message to johnknoefler:
Israel does not have democracy for non-Jews - they have discrimination, they have a "Jewish democracy", and Ahmadinejad's calls are suppressed in the US. Do you deny that his calls for democracy are suppressed here in the US? Look at his letter to Bush, SUPPRESSED here in the US. Look at what he said in the interview, SUPPRESSED here in the US. Look at the comments of Iranians officials, SUPPRESSED here in the US. See link below.
As far as democracy, hell the US was called a democracy in 1831. Was it a democracy for all the blacks?
Hamas was elected then Israel and the US lashed out against the Palestinians. The Palestinians are not allowed to vote any way other than how Israel and the US insists they vote. "instantly Israel and the United States instituted harsh punishment of the Palestinians, cutting off funds, stepping up atrocities, and starving them, to Punish the Palestinians. That pretty much tells you what is meant by "democracy promotion." p11, What We Say Goes, Chomsky
what you refer to is NOT the same. The media is manipulating the public into thinking he has said he would militarily attack Iran. He has said no such thing. He as called for the death of s system of perpetual discrimination against non-Jews.
we are talking about a racist extremist country and agenda. The Zionists moved in and were killing OTHER JEWS because they opposed the racist agenda. You are not hearing most of the crimes Israel commits.
Are you one of these "Christian Zionists". (someone taking a false interpretation of the Bible) seriously, what the hell are you calling me a "liar" about? Look beyond the US media, you don't realize how devious it really is?
LOOK how extreme the US media is. they push lies on us about the very reason we were attacked! Thomas Friedman lies about bin Laden's motives. Friedman claims, "the fact is that bin Laden never focused on this issue. He only started talking about "Palestine" after September 11, when he sensed that he might be losing the support of the Arab street. " (p311 of Longitudes & Attitudes ) and " Osama bin Laden never mentioned the Palestinian cause as motivating his actions until he felt he was losing support in the Arab world. " (p361-362 of Longitudes & Attitudes ) What Friedman has written is a flat out lie. To give just one example that disproves what Friedman wrote: "Your position against Muslims in Palestine is despicable and disgraceful. America has no shame. " - Osama bin Laden May 1998
Do you deny these lies? Do you deny this suppression? Do you deny that Ahmadinejad's calls for democracy in Israel have been suppressed? Even for argument's sake, if you want to insist that Ahmadinejad's calls "aren't sincere" you can't deny that the US media SUPPRESSED his calls. If the media were on the level, they would report it and then discuss it!
Monday, March 17, 2008
Sunday, March 16, 2008
Representative Press Needs Your Help.
Representative Press needs your help. We have to take this to a new level of publicity and raise awareness about this campaign, making a lot more videos will help this mission. Funds are needed to get new computer because what I am working with now is too slow and it is taking too long to make new videos. And older computers don't last forever, I don't want to be in a position again of not being able to make new videos. You can help support Representative Press's campaign for truth by getting a button. For each 10 dollar button you buy, 9 dollars will go to Representative Press. Or you can donate any amount using Paypal.
There are four different button styles:
See The Public Campaign to Stop the Lies and the Denial of the Main Motive for the 9/11 Attacks: U.S. Support for Israel
There are four different button styles:
- It Was Support for Israel That Got Us Attacked on 9/11
- It Was Support for Israel Mini Button
- Mini Button (10 pack)
- It is Depraved to Deny the Main Motive for the 9/11 Attacks.
- It is Depraved to Deny Mini Button
- Mini Button (10 pack)
See The Public Campaign to Stop the Lies and the Denial of the Main Motive for the 9/11 Attacks: U.S. Support for Israel
I'd rather not get into Israel and Palestine
some posts I made to others:
"I'd rather not get into Israel and Palestine"
It is a shame because outrage at US support for Israel's crimes motivated the 9/11 hijackers to attack the US.
And people know damn well that was the motive. Pointing out a motive for a crime does not mean you endorse the crime. I should not have to point that out but in an environment where people are unwilling to discuss Israel and Palestine, it needs to be pointed out. Israel supporters often resort to social blackmail of accusing those who tell the truth of "justifying" terrorism.
--------another message I posted:
didn't hear Wright say "we deserved to get hit on 9/11."
What I did hear is him correctly point out horrific crimes and point out how people ignore them and act shocked that the US would get attacked.
cortmeister262, do you actually deny the motive for the crime, the motive for the 9/11 attacks? If you really don't know the motive, watch my video "What motivated the 9/11 hijackers"
and yes the main motive is outrage at US gov support of Israeli crimes. Did you really not know that?
"I'd rather not get into Israel and Palestine"
It is a shame because outrage at US support for Israel's crimes motivated the 9/11 hijackers to attack the US.
And people know damn well that was the motive. Pointing out a motive for a crime does not mean you endorse the crime. I should not have to point that out but in an environment where people are unwilling to discuss Israel and Palestine, it needs to be pointed out. Israel supporters often resort to social blackmail of accusing those who tell the truth of "justifying" terrorism.
--------another message I posted:
didn't hear Wright say "we deserved to get hit on 9/11."
What I did hear is him correctly point out horrific crimes and point out how people ignore them and act shocked that the US would get attacked.
cortmeister262, do you actually deny the motive for the crime, the motive for the 9/11 attacks? If you really don't know the motive, watch my video "What motivated the 9/11 hijackers"
and yes the main motive is outrage at US gov support of Israeli crimes. Did you really not know that?
Saturday, March 15, 2008
nail down specific facts
Diane,
Events with regard to Fallon's resignation have preoccupied my time. Fallon's resignation is frightening. President Bush and his administration are totally out of control and it is a bad sign for Fallon to resign given the context.
I do want to respond to your points but first I want to point out that I provided two links with regard to Mike Ruppert’s: Crossing the Rubicon because realitydesign said it "is the backbone of non demolition 911 research" and "the hardcore research set." You wrote that I "called our attention to an attempted debunking of Michael C. Ruppert’s timeline by someone with the moniker “COINTELPRO Tool,” BUT what I did was provide two links to debunk two specific claims which Ruppert makes. The first link you ignored. It showed that Ruppert doesn't know what he is talking about with regard to Cheney supposedly being in charge of NORAD. The first link shows there's "minimal or no supporting evidence" for Ruppert’s claim. That was what I was calling your attention to with that link but you ignored that point. The second link went directly to a section which debunked Ruppert’s claim about Osama bin Laden meeting a top CIA official at the American hospital in Dubai. That point, which the writer addresses "from the top," was what I was calling your attention to with the second link but you didn't address that point but rather went into other things. The writer points out "first of all, Le Figaro never "confirmed" anything with Dubai hospital staff, and Ruppert knows this." What I directly linked to was what I was really trying to point out, I didn't intend on discussing the other points, I have not even read "COINTELPRO Tool” on Afghanistan. I hope the tone of this response doesn't sound too gruff, it is not my intention. I just wanted to nail down specific facts. I think a lot of 9/11 conspiracy stuff endlessly shifts focus when specific points get debunked. I think that is not a good thing obviously.
I understand you wrote that you'll respond regarding other issues later. I look forward to it. I will post a reply to specific points with regard to 9/11 and the motive. Thank you for taking the time with your "Second reply to Tom a.k.a. “Representative Press”" I will respond in detail to that soon.
-Tom
Events with regard to Fallon's resignation have preoccupied my time. Fallon's resignation is frightening. President Bush and his administration are totally out of control and it is a bad sign for Fallon to resign given the context.
I do want to respond to your points but first I want to point out that I provided two links with regard to Mike Ruppert’s: Crossing the Rubicon because realitydesign said it "is the backbone of non demolition 911 research" and "the hardcore research set." You wrote that I "called our attention to an attempted debunking of Michael C. Ruppert’s timeline by someone with the moniker “COINTELPRO Tool,” BUT what I did was provide two links to debunk two specific claims which Ruppert makes. The first link you ignored. It showed that Ruppert doesn't know what he is talking about with regard to Cheney supposedly being in charge of NORAD. The first link shows there's "minimal or no supporting evidence" for Ruppert’s claim. That was what I was calling your attention to with that link but you ignored that point. The second link went directly to a section which debunked Ruppert’s claim about Osama bin Laden meeting a top CIA official at the American hospital in Dubai. That point, which the writer addresses "from the top," was what I was calling your attention to with the second link but you didn't address that point but rather went into other things. The writer points out "first of all, Le Figaro never "confirmed" anything with Dubai hospital staff, and Ruppert knows this." What I directly linked to was what I was really trying to point out, I didn't intend on discussing the other points, I have not even read "COINTELPRO Tool” on Afghanistan. I hope the tone of this response doesn't sound too gruff, it is not my intention. I just wanted to nail down specific facts. I think a lot of 9/11 conspiracy stuff endlessly shifts focus when specific points get debunked. I think that is not a good thing obviously.
I understand you wrote that you'll respond regarding other issues later. I look forward to it. I will post a reply to specific points with regard to 9/11 and the motive. Thank you for taking the time with your "Second reply to Tom a.k.a. “Representative Press”" I will respond in detail to that soon.
-Tom
Thursday, March 13, 2008
"would be foolish and dangerous" (what about would be a CRIME?!)
"A U.S. attack on Iran would be foolish and dangerous." - says justforeignpolicy.org
It really annoys me to see people who should know better make no mention of the fact that attacking would be a war crime. It really annoys me to see people who should know better ignore international law. The NYT is notorious for doing so.
the website justforeignpolicy.org writes, "Military Threats Don't."
THAT isn't the point, I don't care if a crime "works" or not, IT IS STILLA CRIME! And ignoring that fact HELPS sell future wars. Look at this (and it isn't just NBC of course) see video: NBC Makes Mockery of US Constitution & Rule of Law
It really annoys me to see people who should know better make no mention of the fact that attacking would be a war crime. It really annoys me to see people who should know better ignore international law. The NYT is notorious for doing so.
the website justforeignpolicy.org writes, "Military Threats Don't."
THAT isn't the point, I don't care if a crime "works" or not, IT IS STILLA CRIME! And ignoring that fact HELPS sell future wars. Look at this (and it isn't just NBC of course) see video: NBC Makes Mockery of US Constitution & Rule of Law
Dear Mr. Miklaszewski
Dear Mr. Miklaszewski,
Could you explain why you use euphemisms to cover-up what is in fact a war crime? You write, "As always, the U.S. would never take the "military option" off the table in case conditions should change and Iran posed a threat to the U.S. or its allies in the region."
Threatening to attack Iran is against international law and attacking them is a war crime. Is it NBC's position that violating international law and carrying out war crimes is so trivial and expected that it should not even be reported? War crimes are simply "options" that a country may decide to do? You think a country has the right to decide that another country is "a threat" and then launch an attack on it? Or is this a right you grant to only certain countries? Violating international law is serious, your reporting does not reflect that fact. Your reporting makes a mockery of our Constitution and the rule of law. Your article assumes violating international law is a non-issue.
"The United Nations Charter is a treaty of the United States, and as such forms part of the "supreme law of the land" under the Constitution, Article VI, Clause 2. The UN Charter is the highest treaty in the world, superseding states’ conflicting obligations under any other international agreement. (Art. 103, UN Charter)
Under the UN Charter, there are only two circumstances in which the use of force is permissible: in collective or individual self-defense against an actual or imminent armed attack; and when the Security Council has directed or authorized use of force to maintain or restore international peace and security. Neither of those circumstances now exist. Absent one of them, U.S. use of force against Iran is unlawful." (text used from http://www.wslfweb.org/docs/Iraqstatemt.htm about a very similar situation with Iraq)
Sincerely,
Tom Murphy
Above is a message to Jim Miklaszewski, NBC News Chief Pentagon Correspondent
see video NBC Makes Mockery of US Constitution & Rule of Law
Could you explain why you use euphemisms to cover-up what is in fact a war crime? You write, "As always, the U.S. would never take the "military option" off the table in case conditions should change and Iran posed a threat to the U.S. or its allies in the region."
Threatening to attack Iran is against international law and attacking them is a war crime. Is it NBC's position that violating international law and carrying out war crimes is so trivial and expected that it should not even be reported? War crimes are simply "options" that a country may decide to do? You think a country has the right to decide that another country is "a threat" and then launch an attack on it? Or is this a right you grant to only certain countries? Violating international law is serious, your reporting does not reflect that fact. Your reporting makes a mockery of our Constitution and the rule of law. Your article assumes violating international law is a non-issue.
"The United Nations Charter is a treaty of the United States, and as such forms part of the "supreme law of the land" under the Constitution, Article VI, Clause 2. The UN Charter is the highest treaty in the world, superseding states’ conflicting obligations under any other international agreement. (Art. 103, UN Charter)
Under the UN Charter, there are only two circumstances in which the use of force is permissible: in collective or individual self-defense against an actual or imminent armed attack; and when the Security Council has directed or authorized use of force to maintain or restore international peace and security. Neither of those circumstances now exist. Absent one of them, U.S. use of force against Iran is unlawful." (text used from http://www.wslfweb.org/docs/Iraqstatemt.htm about a very similar situation with Iraq)
Sincerely,
Tom Murphy
Above is a message to Jim Miklaszewski, NBC News Chief Pentagon Correspondent
see video NBC Makes Mockery of US Constitution & Rule of Law
Wednesday, March 12, 2008
Why Fallon's Resignation is Frightening
Why Fallon's Resignation is Frightening
See Video:
Defense Secretary Robert Gates did not have to accept Admiral Fallon's resignation. "The military people think basically that Admiral Fallon was PUSHED OUT" - Mark Thompson Time Magazine National Security Correspondent
Fallon is described as "the one person in the military or Pentagon standing between the White House and war with Iran."
See new video: NBC Makes Mockery of US Constitution & Rule of Law
See Video:
Defense Secretary Robert Gates did not have to accept Admiral Fallon's resignation. "The military people think basically that Admiral Fallon was PUSHED OUT" - Mark Thompson Time Magazine National Security Correspondent
Fallon is described as "the one person in the military or Pentagon standing between the White House and war with Iran."
See new video: NBC Makes Mockery of US Constitution & Rule of Law
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
Fallon's resignation is frightening.
Fallon's resignation is frightening. President Bush and his administration are totally out of control and it is a bad sign for Fallon to resign given the context. It is unwise to simply hope that it doesn't "mean anything" with regard to a totally outrageous, illegal and unthinkable act which could be catastrophic for God knows how many people. The act I refer to is being discussed matter-of-factly as "war with Iran." A clear war crime and the mainstream media, as I type this, discuss it as simply an "option." It is NOT an option, it is a crime that can not be allowed to be carried out. We can not allow domestic forces to violate our laws and put our lives at risk. Bush attacks countries without any legal, legitimate or moral reason! 
He LIES about the reason why he started his war with Iraq! Bush has said at least four times now that Saddam didn't let the inspectors in. This is how out of control Bush is, it must be made clear immediately to Bush that he has no authority at all to attack another country. All those powers must be taken from him in the legal procedure that we the American people have at our disposal to protect ourselves, impeachment. Mainstream media is working against us. For Bush to claim that Saddam didn't let the inspectors in is totally off the wall and it is DANGEROUS for mainstream media to let such a thing slide. We have a man with SERIOUS problems running our country. This threatens our lives. SEE VIDEO
"The current issue of Esquire Magazine portrays Fallon as the one person in the military or Pentagon standing between the White House and war with Iran. The article credits Fallon with "brazenly challenging his commander in chief" over a possible war with Iran, which Fallon called an "ill-advised action," and implies Fallon would resign rather than go to war against Iran." - By Jim Miklaszewski, NBC News Chief Pentagon Correspondent - Posted at NBC News BLOG "Field Notes" on Tuesday, March 11, 2008 11:25 AM
Breaking: CentCom Chief Admiral Fallon Resigns
Subscribe to Representative Press's Channel on YouTube (it's free and it helps)
See new video: NBC Makes Mockery of US Constitution & Rule of Law
many people. The act I refer to is being discussed matter-of-factly as "war with Iran." A clear war crime and the mainstream media, as I type this, discuss it as simply an "option." It is NOT an option, it is a crime that can not be allowed to be carried out. We can not allow domestic forces to violate our laws and put our lives at risk. Bush attacks countries without any legal, legitimate or moral reason! He LIES about the reason why he started his war with Iraq! Bush has said at least four times now that Saddam didn't let the inspectors in. This is how out of control Bush is, it must be made clear immediately to Bush that he has no authority at all to attack another country. All those powers must be taken from him in the legal procedure that we the American people have at our disposal to protect ourselves, impeachment. Mainstream media is working against us. For Bush to claim that Saddam didn't let the inspectors in is totally off the wall and it is DANGEROUS for mainstream media to let such a thing slide. We have a man with SERIOUS problems running our country. This threatens our lives. SEE VIDEO"The current issue of Esquire Magazine portrays Fallon as the one person in the military or Pentagon standing between the White House and war with Iran. The article credits Fallon with "brazenly challenging his commander in chief" over a possible war with Iran, which Fallon called an "ill-advised action," and implies Fallon would resign rather than go to war against Iran." - By Jim Miklaszewski, NBC News Chief Pentagon Correspondent - Posted at NBC News BLOG "Field Notes" on Tuesday, March 11, 2008 11:25 AM
Breaking: CentCom Chief Admiral Fallon Resigns
Subscribe to Representative Press's Channel on YouTube (it's free and it helps)
See new video: NBC Makes Mockery of US Constitution & Rule of Law
U.S. Gov. Lies to American People and the Troops
U.S. Gov. Lies to American People and the Troops about Pat Tillman and Jessica Lynch (see video)
Hearing of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee: House Hearing on Accuracy of Battlefield Information
"Our hearing today has been about two cases, the Tillman case and the Lynch case, and in both cases, it seems like we have - we say deceptive - misleading information - it wasn't misleading information, we have false information that was put out to the American people. Stories that were fabricated and made up." - Rep. Henry Waxman, Oversight and Government Reform Chairman
READ MORE HERE
Hearing of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee: House Hearing on Accuracy of Battlefield Information
"Our hearing today has been about two cases, the Tillman case and the Lynch case, and in both cases, it seems like we have - we say deceptive - misleading information - it wasn't misleading information, we have false information that was put out to the American people. Stories that were fabricated and made up." - Rep. Henry Waxman, Oversight and Government Reform Chairman
READ MORE HERE
Monday, March 10, 2008
9/11 discussion of basic facts, The "9/11 Truth Movement" is a cruel joke.
9/11 discussion of basic facts, the "9/11 Truth Movement" is a cruel joke.
Hello Diane,Thank you for the reply. I hope this forum will be productive and will advance the cause of justice and security for all. I think this can be achieved if we discuss the facts and the issues. A quick point, I do think my gripe was justified, if you look at how the discussion of basic facts is handled, the unwillingness to discuss and the exclusion of the evidence which debunks their claims, this unreasonableness dominates their forums. I think you are trying too hard to find an excuse for the unreasonableness I have encountered several times. Did you see my e-mail exchange with Justin A. Martell, founder of Student Scholars For 9/11 Truth?
But let's get to the facts and issues. Thank you for taking note of some of the things I have written on my blog, I do plan to do justice to your post but I may not get to explore every point within this post, I plan to get to everything you mention, if not this post then a subsequent one.
You wrote, "We all can agree that the “they hate our freedoms” excuse was ridiculous." I agree. And when I say I agree, I mean that the “they hate our freedoms” excuse was ridiculous. And I assume you know that "we all"does not include all people and that not all people want this truth to be stated. And it should be pointed out that mainstream media caters to those who don't want to think the excuse is ridiculous or don't want others to think it is. And I should point out that the “they hate our freedoms” excuse is an excuse used to protect specific foreign policies from scrutiny, the excuse is not being used for no reason, the reason is to hide the real motives. Do you agree? Look at how pundits omit the specific foreign policies which terrorist themselves list as the reasons why they attack.
I would like to point out how sad it is that while "we all can agree that the “they hate our freedoms” excuse was ridiculous," we all can't get behind that as a point of discussion to demand that it be addressed in the public forum. If the "9/11 Truth Movement" is indeed a demand for truth, why isn't the very first rallying cry a demand that Bush stop lying about the motive for the attack? This is why it is so frustrating to see the "Truth Movement" doing what it is doing. I think you are ignoring my point about the damage this "Truth Movement" has done. You see their websites, they're not confronting Bush on his lying about the motive, they totally misdirect people away from the reality of what the attack was about! This is such a serious thing, this really is unfair. The constant refrain about an "official story," as if all politicians and people in government agree on what happened, totally ignores the fact that what Bush says and what the CIA, FBI and others say are not the same thing. The movement's constant refrain of "official story" is like a propaganda technique which suppresses the fact that Bush and the intelligence agencies are saying different things. The "9/11 Truth Movement" is a cruel joke.
And I want to point out that I didn't say that the "truth movement" was a conspiracy. I think most are independent people who mistakenly believe in a convoluted conspiracy theory and in doing so they unintentionally end up doing what the manipulative commissioners of the 9/111 commission did, cover-up the motives for the attacks. The frustrating thing is this is a life and death issue and I don't like what I see from some of the more vocal and persistent advocates, an immature unreasonable behavior (I will talk about the top ones soon, meanwhile see my blog comments on Griffin and Jones
I appreciate that you are trying to take a serious approach to this so we can end the corrupt political policies and that you're at least starting to take a critical look at the convoluted "controlled demolition" theory. You are being misled by people who are charlatans, con-men or fools. Their arguments are not rational nor scientific. For goodness sakes, Jones doesn't even understand the central basic fact about why the buildings failed, even though he has read what NIST has said.
There is no way around it, what he doesn't understand (and there is no good reason for not understanding it) is CENTRAL to why the buildings collapsed and it is backed up by evidence that he is ignoring either deliberately or out of incompetence. The man demonstrates clearly that he should not be writing a paper like this or be involved in any academic endeavors because if he can't understand what NIST is saying in their report, he has no right trying to write scientific papers. I don't know what the defect is with his mind but there is a problem of some sort, given the evidence he indicates he doesn't understand. It really is disgusting that his ignorance or deception has gone this far. Please read what I wrote at the link, I think it is cut and dry: Prof. Steven E. Jones and his 911 paper
Jones doesn't understand that the photographic evidence and eyewitness reports are of the bowing perimeter columns? After quoting this part of the NIST report, "To the extent that the simulations deviated from the photographic evidence or eyewitness reports," Jones writes " [e.g., complete collapse occurred]" ( e.g. means "for example".) But Jones is totally wrong! NIST is NOT talking about "complete collapse" but rather is referring to the observable events BEFORE complete collapse! Jones has demonstrated that he is embarrassingly not fit to publish scientific papers.
And this kind of incompetence, misunderstanding or deliberate deception is what makes up the "9/11 Truth Movement." Why the hell can't the movement deal with the things we know? The 9/11 commissioners kept testimony out of the 9/11 Report because they didn't want the American people to reassess the policy of supporting Israel. This fact is admitted to in the Kean and Hamilton book. Why isn't the movement even touching that fact?
-Tom
Saturday, March 08, 2008
Samantha Power
"Yet these actions did not arouse such anger in Power. Why?"
Power has a sick mind. She even wrote a review of Chomsky's "Hegemony or Survival" and ignored the fact that he demolishes the notions she holds about Kosovo (see pages 54-55 of "Hegemony or Survival")
She serves powerful interests and she is in denial, what is extremely irritating is for her to review his book and ignore the fact that Chomsky demolishes a central tenet of her world view concerning Kosovo.
Dimitri Oram writes in his article Whitewashing Western Intervention, "Ms. Power presents a warped and decontextualized version of events, relying largely on the say-so of of various interventionists and hawkish US officials, omitting key facts and distorting others."
She is a sick woman, Obama is a monster too.
Power has a sick mind. She even wrote a review of Chomsky's "Hegemony or Survival" and ignored the fact that he demolishes the notions she holds about Kosovo (see pages 54-55 of "Hegemony or Survival")
She serves powerful interests and she is in denial, what is extremely irritating is for her to review his book and ignore the fact that Chomsky demolishes a central tenet of her world view concerning Kosovo.
Dimitri Oram writes in his article Whitewashing Western Intervention, "Ms. Power presents a warped and decontextualized version of events, relying largely on the say-so of of various interventionists and hawkish US officials, omitting key facts and distorting others."
She is a sick woman, Obama is a monster too.
General gripe thread - about the 9/11 Truth movement
General gripe thread - about the 9/11 Truth movement (I posted this at New York City activist )
My gripe is how the facts which disprove their case don't get a fair hearing.
I have been banned from forums just for stating basic facts.
Diane, I think the following info will answer your questions about 9/11:
Please check out my page WTC Pre-Collapse Bowing Debunks 9/11 "Controlled Demolition" Theory and see my videos Sorry Decky11, 9/11 was NOT an "inside job" and Facts the "9/11 Skeptics" don't want you to see among others. (search "9/11" at my YouTube videos page)
My gripe is how the facts which disprove their case don't get a fair hearing.
I have been banned from forums just for stating basic facts.
Diane, I think the following info will answer your questions about 9/11:
Please check out my page WTC Pre-Collapse Bowing Debunks 9/11 "Controlled Demolition" Theory and see my videos Sorry Decky11, 9/11 was NOT an "inside job" and Facts the "9/11 Skeptics" don't want you to see among others. (search "9/11" at my YouTube videos page)
Tuesday, March 04, 2008
Justin A. Martell
So Justin has time to debate yet he claims he "really doesn't have time" to answer even one question that I asked him. Here is my e-mail to Justin.
This is his e-mail to me in response to my e-mail:
("RE: I am making a video response to you" e-mail sent on 11/4/07)
Tom,
First of all, am I really worth devoting your time and energy to make a video response? Second, I didn't really read the message you sent me because a couple sentences in you started going into the Zionist stuff. Sorry, while I think elements of Israeli intelligence were involved, I don't subscribe to much of that.* [*NOTE THAT Justin gets this wrong, I say nothing about "Israeli intelligence" being involved. He apparently makes the assumption that I argue that because of a comment posted by someone else. Justin doesn't pay attention to details and simply goes off on tangents.] Third, I also don't appreciate you posting the email that you sent me on your website. It's disingenuous to post that without telling me, rude, and certainly not an example of good journalism ethics. Lastly, I don't really have time to engage you. For a refutation of ALL of your claims please refer to the chapter on the NIST report and Popular Mechanics in Griffin's Debunking 9/11 Debunking.
Regards,
Justin A. Martell
Scholars For 9/11 Truth (SM)
Founder - Student Scholars For 9/11 Truth
www.sst911.org
This is his e-mail to me in response to my e-mail:
("RE: I am making a video response to you" e-mail sent on 11/4/07)
Tom,
First of all, am I really worth devoting your time and energy to make a video response? Second, I didn't really read the message you sent me because a couple sentences in you started going into the Zionist stuff. Sorry, while I think elements of Israeli intelligence were involved, I don't subscribe to much of that.* [*NOTE THAT Justin gets this wrong, I say nothing about "Israeli intelligence" being involved. He apparently makes the assumption that I argue that because of a comment posted by someone else. Justin doesn't pay attention to details and simply goes off on tangents.] Third, I also don't appreciate you posting the email that you sent me on your website. It's disingenuous to post that without telling me, rude, and certainly not an example of good journalism ethics. Lastly, I don't really have time to engage you. For a refutation of ALL of your claims please refer to the chapter on the NIST report and Popular Mechanics in Griffin's Debunking 9/11 Debunking.
Regards,
Justin A. Martell
Scholars For 9/11 Truth (SM)
Founder - Student Scholars For 9/11 Truth
www.sst911.org
Monday, March 03, 2008
Representative Press's Channel Guide #1
Representative Press's Channel Guide #1
Current Affairs, Foreign Policy, Domestic Policy
Politics should not be privatized. Political power should be in the hands of the people.
Don't let the Bush Administration trick us into another war. President Bush must be impeached in order to prevent him from committing another war crime by attacking Iran. We must end the wars of aggression in the Middle East, NOT expand them into a World War! Ending corrupt political policies is the only way to ensure security. Armed with the knowledge, we can end the terrorist threat
Current Affairs, Foreign Policy, Domestic Policy
Politics should not be privatized. Political power should be in the hands of the people.
What motivated the 9/11 hijackers? See testimony most didn't
Next video we will hear from James, the man who asked Lee Hamilton, "why aren't we addressing the gorilla in the room? The gorilla in the room is US support for Israel." Lee Hamilton insults the American people at a "9/11 Public Discourse Project" Q&A. At the August 2, 2005 "public event," Hamilton quickly tries to silence someone who asks why US support for Israel isn't being addressed since it is what drove the plotter of 9/11 to attack us.
Name: TomDon't let the Bush Administration trick us into another war. President Bush must be impeached in order to prevent him from committing another war crime by attacking Iran. We must end the wars of aggression in the Middle East, NOT expand them into a World War! Ending corrupt political policies is the only way to ensure security. Armed with the knowledge, we can end the terrorist threat
Thursday, February 28, 2008
message and reply on YouTube
Hello,
My name is Michal, and I live in Israel. In Israel I study, enjoy with friends, do my obligations to school and friends, and just live the life anyone would live anywhere in the world.
I live here, and I hear everyday of people being sent in a bad state to hospitals in Sderot, because rockets have been fired on them, even after Israel tried to get peace and moved out of every single inch in Gaza, and tried to give the Palestinians there a good life. In return we were betrayed, and kept being slaughtered.
I'd like to know, how in you video "If Americans Knew What Israel Is Doing", you can say such things about us? ISrael always tried to get peace, and is much beyond war. It's a country that values humans and lives of others, and tries to protect its citizens and give them a good life no matter what. Even in war- it doesn't do anything another country wouldn't have done for its citizens, and in technology it has done much for the world.
If the US helps fight against terror, and Israel works with it agains terror, why do you show such untrue horrible things? WHy Do you hate Israel so much, and Jews? What wrong have we ever done?
I hope you will answer, if it's not too much of a bother.
Hoping to recieve an answer,
Michal.
----------------------------------------------------
Hi Michal,
Someone is giving you false information. Israel hasn't "tried to get peace."
For example, Hamas observed a truce for year and a half, Israel refused to accept it and continued to carry out assassinations, bombings and illegally cutoff funds.
It simply isn't accurate to claim that Israel "values humans and lives of others." Israel continues to commit atrocities. Israel continues its takeover, annexation and cantonization programs. Israel did NOT try "to give the Palestinians there a good life." Israel turned Gaza into "one big Prison." See B’Tselem's report about the continued strangulation of the Gaza.
"Although Israel withdrew from Gaza more than a year ago, its control over the lives of Palestinians there is in some ways even tighter than before, a new report by an Israeli human rights organisation says"
http://www.ifamericansknew.org/cur_sit/gaza-strangled.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6270331.stm
http://www.btselem.org/english/Gaza_Strip/Gaza_Status.asp
Whoever is telling you that "Israel always tried to get peace" is lying to you. They are not being honest about Israel's treatment of the Palestinians. The 9th commandment says, "You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor."
By the way, the video you refereed to is actually an edited version of a promo for a film by http://www.ifamericansknew.org/
-Tom
My name is Michal, and I live in Israel. In Israel I study, enjoy with friends, do my obligations to school and friends, and just live the life anyone would live anywhere in the world.
I live here, and I hear everyday of people being sent in a bad state to hospitals in Sderot, because rockets have been fired on them, even after Israel tried to get peace and moved out of every single inch in Gaza, and tried to give the Palestinians there a good life. In return we were betrayed, and kept being slaughtered.
I'd like to know, how in you video "If Americans Knew What Israel Is Doing", you can say such things about us? ISrael always tried to get peace, and is much beyond war. It's a country that values humans and lives of others, and tries to protect its citizens and give them a good life no matter what. Even in war- it doesn't do anything another country wouldn't have done for its citizens, and in technology it has done much for the world.
If the US helps fight against terror, and Israel works with it agains terror, why do you show such untrue horrible things? WHy Do you hate Israel so much, and Jews? What wrong have we ever done?
I hope you will answer, if it's not too much of a bother.
Hoping to recieve an answer,
Michal.
----------------------------------------------------
Hi Michal,
Someone is giving you false information. Israel hasn't "tried to get peace."
For example, Hamas observed a truce for year and a half, Israel refused to accept it and continued to carry out assassinations, bombings and illegally cutoff funds.
It simply isn't accurate to claim that Israel "values humans and lives of others." Israel continues to commit atrocities. Israel continues its takeover, annexation and cantonization programs. Israel did NOT try "to give the Palestinians there a good life." Israel turned Gaza into "one big Prison." See B’Tselem's report about the continued strangulation of the Gaza.
"Although Israel withdrew from Gaza more than a year ago, its control over the lives of Palestinians there is in some ways even tighter than before, a new report by an Israeli human rights organisation says"
http://www.ifamericansknew.org/cur_sit/gaza-strangled.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6270331.stm
http://www.btselem.org/english/Gaza_Strip/Gaza_Status.asp
Whoever is telling you that "Israel always tried to get peace" is lying to you. They are not being honest about Israel's treatment of the Palestinians. The 9th commandment says, "You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor."
By the way, the video you refereed to is actually an edited version of a promo for a film by http://www.ifamericansknew.org/
-Tom
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
Sunday, February 24, 2008
YouTube Down!
YouTube is down and it it frustrating as hell not to have it. The fact that this can happen is scary, they need to get this fixed immediately boingboing gives a possible explanation as to why YouTube is being blocked and is down.
I hope to use my channel, Representative Press to raise awareness about critical issues.
I hope to use my channel, Representative Press to raise awareness about critical issues.
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
Tuesday, February 19, 2008
Sunday, February 17, 2008
Friday, February 15, 2008
Condoleezza Rice: Liar, Secretary of State, War Criminal Part 1
Condoleezza Rice: Liar, Secretary of State, War Criminal Part 1
Wexler asks Rice, isn't it true that you had intelligence that cast doubt on your repeated claims that Iraq did have WMD. It is worse than even how Wexler characterizes it. SEE PROOF, that the Bush Administration was committing fraud in order to fool the public into thinking Iraq had WMD. Spread the word. Send this link to others:
http://representativepress.googlepages.com/RiceLies.html
Wexler asks Rice, isn't it true that you had intelligence that cast doubt on your repeated claims that Iraq did have WMD. It is worse than even how Wexler characterizes it. SEE PROOF, that the Bush Administration was committing fraud in order to fool the public into thinking Iraq had WMD. Spread the word. Send this link to others:
http://representativepress.googlepages.com/RiceLies.html
Tuesday, February 12, 2008
Monday, February 11, 2008
Saturday, February 09, 2008
Friday, February 08, 2008
Wednesday, February 06, 2008
Thanks for the links!
Thanks for the links!
History's Greatest Monster, Quite possibly it's Chris Hayes. - Atrios
The Chris Hayes Fraud "At last, someone has the courage to tell the truth about Chris Hayes and his efforts to destroy democracy" - Matthew Yglesias
SOMEWHERE, DEMOCRACY IS WEEPING. "The real interesting story of the election is not the battle between Obama and Clinton, but the fraud perpetrated ny magazine, and in particular, my friend Chris Hayes, that strangled the Mike Gravel surge in its crib" - Ezra Klein
History's Greatest Monster, Quite possibly it's Chris Hayes. - Atrios
The Chris Hayes Fraud "At last, someone has the courage to tell the truth about Chris Hayes and his efforts to destroy democracy" - Matthew Yglesias
SOMEWHERE, DEMOCRACY IS WEEPING. "The real interesting story of the election is not the battle between Obama and Clinton, but the fraud perpetrated ny magazine, and in particular, my friend Chris Hayes, that strangled the Mike Gravel surge in its crib" - Ezra Klein
Monday, February 04, 2008
Saturday, February 02, 2008
MoveOn.org Pushes the Worst, Ignoring Gravel for President
MoveOn.org Pushes the Worst, Ignoring Gravel for President
Hi Eli, you and your organization are doing such a disservice to the American people.
You and the people who control MoveOn.org are undermining efforts to end the war.
MoveOn pushes candidates who ignore the US Constitution and International Law. Obama openly violates international law by threatening Iran with an attack.
Hi Eli, you and your organization are doing such a disservice to the American people.
You and the people who control MoveOn.org are undermining efforts to end the war.
MoveOn pushes candidates who ignore the US Constitution and International Law. Obama openly violates international law by threatening Iran with an attack.
Friday, January 25, 2008
Monday, January 21, 2008
Friday, January 11, 2008
Petty Clinton Omits Gravel, Hillary Shows Her True Colors
see video: Petty Clinton Omits Gravel, Hillary Shows Her True Colors
Hillary Clinton showed her true colors by ungraciously omitting Mike Gravel when she listed Presidential Democratic candidates.
Hillary can't even hide her true nature in her acceptance speech. The voice which she says she found in this campaign is a petty and ungracious one.
Hillary once again votes for a resolution concocted as an excuse for another war.
This is crazy. Hillary Clinton's vote brings our country another step closer to war against Iran. Hillary Clinton's experience is pushing us into another war and Mike Gravel calls her on it.
Hillary Clinton showed her true colors by ungraciously omitting Mike Gravel when she listed Presidential Democratic candidates.
Hillary can't even hide her true nature in her acceptance speech. The voice which she says she found in this campaign is a petty and ungracious one.
Hillary once again votes for a resolution concocted as an excuse for another war.
This is crazy. Hillary Clinton's vote brings our country another step closer to war against Iran. Hillary Clinton's experience is pushing us into another war and Mike Gravel calls her on it.
Thursday, January 10, 2008
Monday, January 07, 2008
Wednesday, January 02, 2008
IF there was evidence of explosives
IF there was evidence of explosives, why wouldn't the investigators have assumed terrorists planted the explosives? WHY would 200 technical experts, including about 85 career NIST experts and 125 leading experts from the private sector and academia, "know" that they shouldn't say what the evidence supposedly showed? IF they saw indications of "controlled demolition," how would they "know" not to simply say it? Wouldn't they assume that terrorists did it and report it?
This is a question that no "9/11 truther" has answered. IF there really was evidence of controlled demolition, why wouldn't the 200 technical experts simply report it?
No "9/11 truther" has even attempted to give me a scenario in which experts would "know" that they should ignore or suppress the "evidence of controlled demolition."
From what I have read, many who believe in "controlled demolition" insist that NIST is "lying" or "suppressing" the supposed facts. What I am asking is why would they do that? This is one of the big logical flaws of "9/11 truth movement."
This is a question that no "9/11 truther" has answered. IF there really was evidence of controlled demolition, why wouldn't the 200 technical experts simply report it?
No "9/11 truther" has even attempted to give me a scenario in which experts would "know" that they should ignore or suppress the "evidence of controlled demolition."
From what I have read, many who believe in "controlled demolition" insist that NIST is "lying" or "suppressing" the supposed facts. What I am asking is why would they do that? This is one of the big logical flaws of "9/11 truth movement."
Thursday, December 20, 2007
Monday, December 17, 2007
Friday, December 14, 2007
Expert: Bin Laden Warned of 'Unprecedented' Attack
Expert: Bin Laden Warned of 'Unprecedented' Attack
(Reuters) Sep 11, 11:19 AM ET
Saudi dissident Osama bin Laden warned three weeks ago that he and his followers would carry out an unprecedented attack on U.S. interests for its support of Israel, an Arab journalist with access to him said Tuesday.
Abdel-Bari Atwan, editor of the London-based al-Quds al-Arabi, an Arabic-language weekly news magazine, said Islamic fundamentalists led by bin Laden were "almost certainly" behind the attack of the World Trade Center in New York.
"It is most likely the work of Islamic fundamentalists. Osama bin Laden warned three weeks ago that he would attack American interests in an unprecedented attack, a very big one," Atwan told Reuters.
"Personally, we received information that he planned very, very big attacks against American interests. We received several warnings like this. We did not take it so seriously, preferring to see what would happen before reporting it."
Atwan has interviewed bin Laden and maintains close contacts with his followers. ...
This information was reported by Reuters on the day of 9/11. Some news outlets reported it, but many didn't or after initially reporting it, they later left out the reference to Israel. (On TV I only saw this report mentioned once and it looks like it slipped in because Tom Brokaw read from the news wire, reading it live on air without knowing what it was going to say. I didn't see him make one mention of it after) UPDATE: I found another mention, this time by CBS, where someone read this Reuters newswire to include the part mentioning Israel. Here is an example of where they didn't read “Israel”
(Reuters) Sep 11, 11:19 AM ET
Saudi dissident Osama bin Laden warned three weeks ago that he and his followers would carry out an unprecedented attack on U.S. interests for its support of Israel, an Arab journalist with access to him said Tuesday.
Abdel-Bari Atwan, editor of the London-based al-Quds al-Arabi, an Arabic-language weekly news magazine, said Islamic fundamentalists led by bin Laden were "almost certainly" behind the attack of the World Trade Center in New York.
"It is most likely the work of Islamic fundamentalists. Osama bin Laden warned three weeks ago that he would attack American interests in an unprecedented attack, a very big one," Atwan told Reuters.
"Personally, we received information that he planned very, very big attacks against American interests. We received several warnings like this. We did not take it so seriously, preferring to see what would happen before reporting it."
Atwan has interviewed bin Laden and maintains close contacts with his followers. ...
This information was reported by Reuters on the day of 9/11. Some news outlets reported it, but many didn't or after initially reporting it, they later left out the reference to Israel. (On TV I only saw this report mentioned once and it looks like it slipped in because Tom Brokaw read from the news wire, reading it live on air without knowing what it was going to say. I didn't see him make one mention of it after) UPDATE: I found another mention, this time by CBS, where someone read this Reuters newswire to include the part mentioning Israel. Here is an example of where they didn't read “Israel”
Wednesday, December 05, 2007
Another Attack on RepresentativePress
Another Attack on Representative Press
Once again, someone has falsely claimed that one of my web pages or videos violates one of the terms of use of a particular site. This false report, which has disabled my googlepages site, is yet another attempt to censor my political speech.
This is the message I get at my page http://representativepress.googlepages.com/:
"This site has been disabled for violations of our Program Policies. If you feel this disabling was in error, please visit our contact page to let us know. Contact Us"
This is the latest sabotage of Representative Press. Those attempting to censor my political speech have used this tactic before. Hopefully Googlepages will re-enable my account soon. When they did this to a video I put on YouTube, YouTube saw these dirty tricks for what they were, thankfully. See my video: I Heard Back from the YouTube Team about the CENSORED VIDEO
Getting the truth out is a constant battle, I could use any help I can get. Please support Representative Press any way you can. I need to get more equipment and redouble my efforts. This Christmas Please Buy Your Christmas Gifts Through the Representative Press Store or make a donation to Representative Press
The site they managed to get deleted was the one I linked to from the banner at my YouTube account: "You can help spread the word, pass this link on to everyone you can" Please pass the link of my YouTube account on to everyone you can: http://www.youtube.com/representativepress
If anyone has any advice about getting a GooglePages website re-enabled, please leave a comment: See video: Another Attack on Representative Press: Website SABOTAGE
Once again, someone has falsely claimed that one of my web pages or videos violates one of the terms of use of a particular site. This false report, which has disabled my googlepages site, is yet another attempt to censor my political speech.
This is the message I get at my page http://representativepress.googlepages.com/:
"This site has been disabled for violations of our Program Policies. If you feel this disabling was in error, please visit our contact page to let us know. Contact Us"
This is the latest sabotage of Representative Press. Those attempting to censor my political speech have used this tactic before. Hopefully Googlepages will re-enable my account soon. When they did this to a video I put on YouTube, YouTube saw these dirty tricks for what they were, thankfully. See my video: I Heard Back from the YouTube Team about the CENSORED VIDEO
Getting the truth out is a constant battle, I could use any help I can get. Please support Representative Press any way you can. I need to get more equipment and redouble my efforts. This Christmas Please Buy Your Christmas Gifts Through the Representative Press Store or make a donation to Representative Press
The site they managed to get deleted was the one I linked to from the banner at my YouTube account: "You can help spread the word, pass this link on to everyone you can" Please pass the link of my YouTube account on to everyone you can: http://www.youtube.com/representativepress
If anyone has any advice about getting a GooglePages website re-enabled, please leave a comment: See video: Another Attack on Representative Press: Website SABOTAGE
Tuesday, December 04, 2007
Please ask Lou Dobbs if this is his idea of journalism.
Dear Amy and Juan,
Please ask Lou Dobbs if this is his idea of journalism. When he had Michael Scheuer, the former chief of the CIA unit tracking Osama Bin Laden, on his show, Scheuer said that Bush and Clinton, both parties are lying about the very reason that we are being attacked by terrorists. This is an EXTREMELY SERIOUS FACT and one that goes unreported in mainstream media. I have never seen anyone in MSM actually say that the President is lying about this! What kind of journalist skips to the next question when he is presented with such an earth shattering statement?
Aired July 7, 2005:
DOBBS: And Michael, as we have reported here tonight, radical Islamist terrorism was not even one of the principal elements at the G-8 meeting until, of course, these tragic barbaric attacks today. What do you make of that?
SCHEUER: I make of the fact, sir, that unfortunately the politicians are very comfortable with preaching the idea that this is a very small group of people who are opposing us, and that they hate us for our freedoms and our liberties. The politicians really are at great fault for not squaring with the American people. We're being attacked for what we do in the Islamic world, not for who we are or what we believe in or how we live. And there's a huge burden of guilt to be laid at Mr. Bush, Mr. Clinton, both parties for simply lying to the American people.
DOBBS: Are you hopeful that we're going to see improved border security, improved homeland security, a real commitment?
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0507/07/ldt.01.html
Please do ask him about this. Is the fact that Bush, Clinton and the rest of the politicians are lying about the very reason America is being targeted by terrorists a non-issue to this guy?!? This was the clearest and most direct statement I have ever heard said on TV about this - and the only time I have heard Scheuer (or anyone ever) say they are actually LYING about this and Dobbs does no follow up? Please hold him accountable for this. Please ask him, this is too extreme not to note.
Sincerely,
Tom Murphy
Representative Press
Please ask Lou Dobbs if this is his idea of journalism. When he had Michael Scheuer, the former chief of the CIA unit tracking Osama Bin Laden, on his show, Scheuer said that Bush and Clinton, both parties are lying about the very reason that we are being attacked by terrorists. This is an EXTREMELY SERIOUS FACT and one that goes unreported in mainstream media. I have never seen anyone in MSM actually say that the President is lying about this! What kind of journalist skips to the next question when he is presented with such an earth shattering statement?
Aired July 7, 2005:
DOBBS: And Michael, as we have reported here tonight, radical Islamist terrorism was not even one of the principal elements at the G-8 meeting until, of course, these tragic barbaric attacks today. What do you make of that?
SCHEUER: I make of the fact, sir, that unfortunately the politicians are very comfortable with preaching the idea that this is a very small group of people who are opposing us, and that they hate us for our freedoms and our liberties. The politicians really are at great fault for not squaring with the American people. We're being attacked for what we do in the Islamic world, not for who we are or what we believe in or how we live. And there's a huge burden of guilt to be laid at Mr. Bush, Mr. Clinton, both parties for simply lying to the American people.
DOBBS: Are you hopeful that we're going to see improved border security, improved homeland security, a real commitment?
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0507/07/ldt.01.html
Please do ask him about this. Is the fact that Bush, Clinton and the rest of the politicians are lying about the very reason America is being targeted by terrorists a non-issue to this guy?!? This was the clearest and most direct statement I have ever heard said on TV about this - and the only time I have heard Scheuer (or anyone ever) say they are actually LYING about this and Dobbs does no follow up? Please hold him accountable for this. Please ask him, this is too extreme not to note.
Sincerely,
Tom Murphy
Representative Press
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
The CNN political team chooses the videos, not you.
Marty Kaplan points out "the game that CNN is really playing" in his article The CNN/RubeTube Debate, "The notion that the CNN-YouTube debate represents a grass-roots triumph of the internet age is laughable."
"For all the talk about online voter empowerment, the web is still too immature a medium to set an agenda for a national debate, says CNN senior vice president David Bohrman.
"If you would have taken the most-viewed questions last time, the top question would have been whether Arnold Schwarzenegger was a cyborg sent to save the planet Earth," says Bohrman, the debate's executive producer. "The second-most-viewed video question was: Will you a convene a national meeting on UFOs?" - CNN-YouTube Debate Producer Doubts the Wisdom of the Crowd
Look at 10Questions.com, they let people vote and the top ten questions the people picked were not "crazy."
SEE VIDEO: The CNN political team chooses the videos, not you.
It is a disgrace that CNN picks the videos! This is the kind of question they don't want asked
Bohrman's comments about most watched are disingenuous, the videos selected should be the ones voted on, not most watched. For God sakes, I have to watch a video before I can decide if it should be asked in the debate. Bohrman is making up excuses.
This is a question that should be asked!
CNN/YouTube Republican Debate: Giuliani 9/11 Question Giuliani claims, "American foreign policy had nothing to do with the September 11th. September 11th happened because these people who hate us, hate us because of the freedoms that we have." Giuliani is lying to us. see my question. Think Bohrman would allow this to be asked?
"For all the talk about online voter empowerment, the web is still too immature a medium to set an agenda for a national debate, says CNN senior vice president David Bohrman.
"If you would have taken the most-viewed questions last time, the top question would have been whether Arnold Schwarzenegger was a cyborg sent to save the planet Earth," says Bohrman, the debate's executive producer. "The second-most-viewed video question was: Will you a convene a national meeting on UFOs?" - CNN-YouTube Debate Producer Doubts the Wisdom of the Crowd
Look at 10Questions.com, they let people vote and the top ten questions the people picked were not "crazy."
SEE VIDEO: The CNN political team chooses the videos, not you.
It is a disgrace that CNN picks the videos! This is the kind of question they don't want asked
Bohrman's comments about most watched are disingenuous, the videos selected should be the ones voted on, not most watched. For God sakes, I have to watch a video before I can decide if it should be asked in the debate. Bohrman is making up excuses.
This is a question that should be asked!
CNN/YouTube Republican Debate: Giuliani 9/11 Question Giuliani claims, "American foreign policy had nothing to do with the September 11th. September 11th happened because these people who hate us, hate us because of the freedoms that we have." Giuliani is lying to us. see my question. Think Bohrman would allow this to be asked?
Tuesday, November 27, 2007
See this article: CNN-YouTube Debate Producer Doubts the Wisdom of the Crowd
"For all the talk about online voter empowerment, the web is still too immature a medium to set an agenda for a national debate, says CNN senior vice president David Bohrman.
"If you would have taken the most-viewed questions last time, the top question would have been whether Arnold Schwarzenegger was a cyborg sent to save the planet Earth," says Bohrman, the debate's executive producer. "The second-most-viewed video question was: Will you a convene a national meeting on UFOs?""
It is a disgrace that CNN picks the videos! This is the kind of question they don't want asked
Bohrman's comments about most watched are disingenuous, the videos selected should be the ones voted on, not most watched. For God sakes, I have to watch a video before I can decide if it should be asked in the debate. Bohrman is making up excuses.
This is a question that should be asked!
CNN/YouTube Republican Debate: Giuliani 9/11 Question Giuliani claims, "American foreign policy had nothing to do with the September 11th. September 11th happened because these people who hate us, hate us because of the freedoms that we have." Giuliani is lying to us. see my question. Think Bohrman would allow this to be asked?
"For all the talk about online voter empowerment, the web is still too immature a medium to set an agenda for a national debate, says CNN senior vice president David Bohrman.
"If you would have taken the most-viewed questions last time, the top question would have been whether Arnold Schwarzenegger was a cyborg sent to save the planet Earth," says Bohrman, the debate's executive producer. "The second-most-viewed video question was: Will you a convene a national meeting on UFOs?""
It is a disgrace that CNN picks the videos! This is the kind of question they don't want asked
Bohrman's comments about most watched are disingenuous, the videos selected should be the ones voted on, not most watched. For God sakes, I have to watch a video before I can decide if it should be asked in the debate. Bohrman is making up excuses.
This is a question that should be asked!
CNN/YouTube Republican Debate: Giuliani 9/11 Question Giuliani claims, "American foreign policy had nothing to do with the September 11th. September 11th happened because these people who hate us, hate us because of the freedoms that we have." Giuliani is lying to us. see my question. Think Bohrman would allow this to be asked?
Saturday, November 24, 2007
CNN/YouTube Republican Debate: Giuliani 9/11 Question
CNN/YouTube Republican Debate: Giuliani 9/11 Question 6 Videos
Giuliani claims, "American foreign policy had nothing to do with the September 11th. September 11th happened because these people who hate us, hate us because of the freedoms that we have." Giuliani is lying to us.
Contact CNN: 404-827-1500 or http://www.cnn.com/feedback/cnntv
Mr. Giuliani, how can you lie
to the American people about
why we were attacked on 9/11
and lie about why we're still
at risk of being attacked again?
Giuliani claims, "American foreign policy had nothing to do with the September 11th. September 11th happened because these people who hate us, hate us because of the freedoms that we have." Giuliani is lying to us.
Contact CNN: 404-827-1500 or http://www.cnn.com/feedback/cnntv
Mr. Giuliani, how can you lie
to the American people about
why we were attacked on 9/11
and lie about why we're still
at risk of being attacked again?
Friday, November 23, 2007
Sunday, November 18, 2007
Friday, November 16, 2007
Wednesday, November 14, 2007
Sunday, November 11, 2007
If I could ask the media a question
The media helps to sell the idea of bombing Iran by the very fact that they refuse to report that bombing Iran would be a war crime. Bombing Iran would be illegal. Bombing Iran would be a violation of international law.
If I could ask the media a question it would be this: Why the hell can't you report the truth and inform the American people of the basic fact that attacking Iran is illegal?
If I could ask the media a question it would be this: Why the hell can't you report the truth and inform the American people of the basic fact that attacking Iran is illegal?
Friday, November 09, 2007
The first step is to stop using the term "blame America."
Greg, I am disappointed to see you write something like this: "If an Arab sort of blames America for 9/11, it's despicable"
Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal neither "blamed America" NOR did he "sort of blame America."
Prince Alwaleed bin Talal's statement to the media was, "At times like this, we must address some of the issues that led to such a criminal attack. I believe the government of the United States of America should reexamine its policies in the Middle East and adopt a more balanced stance towards the Palestinian cause. While the U.N. passed clear resolutions numbered 242 and 338 calling for the Israeli withdrawal from the West Bank and Gaza Strip decades ago, our Palestinian brethren continue to be slaughtered at the hands of Israelis while the world turns the other cheek."
Greg, I noticed you omitted mention of what "the issues" were which were clearly spelled out in the statement, namely the U.S. government's policy of support for Israel and the resulting suffering of the Palestinians. You mischaracterized Prince Alwaleed bin Talal's statement, he did not say "America deserved 9/11."
Are you telling me you by into Giuliani's manipulative game of insisting that talking about the motive for the crime of 9/11 means that one approves of the crime or sees it as a justifiable act? Giuliani uses a dirty trick in order to prevent the policy of supporting Israel's crimes from being examined. Giuliani attempts to intimidate people into not questioning the policies or angering people so much that cannot think about the policies.
From what you wrote and what you didn't write, I get the impression that you don't want the American people to realize why it is that terrorists attacked on 9/11 or that you don't want the American people to do something about the policies that unnecessarily make us all targets. Tell me this is not the case and that you will work to make others aware of the devious games politicians and pundits have been playing on the American people. Clearly Giuliani serves the agenda of keeping the status quo with regards to the policy of supporting Israel so he deceives the public to prevent them from even thinking changing the policy of supporting Israel.
I can't think of a more vulgar violation of the people's rights then to rob them of the freedom to decide for themselves if they want to risk their lives over specific foreign policies.
Greg, your article morphs Clinton, Bush and other political elites into a single concept called "America" which you then insist is blameless. This is a dirty game because politicians and their horrible policies are not "America itself." Your artificial construct means that the people of the United States can never hold their politicians accountable for political policies. And that is a serious problem because our lives continue to be totally unnecessarily put at risk because of these illegal and immoral policies. These polices are precisely what enrage people into committing acts of terrorism against the U.S. in spite of the lies Guiliani and other politicians tell. "The politicians really are at great fault for not squaring with the American people. We're being attacked for what we do in the Islamic world, not for who we are or what we believe in or how we live. And there's a huge burden of guilt to be laid at Mr. Bush, Mr. Clinton, both parties for simply lying to the American people." - Michael Scheuer, Former CIA Bin Laden Unit Chief
Greg, you can help stop these politicians from putting our lives at risk. The first step is to stop using the term "blame America." The next step is to call for an end to all illegal and immoral foreign policies.
Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal neither "blamed America" NOR did he "sort of blame America."
Prince Alwaleed bin Talal's statement to the media was, "At times like this, we must address some of the issues that led to such a criminal attack. I believe the government of the United States of America should reexamine its policies in the Middle East and adopt a more balanced stance towards the Palestinian cause. While the U.N. passed clear resolutions numbered 242 and 338 calling for the Israeli withdrawal from the West Bank and Gaza Strip decades ago, our Palestinian brethren continue to be slaughtered at the hands of Israelis while the world turns the other cheek."
Greg, I noticed you omitted mention of what "the issues" were which were clearly spelled out in the statement, namely the U.S. government's policy of support for Israel and the resulting suffering of the Palestinians. You mischaracterized Prince Alwaleed bin Talal's statement, he did not say "America deserved 9/11."
Are you telling me you by into Giuliani's manipulative game of insisting that talking about the motive for the crime of 9/11 means that one approves of the crime or sees it as a justifiable act? Giuliani uses a dirty trick in order to prevent the policy of supporting Israel's crimes from being examined. Giuliani attempts to intimidate people into not questioning the policies or angering people so much that cannot think about the policies.
From what you wrote and what you didn't write, I get the impression that you don't want the American people to realize why it is that terrorists attacked on 9/11 or that you don't want the American people to do something about the policies that unnecessarily make us all targets. Tell me this is not the case and that you will work to make others aware of the devious games politicians and pundits have been playing on the American people. Clearly Giuliani serves the agenda of keeping the status quo with regards to the policy of supporting Israel so he deceives the public to prevent them from even thinking changing the policy of supporting Israel.
I can't think of a more vulgar violation of the people's rights then to rob them of the freedom to decide for themselves if they want to risk their lives over specific foreign policies.
Greg, your article morphs Clinton, Bush and other political elites into a single concept called "America" which you then insist is blameless. This is a dirty game because politicians and their horrible policies are not "America itself." Your artificial construct means that the people of the United States can never hold their politicians accountable for political policies. And that is a serious problem because our lives continue to be totally unnecessarily put at risk because of these illegal and immoral policies. These polices are precisely what enrage people into committing acts of terrorism against the U.S. in spite of the lies Guiliani and other politicians tell. "The politicians really are at great fault for not squaring with the American people. We're being attacked for what we do in the Islamic world, not for who we are or what we believe in or how we live. And there's a huge burden of guilt to be laid at Mr. Bush, Mr. Clinton, both parties for simply lying to the American people." - Michael Scheuer, Former CIA Bin Laden Unit Chief
Greg, you can help stop these politicians from putting our lives at risk. The first step is to stop using the term "blame America." The next step is to call for an end to all illegal and immoral foreign policies.
Thursday, November 08, 2007
Kucinich Reads Resolution to Impeach Vice President Cheney 3 Videos
Kucinich Reads Resolution to Impeach Vice President Cheney 3 Videos
Richard B. Cheney, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of Vice President of the United States, has openly threatened aggression against the Republic of Iran absent any real threat to the United States.
Despite no evidence that Iran has the intention or the capability of attacking the United States and despite the turmoil created by United States invasion of Iraq, the Vice President has openly threatened aggression against Iran.
The Vice President, who repeatedly and falsely claimed to have had specific, detailed knowledge of Iraq's alleged weapons of mass destruction capabilities, is no doubt fully aware of evidence that demonstrates Iran poses no real threat to the United States of America.
The Vice President's deception upon the citizens and Congress of the United States that enabled the failed United States invasion of Iraq forcibly altered the rules of diplomacy such that the Vice President's recent belligerent actions towards Iran are destabilizing and counterproductive to the national security of the United States.
In all of this, Vice President Richard B. Cheney has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as Vice President, and subversive of constitutional government, to the prejudice of the cause of law and justice and the manifest injury of the people of the United States.
Wherefore Richard B. Cheney, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, and removal from office.
Richard B. Cheney, in violation of his constitutional oath to faithfully execute the office of Vice President of the United States, has openly threatened aggression against the Republic of Iran absent any real threat to the United States.
Despite no evidence that Iran has the intention or the capability of attacking the United States and despite the turmoil created by United States invasion of Iraq, the Vice President has openly threatened aggression against Iran.
The Vice President, who repeatedly and falsely claimed to have had specific, detailed knowledge of Iraq's alleged weapons of mass destruction capabilities, is no doubt fully aware of evidence that demonstrates Iran poses no real threat to the United States of America.
The Vice President's deception upon the citizens and Congress of the United States that enabled the failed United States invasion of Iraq forcibly altered the rules of diplomacy such that the Vice President's recent belligerent actions towards Iran are destabilizing and counterproductive to the national security of the United States.
In all of this, Vice President Richard B. Cheney has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as Vice President, and subversive of constitutional government, to the prejudice of the cause of law and justice and the manifest injury of the people of the United States.
Wherefore Richard B. Cheney, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, and removal from office.
Tuesday, November 06, 2007
Why should the Palestinians answer for the Holocaust?
Well, if an atrocity was committed in Germany, or Europe for that matter, why should the Palestinians answer for this?
MR. WALLACE: Okay. Last December, you said this: "The Europeans created a myth -- the Holocaust."
A myth?
PRESIDENT AHMADINEJAD: Well, I don't understand, what questions are you going to put to me?
MR. WALLACE: The questions I intend to put to you are things that you have said in the past, things that have made headlines.
PRESIDENT AHMADINEJAD: Well, I have said these in the past. Do you want us to repeat what has been said already? That would produce a very repetitious -- if I can use that word -- interview.
Put a new question to me, sir.
MR. WALLACE: Please. I am doing the questioning.
America is trying to understand President Ahmadinejad. And one of the ways that we can understand you is by repeating various things that you have said over a period of the past years. Certainly you're not ashamed of the things that you've said --
PRESIDENT AHMADINEJAD: That is very correct. I am not ashamed, and I have -- whatever I have said is correct. There are many things that the American public must come to know. Many others, on the other hand, don't want the American public to know about these. It will be best if we talk about those as well.
MR. WALLACE: For instance?
PRESIDENT AHMADINEJAD: Well, with regards to unemployment in the U.S. and the behavior of the American administration throughout the (war/world ?), and also the literacy rate in the U.S., and the wars that have been waged by the American government in the past 100 years, imposed it on others -- these are important issues.
MR. WALLACE: I see --
PRESIDENT AHMADINEJAD: But with regards to the Holocaust --
MR. WALLACE: Yes --
PRESIDENT AHMADINEJAD: -- well, my question is, if something has happened, I am sure that there are very clear evidence out there available. And this is something which has had a hand, if I can use that word, in the equations and the formulas of the past 60 years.
And on the pretext of this, a land has been occupied. Millions of people have been made refugees. Thousands of people to date have been killed, sir. Thousands of people have been put in prison. Well, at the very moment, a great war is raging because of that.
So apparently this was an important issue. If this is real, then they should let everyone research it. Everyone should talk about it. And once it is prohibited -- of course, research and talking about it is prohibited -- that brings about questions. If it is a reality, well, it will only help if we do more research on the subject.
My question was not this, to be honest with you, in the first place. What I did say was that if this is a reality, if this is real, where did it take place?
MR. WALLACE: In Germany. In Germany.
PRESIDENT AHMADINEJAD: Who caused this? In Europe --
MR. WALLACE: In Europe.
PRESIDENT AHMADINEJAD: (In English.) In Europe.
MR. WALLACE: If I may, so what you are suggesting -- one moment -- what you are suggesting, then -- that Israel should be over in Germany, because that's where the Holocaust took place?
PRESIDENT AHMADINEJAD: (Through interpreter.) I'm not saying that, mind you.
Well, if an atrocity was committed in Germany, or Europe for that matter, why should the Palestinians answer for this? I'm not saying that the answer to the Holocaust led to the establishment of a government. This is something that the British and the Americans are saying. I am saying that if this happened, the Palestinians must not pay for this or be responsible for this. They had no role to play in this. Why on the pretext of the Holocaust they have occupied Palestine? This is the question that Western media -- mass media never bothered with, and to date, I have not received an answer. I think that they have to provide answers to this question. If they do just that, many of the outstanding issues will be resolved automatically. Please remember that we are saddened when a person is killed in any part of the world.
MR. WALLACE: I understand. I understand. Look, if you could -- if you could keep your answers concise, I beg you, we'll get more questions in.
PRESIDENT AHMADINEJAD: Well, one of your questions required -- all of your questions require a book-long answer. If you want me to just finish the interview, please tell me and we can wrap up right now.
Sunday, November 04, 2007
I am making a video response to you
Justin,
I had sent you a message back in June. I am planning a video in response to your reply back to me. I wasn't motivated to respond to your reply to me for the simple reason that your reply was dismissive and unreasonable. This was your reply to me, "I am capable of forming my own opinions. Thanks." That was a reply to my message about Prof Jones being wrong. In that message, I had included a link which asked you to check out the fact that "The very thing that Griffin points to as a feature of a fire caused collapse we can see in photos of the World Trade Center."
I just watched your David Ray Griffin Interview and I see you make no mention of this critical fact which Griffin is ignorant of. At the link I sent you, I wrote, "The very thing that Griffin points to as a feature of a fire caused collapse we can see in photos of the World Trade Center.
Griffin writes, "in fire-induced collapses---if we had any examples of such---the onset would be gradual. Horizontal beams and trusses would begin to sag; vertical columns, if subjected to strong forces, would begin to bend. But as videos of the towers show, there were no signs of bending or sagging, even on the floors just above the damage caused by the impact of the planes." But contrary to what Griffin claims, there were indeed signs of bending or sagging. Witnesses reported it and photos document it. Griffin is simply wrong.
Your reply to me suggests that you didn't even take the time to look at the information I was trying to make you aware of. For someone putting themselves out there as one who is "researching various aspects of the September 11th, 2001 terrorist attacks." I find your response to me especially disappointing and frustrating. What kind of scholar is so sure of his position that he refuses to even look at facts he is being presented with?
I am making a video response to our video David Ray Griffin Interview which will highlight the errors that Griffin makes and which you failed to address.
Since I plan to point out in my video how unreasonable your original reply was to me, I thought I would give you the opportunity to review what I had originally sent you and to formulate some sort of response that won't put you in such a bad light. I assume no scholar would want to look unreasonable and unwilling to even review information that calls into question their theory.
In your interview, Mr. Jackman asks Griffin what is the "the biggest piece of eye-opening evidence" and Griffin says that if the question is what is "the clearest evidence that it was an inside job," he answers, "I, like many other people, would probably say building 7." It is incredible that this man can be ignorant of something so well documented and available but perhaps he too doesn't take the time to review information which people send him. Griffin could take a look at the facts laid out at this link and see that building 7 was hit by debris from WTC 1 and was on fire for about 7 hours. Please review the link for yourself. You will see that it is no mystery why the building collapsed. Captain Chris Boyle of Engine 94 explained, "on the north and east side of 7 it didn't look like there was any damage at all, but then you looked on the south side of 7 there had to be a hole 20 stories tall in the building, with fire on several floors. Debris was falling down on the building and it didn't look good."
Fire chief Daniel Nigro clearly thought the building could collapse. Here's what he said, "The biggest decision we had to make was to clear the area and create a collapse zone around the severely damaged [WTC Building 7]. A number of fire officers and companies assessed the damage to the building. The appraisals indicated that the building's integrity was in serious doubt."
Ignorance spreads when there is an unwillingness to engage in a dialog.
-Tom
Representative Press
UPDATE: Here is his e-mail back to me.
I had sent you a message back in June. I am planning a video in response to your reply back to me. I wasn't motivated to respond to your reply to me for the simple reason that your reply was dismissive and unreasonable. This was your reply to me, "I am capable of forming my own opinions. Thanks." That was a reply to my message about Prof Jones being wrong. In that message, I had included a link which asked you to check out the fact that "The very thing that Griffin points to as a feature of a fire caused collapse we can see in photos of the World Trade Center."
I just watched your David Ray Griffin Interview and I see you make no mention of this critical fact which Griffin is ignorant of. At the link I sent you, I wrote, "The very thing that Griffin points to as a feature of a fire caused collapse we can see in photos of the World Trade Center.
Griffin writes, "in fire-induced collapses---if we had any examples of such---the onset would be gradual. Horizontal beams and trusses would begin to sag; vertical columns, if subjected to strong forces, would begin to bend. But as videos of the towers show, there were no signs of bending or sagging, even on the floors just above the damage caused by the impact of the planes." But contrary to what Griffin claims, there were indeed signs of bending or sagging. Witnesses reported it and photos document it. Griffin is simply wrong.
Your reply to me suggests that you didn't even take the time to look at the information I was trying to make you aware of. For someone putting themselves out there as one who is "researching various aspects of the September 11th, 2001 terrorist attacks." I find your response to me especially disappointing and frustrating. What kind of scholar is so sure of his position that he refuses to even look at facts he is being presented with?
I am making a video response to our video David Ray Griffin Interview which will highlight the errors that Griffin makes and which you failed to address.
Since I plan to point out in my video how unreasonable your original reply was to me, I thought I would give you the opportunity to review what I had originally sent you and to formulate some sort of response that won't put you in such a bad light. I assume no scholar would want to look unreasonable and unwilling to even review information that calls into question their theory.
In your interview, Mr. Jackman asks Griffin what is the "the biggest piece of eye-opening evidence" and Griffin says that if the question is what is "the clearest evidence that it was an inside job," he answers, "I, like many other people, would probably say building 7." It is incredible that this man can be ignorant of something so well documented and available but perhaps he too doesn't take the time to review information which people send him. Griffin could take a look at the facts laid out at this link and see that building 7 was hit by debris from WTC 1 and was on fire for about 7 hours. Please review the link for yourself. You will see that it is no mystery why the building collapsed. Captain Chris Boyle of Engine 94 explained, "on the north and east side of 7 it didn't look like there was any damage at all, but then you looked on the south side of 7 there had to be a hole 20 stories tall in the building, with fire on several floors. Debris was falling down on the building and it didn't look good."
Fire chief Daniel Nigro clearly thought the building could collapse. Here's what he said, "The biggest decision we had to make was to clear the area and create a collapse zone around the severely damaged [WTC Building 7]. A number of fire officers and companies assessed the damage to the building. The appraisals indicated that the building's integrity was in serious doubt."
Ignorance spreads when there is an unwillingness to engage in a dialog.
-Tom
Representative Press
UPDATE: Here is his e-mail back to me.
Thursday, November 01, 2007
Tuesday, October 30, 2007
Zionist Pressure Fails to Stop Overcoming Zionism Book
Zionist Pressure Fails to Stop Overcoming Zionism Book
Joel Kovel, author of Overcoming Zionism, said, "What we don't have is any kind of real debate on this subject in our country at this time ... basically these Zionist repression groups have had pretty much a free hand ... that's
why I wrote the book. I mean, I wanted to -- I disregarded all the taboos, that you're not supposed to talk about Israel in any depth in this country." (see video) 
Joel Kovel, author of Overcoming Zionism, talks with Amy Goodman about Zionist pressure which caused University of Michigan Press to drop his book from distribution.
Joel Kovel, author of Overcoming Zionism, said, "What we don't have is any kind of real debate on this subject in our country at this time ... basically these Zionist repression groups have had pretty much a free hand ... that's
why I wrote the book. I mean, I wanted to -- I disregarded all the taboos, that you're not supposed to talk about Israel in any depth in this country." (see video) Joel Kovel, author of Overcoming Zionism, talks with Amy Goodman about Zionist pressure which caused University of Michigan Press to drop his book from distribution.
Sunday, October 28, 2007
War Crime
The elites running this country are ruining our country by ignoring our Constitution, ignoring international law and acting like committing a war crime is simply "an option." The elites who run our government disrespect our Constitution and the rule of law. The elites who run our government share a depraved mindset which accepts the notion that "might makes right" if the U.S. government is doing it. Depraved pundits and politicians push the idea that it would be OK for the U.S to attack Iran. Depraved pundits and politicians take for granted the sick idea that international law is to be ignored. They have no respect for our Constitution. Article 6, clause 2 of the U.S. Constitution says "all the treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land." Signing the UN Charter means the U.S. will adhere to the international law against war crimes.
Re: Don't Let Them Trick Us into Another War
Mainstream Media is Selling Another War
Dana Pushes Bush's Big Lie, Reporters Sit on their Asses
Re: Don't Let Them Trick Us into Another War
Mainstream Media is Selling Another War
Dana Pushes Bush's Big Lie, Reporters Sit on their Asses
Friday, October 26, 2007
Thursday, October 25, 2007
Wednesday, October 24, 2007
Are you aware of the fact ...
Once again I try to reason with a 9/11 "truther."Below is my YouTube message exchange with "natetruth":
My message to him:
Sent: October 23, 2007
Read: October 23, 2007
Subject: Are you aware of the fact
Are you aware of the fact that the very thing David Ray Griffin points to as a sign of a fire induced collapse actually happened? Trusses DID sag and columns DID bend well before the buildings collapsed.
GOOGLE: "The very thing that Griffin points to as a feature of a fire caused collapse we can see in photos of the World Trade Center."
His reply to me:
Sent: October 23, 2007
Subject: Re: Are you aware of the fact
yaya, you guys always start messaging me every time I load a video. I am aware of what Griffin says. Griffin is nothing to me, I don't fallow what one person says, mostly this guy. I have been involved with the studies of this for years buddy. I'm sure you have your points and I've watched your videos before. I am at ground zero every Saturday talking to people, come if you are ever around. But I don't have time to start a debate with another person out of the dozens that I have. I'll waist valuable time and you will also,
Cheers
Nate E
My message back to Nate:
Sent: October 24, 2007
Read: —
Subject: Re: Re: Are you aware of the fact
Nate,
Why is it every single time I contact one of you guys, you can't defend or even attempt to defend your theory?
At this point I can cut and paste from my own arguments and notes so I am not "wasting time." Are you telling me you don't have anything already written to refute my point?
If we are to have a functioning society, we should be able to respond logically to people and especially if we insist on advancing a particular theory.
Griffin believes in "controlled demolition" (like you I am assuming)
Griffin writes, "in fire-induced collapses---if we had any examples of such---the onset would be gradual. Horizontal beams and trusses would begin to sag; vertical columns, if subjected to strong forces, would begin to bend. But as videos of the towers show, there were no signs of bending or sagging, even on the floors just above the damage caused by the impact of the planes."
But contrary to what Griffin claims, there were indeed signs of bending or sagging. Witnesses reported it and photos document it!
9/11 conspiracy people are still at it
http://representativepress.blogspot.com/2006/05/911-conspiracy-people-are-still-at-it.html
Do you deny that trusses were sagging and columns were bending well before the collapse of the buildings? Apparently the reason the "controlled demolition" crowd believes what they do is because they are ignorant of the basic fact that well before the buildings collapsed, Trusses DID sag and columns DID bend.
If I take the time to go down to the WTC site, are you going to stare silently when I make the above point? Be honest with yourself, your theory doesn't make sense and the evidence debunks it.
WTC Pre-Collapse Bowing Debunks 9/11 "Controlled Demolition" Theory
http://www.representativepress.org/BowingDebunksExplosives.html
-Tom
Nate's message back to me:
Sent: October 24, 2007
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Are you aware of the fact
I recieved three of the same message, you are cut and pasting
Now debate online all day with someone else who has the time or no job. I told you where I'll talk and when I have the time, have a good one,
Nate E
My message to him:
Sent: October 23, 2007
Read: October 23, 2007
Subject: Are you aware of the fact
Are you aware of the fact that the very thing David Ray Griffin points to as a sign of a fire induced collapse actually happened? Trusses DID sag and columns DID bend well before the buildings collapsed.
GOOGLE: "The very thing that Griffin points to as a feature of a fire caused collapse we can see in photos of the World Trade Center."
His reply to me:
Sent: October 23, 2007
Subject: Re: Are you aware of the fact
yaya, you guys always start messaging me every time I load a video. I am aware of what Griffin says. Griffin is nothing to me, I don't fallow what one person says, mostly this guy. I have been involved with the studies of this for years buddy. I'm sure you have your points and I've watched your videos before. I am at ground zero every Saturday talking to people, come if you are ever around. But I don't have time to start a debate with another person out of the dozens that I have. I'll waist valuable time and you will also,
Cheers
Nate E
My message back to Nate:
Sent: October 24, 2007
Read: —
Subject: Re: Re: Are you aware of the fact
Nate,
Why is it every single time I contact one of you guys, you can't defend or even attempt to defend your theory?
At this point I can cut and paste from my own arguments and notes so I am not "wasting time." Are you telling me you don't have anything already written to refute my point?
If we are to have a functioning society, we should be able to respond logically to people and especially if we insist on advancing a particular theory.
Griffin believes in "controlled demolition" (like you I am assuming)
Griffin writes, "in fire-induced collapses---if we had any examples of such---the onset would be gradual. Horizontal beams and trusses would begin to sag; vertical columns, if subjected to strong forces, would begin to bend. But as videos of the towers show, there were no signs of bending or sagging, even on the floors just above the damage caused by the impact of the planes."
But contrary to what Griffin claims, there were indeed signs of bending or sagging. Witnesses reported it and photos document it!
9/11 conspiracy people are still at it
http://representativepress.blogspot.com/2006/05/911-conspiracy-people-are-still-at-it.html
Do you deny that trusses were sagging and columns were bending well before the collapse of the buildings? Apparently the reason the "controlled demolition" crowd believes what they do is because they are ignorant of the basic fact that well before the buildings collapsed, Trusses DID sag and columns DID bend.
If I take the time to go down to the WTC site, are you going to stare silently when I make the above point? Be honest with yourself, your theory doesn't make sense and the evidence debunks it.
WTC Pre-Collapse Bowing Debunks 9/11 "Controlled Demolition" Theory
http://www.representativepress.org/BowingDebunksExplosives.html
-Tom
Nate's message back to me:
Sent: October 24, 2007
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Are you aware of the fact
I recieved three of the same message, you are cut and pasting
Now debate online all day with someone else who has the time or no job. I told you where I'll talk and when I have the time, have a good one,
Nate E
Monday, October 22, 2007
Sunday, October 21, 2007
Thom Hartmann's Hypocrisy for Israel Part 2
Thom Hartmann's Hypocrisy for Israel Part 2
Thom Hartmann tries to dismiss as a bizarre "conspiracy theory" the idea that Israel pushed for a war against Iraq. Apparently Thom Hartmann is so eager to dismiss any idea that Israel was part of the push for the Iraq War that he misrepresents the basic information.
Thom Hartmann tries to dismiss as a bizarre "conspiracy theory" the idea that Israel pushed for a war against Iraq. Apparently Thom Hartmann is so eager to dismiss any idea that Israel was part of the push for the Iraq War that he misrepresents the basic information.Saturday, October 20, 2007
Wednesday, October 17, 2007
Nobel economics winner says market forces flawed
"Unfortunately, this [ the “free market”] remains something of a state religion in the US, so while hundreds of newspapers have reported on Maskin’s winning of a Nobel, few seem to have bothered to pick up the Reuters story of what the Nobel Prize winner actually says. (In fact, as I write this, the wire story is already a day old, and while I might have missed something, I can’t find it in a single American newspaper.)
The efficiency of the great free market, absolutely proven once again." - Bob Harris
"Societies should not rely on market forces to protect the environment or provide quality health care for all citizens, a winner of the 2007 Nobel Prize for economics said on Monday. ... In its statement with the award, the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences said the market's efficiency may be undermined because consumers are not perfectly informed, competition is not completely free, and "privately desirable production and consumption may generate social costs and benefits." - Nobel economics winner says market forces flawed
Links: A note to a Youtuber about "Socialism"
Huffington Post article and two Chomsky articles
The efficiency of the great free market, absolutely proven once again." - Bob Harris
"Societies should not rely on market forces to protect the environment or provide quality health care for all citizens, a winner of the 2007 Nobel Prize for economics said on Monday. ... In its statement with the award, the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences said the market's efficiency may be undermined because consumers are not perfectly informed, competition is not completely free, and "privately desirable production and consumption may generate social costs and benefits." - Nobel economics winner says market forces flawed
Links: A note to a Youtuber about "Socialism"
Huffington Post article and two Chomsky articles
Tuesday, October 16, 2007
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
