The Force Can Have a Strong Influence on the Weak-Minded
From Dylan Avery's blog:
A message from Jason Bermas.
I would just like to apologize for the comment I made to one Abby Scott on September 9th of this past year. I made the MISTAKE of saying that the firefighters were paid off, I did not mean this, and am convinced some sort of Jedi Mind trick was pulled on me. I was discussing how if you have a government job and want to keep it, aka Controlled Demolition Inc. you keep your mouth shut. It then moved to the firefighters and some how I said "The firefighters are paid off", and then cited how many of them discussed the bombs in the days after.
I DO NOT BELIEVE THE FIREFIGHTERS WERE PAID OFF! I hold them as heroes in the highest regard, and I truly believe that they were threatened in the aftermath of the event that not only traumatized a country, but still affect their lives deeply to this very day. Many of these men have families, and would do anything to keep them safe. I also believe many of them do not, and can not think the worst of their country. I know it was very difficult for me.
In closing I would just like to say that I am far from perfect, have made mistakes in the past and will in the future. To err is human I guess. I know when trying to expose this movement to the world it must be presented in a concise manner with little room for error, so I will continue to do my best at sticking to the facts, and try and not let my emotions get the best of me.
Peace and Love
Jason Bermas
posted by James B. @ 9:53 AM
45 comments
45 Comments:
Joking...
James,
Jason ended with Peace and Love.... doesn't that make it all better.
At least he admitted his mistake. Folks on here admit nothing even when it is in 'their' face.
Just out of curiosity, what exactly are these mistakes?
So now all surviving firefighters who were on the scene at ground zero were succesfully bullied into silence over the deaths of 300 of thier brothers?
All of them... without a single leak in the five years since?
Can someone explain to me how Mr. Bermas is trying not to slander the NYFD?
Swing Dangler said...
At least
I appreciate your presence here swing (for obvious reasons).
Your comment brings up something fairly perplexing to me. I don't expect an answer, but I thought I'd throw out the some thoughts and questions.
Even after reading and commenting on this blog for quite a while (on and off), I still don't believe I have a handle on who Pat and James are, and who the main commentors are that support the postions taken by this blog.
I get the idea that those behind this blog are closely tied to US military and the so-called 101st Fighting Keyboarders, or such.
I know I should do some basic online research to get a better handle on this.
A while back I a commenter here and I were talking about "right wing" blogs and such, and I would criticising Malkin (Hot Air) and perhaps a few others like Hugh Hewitt. The person pointed me to a The Volkolh (spelling?) Conspiracy and lauded the quality of the content to be found there. After checking it out, I had to agree that particular blog was anything but misguided right-wing mindless bashing.
Which brings me to my question, are most commenters here supporting "Screw Loose Change" like Alex has said of himself:
Paraphasing: Those of us who believe and espouse alternative theories about 9/11 are hurting American......
It sounds so much like Bill O'Reilly unhinged that it's hard for me to acknowledge that way of thinking as a legitimate argument.
Am I missing something?
Under pressure from numerous posts telling of his slander, he retracted his statement about the Firefighters being paid off. Well that is better than allowing it to stand I guess.
Maybe they should learn from this, and just keep their mouths shut unless they are sure of the facts.
TAM
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Like hey man, I mean Jason is our researcher. It's like he went out and did some research and found out he did say that.
How could you find a better researcher than that?
And I still think that South Park is on our side, it's just that the media is controlled so they had to say we are retards.
Even after reading and commenting on this blog for quite a while (on and off), I still don't believe I have a handle on who Pat and James are, and who the main commentors are that support the postions taken by this blog.
I get the idea that those behind this blog are closely tied to US military and the so-called 101st Fighting Keyboarders, or such.
Go to my profile, I have been completely upfront about who I am, I even use my real name. My only association with the US military is as a serving Army National Guardsman. My views are those of myself, and do not represent the US government, the Army, or the National Guard in any way. The 101st fighting keyboardists is just an organization of bloggers set up to promote each other, it has no military affiliation.
BG
James B
Chief is a combination software geek from Bellevue, part-time Chief Warrant Officer in the Army National Guard (thus the clever name), and current MBA student. A graduate in Russian and East European studies from the University of Washington, his interests include foreign affairs, economics, politics, technology and languages. Polite inquiries and job offers will be answered at chiefb-at-gmail.com
----
So he works for the Armed Forces. Has been conditioned in the military for a particular line of thought. I suspect he is very patriotic. To be honest I'm unsure of the true motivation for this blog, other than the orginal counter to Loose Change.
Is it part of a military assignment? I don't know. Even thinking such brings out the OS hitmen even though it is an ongoing Defense operation and that the President even addressed the CT's surrouding 9/11.
I would state now'adays, 99% of the posters here support this blog, believe in the official story 100%, and accept nothing as fact unless a Federal organziation states it as such. They tend to ignore anything and everything that brings to question the official story wether it is evidence of explosives, testimony of firefighters, rescue workers, eyewitnesses, video and audio evidence and analysis, and common sense. They ignore politicians and experts who also question the OS. They tend to lump someone who questions the OS into a crowd and then begins to attack the character of said person specifically or in general on this blog. It is a great tactic to ignore anything they don't agree with. In order to belive anything they must hold a particular degree and a particular title, and work for a particular agency or institute or else it is a lie. There is no room for open minds and new information.
TAM seems to be the most reasonable of the bunch, yet even he discounts certain evidence that contradicts the OS. Alex of course is the worst through personal attacks, elementary examples, and hypocritical beliefs. SteveWtends to respond with how to say a lot and say nothing and then likes to cut and paste canned responses without quoting the experts opinion he so commonly posts. He likes to tag team with Alex against anyone who posts against their views. CHF is an expert in mental disorders as anyone who brings up anything other than the OS is a retard. Perhaps the smell of kerosene wafted down the elevator shafts? Or was it parafin CHF? Does the indidivual know what kerosene smells like? Does the indidivual know what explosives smell like after detonation.
James appears to be the spokesperson. Wether or not he sought attention he has gotten it and appears to be pretty proud of his accomplishment. To what ends? I have no idea. He reminds me of a Dylan for the OS side but without the video. Patseems to be James's sidekick. He hasn't called me enough names to make a judgement call.
CHF What should be admitted? Perhaps that something other than fuel and damage brought down the WTC 1 and 2 based upon the evidence. That would be a start. Perhaps terrorist were able to plant explosives in the building. Did you ever consider that? Didn't they get away with it once already?
Notice I said something, because I'm not an expert as to explosive demos. I'm not an expert in terrorism. But I can read and I've read the same stuff reports, theories, etc.(and the rebuttals)and I come to a different conclusion. For that, I and bg are retards.
If anyone was really serious about the whole thing, 1)They would join the 9/11 National Debate. 2)They would take the 9/11 million dollar challenge and earn some extra money by proving their theory. What this whole thing boils down to is really one collapse theory versus another theory. Neither side can prove the theory or it wouldn't be a theory.
Is it part of a military assignment? I don't know. Even thinking such brings out the OS hitmen even though it is an ongoing Defense operation and that the President even addressed the CT's surrouding 9/11.
LOL Yeah, the entire New World Order is being run by the Washington Army National Guard out of our secret illuminati lair beneath the armory in Yakima.
I am not exactly sure how Pat merits "sidekick" status. He does more posts and media than I do.
You got me bg!
I am a card carrying member of the NWO! HAHAHAH!
I wish I had a card with my name on it.
LOL Yeah, the entire New World Order is being run by the Washington Army National Guard out of our secret illuminati lair beneath the armory in Yakima.
Hey James, why the sarcasm? It is an ongoing operation through the DOD. Why is it so far out to even think this blog is a part of the operation. I posted the link in an earlier post when I asked you that question. You didn't address it then.
See BG nothing can get posted on this blog without sarcastic responses if your not on their 'side'. It is perhaps some of the most unintellectual argumentative responses ever read that is with the exception of TAM whose words speak more to his degree,education, and maturity than most of the other posters on here.
James I have yet to hear you sound off for an explanation of the firefighter's video statements about steel flowing like lava or 'looking' like a foundry. Are you ignoring it? Does it make you wonder if the photo we were discussing a few posts ago actually held merit now that there is additional evidence of what appears to be in that photo.
Does anyone know if the FBI gag order on firefighters or police officers has been lifted? In the morning of Sept. 11, 2005, New York City auxiliary fire lieutenant Paul Isaac Jr. asserted, yet again, that 9-11 was an inside job. “I know 9-11 was an inside job. The police know it’s an inside job; and the firemen know it too,” said Isaac."
“It’s amazing how many people are afraid to talk for fear of retaliation or losing their jobs,” said Isaac, regarding the FBI gag order placed on law enforcement and fire department officials, preventing them from openly talking about any inside knowledge of 9-11. From interview at Wingtv
(Before you go off, don't attack the source, attack the hero.)
Want more evidence-try an audio-spectral analysis of the explosions going off prior to the collapse:http://www.mediumrecords.com/
wtc/audio01.html#varick2
Be sure to read the rebuttal to the rebuttal when you whip out the flawed 9/11myths site.
BG Closely read the respones to the information above and watch the BS flow. It will be a clasic example of group think that Psych. 101 classes across the country could use.
Good day and good weekend. And remember: Caring about the memories of dead people and killing people are two different things!
Swing:
I have one word...Evidence.
Ok, more than one word. Seriously, You ask us to accept that something besides (1) Severing of columns by the planes, (2)office fires, and (3) removal of fire proofing, caused the collapse, yet noone, NOONE, has provided a shread of SOLID PROOF OR EVIDENCE that it was anything but this. Show me any, any solid physical evidence that proves explosives were used. Sulfur residue on steel does not qualify, by a long shot, and this is the closest to any physical evidence that can be brought forward to support the CD theory of WTC1/2.
Hundreds of people witnessed the planes hit the towers. Millions watched them hit on TV. Thousands watched the fires rage atop the buildings. Thousands saw the holes in the buildings created by the impacts. Millions watched the buildings collapse on TV. Millions watched OBL claim responsibility for the attacks (yes after initially denying it. he seems good at playing mind games with the infidels).
How many saw any "Explosives"? How many heard an "Explosion" that they could say, based on hearing it before, was caused by an explosive rather than an aeresol can, or an oxygen cannister, or an electrical transformer, or something else? How many witnesses saw thermite charges place on columns? What physical evidence (besides sulfur, which you can find in dry wall and many other things) is there of thermite use? How many testify to seeing suspicous workers working on the walls in the weeks prior to 9/11? How many people saw govt agents planting plane debris on the pentagon lawn? How many witnesses said they saw a missile hit the pentagon? How many said they saw a plane approach the pentagon, but then saw it fly over, leaving an explosion underneath?
I am just asking questions.
TAM
CHF Which is it? Kerosene or parafin? Why is the witnesses to in the story confused about the smell, CHF? That is why I asked if the person knows what it smells like. Come on use a little reason when arguing with me.
And again your using ONE witness to the smell of keorsene or was it parafin? Then you try to flip that example on me in regards to the explosions. Well witnesses didn't have any doubts about what the explosions sounded like.
"Well Joe, it sounded like a bomb going off or a hair spray canister exploding I'm just not sure!" ...or "Well firefighter James, it sounded like explosions going off or the tires popping in our firetrucks!"
"Geez, Billy, if another explosion goes off from bombs or steel snapping this building is coming down!"
See quite a bit of difference.
For the sake of kerosene, lets say the flaming kerosene did travel down the shafts.
1)Why didn't the firefighters move to put that out so they wouldn't be trapped when they moved towards the upper stories? Or are you suggesting they didn't think about the saftey of their teams?
2) Why wasn't there press reports of the raging fire in the shafts and the lobby?
3)Why didn't black smoke billow out of the shafts from all this fire?
4)Would flaming kerosene make explosive sounds hitting the bottom of an elevator shaft that were registered across the river?
5)Would flaming kerosene have enough enegry to knock the marble off of walls?
Chf Move on brother, cause you have nothing left to argue about when it comes to the whole 'kerosene down the shafts' issue.
Tam Man you hit so many points that it is hard to follow. I wish you wouldn't lump so many things togther. I'm not going to even address the Pentagon thing. I don't buy the missile theory either, bro.
(1) Severing of columns by the planes. (didn't we cover this as speculation, not evidence?) It would be nice to see the computer models ourselves, wouldn't you agree?
Which do you want me to tackle first?
How many heard world famous news anchors describe the collapse as looking like a controlled demolition? I guess the numbers game works both ways, doesn't it.
How many times did the offical theory 'change' to fit the non-CD theory?
Please don't bring up the suspicious OBL tape as evidence of guilt. Because I can turn around and use his other words to describe himself denying the attack.
What physical evidence (besides sulfur, which you can find in dry wall and many other things) is there of thermite use?
Ok, I'll play with logic. Just because there is small amounts of sulphur in drywall, doesn't disprove the potential use of thermite. And to be honest, if the theory is true, I don't know what kind of device terrorists would use. I'm not totally supporting thermite, but you can see how easily your point is disproven.
MacCan jet fuel and office material be attributed to that video I keep going back to? Speaking of that, why doesn't big James post videos that might bring question to the OS? Nevermind, I know why, because it is not a fair and balanced blog, it is more like BG stated an O'Riely blog. Although I'm thankful James allows me to post on his blog. Thanks!
How many heard an "Explosion" that they could say, based on hearing it before, was caused by an explosive rather than an aeresol can, or an oxygen cannister, or an electrical transformer, or something else? Let me twist it for you: How many heard explosions that were similiar to the explosions heard during a controlled demolition?
Fair enough? Isn't someone from here compiling firefighter testimony? Are they doing that with police officers? What about press reporters? Local citizens as well? What about the folks across the river? Is anyone compiling those numbers?
Is a canister explosion really going to be mistaken for a potential truck bomb as some witnesses thought? Just a little common sense.
Really Mac, is a good terrorist going to be witnessed placing the explosive? Is a device going to be put into place that can be easily seen in a terrorist operation of this magnitude?
Mac, would you agree that soundwaves analysis might clear up the issue? Say the analysis of soundwaves from one item compared to another?
CHF One last note on our discussion: look up converse accident in a philosophy book or website and you will end your part of the discussion willingly.
And for the rest of you:
What exactly would have to be brough to your attention that would raise doubts to the official conspiracy theory of 9/11? I can't wait for the response!
Well, he's figured us out.
Hey Chief, I know we're not supposed to get the death-squads rolling until next week, but couldn't we make an exception for this guy? I've been dying to try out my new carbine, and this seems like a great opportunity...
I would state now'adays, 99% of the posters here support this blog, believe in the official story 100%, and accept nothing as fact unless a Federal organziation states it as such. They tend to ignore anything and everything that brings to question the official story wether it is evidence of explosives, testimony of firefighters, rescue workers, eyewitnesses, video and audio evidence and analysis, and common sense. They ignore politicians and experts who also question the OS. They tend to lump someone who questions the OS into a crowd and then begins to attack the character of said person specifically or in general on this blog.
I'm sorry, I got a little distracted reading you tell me how I and everyone else are like.
Did you say something about lumping people together?
If you're gonna be that blatant with the hypocrisy, can you at least try to make it subtle? Maybe not do something then condemn it until you've started a new paragraph?
Cause I gotta be honest, when you do it this way, it's like you're not even trying to look like you want to be taken seriously.
Hey, Swingie, you forgot poor little pomeroo. You remember, he's the guy who regularly points out that you and bg are frauds and ignoramuses. He posts all those terribly inconvenient quotes from actual demolition experts--you know, the ones you NEVER respond to. He never neglects to remind the others here that you have failed to produced a shred of evidence for your insane and pernicious fantasies. He asks repeatedly, to no effect, that you show a few errors in the NIST report, the Popular Mechanics, the Protec paper, Dr. Greening's paper...
Hey, I just remembered why you forgot about pomeroo.
Hey Chief, I know we're not supposed to get the death-squads rolling until next week, but couldn't we make an exception for this guy?
Hmm, well it is drill weekend...
I didn't make Danglers list. :(
I need to be more active here (and call tinfoild turban wearers more names).
Swing:
Tam Man you hit so many points that it is hard to follow. I wish you wouldn't lump so many things togther. I'm not going to even address the Pentagon thing. I don't buy the missile theory either, bro.
I agree, a better place for this is a forum, but none of the CTers that blog post seem interested in coming to JREF, which currently is the only Forum I visit.
I am not arguing my points with evidence, dont mistake me, I could. I am saying provide me evidence of your theories on matters.
(1) Severing of columns by the planes. (didn't we cover this as speculation, not evidence?) It would be nice to see the computer models ourselves, wouldn't you agree?
Yes we did cover it. I was merely restating the OS, and saying that this is what I believe, and noone has shown me any solid evidence that it was anything but...hence to me it still sticks as the most likely cause of collapse for the towers.
Which do you want me to tackle first?
which ever tickles your fancy.
How many heard world famous news anchors describe the collapse as looking like a controlled demolition?
LOOKED LIKE. LOOKED LIKE. This does not equate to WAS. You cannot apply the "looks like a duck" analogy to something so complex. A building that falls straight down like that, is going to "look like" a CD to the untrained eye, as we have no other benchmark to compare it to. In fact, it looks similar to, but no like a CD, in the sense that it came down from top to bottom, not bottom first, as one would see in a true CD (referring to WTC 1 & 2 of course).
I guess the numbers game works both ways, doesn't it.
Of course, it works for all ways, but I do not see numbers playing in the CT favor on any issue.
How many times did the offical theory 'change' to fit the non-CD theory?
Good question. If you have proof the official story changed to "Fit" a "Non-CD" version of things, show me where it changed, and who changed it. NISTs original report on WTC1 and 2 is not version 418 is it?
Please don't bring up the suspicious OBL tape as evidence of guilt. Because I can turn around and use his other words to describe himself denying the attack.
Though I cannot, off the top of my head, remember the reference, I recall reading an article by a reporter who interviewed OBL. In it, OBL admitted he initially denied the attacks, because he felt the americans do the same thing, and was going to give them a taste of their own medicine. Once again, off top of my head I cannot recall the reference, but I truthfully tell you I read this...anyone remember the article?
What physical evidence (besides sulfur, which you can find in dry wall and many other things) is there of thermite use?
Ok, I'll play with logic. Just because there is small amounts of sulphur in drywall, doesn't disprove the potential use of thermite.
Do not twist it, that was not what I asked for. I asked for proof that thermite was used. We have tonnes of video evidence that the buildings were hit by planes, that there were large fires in the buildings. What I asked for was proof of thermite.
Drywall has more than "a little" sulfur in it, and there was TONNES of drywall in the WTCs.
And to be honest, if the theory is true, I don't know what kind of device terrorists would use. I'm not totally supporting thermite, but you can see how easily your point is disproven.
my point is not disproven, as my point was asking you for evidence of thermite use.
MacCan jet fuel and office material be attributed to that video I keep going back to? Speaking of that, why doesn't big James post videos that might bring question to the OS? Nevermind, I know why, because it is not a fair and balanced blog, it is more like BG stated an O'Riely blog. Although I'm thankful James allows me to post on his blog. Thanks!
opinion only, so I will not address, except to say...what video. Post a link so I know what you are talking about.
How many heard an "Explosion" that they could say, based on hearing it before, was caused by an explosive rather than an aeresol can, or an oxygen cannister, or an electrical transformer, or something else? Let me twist it for you: How many heard explosions that were similiar to the explosions heard during a controlled demolition?
why twist it. Can my question not be answered by you without doing so. My point, as you well know, is that all the claims of hearing "explosions" is very, very weak nonspecific evidence for the use of explosive devices in the attacks. To the untrained ears, yes an exploding oxygen cannister or aeresol cannister would sound like a "bomb" as it makes a loud bang, which is all most of us would know to expect when hearing a bomb go off.
Fair enough? Isn't someone from here compiling firefighter testimony? Are they doing that with police officers? What about press reporters? Local citizens as well? What about the folks across the river? Is anyone compiling those numbers?
I do not know. What is your point with this? I'd say if you want to, you start such things.
Really Mac, is a good terrorist going to be witnessed placing the explosive? Is a device going to be put into place that can be easily seen in a terrorist operation of this magnitude?
In this you have a point, but your point helps me with my follow up point.
Yes, a good, super duper evil cabal group would insure that nothing was witnessed, but to plant enough explosives in this super secretive, "not a single person sees" manner, would require ENORMOUS amount of time free from any potential witnesses. Look at how long it takes to rig a conventional building, much smaller in size, with explosives, when they have unlimited access to the building, then tell me how long it would take to rig 2 110 storey buildings and a 47 storey building, with said explosives, in said fashion. Where/when would they get all this time to access the inerts of the building with noone seeing?
Mac, would you agree that soundwaves analysis might clear up the issue? Say the analysis of soundwaves from one item compared to another?
If you are referring to the explosions heard in the 9/11 video, where they account for delay in sound travel to the video events, I have seen it, and I do not buy it.
Most Debunkers believe the sound they think is a pre collapse explosion, is in fact just mic noise.
Now, if we had multiple recordings of the collapses, before and after, and then had a professional sound analysis team look at these recordings and determined that (a) the sounds recorded were in fact explosions, and not wind noise in the mic, and that based on their analysis there were significant explosions occuring in both WTCs seconds prior to the initiation of the collapse, than I would have a serious look at it.
See the biggest problem is that my standards for solid evidence are very, very high, and in, most cases, the CTers cannot provide evidence that meets my criteria.
TAM
OK, I'll defend what he said, even though I think he should not have said it. He was saying that in effect the fireman are paid off because they have government jobs, which is different from saying they get are getting paid extra not to talk. But still offensive.
But there is an element of truth in that there are disincentives to rock the boat. This is true in any organization. Unless you know something for sure, is it worth doing anything when it only gets you grief, ostracism, and can hurt your family?
I already said in another comment that I respect the fireman and am not trying to dishonor them. Now I read Jason saying the same thing. Oh well, I meant it, and I bet he does too.
BG, you raise an interesting point about people here. I may be naiive, but people here strike me as sincere.
Reading the comments, I think my instincts were right. JamesB sounds real - I know someone with a similar background. He threw great parties and he and his military friends didn't kick my ass when I got drunk and started spouting antiwar talk.
It's 911blogger that gives me the creeps. PsyOp Central, it seems to me. There's some normal people posting with good ideas, but there's also a lot of what seems to me to be
mind games designed to discredit and distract.
Or maybe it's true that many of the the majority of people who doubt the official story are delusional assholes with a hard on for blaming the Jews.
That doesn't mean I'm that way.
Anyway, I don't feel like I have to take a shower when I leave here. Plus, it seems like I can learn more here rather than at choir practice, though I wish there was less haranguing and more argument.
"They ignore politicians and experts who also question the OS. "
I don't know any "experts" who are questioning the "official story", just anti-American kooks. I also ignore people who say the Earth is flat and space aliens live among us. I guess I'm at fault for not lending credence to any and all conspiracy theories.
"They tend to lump someone who questions the OS into a crowd and then begins to attack the character of said person specifically or in general on this blog."
Boo Hoo. You are merely accused of stupidity and/or dishonesty, you and your ilk accuse others of perpetrating mass murder on NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER. Which is worse?
TAM --
"See the biggest problem is that my standards for solid evidence are very, very high, and in, most cases, the CTers cannot provide evidence that meets my criteria."
Do you apply the same standards to what the USG says?
"But there is an element of truth in that there are disincentives to rock the boat."
Ningen, you do seem sincere, but let's analyze this comment. Hundreds of firefighters see thier buddies get murdered (by this supposed government plot) and keep silent about it because they fear job insecurity? Not one breaks the silence. Come on, that isn't realistic. This is just another invention by the Deniers. They have no evidence, so they have to invent it by slandering broad swaths of people.
"Do you apply the same standards to what the USG says?"
Sure, I do. Governments can and do coverup but something on this scale? No way. No more than a handful of people knew about Watergate and it became public in short order.
Again, let's look at the Denier "theory", think about all the aspects of the supposed "inside job", it would have required the cooperation of thousands and they can't identify any, much less provide proof of their complicity. 9/11 Denial is not a fact-based set of beliefs, it is a religion.
Ningen wrote: "He was saying that in effect the fireman are paid off because they have government jobs. . ."
I'm pretty sure a *lot* of the firefighters were volunteers.
I'm a Jedi! I'm a Jedi!
My eleven year old brother will be so proud.
ningen:
I try to yes. I consider what NIST has put out to be quite good. It is evidence that comes from a panel of the most qualified experts in their fields, which are the fields of most important to the attacks.
Was there a particular piece of USG provided evidence that you feel is bogus and of poor quality that you wish to make known to me?
TAM
Atta's passport or the red bandana perhaps?
You people truly are retarded. We don't need any direct evidence, just because two items survived crashes (not unheard of, by the way) it's a conspiracy!
Really, you folks need to stop and think.
They tend to lump someone who questions the OS into a crowd and then begins to attack the character of said person specifically or in general on this blog.
That's because they are all part of a crowd. Just like people who say evolution is garbage is a crowd, or people who say they've been adbucted by aliens. The great irony of the folks who cry "sheeple" and "disinformation" is that they are the sheep and that they spread dis/misinformation.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Re: Atta's passport...
http://911myths.com/html/passport_recovered.html
To use the whole "to err is human remark" and the "I was brainwashed" bit is bullshit. he said somehting retarded because of his retarded beliefs and he got caught. Fuck him. What a load of shit. What a piece of shit.
Those of us who believe and espouse alternative theories about 9/11 are hurting American......
It sounds so much like Bill O'Reilly unhinged that it's hard for me to acknowledge that way of thinking as a legitimate argument.
How is that unhinged? Lying about a country never does any good for that country. It's just a simple fact. You don't help America by throwing the blame from those responsible (the Nineteen) to the American government. You also are criticizing the government for a fantasy, when there are real things to criticize the government for - not to mention that honest critics are sickened by folks like you because their opponents can then lump them in with the "crazies".
But besides all that, I support Screw Loose Change because I'm a firm believer in that Enlightment idea of objective truth. Truth exists whether or not one believes in it or not. In order for us mere mortals to understand this grand idea we use such magical tools as logic, reason, and evidence to ferret it out (that last sentence is dripping with sarcasm, by the way).
I hate all enemies of reality, and you people are just one such group.
You called me an "enemy of reality".
How rich.
Have you seen the pictures the Pentagon? Have you seen the released video?
How dare you say I should believe the official story based on the dubious reality that we can all witness equally!
How dare you call me and others honestly wanting to see the evidence "enenmies of reality".
Bg, you simply must stop misrepresenting yourself. Your desire for a new investigation is disingenuous, not honest. Your entire approach is dishonest. You show absolutely no interest in the truth, as demonstrated by your dismissal of mountains of evidence that contradict your fantasies.
How dare you call me and others honestly wanting to see the evidence "enenmies of reality".
Simple: Because every time you're shown the evidence, you lie, make excuses, ask irrelevant questions, and otherwise ignore the evidence being presented to you. Moreover, you refuse to accept the fact that you are simply not qualified to understand some of the evidence. You then go on to accuse those who ARE qualified of scientificaly analyzing the evidence of being "part of the coverup". In other words, you refuse to face reality, you blame your own shortcomings on others, and you make baseless accusations without any evidence. If that doesn't make you "an enemy of reality", I don't know what would.
Now he brings up the pentagon, if he goes there he will be further destroyed
Hey TYM What have you to prove otherwise?
Pomeroo Please link back to where you have done the following:
You remember, he's the guy who regularly points out that you and bg are frauds and ignoramuses. He posts all those terribly inconvenient quotes from actual demolition experts--you know, the ones you NEVER respond to. He never neglects to remind the others here that you have failed to produced a shred of evidence for your insane and pernicious fantasies.
Swinger, please throw yourself off a bridge.
Alex...a side order of Canadian bacon with that hypocracy you so dearly love if you will and a new report on UFO activity in the far north! Isn't there a Canadian Conspiracy Government website you can troll on and learn about your own country?
Post a Comment
<< Home