all of the factors involved in a controlled experiment, this was random and there could have been so many factors involved that cannot be observed by a simple video clip.

google "Tim Osman"

[Conza88]

Maybe because the "morons" understand that Ron Paul has very similar interests as the truthers. You, Gadsden Flag are probably have a very similary political philosophy as truthers have, you just disagree on 911.

Ron Paul understands the NWO, truthers understand the NWO, i believe you probably understand at least little about the NWO.

It's about fighting the NWO, not about calling truthers morons and telling them to leave.

Yeah you're right. Maybe the "911 crowd / truthers" are different over there...

911oz forum thread (http://www.911oz.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2079)

Read that... there seems to be ALOT of tools out there, even in the 911 movement - that associate Capitalism as the NWO's goal. :rolleyes: And that communism is the best place to be.

They don't understand the Nwo..

[VoteForRonPaul]

Why do 9/11 truth morons love Ron Paul so much?
Go away.
You Are Useless!

[ClayTrainor]

Yeah you're right. Maybe the "911 crowd / truthers" are different over there...

911oz forum thread (http://www.911oz.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2079)

Read that... there seems to be ALOT of tools out there, even in the 911 movement - that associate Capitalism as the NWO's goal. :rolleyes: And that communism is the best place to be.

They don't understand the Nwo..

Dude, i want to read it but, i'll probably end up breaking something out of anger.

Socialism is like a disease these days :(

[VoteForRonPaul]

Dude, i want to read it but, i'll probably end up breaking something out of anger.

Socialism is like a disease these days :(
I think what we have seen in this forum is a good sign! Not because I support socialism but because what I have seen. 9/11 brought people together from the left and right young and olds where all demand opening the 9/11 files. And while discussing socialism and capitalism is allowed there, discussing 9/11 is banned here in Ron Paul forum or the so called Liberty Forest :rolleyes:

[kombayn]

I really wish the troofers would take the time out and make a trip to the middle east to see how fucked up of a region it really is. But they sit at home on their computers believing any video racked up by a conspiracy theorist. You're being played for as fools and so are your wallets.

http://www.debunking911.com

Educate yourself. War-fare actually exists.

[lucius]

I really wish the troofers would take the time out and make a trip to the middle east to see how fucked up of a region it really is. But they sit at home on their computers believing any video racked up by a conspiracy theorist. You're being played for as fools and so are your wallets.
...

Watch Neo-CONNED: a speech by Ron Paul: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-495829089909498224&q=neoconned&ei=0IOQSO_AIYWSqQL4lampBw&hl=en

Once again, insightful, especially minutes 36-40: at the 37:45 mark he describes a tried & true reoccurring pattern that has been happening for almost a 100 years--what's different now?


Neocons – anxious for the U.S. to use force to realign the boundaries and change regimes in the Middle East – clearly understand the benefit of a galvanizing and emotional event to rally the people to their cause. Without a special event, they realized the difficulty in selling their policy of preemptive war where our own military personnel would be killed. Whether it was the Lusitania, Pearl Harbor, the Gulf of Tonkin or the Maine, all served their purpose in promoting a war that was sought by our leaders. ~Neo-Conned by Rep. Ron Paul: http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul110.html

[0zzy]

Watch Neo-CONNED: a speech by Ron Paul: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-495829089909498224&q=neoconned&ei=0IOQSO_AIYWSqQL4lampBw&hl=en

Once again, insightful, especially minutes 36-40: at the 37:45 mark he describes a tried & true reoccurring pattern that has been happening for almost a 100 years--what's different now?

He didn't say the government conducted them, only that they used these events for their own agendas as they did with 9.11.

[VoteForRonPaul]

He didn't say the government conducted them, only that they used these events for their own agendas as they did with 9.11.
Ozzy, if you think that this corrupted government is innocent and did not conduct the 9/11 crime, then why you would be supporting a new investigation?What questions you have that you think it was not answered in the commission report?

[0zzy]

Ozzy, if you think that this corrupted government is innocent and did not conduct the 9/11 crime, then why you would be supporting a new investigation?What questions you have that you think it was not answered in the commission report?

I think their was corruption in the government investigation and it didn't, from what I hear, talk much about WTC7. I would support an independent investigation so we can see who was responsible of the ineptness.

[V-rod]

I think their was corruption in the government investigation and it didn't, from what I hear, talk much about WTC7. I would support an independent investigation so we can see who was responsible of the ineptness.

If a independent group turns up nothing it would still be labeled a neo-con trotskyite false-flag coverup.

[0zzy]

If a independent group turns up nothing it would still be labeled a neo-con trotskyite false-flag coverup.

I suppose.

[VoteForRonPaul]

I think their was corruption in the government investigation and it didn't, from what I hear, talk much about WTC7. I would support an independent investigation so we can see who was responsible of the ineptness.
Is not corruption a crime?And why their would be corruption in such horrific event?
I looked up corruption on the web and here is the definition: lack of integrity or honesty (especially susceptibility to bribery); use of a position of trust for dishonest gain.

According to this definition, what kind of dishonest gain the government would get from blocking an independent and honest investigation?

Regarding WTC7 the government already released its report this month and you can read it here http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/releases/wtc082108.html
It concluded that fire caused the building to collapse but do you believe them? And if you do not so why they would lie after 7 years from the date of the collapse? Are they hiding something and why should they hide something?

[revolutionary8]

Why would our government blame Al Queda for the attacks, if they really had ambitions for Iraq? How did they keep their murderous plan so secret? Nixon could not even get away with watergate. Did not Osama bin Laden have a motive to carry out such terror attacks? I have seen a lot of the 9/11 truth stuff, and I'll admit that WTC-7 is very fishy, but scientists have trouble enough observing all of the factors involved in a controlled experiment, this was random and there could have been so many factors involved that cannot be observed by a simple video clip.
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2063/2367862733_986f44483f.jpg?v=0
If you think Watergate was a "big deal" THINK AGAIN.
look to the right and of course at the TREES. ;)
That is Bohemian Grove

[Conza88]

Can I get a run down on all those in that photo if possible? :)

I know Reagan, Nixon... who else is there?

[revolutionary8]

Can I get a run down on all those in that photo if possible? :)

I know Reagan, Nixon... who else is there?
ZIt looks as if GEORGE SHULTZ is one.

http://www.usdiplomacy.org/exhibit/images/secretaries/Shultz,%20George%20P.jpg

[lucius]

He didn't say the government conducted them, only that they used these events for their own agendas as they did with 9.11.

Fair enough, here is a broader context; Ron Paul has huevos the size of coconuts to give this speech in our political climate:


Here is a brief summary of the general understanding of what neocons believe:

1) They agree with Trotsky on permanent revolution, violent as well as intellectual. (Russian revolutionary and Marxist theorist.)
2) They are for redrawing the map of the Middle East and are willing to use force to do so.
3) They believe in preemptive war to achieve desired ends.
4) They accept the notion that the ends justify the means – that hard-ball politics is a moral necessity.
5) They express no opposition to the welfare state.
6) They are not bashful about an American empire; instead they strongly endorse it.
7) They believe lying is necessary for the state to survive.
8) They believe a powerful federal government is a benefit.
9) They believe pertinent facts about how a society should be run should be held by the elite and
withheld from those who do not have the courage to deal with it.
10) They believe neutrality in foreign affairs is ill-advised.
11) They hold Leo Strauss in high esteem. (Strauss endorsed noble lies: myths used by political leaders seeking to maintain a cohesive society.)
12) They believe imperialism, if progressive in nature, is appropriate.
13) Using American might to force American ideals on others is acceptable. Force should
not be limited to the defense of our country.
14) 9-11 resulted from the lack of foreign entanglements, not from too many.
15) They dislike and despise libertarians (therefore, the same applies to all strict constitutionalists.)
16) They endorse attacks on civil liberties, such as those found in the Patriot Act, as being necessary.
17) They unconditionally support Israel and have a close alliance with the Likud Party. (The Likud promotes a revival of Jewish-oriented culture, in keeping with the principles of revisionist zionism.)
...
Neocons – anxious for the U.S. to use force to realign the boundaries and change regimes in the Middle East – clearly understand the benefit of a galvanizing and emotional event to rally the people to their cause. Without a special event, they realized the difficulty in selling their policy of preemptive war where our own military personnel would be killed. Whether it was the Lusitania, Pearl Harbor, the Gulf of Tonkin or the Maine, all served their purpose in promoting a war that was sought by our leaders.

Ledeen writes of a fortuitous event (1999): “…of course, we can always get lucky. (Why specifically date this?) Stunning events from outside can providentially awaken the enterprise from its growing torpor, and demonstrate the need for reversal, as the devastating Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941 so effectively aroused the U.S. from its soothing dreams of permanent neutrality.”

Amazingly, Ledeen calls Pearl Harbor a “lucky” event. The Project for a New American Century, as recently as September 2000, likewise, foresaw the need for “a Pearl Harbor event” that would galvanize the American people to support their ambitious plans to ensure political and economic domination of the world, while strangling any potential “rival.” (Skillful tie-in, Zbigniew Brzezinski in his watermark 'The Grand Chessboard' uses this exact phase as well in 1997/it's almost common knowledge that Pearl Harbor was a 'LIHOP' scenario)

Recognizing a “need” for a Pearl Harbor event, and referring to Pearl Harbor as being “lucky” are not identical to support and knowledge of such an event (a disclaimer?), but that this sympathy for a galvanizing event, as 9-11 turned out to be, was used to promote an agenda that strict constitutionalists and devotees of the Founders of this nation find appalling, is indeed disturbing. After 9-11, Rumsfeld and others argued for an immediate attack on Iraq, even though it was not implicated in the attacks. ~Neo-Conned by Rep. Ron Paul: http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul110.html

Sorry for the slow response, I just discovered torrents--an old dog...new trick.

'The Grand Chessboard' bonus quote: "...To put it in a terminology that harkens back to the more brutal age of ancient empires, the three grand imperatives of imperial geostrategy are to prevent collusion and maintain security dependence among the vassals, to keep tributaries pliant and protected, and to keep the barbarians from coming together." (p.40)

[VoteForRonPaul]

Fair enough, here is a broader context; Ron Paul has huevos the size of coconuts to give this speech in our political climate:

Here is a brief summary of the general understanding of what neocons believe:

1) They agree with Trotsky on permanent revolution, violent as well as intellectual. (Russian revolutionary and Marxist theorist.)
2) They are for redrawing the map of the Middle East and are willing to use force to do so.
3) They believe in preemptive war to achieve desired ends.
4) They accept the notion that the ends justify the means – that hard-ball politics is a moral necessity.
5) They express no opposition to the welfare state.
6) They are not bashful about an American empire; instead they strongly endorse it.
7) They believe lying is necessary for the state to survive.
8) They believe a powerful federal government is a benefit.
9) They believe pertinent facts about how a society should be run should be held by the elite and
withheld from those who do not have the courage to deal with it.
10) They believe neutrality in foreign affairs is ill-advised.
11) They hold Leo Strauss in high esteem. (Strauss endorsed noble lies: myths used by political leaders seeking to maintain a cohesive society.)
12) They believe imperialism, if progressive in nature, is appropriate.
13) Using American might to force American ideals on others is acceptable. Force should
not be limited to the defense of our country.
14) 9-11 resulted from the lack of foreign entanglements, not from too many.
15) They dislike and despise libertarians (therefore, the same applies to all strict constitutionalists.)
16) They endorse attacks on civil liberties, such as those found in the Patriot Act, as being necessary.
17) They unconditionally support Israel and have a close alliance with the Likud Party. (The Likud promotes a revival of Jewish-oriented culture, in keeping with the principles of revisionist zionism.)
...
Neocons – anxious for the U.S. to use force to realign the boundaries and change regimes in the Middle East – clearly understand the benefit of a galvanizing and emotional event to rally the people to their cause. Without a special event, they realized the difficulty in selling their policy of preemptive war where our own military personnel would be killed. Whether it was the Lusitania, Pearl Harbor, the Gulf of Tonkin or the Maine, all served their purpose in promoting a war that was sought by our leaders.

Ledeen writes of a fortuitous event (1999): “…of course, we can always get lucky. (Why specifically date this?) Stunning events from outside can providentially awaken the enterprise from its growing torpor, and demonstrate the need for reversal, as the devastating Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941 so effectively aroused the U.S. from its soothing dreams of permanent neutrality.”

Amazingly, Ledeen calls Pearl Harbor a “lucky” event. The Project for a New American Century, as recently as September 2000, likewise, foresaw the need for “a Pearl Harbor event” that would galvanize the American people to support their ambitious plans to ensure political and economic domination of the world, while strangling any potential “rival.” (Skillful tie-in, Zbigniew Brzezinski in his watermark 'The Grand Chessboard' uses this exact phase as well in 1997/it's almost common knowledge that Pearl Harbor was a 'LIHOP' scenario)

Recognizing a “need” for a Pearl Harbor event, and referring to Pearl Harbor as being “lucky” are not identical to support and knowledge of such an event (a disclaimer?), but that this sympathy for a galvanizing event, as 9-11 turned out to be, was used to promote an agenda that strict constitutionalists and devotees of the Founders of this nation find appalling, is indeed disturbing. After 9-11, Rumsfeld and others argued for an immediate attack on Iraq, even though it was not implicated in the attacks. ~Neo-Conned by Rep. Ron Paul: http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul110.html

Sorry for the slow response, I just discovered torrents--an old dog...new trick.

'The Grand Chessboard' bonus quote: "...To put it in a terminology that harkens back to the more brutal age of ancient empires, the three grand imperatives of imperial geostrategy are to prevent collusion and maintain security dependence among the vassals, to keep tributaries pliant and protected, and to keep the barbarians from coming together." (p.40)
Very interesting quotes and personally I believe that Ron Paul understands that it was an in***e j*b but for political reasons he backed off and he has his excuses.
I still love the man :)
Someday he will say it loud :D

[newyearsrevolution08]

If a independent group turns up nothing it would still be labeled a neo-con trotskyite false-flag coverup.

I don't see many people labeling it a "neo-con trotskyite false-flag coverup" without spell check enabled though.

[Anti Federalist]

Why do 9/11 truth morons love Ron Paul so much?
Go away.

LoL.

I was going to write a short, foul retort, but decided not to.

I've been following and supporting the efforts of Ron Paul for over ten years.

Been a 9/11 "truth moron" almost since the day it happened.

And I'm not going anywhere.

Deal with it.

[lucius]

Very interesting quotes and personally I believe that Ron Paul understands that it was an in***e j*b but for political reasons he backed off and he has his excuses.
I still love the man :)
Someday he will say it loud :D

:) still waters run deep...

[Mini-Me]

I used to be interested in the 9/11 truth thing, but it just became way too confusing. There's absolutely no consensus regarding many issues, such as:
Who was involved?
Controlled demolition?
Pentagon hit by missle? Boeing? Smaller plane?
Hijackers alive? Dead? Planes unmanned and flown by drones?
Were things orchestrated top-down by traitors, or did top-level guys like Cheney merely know about the upcoming attacks and set up events to ensure their "success?"

Some possibilities are just simply way too over-the-top to be true, because they would require massive involvement and silence, etc. For instance, it would require truly extraordinary evidence to convince me that entire flights were diverted to secret locations, people were let off/killed, planes were switched, blah blah, and not one of the many people conceivably involved can credibly testify to this. In certain instances, proposed alternatives to the official story have even more holes in them than the official story itself...when it seems the official story "cannot possibly be true," but neither can any imagined alternatives, it's obvious that either one of them actually IS true (defying all common sense) or the truth is a yet-unspoken possibility.

Other possibilities are far more plausible and easier for conspirators to get away with - for instance, it's not too far-fetched to think that Cheney and a few neocons expected the attacks based on intelligence reports that they "didn't think were credible," and purposely sabotaged our air defenses that day with all of the similar training exercises in the southwest, etc.

Just about every specific fact is in contention. There will be assertions, rebuttals, rebuttals of the rebuttals, etc...and by doing only Internet research, there's no real way to ascertain the actual facts. Example: When Silverstein said "Pull it," were there firefighters in WTC 7, or were there not? If so, he could've been referring to a firefighter unit, but if not, that's obviously not the case. Some people assert there were firefighters, others assert there were not. So, who to believe? Who has strong evidence for their claims, one way or another?

On top of all that, many documentaries contain contradictory information...and it doesn't help that many advance very specific views of 9/11 or the NWO as hard truth, to the exclusion of other possibilities (e.g. Zeitgeist and its anti-religious stance, etc.). In fact, that's one of the biggest problems with the whole movement: People call practically everything "hard proof," and that makes it really hard to sort the speculative bullshit out from the credible information.

I agree that there's a whoooooooole lot fishy about 9/11 (just read the "coincidence theorist's guide to 9/11" for a taste of just how bad the whole situation smells)...but the 9/11 Truth movement has really gone wrong by repeatedly jumping to conclusions (and different truthers will be jumping to different contradictory conclusions and 100% sure they're right) instead of actually seeking any specific truths in an objective manner.

When it comes down to it, all I know is that I know nothing for sure...and if any 9/11 truthers are being intellectually honest, they'll agree they're in the same boat as me. Seriously pursuing this research by discovering/proving specific facts from the ground up would require an extremely strong commitment and an assload of free time...but the current way of going about it is nothing more than mental masturbation. Something very specific happened on 9/11 and in the preceding months, and once the entire truth is known (if ever), it should actually make sense. I don't have the kind of dedication or free time necessary to find out the entire truth and build a water-tight case myself, so it looks like I have to wait for someone else to do it...but until then, truthers would probably do well not to damage their credibility further by constantly shouting hysterically at people without even knowing for themselves what really happened.

[VoteForRonPaul]

I used to be interested in the 9/11 truth thing, but it just became way too confusing. There's absolutely no consensus regarding many issues, such as:
Who was involved?
Controlled demolition?
Pentagon hit by missle? Boeing? Smaller plane?
Hijackers alive? Dead? Planes unmanned and flown by drones?
Were things orchestrated top-down by traitors, or did top-level guys like Cheney merely know about the upcoming attacks and set up events to ensure their "success?"

Some possibilities are just simply way too over-the-top to be true, because they would require massive involvement and silence, etc. For instance, it would require truly extraordinary evidence to convince me that entire flights were diverted to secret locations, people were let off/killed, planes were switched, blah blah, and not one of the many people conceivably involved can credibly testify to this. In certain instances, proposed alternatives to the official story have even more holes in them than the official story itself...when it seems the official story "cannot possibly be true," but neither can any imagined alternatives, it's obvious that either one of them actually IS true (defying all common sense) or the truth is a yet-unspoken possibility.

Other possibilities are far more plausible and easier for conspirators to get away with - for instance, it's not too far-fetched to think that Cheney and a few neocons expected the attacks based on intelligence reports that they "didn't think were credible," and purposely sabotaged our air defenses that day with all of the similar training exercises in the southwest, etc.

Just about every specific fact is in contention. There will be assertions, rebuttals, rebuttals of the rebuttals, etc...and by doing only Internet research, there's no real way to ascertain the actual facts. Example: When Silverstein said "Pull it," were there firefighters in WTC 7, or were there not? If so, he could've been referring to a firefighter unit, but if not, that's obviously not the case. Some people assert there were firefighters, others assert there were not. So, who to believe? Who has strong evidence for their claims, one way or another?

On top of all that, many documentaries contain contradictory information...and it doesn't help that many advance very specific views of 9/11 or the NWO as hard truth, to the exclusion of other possibilities (e.g. Zeitgeist and its anti-religious stance, etc.). In fact, that's one of the biggest problems with the whole movement: People call practically everything "hard proof," and that makes it really hard to sort the speculative bullshit out from the credible information.

I agree that there's a whoooooooole lot fishy about 9/11 (just read the "coincidence theorist's guide to 9/11" for a taste of just how bad the whole situation smells)...but the 9/11 Truth movement has really gone wrong by repeatedly jumping to conclusions (and different truthers will be jumping to different contradictory conclusions and 100% sure they're right) instead of actually seeking any specific truths in an objective manner.

When it comes down to it, all I know is that I know nothing for sure...and if any 9/11 truthers are being intellectually honest, they'll agree they're in the same boat as me. Seriously pursuing this research by discovering/proving specific facts from the ground up would require an extremely strong commitment and an assload of free time...but the current way of going about it is nothing more than mental masturbation. Something very specific happened on 9/11 and in the preceding months, and once the entire truth is known (if ever), it should actually make sense. I don't have the kind of dedication or free time necessary to find out the entire truth and build a water-tight case myself, so it looks like I have to wait for someone else to do it...but until then, truthers would probably do well not to damage their credibility further by constantly shouting hysterically at people without even knowing for themselves what really happened.
Man you are making it so difficult while it is as easy as a knife through butter :D

All what you have just said prove indeed that we all are in desperate need for an independent investigation.

Forget about no planes theories and all this stuff. And if you need logical argument about non scientific stuff then you will not find better than David Ray Griffin. He has done an amazing job in tracking and catching the horrible mistakes and contradictions which this government and its allies has left behind them in the crime scene. You can find his books on Amazon (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/search-handle-url?_encoding=UTF8&search-type=ss&index=books&field-author=David%20Ray%20Griffin)

All those contradictions and false testimonies are enough to point the fingers and put people behind bars.

When it comes to hard science there are no better than reading from people who risked their lives, their reputation and their jobs for the sake of truth and you can find them on those websites http://www.ae911truth.org/ http://stj911.org/ and http://www.journalof911studies.com/

Are the truth movement stories full of holes? Ofcourse and that is normal and expected but you got to do this comparison to see things more clear

9/11 Commission’s total budget is $15 million

Monica Lewinsky and Clinton affair $40 million and up

Truth movement budget is volunteers efforts


It is that simple :)

Thumps up for the volunteers

[newyearsrevolution08]

Been a 9/11 "truth moron" almost since the day it happened.

And I'm not going anywhere.

Deal with it.

A truth moron, never heard it written in that way before.

I think it is more of a thing that is hard to wrap our little brains around to be honest. I DO NOT WANT to believe our government was part of the killings that happened on 9-11 and sometimes it is easier to disregard what did happen no matter what evidence is presented.

Either way, I would rather be a truth moron than someone with their head in the sand waiting for things to make sense....

keep it up moron :D

[VoteForRonPaul]

......keep it up moron :D
:D

[V-rod]

Check out the video in my sig

[Vet_from_cali]

pretty much everyone i talk to who has seen the pentagon video concluded that it was NOT hit by a large 747, but was hit by a missile. what confuses me, is that everyone who agrees that a missile hit the pentagon, still believes the rest of the story is true, told by the government. if in fact it was hit by a missile, then there is an outright LIE by the government... and if they lied about that what makes you think they told the truth about everything else??


my 2cents

[dannno]

pretty much everyone i talk to who has seen the pentagon video concluded that it was NOT hit by a large 747, but was hit by a missile. what confuses me, is that everyone who agrees that a missile hit the pentagon, still believes the rest of the story is true, told by the government. if in fact it was hit by a missile, then there is an outright LIE by the government... and if they lied about that what makes you think they told the truth about everything else??


my 2cents

I wouldn't assume it was a missile, though a missile could have been involved it was likely controlled demolition, while the real plane flew over the Pentagon.


Here is the best resource on the Pentagon attack:

www.ThePentaCon.com

[Mini-Me]

Man you are making it so difficult while it is as easy as a knife through butter :D

All what you have just said prove indeed that we all are in desperate need for an independent investigation.

Forget about no planes theories and all this stuff. And if you need logical argument about non scientific stuff then you will not find better than David Ray Griffin. He has done an amazing job in tracking and catching the horrible mistakes and contradictions which this government and its allies has left behind them in the crime scene. You can find his books on Amazon (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/search-handle-url?_encoding=UTF8&search-type=ss&index=books&field-author=David%20Ray%20Griffin)

All those contradictions and false testimonies are enough to point the fingers and put people behind bars.

When it comes to hard science there are no better than reading from people who risked their lives, their reputation and their jobs for the sake of truth and you can find them on those websites http://www.ae911truth.org/ http://stj911.org/ and http://www.journalof911studies.com/

Are the truth movement stories full of holes? Ofcourse and that is normal and expected but you got to do this comparison to see things more clear

9/11 Commission’s total budget is $15 million

Monica Lewinsky and Clinton affair $40 million and up

Truth movement budget is volunteers efforts


It is that simple :)

Thumps up for the volunteers

You're not telling me anything I don't already know, though...but I disagree that the false testimonies are enough to net you convictions. Most people will chalk up false testimonies and such to the "confusion" of the day, blah blah. None of that is enough for conviction...either that or it's just that nobody has made a very strong case proving otherwise. If you have enough evidence to point fingers, then point them at specific people. From what I have seen though, everything is still very much in the "wishy-washy" stage.

It's apparent there are problems with the official story and that there should be a new investigation. I agree with you on that. However, there will never be another government-commissioned or sanctioned investigation, so the only new investigation that can be performed must be done by private citizens. In other words, truthers are forgetting that they are the independent investigation...and as of yet, there's no real consensus on anything, and nobody can even agree on a single point except that the official story has more holes than swiss cheese and stinks worse than limburger. The truthers are doing this all out of order...they're trying to convince the public about what happened before even knowing anything for themselves with any degree of certainty, except that what happened was not what the official story said happened. This isn't enough to convince Joe Average...he'll just gloss over holes in the official story and all contradictory evidence and chalk it up to the confusion of the day, honest mistakes, etc. He will not discount what the media pounded into his head until he has undeniable proof of another very specific scenario that he can replace the official story with in his mind to make sense of everything. Until you can give this to him and leave him utterly dumbfounded, attempting to convince him about anything will only try his patience.

[Archie]

+1zillion

[VoteForRonPaul]

You're not telling me anything I don't already know, though...
In my post there are alot more than you already know but only if you have time to read!



but I disagree that the false testimonies are enough to net you convictions. Most people will chalk up false testimonies and such to the "confusion" of the day, blah blah. None of that is enough for conviction...either that or it's just that nobody has made a very strong case proving otherwise.
Then there is a serious problem with your justice system!



If you have enough evidence to point fingers, then point them at specific people. From what I have seen though, everything is still very much in the "wishy-washy" stage.

http://stj911.org/paul/SDGJWantedPoster.pdf

:) Have not you heard of San Diego Citizens' Grand Jury
On The Crimes Of September 11, 2001

The fourteen persons named by the San Diego Citizens Grand Jury as showing probable cause for further investigation on the Charge of 'Conspiracy to Commit Mass Murder'


1-THOMAS PICKARD, Acting Director of the U. S. Federal Bureau of Investigation from June 25, 2001 to September 4, 2001

2-MICHAEL CHERKASKY, Chief Executive Officer of Kroll, Inc. on 9/11/01; former investigator in the Manhattan District Attorney's Office from 1978 to 1994; current C.E.O. of the Marsh & McClennan insurance firm

3-GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States on 9/11/01

4-LARRY SILVERSTEIN, C.E.O. of Silverstein Properties, primary leaseholder of the World Trade Center Twin Towers, and developer of the third skyscraper that disintegrated into its own footprint in lower Manhattan on 9/11/01, World Trade Building 7

5-RICHARD CHENEY, Vice-President of the U. S. on 9/11/01

6-DONALD RUMSFELD, Secretary of Defense of the U. S. on 9/11/01

7-MARVIN BUSH, member of Board of Directors of Securacom, a firm entrusted with security for the Twin Towers, from 1996 to 2000

8-WIRT WALKER, C.E.O. of Securacom (later Stratasec) from 1999 to 2003

9-RICHARD MYERS, Acting Chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff on 9/11/01

10-RALPH EBERHART, Commander of North American Aerospace Command (NORAD) on 9/11/01

11-L. PAUL BREMER, Executive with Marsh & McClennan on 9/11/01; Chairman of the U. S. Congress' National Commission on Terrorism from 1999 to 2000; U.S. Ambassador-at-Large for Counterterrorism from 1986 to 1989; Presidential Envoy to Irag and Adminstrator of the Coaltion Provisional Authority from May 2003 to December 2004

12-PETER G. PETERSON, C.E.O. of the Blackstone Group, parent corporation of one of three lease-holdersfor WTC 7 on 9/11/01; also Chairman of the Federal Reserve Ban New York and Chairman of the Council on Foreign Relations on 9/11/01

13-DAVID ROCKEFELLER, prime builder of the Twin Towers and all of the World Trade Center complex as Chairman of the Downtown-Lower Manhattan Association from 1958 to 1975; President or C.E.O. of the Chase Manhattan Bank from 1961 to 1981; Chairman of the Council on Foreign Relations from 1970 to 1985

14-MAURICE GREENBERG, C.E.O. of the American International Group (A.I.G.) on 9/11/01; A.I.G. the 'leading U. S.-based insurance organization and the largest underwriter of commercial and industrial insurance in the United States', according to its website in February 2000; A.I.G. also a major share-holder in Marsh & McClennan (whose C.E.O. on 9/11/01 was Maurice Greenberg's son Jeffrey; a major investor (7%) in the Blackstone Group; and the leading investor in Kroll, Inc., which became a subsidiary of Marsh & McClennan in 2002.



It's apparent there are problems with the official story and that there should be a new investigation. I agree with you on that. However, there will never be another government-commissioned or sanctioned investigation, so the only new investigation that can be performed must be done by private citizens. In other words, truthers are forgetting that they are the independent investigation...and as of yet, there's no real consensus on anything, and nobody can even agree on a single point except that the official story has more holes than swiss cheese and stinks worse than limburger.
That is a false statement. Congress is going to fund the new investigation when we pressure them enough. And we are succeeding in our mission and someday they will break the censorship. No body can stop us! Not even you :D



The truthers are doing this all out of order...they're trying to convince the public about what happened before even knowing anything for themselves with any degree of certainty, except that what happened was not what the official story said happened.
That is another false statement. There is undeniable evidence of explosives in ground zero of the 3 buildings. Scientifically proven. There is enough evidence of lies, contradictions and false testimonies that cannot be denied.



This isn't enough to convince Joe Average...he'll just gloss over holes in the official story and all contradictory evidence and chalk it up to the confusion of the day, honest mistakes, etc. He will not discount what the media pounded into his head until he has undeniable proof of another very specific scenario that he can replace the official story with in his mind to make sense of everything. Until you can give this to him and leave him utterly dumbfounded, attempting to convince him about anything will only try his patience. Another false statement, there is alot of Joes added every day to the movement and convinced with the truth.

[Mini-Me]

<facepalm>
I'm so glad you took my post to heart and understand what you're doing wrong. :rolleyes:


In my post there are alot more than you already know but only if you have time to read!
No, there really isn't.


Then there is a serious problem with your justice system!
Yes and no - however, you yourself mentioned that there is only probable cause to investigate those people, not solid enough evidence to outright convict beyond a reasonable doubt at this point.



http://stj911.org/paul/SDGJWantedPoster.pdf

:) Have not you heard of San Diego Citizens' Grand Jury
On The Crimes Of September 11, 2001

The fourteen persons named by the San Diego Citizens Grand Jury as showing probable cause for further investigation on the Charge of 'Conspiracy to Commit Mass Murder'


1-THOMAS PICKARD, Acting Director of the U. S. Federal Bureau of Investigation from June 25, 2001 to September 4, 2001

2-MICHAEL CHERKASKY, Chief Executive Officer of Kroll, Inc. on 9/11/01; former investigator in the Manhattan District Attorney's Office from 1978 to 1994; current C.E.O. of the Marsh & McClennan insurance firm

3-GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States on 9/11/01

4-LARRY SILVERSTEIN, C.E.O. of Silverstein Properties, primary leaseholder of the World Trade Center Twin Towers, and developer of the third skyscraper that disintegrated into its own footprint in lower Manhattan on 9/11/01, World Trade Building 7

5-RICHARD CHENEY, Vice-President of the U. S. on 9/11/01

6-DONALD RUMSFELD, Secretary of Defense of the U. S. on 9/11/01

7-MARVIN BUSH, member of Board of Directors of Securacom, a firm entrusted with security for the Twin Towers, from 1996 to 2000

8-WIRT WALKER, C.E.O. of Securacom (later Stratasec) from 1999 to 2003

9-RICHARD MYERS, Acting Chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff on 9/11/01

10-RALPH EBERHART, Commander of North American Aerospace Command (NORAD) on 9/11/01

11-L. PAUL BREMER, Executive with Marsh & McClennan on 9/11/01; Chairman of the U. S. Congress' National Commission on Terrorism from 1999 to 2000; U.S. Ambassador-at-Large for Counterterrorism from 1986 to 1989; Presidential Envoy to Irag and Adminstrator of the Coaltion Provisional Authority from May 2003 to December 2004

12-PETER G. PETERSON, C.E.O. of the Blackstone Group, parent corporation of one of three lease-holdersfor WTC 7 on 9/11/01; also Chairman of the Federal Reserve Ban New York and Chairman of the Council on Foreign Relations on 9/11/01

13-DAVID ROCKEFELLER, prime builder of the Twin Towers and all of the World Trade Center complex as Chairman of the Downtown-Lower Manhattan Association from 1958 to 1975; President or C.E.O. of the Chase Manhattan Bank from 1961 to 1981; Chairman of the Council on Foreign Relations from 1970 to 1985

14-MAURICE GREENBERG, C.E.O. of the American International Group (A.I.G.) on 9/11/01; A.I.G. the 'leading U. S.-based insurance organization and the largest underwriter of commercial and industrial insurance in the United States', according to its website in February 2000; A.I.G. also a major share-holder in Marsh & McClennan (whose C.E.O. on 9/11/01 was Maurice Greenberg's son Jeffrey; a major investor (7%) in the Blackstone Group; and the leading investor in Kroll, Inc., which became a subsidiary of Marsh & McClennan in 2002.

See above.



That is a false statement. Congress is going to fund the new investigation when we pressure them enough. And we are succeeding in our mission and someday they will break the censorship. No body can stop us! Not even you :D
What are you basing this statement on? What indication has Congress given that it's even listening right now? I hope you're right, but blind optimism in constant nagging is a pretty poor strategy. Sometimes it works, but sometimes it just alienates people and makes them tired of you - and you need to be able to recognize when things aren't working so you know when to change tactics. The vast majority of people are just sick and tired of truthers, and they don't even pay any attention to you guys anymore, because they haven't seen anything that isn't "easily rebutted." Now, many so-called rebuttals are probably bullshit and "not even wrong" because their factual basis is often entirely absent, but the average person doesn't know that - the average person doesn't have time to sift through several layers of rebuttals and counter-rebuttals, and most people eventually just turn off their brains and think, "The facts are so up in the air that I might as well just believe the official story." Others are like me, and they decide, "The facts are so up in the air that I'm just going to believe absolutely nothing of what I hear from anyone until they can empirically prove their case." The average person has seen so much "easily rebutted" pseudoscientific evidence that they don't even care to see "the next guy's hypothesis." The half-assed research and utter lack of consensus among 9/11 truthers is combining with your overzealous sermons to alienate the vast majority of your audience.

If you really give a damn about ever being successful, you need to listen to what I'm saying: I'm not telling you to go away and stop thinking about 9/11 truth. I'm telling you to start getting serious about finding out the truth before you go around trying to convince other people! Right now, most people just think, "Oh, God...it's those damn crazy truthers! Here they go again with this week's version of 9/11!" This may not be right, but you have to accept that it's the attitude most people have...and if you want to convince them, you're going to have to start changing tactics. Battering them harder and harder with the same old tactics will only turn them away even more.



That is another false statement. There is undeniable evidence of explosives in ground zero of the 3 buildings. Scientifically proven. There is enough evidence of lies, contradictions and false testimonies that cannot be denied.
This is the exact bullshit I'm talking about. You guys keep coming up with these overblown claims with words like "undeniable" and "scientifically proven" when there's a boatload of controversy and dissent among the scientists who have studied these things. By doing so, you're cheapening phrases like "scientifically proven" until they mean nothing to the people who hear them from you. Is there evidence? Yes, there is - but apparently, there's not enough to convince every scientist who looks at it - and therefore, the word of a few of them should not be enough to convince you beyond any doubt, either!



Another false statement, there is alot of Joes added every day to the movement and convinced with the truth.
With your current tactics, for every Joe you convince to join you, you're convincing many more people never to give you the time of day. For the love of God, just look at all of the vehemence that is directed at truthers! Do you seriously think your strategy is working? I'm trying to beg and plead with you to see reason and start building a stronger case before turning more and more people against you! There's too much evangelizing going on, and not enough actual research.

By the way, you just said you've convinced these Joes with "the truth." What truth? Please, tell me exactly what happened on 9/11, specifically. Until then, you don't actually have the truth - you only have a strong suspicion that the official story is a lie. I agree with you on that...but that doesn't mean I know squat about what actually did happen. I have my suspicions, but that's all.

[VoteForRonPaul]

This is the exact bullshit I'm talking about[/B]. You guys keep coming up with these overblown claims with words like "undeniable" and "scientifically proven" when there's a boatload of controversy and dissent among the scientists who have studied these things. By doing so, you're cheapening phrases like "scientifically proven" until they mean nothing to the people who hear them from you. Is there evidence? Yes, there is - but apparently, there's not enough to convince every scientist who looks at it - and therefore, the word of a few of them should not be enough to convince you beyond any doubt, either!

Sorry, but arguing with you about your useless points is just waste of my time. The time I will waste arguing about your non-sense I can use it to bring another Joe to truth.



Is there evidence? Yes, there is...
Thank you, that is all I wanted to hear.



It's apparent there are problems with the official story and that there should be a new investigation...
Thank you for standing by us on this one!

[constituent]

By doing so, you're cheapening phrases like "scientifically proven" until they mean nothing to the people who hear them from you.

i see that as a net positive, myself.

really, they mean nothing, w/ or w/out 9/11 "truth,"