PDA

View Full Version : Story on Ventura, Tucker




Rangeley
09-06-2008, 11:57 AM
From our friends at the Weekly Standard. (http://www.weeklystandard.com/content/public/articles/000/000/015/538nxumh.asp?pg=1) It's written by Matt Labash, a friend of Tucker Carlson (apperantly) and journalist for the above organization.



...My high-placed Paultard source gives me all sorts of insider dope. Former Minnesota governor/pro wrestler Jesse Ventura, who is on the speaking docket, is a serious 9/11 denier. So the Paulians have convinced Ventura to button it on the subject, since furthering the cause of liberty and sound money doesn't have much to do with who Ventura thinks may or may not have felled the Twin Towers...

...Backstage I find Jesse Ventura holding court. In jeans and a Navy SEAL T-shirt under a sports jacket, his large shiny head ringed with long wisps of unkempt hair, he has, since leaving office and moving to Mexico, taken on the demeanor of a deranged homeless man. When I approach, Ventura is talking about his Belgian Malinois attack dog who understands commands in three languages, and who's picking up Spanish as a fourth. "He's the smartest one in the house," he says, making an entirely believable claim.

I decide to bait Ventura, offering that some of the 9/11 Truthers in the crowd are disappointed their viewpoints aren't being represented.

"They will when I get up there," he growls. He says he's been studying the issue "for well over a year and a half," and he feels "very strongly that the truth has not been forthcoming."

When asked what the truth is and whether the government had something to do with it, he says, "I don't know. But I know this, I do have somewhat of a demolition background, being a member of the Navy's underwater demolition team, and I spoke to a few of my teammates a couple weeks ago. We're all in agreement that buildings can't fall at the rate of gravity without being assisted. And that's called physics, that's not an opinion."

Taking the stage, Ventura has the crowd ululating as he hits all the hot buttons, from the evils of the Patriot Act and closed presidential debates to the need to jealously guard our Second Amendment rights. Then, keeping his promise to me (and breaching assurances to convention organizers), he gets down to business, to a little "something called 9/11." It's like lighting a match around the double-knits. They ignite.

Under the impression that there are no stupid questions, Ventura proceeds to ask several: such as why doesn't the FBI website's list of top ten international terrorists include the 9/11 attacks among Osama bin Laden's other crimes? And why hasn't the Justice Department charged Osama bin Laden? Though he doesn't actually accuse the government of participating in the attacks, he doesn't need to, judging from the crowd reaction. "Inside job!" someone chants.

Backstage afterwards, Ventura is further holding court for reporters, after having hinted to the crowd that he might be amenable to a presidential run in 2012 if the Revolution stays on track. "I will be watching!" he threatened.

Tucker hadn't heard the speech, so I break the news to him that Ventura got off his leash. Being a devout believer in the conventional, single-bullet version of the 9/11 attacks (that the terrorists acted alone), Tucker is both alarmed and offended, but doesn't have much time to reflect. He is accosted by some grubby indie-media types who start trying to engage him: "Have you ever heard of the Controlled Demolition Hypothesis. .  .  . Who I believe did it are the ones who control our money systems. .  .  . Have you followed the [National Institute of Standards and Technology] report on the collapse of building seven?"

After a brief sparring match with the nutcakes, Tucker looks ashen. "This is crazy. I've got to get out of here. Let's go get dinner." We slip out the back door of the arena to hail a cab and get some steaks. But Tucker's still supposed to be emceeing the event, and Paul has yet to speak.

"Are you going to tell him you're leaving?" I ask.

"Nahhh," Tucker says. "I really like Ron Paul. I don't want to hurt his feelings."

While I can't say that the sole act of this journalist's baiting was what caused Ventura to break his promise to Ron Paul and the organizers of the rally, I can say Ventura, for whatever reason, broke his promise to them. People who said he wouldn't have been invited if Ron Paul didn't want him to talk about it are silly - he invited people who probably have all sorts of different views on different issues. The one area they all agreed on was on liberty - and not coincidentally, that was what the rally was about. It wasn't about religious views, it wasn't about people's favorite sports teams. And it wasn't about 9-11.

It also sheds light on Tucker Carlson's leaving - he was given assurances that it would stay on message, and that was broken. While I don't really like that he left, he wasn't the one to break the agreement and at least had a reason to leave.

Primbs
09-06-2008, 12:17 PM
Why leave at that point. He was already there on camera. Tucker can't hide the fact that he wasn't there.

Didn't Tucker put Ron Paul in a difficult position again, by leaving during the middle of an event?

RickyJ
09-06-2008, 12:19 PM
Tucker looks ashen. "This is crazy. I've got to get out of here. Let's go get dinner." We slip out the back door of the arena to hail a cab and get some steaks. But Tucker's still supposed to be emceeing the event, and Paul has yet to speak.

"Are you going to tell him you're leaving?" I ask.

"Nahhh," Tucker says. "I really like Ron Paul. I don't want to hurt his feelings."

Tucker is a good little stooge for the government. This was his plan all along folks, to sabotage the rally by getting up and leaving in the middle. He is a lowlife loser and always will be.

Kotin
09-06-2008, 12:21 PM
Tucker is a good little stooge for the government. This was his plan all along folks, to sabotage the rally by getting up and leaving in the middle. He is a lowlife loser and always will be.

yeah shit.. he sure sabotaged it.


I mean gosh, without tucker there it cant be good.


lol cmon wtf who cares that he left??

Jeremy
09-06-2008, 12:21 PM
this sounds like fiction :D

youre saying he left because he wanted to have a chat with some guy?

Rangeley
09-06-2008, 12:23 PM
Why leave at that point. He was already there on camera. Tucker can't hide the fact that he wasn't there.

Didn't Tucker put Ron Paul in a difficult position again, by leaving during the middle of an event?
I agree, I don't think he should have left. But when Ventura broke his promise, it meant that the promise to Tucker that it would not drift into such side topics was broken.

Rangeley
09-06-2008, 12:27 PM
this sounds like fiction :D

youre saying he left because he wanted to have a chat with some guy?
No, we already knew he left because of Ventura. This just shows that 1. Ventura wasn't supposed to talk about his 9-11 views, 2. Ventura was baited into talking about them on stage, 3. Ventura, whether directly because of the baiting or for another reason, broke his agreement and talked about his 9-11 views, 4. The agreement bring broken, Tucker decided to leave.

As I said before, I don't think Tucker should have even though the agreement was broken, but you have to admit that he wasn't the one breaking the agreement. He should have stayed despite it, though, but oh well.

Ninja Homer
09-06-2008, 12:28 PM
Tucker's a pussy. I hope they didn't pay him anything.

What promise did Ventura break? I haven't heard anything about that.

Jeremy
09-06-2008, 12:29 PM
No, we already knew he left because of Ventura. This just shows that 1. Ventura wasn't supposed to talk about his 9-11 views, 2. Ventura was baited into talking about them on stage, 3. Ventura, whether directly because of the baiting or for another reason, broke his agreement and talked about his 9-11 views, 4. The agreement bring broken, Tucker decided to leave.

As I said before, I don't think Tucker should have even though the agreement was broken, but you have to admit that he wasn't the one breaking the agreement. He should have stayed despite it, though, but oh well.

in other words, Matt Labash is our newest enemy

No1ButPaul08
09-06-2008, 12:32 PM
How does the author know that Ventura promised convention organizers to not speak about 9/11?

Rangeley
09-06-2008, 12:32 PM
in other words, Matt Labash is our newest enemy
The Weekly Standard is a neoconservative magazine, of course they are going to be hostile to our message and trying to do things like this. But the press always tries to bait people into saying things they shouldn't, not just us. If Ventura was truly so foolish as to take the bait and break the agreement, that doesn't reflect well on him. If he was planning on talking about it even without the baiting, well, that doesn't either.

Orgoonian
09-06-2008, 12:35 PM
Isn't the weekly standard owned by Bill Crystal?

Oops,he is the editor,my bad.

Primbs
09-06-2008, 12:35 PM
The campaign doesn't want to emphasize the 911 stuff. That is why they wanted Ventura not to mention it.

Probably Ventura got riled up before going on stage and forgot about that one part he wasn't suppose to mention.

It could have been an honest slip up on Ventura's part.

Tucker on the other has proven himself before to not have the best interest of Ron Paul at heart. When he shows up with hookers to a campaign event and gets national news, that is bad.

Did the Nevada delegation try to credential hookers for RNC to put on national television for John McCain? I don't think so.

Rangeley
09-06-2008, 12:41 PM
Isn't the weekly standard owned by Bill Crystal?
Owned by Rupert Murdoch's News Corp, founded/edited by Bill Kristol and Fred Barnes.

The campaign doesn't want to emphasize the 911 stuff. That is why they wanted Ventura not to mention it.

Probably Ventura got riled up before going on stage and forgot about that one part he wasn't suppose to mention.

It could have been an honest slip up on Ventura's part.

Tucker on the other has proven himself before to not have the best interest of Ron Paul at heart. When he shows up with hookers to a campaign event and gets national news, that is bad.

Did the Nevada delegation try to credential hookers for RNC to put on national television for John McCain? I don't think so.
Yeah, I don't think he should have been chosen as the emcee as he was only signing on under the agreement that people would not delve into their 9/11 views. They should have had someone who would be in even if someone broke their agreement and talked about it, not only just in case something like this happened, but because I think we need people with a higher level of commitment then that. Ron Paul doesn't believe in 9-11 conspiracy theories, yet it doesn't stop him from working with people who talk about it that share his view on freedom.

RickyJ
09-06-2008, 12:41 PM
If Ventura was truly so foolish as to take the bait and break the agreement


You have no proof there was any agreement to not talk about 9/11.

Ninja Homer
09-06-2008, 12:42 PM
Asking again... How do you know the CFL asked Ventura not to mention 9/11?

ClayTrainor
09-06-2008, 12:44 PM
Asking again... How do you know the CFL asked Ventura not to mention 9/11?

I would also like to know this, as it's the first i've heard of it.

Not denying it but, i would like to see some evidence of it before i believe it.

RickyJ
09-06-2008, 12:44 PM
Ron Paul doesn't believe in 9-11 conspiracy theories


Oh yes he does. He believes the biggest most far out one of them all, the government version.

Rangeley
09-06-2008, 12:46 PM
You have no proof there was any agreement to not talk about 9/11.
True, until this article I merely speculated that they would have asked people to stay off the topic. With this article, the author is claiming that there was an agreement. I realize it's the Weekly Standard and they have a rather terrible track record for truth, but why would they claim there was an agreement if there wasn't one?

Wouldn't the lack of an agreement be better for them, as they could then criticize the rally, Ron Paul, the CFL etc for approving of it?

RockEnds
09-06-2008, 12:50 PM
Honestly, I didn't even notice Tucker was gone until I got home and read this forum.

gls
09-06-2008, 12:54 PM
I highly doubt the C4L organizers cared about the questions Ventura posed. He did not say anything that is not a fact.

Tucker is an unprofessional baby and I hope he wasn't paid, though he probably was.

Ninja Homer
09-06-2008, 12:59 PM
True, until this article I merely speculated that they would have asked people to stay off the topic. With this article, the author is claiming that there was an agreement. I realize it's the Weekly Standard and they have a rather terrible track record for truth, but why would they claim there was an agreement if there wasn't one?

Wouldn't the lack of an agreement be better for them, as they could then criticize the rally, Ron Paul, the CFL etc for approving of it?

No offense, but I'm not accepting an article entitled, "Among the Paultards" as a source that there was some sort of agreement that speakers wouldn't talk about 9/11. There very well may have been an agreement, but that ain't a good source.

Here's another on-topic paragraph from that article (http://www.weeklystandard.com/content/public/articles/000/000/015/538nxumh.asp?pg=2):


My high-placed Paultard source gives me all sorts of insider dope. Former Minnesota governor/pro wrestler Jesse Ventura, who is on the speaking docket, is a serious 9/11 denier. So the Paulians have convinced Ventura to button it on the subject, since furthering the cause of liberty and sound money doesn't have much to do with who Ventura thinks may or may not have felled the Twin Towers. Tucker also won't introduce a speaker from the John Birch Society, just as a matter of principle. And though the schedule calls for a 12:30 P.M. opening bell, "the hemp activists have taken over organizing," says Tucker, "so there's not a chance that we start on time."

If this article is to be trusted, it seems to me that the reason Tucker left is because he refused to introduce the guy from the John Birch Society.

Once again... Tucker is a pussy.

RickyJ
09-06-2008, 01:00 PM
Honestly, I didn't even notice Tucker was gone until I got home and read this forum.


I didn't either. He obviously shouldn't have been there to start with.

PatriotOne
09-06-2008, 01:09 PM
Blah. blah, blah. You would think the writer and Tucker might reflect upon the questions posed. Seems to be quite a bit more important than that bullshit.

We're all in agreement that buildings can't fall at the rate of gravity without being assisted. And that's called physics, that's not an opinion."

why doesn't the FBI website's list of top ten international terrorists include the 9/11 attacks among Osama bin Laden's other crimes? And why hasn't the Justice Department charged Osama bin Laden?

Rangeley
09-06-2008, 01:17 PM
No offense, but I'm not accepting an article entitled, "Among the Paultards" as a source that there was some sort of agreement that speakers wouldn't talk about 9/11. There very well may have been an agreement, but that ain't a good source.

Here's another on-topic paragraph from that article (http://www.weeklystandard.com/content/public/articles/000/000/015/538nxumh.asp?pg=2):



If this article is to be trusted, it seems to me that the reason Tucker left is because he refused to introduce the guy from the John Birch Society.

Once again... Tucker is a pussy.
The John Birch Society guy was earlier, though. He didn't leave until after Ventura, who he did actually introduce (interestingly enough.)

As far as trusting the article's claim goes, I agree it's not proof. It just doesn't seem to me, to be something that they would lie about. But they could very well be, I guess you have to take it for what it is.

RockEnds
09-06-2008, 01:17 PM
I didn't either. He obviously shouldn't have been there to start with.

Agreed. To me, he was just an opening oddity. 'Wow, there's Carlson. I'll be damned. He showed up.' Kind of thing.

KenInMontiMN
09-06-2008, 01:17 PM
I'd say we got the best possibe scenario- Ventura didn't rant forever on the subject onstage, but limited himself to just a couple pointed questions; remarkable considering he didn't have his Belgian Malinois along for advice and to keep the bod on the short leash. Plus we got a better emcee to step up. What more do you want??

Ninja Homer
09-06-2008, 01:21 PM
Blah. blah, blah. You would think the writer and Tucker might reflect upon the questions posed. Seems to be quite a bit more important than that bullshit.

We're all in agreement that buildings can't fall at the rate of gravity without being assisted. And that's called physics, that's not an opinion."

why doesn't the FBI website's list of top ten international terrorists include the 9/11 attacks among Osama bin Laden's other crimes? And why hasn't the Justice Department charged Osama bin Laden?

No shit!

"Truth is treason in an empire of lies." - Ron Paul

So why do some think it's treasonous to the movement to even question the official 9/11 report? I understand why the sheeple think that way, but I expect more from a Ron Paul supporter.

I wouldn't call Ventura a "truther" I'd call him a "questioner", which is pretty much where I'm at on the issue. There's nothing wrong with that, it's just a healthy skepticism of a government that has obviously lied to us before. Hell, I question the official report just because Bush told me not to.

Ninja Homer
09-06-2008, 01:28 PM
The John Birch Society guy was earlier, though. He didn't leave until after Ventura, who he did actually introduce (interestingly enough.)

As far as trusting the article's claim goes, I agree it's not proof. It just doesn't seem to me, to be something that they would lie about. But they could very well be, I guess you have to take it for what it is.

Yeah, you're right on that.

I guess I'll just have to wait and see if anything else comes out about it. It's really not that big of a deal to me anyway.

I wasn't impressed with Tucker at all. However, BJ Lawson did an awesome job emceeing the Ron Paul Nation Celebration... I would have rather seen him do the Rally as well.

ChrisInMN
09-06-2008, 03:22 PM
Before the event even started, there were several 9/11 truthers there with media credentials talking to Tucker. The auditorium had hundreds of people with investigate 9/11 shirts on, there's no way that anyone there didn't know that 9/11 truth was at full force there.
As for the campaign asking Ventura not to talk about 9/11 - I doubt it. For a group of people that preach the constitution, I doubt they'd violate someone else's first amendment right to say what they wanted as long as it wasn't profane or off color (racist, etc.)
For whatever reason Tucker left the event, no one really noticed. It's not like he was the one that was holding the entire rally together by any means. If Tucker cared so damn much about Ron Paul, why wasn't he more vocal prior to the primaries? As far as I'm concerned Tucker is an idiot who caught on to the message after it was too late for him to help out.

ChrisInMN

Jeremy
09-06-2008, 03:30 PM
Don't forget that the article could simply be a lie and/or a joke.

gjvrieze
09-06-2008, 03:55 PM
Don't forget that the article could simply be a lie and/or a joke.

I have a hard time believing a neocon's view of our rally with any credit!!

Lovecraftian4Paul
09-06-2008, 04:33 PM
I have a hard time believing Ventura made any promises not to discuss something. That's very unlike him. Moreover, he only asked two very valid questions and kept himself under control fairly well. I was close to the podium while he was speaking. There were more than a few people in the audience yelling out "building seven," but Ventura just said "now, now, now" and moved on. I thought the former Governor did a good job of briefly touching on the subject and refusing to go onto more controversial questions about 9/11.

Tucker is a real letdown. Especially after he told us in his own introduction to give every speaker there a chance and listen to what they say. What a hypocritical coward!

gjvrieze
09-06-2008, 04:47 PM
Tucker is a real letdown. Especially after he told us in his own introduction to give every speaker there a chance and listen to what they say. What a hypocritical coward!

I always believed he was a neocon, so it surprised me to see his name on the list of people speaking in the first place....

Nirvikalpa
09-06-2008, 04:50 PM
Tucker needs to grow a pair, and Ventura needs to grow a brain.

SeanEdwards
09-06-2008, 04:59 PM
Tucker on the other has proven himself before to not have the best interest of Ron Paul at heart. When he shows up with hookers to a campaign event and gets national news, that is bad.



Showing up with hookers is bad, but showing up with a '9/11 was an inside job" sign is good?

I think I'd rather associate with prostitutes than crazy people.

JohnMeridith
09-06-2008, 05:06 PM
Showing up with hookers is bad, but showing up with a '9/11 was an inside job" sign is good?

I think I'd rather associate with prostitutes than crazy people.
I love it. The easiest way to stop all the "crazy people" is transparency of government. Maybe that will shut up us Pearl Harbor and JFK conspiracy people as well.

I doubt JV would make any promise to not speak his mind.

Rangeley
09-06-2008, 05:32 PM
For a group of people that preach the constitution, I doubt they'd violate someone else's first amendment right to say what they wanted as long as it wasn't profane or off color (racist, etc.)
It wasn't an open mic night where notable guests got to exercise their first amendment rights and speak on a topic of their choosing. The rally was for the CFL, and was about liberty. I don't see why people would think that the organizers wouldn't tell speakers to actually stay on topic.

Ron Paul recognizes that there is a lot of overlap between 9/11 Truthers, and the Liberty Movement - but it is simply an overlap. They are not the same movement, and this rally was not a rally for the 9/11 Truth movement. There is probably a lot of overlap between creationism and the Liberty movement - I think Ron Paul said he himself was a creationist - but does anyone think it would be appropriate for someone to go up and "ask questions" about evolution?

Further, the first amendment prevents the government from restricting free speech. It doesn't stop a private organization from telling it's speakers that they shouldn't talk about certain things when on stage. They don't have a right to speak up there, it was an honor given to a few lucky people. Ventura going off topic like that after being given the privilege is just too bad.

ClayTrainor
09-06-2008, 05:33 PM
Tucker needs to grow a pair, and Ventura needs to grow a brain.

I hear ya with the tucker "balls" coMment but, why do u think Ventura needs to grow a brain? What was so out of line with the bin laden questions? Ron Paul even admitted that the questions were perfectly valid in a post-rally interview.

I see alot of Ventura bashing but have yet to see anyone of the "anti-truthers" give a decent response to the perfectly valid questions Ventura raised.

Ventura also does not make claims, he just asks questions about things that don't make sense to him.

Tall Girl
09-06-2008, 05:41 PM
No, we already knew he left because of Ventura. This just shows that 1. Ventura wasn't supposed to talk about his 9-11 views, 2. Ventura was baited into talking about them on stage, 3. Ventura, whether directly because of the baiting or for another reason, broke his agreement and talked about his 9-11 views, 4. The agreement bring broken, Tucker decided to leave.


I am relieved to hear that Jessie was not suppose to talk about 9/11. I agree that it is too fringe of a topic and it has nothing to do with the cause for Liberty. Whether or not 9/11 was an "inside job" doesn't really matter at this point - it's done and over and we can't go back and fix it. I don't understand how people explain away the planes flying into the buildings. Were they holograms? LOL

When Jessie got off onto the 9/11 topic I felt a bit mortified. I thought, "Oh lovely, this is going to be the only news that comes out of this rally. The whole idea that it is a rally for Liberty isn't going to see any air tim." Although I've seen Jessie's remarks referred to in articles, they haven't played center stage in most articles and that is a relief!

Nirvikalpa
09-06-2008, 05:43 PM
I hear ya with the tucker "balls" coMment but, why do u think Ventura needs to grow a brain? What was so out of line with the bin laden questions? Ron Paul even admitted that the questions were perfectly valid in a post-rally interview.

I see alot of Ventura bashing but have yet to see anyone of the "anti-truthers" give a decent response to the perfectly valid questions Ventura raised.

Ventura also does not make claims, he just asks questions about things that don't make sense to him.

Simple: it wasn't the time or the place to be discussing the matter. Out of something called respect (for Ron Paul) he should have kept his big mouth shut and not have ran with his ego.

sratiug
09-06-2008, 05:45 PM
Anti-truthers are just stupid. Doesn't everybody know that some of those hijackers were found later alive and well? WTF? And why has there been no trial of Bin Laden. Really. Why not? Why were Bin Ladens aloud to fly out of the US (when no one else could) without being treated as suspects, or is it because they were suspects? Bush wanted Henry Kissinger to head the 911 Commission. One of the biggest criminals in history. Why not a prosecutor? There is no rational explanation for the events of 911. If you are anti-truth you are anti-American. Please STFU.

awake
09-06-2008, 05:54 PM
If I were looking to disrupt this movement the most (which I am not) I would most want to pour salt onto the Truthers vs Ron Paulers drama that is so easily done here. Remember folks there are programs already long ago at work to disrupt this movement. Be wise and recognize that it is systematic to them in nature - divide and conquer, place false leaders, diversion, play one faction on another etc.

Psyops 101

For those who do not fall for the above tactics can easily appreciate that we share a single idea that we all are allowed to say what we believe... let this be our common denominator of who is welcome in this movement and who is not.


The whole thing can be summed up in the universal solder portion of Dr. Pauls speech... we all have been deceived by powerful men and their delusional quests for self validation. Mr Ventura is not out of line in any way shape or form when he approaches the 9/11 topic, let the man ask valid questions....

RickyJ
09-06-2008, 06:25 PM
I am relieved to hear that Jessie was not suppose to talk about 9/11.

You can believe what you want to believe but I highly doubt that Jesse agreed to not talk about 9/11 and then did so. Jesse is a man of his word. First of all he wouldn't agree to not talk about something in the first place that he thought was important. Second, if he did so then he would keep his word.

Lovecraftian4Paul
09-06-2008, 06:26 PM
Yeah, there's no reason to believe Ventura made some kind of agreement when the only source is this neo-con article. I'll only believe it if someone inside or close to the CFL organizers speak up and say this was so.

RickyJ
09-06-2008, 06:28 PM
Out of something called respect (for Ron Paul) he should have kept his big mouth shut and not have ran with his ego.

It is OK to give Ron Paul respect, but when he is as wrong as he is about 9/11 it is time to wake him up, not let him remain ignorant.

ClayTrainor
09-06-2008, 08:54 PM
Simple: it wasn't the time or the place to be discussing the matter. Out of something called respect (for Ron Paul) he should have kept his big mouth shut and not have ran with his ego.

well, that's your opinion.

He didnt' make any baselss claims, and is a well known "911 Truth Advocate", so Ron Paul simply inviting him to speak is ground enough for the media to connect him to the 911 truthers.

Ron Paul is not afraid of associating himself with the truthers and actually welcomes their support but, you are correct there is a time and place for this angle of marketing but, i argue that Ventura did not disrespect Ron Pauls convention in any way.

Even if Ventura completely left out the bin laden questions, im pretty sure we'd have alot of people upset and badmouthing jesse simply because he's a truther, who implied that he may make a run for the presidency (with extreme confidence), and will most likely have a large portion of the RP Revolutions support. This tends to anger people who think the 911 conspiracies are simply ridiculous. Although i still have yet to hear what was so ridiculous about his questions.

Dont forget we're all labeled as conspiracy theorists by the media without even including the 911 issue.

Jesse does have a big ego, but I think he's genuinely concerned for his nation, and did not go into 911 truth, just asked a couple of provocative questions.

I actually think he was quite respectful with the issue and the questions he asked are genuine, logical questions that we should all be aware of, truther or not.

There were several people with 911 truth tshirts on at the rally... I dont appreciate the chanting and aggressive tactics at the rally but, i stand by my statement that,

Ventura said nothing out of line in regards to 911 and you guys seem more pissed off at his personality than his positions.

And i still stand my statement that i've been saying since the beginning of these Ventura topics...

I hear ALOT of bitching about Ventura's questions but have yet to hear 1 single response that discredits them.

SeanEdwards
09-06-2008, 10:16 PM
Anti-truthers are just stupid. Doesn't everybody know that some of those hijackers were found later alive and well? WTF? And why has there been no trial of Bin Laden. Really. Why not? Why were Bin Ladens aloud to fly out of the US (when no one else could) without being treated as suspects, or is it because they were suspects? Bush wanted Henry Kissinger to head the 911 Commission. One of the biggest criminals in history. Why not a prosecutor? There is no rational explanation for the events of 911. If you are anti-truth you are anti-American. Please STFU.

With us or against us, is it?

Hypocrite.

ClayTrainor
09-06-2008, 11:33 PM
With us or against us, is it?

Fuck you, hypocrite.

Yea i hear ya...

sometimes i really get angered at the behavior of some truthers.

I'm always preaching unity... we need everyone in this movement, truthers and anti-truthers alike.

The debate simply isnt over, and there's no point in us dividing ourselves on an unresolved issue when we have so much in common in so many other aspects of the political spectrum.

We need to learn to discuss 911 with respect, and leave the insults behind... that goes for both sides of the argument!

CasualApathy
09-06-2008, 11:37 PM
Simple: it wasn't the time or the place to be discussing the matter. Out of something called respect (for Ron Paul) he should have kept his big mouth shut and not have ran with his ego.

Ron Paul doesn't demand respect from people, thats what makes him so special. He would never limit the free speech of anyone because he is a man of principle. We should all live up to that standard instead of getting offended so easily, and so should people outside this movement. The only way they are going to learn that is by being brought out of their comfort-zone every once in a while.

jyakulis
09-07-2008, 06:29 PM
seriously tucker can eat shit. he probably lost us more votes than the truthers did singlehandedly with his little racist piece:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SWpADkP4QqY

at least 3 people that i spoke with about ron paul trying to talk them into supporting him immediately started telling me how ron was a racist and how they could never support him because of this.

Flash
09-07-2008, 10:50 PM
seriously tucker can eat shit. he probably lost us more votes than the truthers did singlehandedly with his little racist piece:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SWpADkP4QqY

at least 3 people that i spoke with about ron paul trying to talk them into supporting him immediately started telling me how ron was a racist and how they could never support him because of this.


The most shocking thing is that 3 people actually watched that boring show.

ChrisInMN
09-07-2008, 11:03 PM
It wasn't an open mic night where notable guests got to exercise their first amendment rights and speak on a topic of their choosing. The rally was for the CFL, and was about liberty. I don't see why people would think that the organizers wouldn't tell speakers to actually stay on topic.




And Ventura's speech was 100% about liberty. Before he brought up 9/11 he stated that his mother and father are both WWII vets, himself and his brother are both Vietnam Vets and that he's earned the right to say what he wants to say and regardless of the venue I agree with him.
After Ventura's been on Alex Jones several times talking 9/11, and every single mainstream media event he's done in support of his book (which again, he talks about 9/11 for half the book) and bring up 9/11 - does it really take a rocket scientist to understand what he's probably going to bring up in a speech?
Sure, it wasn't open mic night, but obviously someone thought it would be a good idea to have a Ventura open mic night and that's what they got. For people to cry about what happens after they make a choice is 100% against what Dr. Paul preaches. If they were scared of anything 9/11 related coming up, then Ventura was a poor pick for a speaker - plain and simple.

ChrisInMN

RickyJ
09-07-2008, 11:06 PM
Heck, whoever invited Tucker really screwed up. I sure hope Dr. Paul didn't.

libertarian4321
09-09-2008, 07:25 AM
Anti-truthers are just stupid. Doesn't everybody know that some of those hijackers were found later alive and well? WTF? And why has there been no trial of Bin Laden. Really. Why not? Why were Bin Ladens aloud to fly out of the US (when no one else could) without being treated as suspects, or is it because they were suspects? Bush wanted Henry Kissinger to head the 911 Commission. One of the biggest criminals in history. Why not a prosecutor? There is no rational explanation for the events of 911. If you are anti-truth you are anti-American. Please STFU.

You look good in that tin foil hat, where can I get one?

nate4ron
09-09-2008, 07:39 AM
It's hard enough getting people to support Ron Paul and his message, but it becomes impossible once they find out 9/11 truthers are associated with him. Good job, guys! Less people are inclined to join the "revolution" because you can't help but be so outspoken about 9/11 being an inside job. Awesome! :rolleyes:

HaddEnuff
09-09-2008, 10:38 AM
You look good in that tin foil hat, where can I get one?
In other words, you have no answers.

HaddEnuff
09-09-2008, 10:41 AM
It's hard enough getting people to support Ron Paul and his message, but it becomes impossible once they find out 9/11 truthers are associated with him. Good job, guys! Less people are inclined to join the "revolution" because you can't help but be so outspoken about 9/11 being an inside job. Awesome! :rolleyes:
Yeah, guys. If you "truthers" weren't here, the mainstream media would have seen the light and jumped on Ron Paul's side and he would be the Republican nominee by now.:rolleyes:

nate4ron
09-09-2008, 11:07 AM
Yeah, guys. If you "truthers" weren't here, the mainstream media would have seen the light and jumped on Ron Paul's side and he would be the Republican nominee by now.:rolleyes:

I'm talking about getting others to join Ron Paul's movement and adopt his message. I said nothing of the mainstream media...

HaddEnuff
09-09-2008, 01:14 PM
I'm talking about getting others to join Ron Paul's movement and adopt his message. I said nothing of the mainstream media...
...and that's the problem. You don't even see the connection.