Let's see, your suspects have one thing in common: There isn't enough solid evidence against any of them to implicate them in anything. We've got some pretty specific circumstantial evidence on Dick Cheney, but you made a card for the "Harley Guy" whose only offense is rather robotically espousing the official version of what brought down the towers from the scene. You might as well make a card for the producers of the "Lone Assassins" TV show.
If your goal is to create artwork which belittle and parody the Truth movement then you've succeeded.
William F. Pepper was recently on the radio program called Visiblity 9/11 and he spoke about COINTELPRO efforts to disrupt activist groups. He suggested that the best way to protect yourself from such efforts to disrupt was to be very careful about your facts, to keep away from speculation, and to try to keep your head and not get overly excited by any particular theory until it could be verified.
The Harley Guy is a bit of evidence that means nothing on its face. Without discovering who he is and who he might have been working for there is no way to demonstrate that his comments were anything but his interpretation of what he saw. We might watch his video and believe that he's a plant, but the belief is based on nothing without evidence.
Silverstein's "pull it" comment if taken to mean "pull building 7" also does not, on its own, demonstrate any involvement on his part in orchestrating the attacks. Instead all this shows is that he knew that WTC 7 was demolished and has chosen not to publicize the fact. Perhaps he knows what happened that day, perhaps he has simply received word that it would be healthier for him to keep what he knows about WTC 7 quiet after his flub. Perhaps "pull it" means what he says it means. Without more substantial evidence we can't know.
We've got to be careful. On the other hand if somebody can provide substantial evidence against any of these "suspects" that might lead to an indictement then I for one would be very eager to see it or hear it.
With apologies to the representatives of Larry S's defense team present, when property is destroyed under suspicious circumstances that are not adequately explained, suspicion falls quite naturally on the owner/insurance holder.
Given that the owner in this case has also made suspicious comments, and failed to clarify them unequivocably, in person (i.e. not through a spokesperson), if anyone belongs on one of these cards it's Lucky Larry.
...if the quotes are factual and outrageous enough then, it may cause some people who have never seen or heard them to wonder if really it was said and why it was said. Hopefully, this would give rise to their investigating the circumstances surrounding the quote, it's relevance, and importance.
RT's found a niche. Let him run with it.
New series????
"Disinfo Agent"
"Media Whore"
"Useful Idiot"
They can make for interesting revolving/random graphics for web sites, too.
--
The true threat to liberty comes not from terrorists but from our political leaders whose natural inclination is to seize upon any excuse to diminish them.
~~ Walter Williams, Nightly Business Report, September 2001
with the PDB 01-08-06 in back and all 6 FBI agents stopped by higher ups named. (Wright, Samit, Rowley, Floyd, O'Neill, Williams) and let's not forget Randy Glass and Able Danger.
plus OP Bojinka plus exercise pictures of Pentagon.
Powell:
[We]"put before the world, the American people, a persuasive case that ... it is al-Qaida, led by Osama bin Laden, who has been responsible."
Ces cartes sont magnifiques. Les cartes sont en français, mais si quelqu’un les aime, nous pouvons faire des traductions des cartes les plus intéressants.
--
The true threat to liberty comes not from terrorists but from our political leaders whose natural inclination is to seize upon any excuse to diminish them.
~~ Walter Williams, Nightly Business Report, September 2001
I realize some people think that making light of this is in some way unhelpful. Obviously I disagree, but let me explain why.
First of all, just look at how a semi-random selection of suspects led to people suggesting others to include on the suspects team. I think that making a list of people who have some splainin to do is helpful not just in the absence of a real investigation, but if and when we get one it will be a good way to judge their performance. Don't like being considered a suspect? Fine. Let's have a trial so you can, under oath, clear your name. We have a right to a redress of grievances, and our grievances involve these people. It isn't our fault that they are suspicious, they have MADE themselves suspicious.
The sooner these folks are investigated and put on trial, the sooner folks like me can stop worrying about what other crimes they may be plotting and go back to simpler worries like making a living, saving for retirement, finding true love, etc.
This is not something any of us ever thought we would end up having to do with our lives, having to set aside all kinds of other worthwhile pursuits to do what is right. If we can't at the same time find the lighter side in all of this absurdity, we will not last long as an opposition movement. If we don't display creative energy and a positive disposition, if all we do is doomfully predict the coming police state, prison camps, and further false flag attacks we may as well give up.
As a movement with the lofty goal in mind of destroying a paradigm, we have to grow organically--no one can direct our efforts. If someone decides to make light of the issues as a way of venting steam, and you disagree, voice your disagreement. If you feel that their work is flawed in some way, point out how. Or better yet, take it upon yourself to outdo them, and make a more accurate set of trading cards from your point of view, and then, like Fleer and Topps, we can let the free market sort out the good from the mediocre. Keep in mind though that since I don't believe in intellectual property or copyright, mine will be free for anyone to print. :)
Or maybe I'll just half-ass the whole project like I usually do. In any case, print, steal, copy, borrow, or help if you're so inclined! There's a limit to what we can accomplish as a movement at any given moment--until we get our investigation and trials, we can afford to have some fun. Hell, we can't afford NOT to!
I think it is funny as all hell, but the joke is really on them. What about having the betrayal cards or agent provocateur cards Fetzer Reyonalds Thorn Etc.. Those morons are just as guilty as the Perps. There got to be a way we can find out who the Harley guy is. Does anyone know any cops FBI or we all can pitch in for a Private investigator lets start the Harley guy truth movement
Should be played NOW with printed face cards (until on-line version is released), with stats and space for note-taking additional stats on the back of each card in circulation.
Internet access a plus, and should be rotated as a responsibility for each player in turn to search for best results. Time is a factor, as well as key strokes locating best resourced search results. Fellow players are encouraged to offer amicable consensus as to the quality of results.
New details should be periodically typed, with up-dated cards printed and shared with the world through the internet.
Best played with at least two people, no minimum age, no real losers so long as they hold up a hand and practice with the internet.
Rules of the Game:
Deal out all available cards to the players so that no cards remain.
Place or hold your cards, so that others players may view your current line-up.
Beginning with the player holding the "Joker", player one looks around the playing table for the All-Star they feel is most reprehensible for either perpetrating AND/OR covering up the crimes of 911. Player must voice the historical moment at which time they feel the All-Star earned a listed Stat Star. Person holding the All-Star, confirms whether or not that Star is actually listed in the stats. If its the first Stat Star, the All-Star is immediately taken into custody by player one.
If no other player is able to challenge the primacy of the First Stat Star, nor list at least two ADDITIONAL Stars in the Stats, card remains in custody until such time. (Here in enters the internet, to confirm, challenge accuracy, and for locating additional Stats on the All-Star to be noted on card for future play. Please up-date cards often and share new playing cards with other good people.)
Player one now releases the Joker into "protective custody" in the center of the table. This Joker is not off the hook, and may be selected to join the dock with other All-Stars in future play. Other overflow All-Star from any hand, may be sent to protective custody in exchange for challenging All-Star Stats yet unspoken in play.
Next player in turn, to the "left" of player one (they still need a chance), scans the line-ups for their choice of All-Star... and the game is afoot.
Winner is declared when no other players are able to better the listed stats on the back of the All-Star cards held by the player with the most All-Stars in Custody.
This is intense, and I'll have to look it over with more time, but it looks great. Every year a news eries could come out with updated stats, that way the older ones become collectible... the mind reels just considering the possibilities! In fact, this could be extended into a whole "power elites" game that could be used/played to keep track of major players in world events generally... somehow we can tie the value of the old cards to enable the market to sort out who is seen as wielding lots of influence.... hrmmm... buzzzz... whirrrrr..... ding.......
But she hasn't really attacked the truth movement so for now she's off the hook. We have to incentivize coming forward but more importantly disincentivize speaking against the truth.
Oprah was not elected, did not have direct power-control-responsibility on 911. She is a show woman--nothing bad about that, but there is a big distinction between people who are directly obligated to respond to the public and people who have influence due to their popularity.
The right wallows in this mistake all the time--for instance if you were to believe them, Marilyn Manson was more responsible for the conditions at Colombine High than the useless teachers who did nothing about the severe abusive behavior they personally witnessed every day--behavior that would put any adult in jail or prison for assult. But the right worships power--so you must blame the victim or anyone else they don"t like--anything but actually hold authority accountable, which is anathama to them.
So, no, I don"t think "going after" Oprah will accomplish anything--but make us look a bit silly. As long as she doesn"t leap on the condemnation bandwagon, I consider her a future ally--she has been willing to come out against the bastards on other issues. Yes, it would be nice if she took up the cause like Joan of Arc, but face it---few people can be Joans. She will have to answer to her own conscience if she knows and is avoiding it--but so will some firefighters and other first responders who fear for their pensions if they speak out.
Save our outrage for those who had primary responsiblity in 911, and those who were in direct positions of access to have the secondary responsibility to blow the whistle.
I'm so relieved that you don't want go after Oprah. Halleliujah! Of course, RT considers her complict and has said so. That was the point I was making. Going after Oprah would be absurd. Really dumb, but only slightly more stupid would be to make this Harley Guy a suspect based on nothing more than the fact that we don't like what he said on TV.
If you want Oprah to cover nine eleven truth you have every right to contact her and ask her to do so. Otherwise she runs her show and isn't responsible for our governments corruption...
I've asked her numerous times to interview Dr. DAvid Ray Griffin and others. She surely could handle that I feel. Anyway. What else are you going to do in the next five minutes. Might as well. Click above.
No I don't. I think she's like so many other people these days--either amazingly ignorant, pathologically deluded, or extremely cowardly. Do I think that Oprah is knowingly and with malice withholding the truth from the American people? No. She is probably doing so out of self-interest, which may or may not be justified given her immense wealth that, unless she has been threatened with violence, should provide ample protection for her to do the right thing.
If misterguy would like to dig up wherever I said Oprah was complicit in the 9/11 attacks I would like to see that. If, as I suspect, he is twisting my words (again) I would like to ask him to stop doing so. It makes a big difference, I should note, to say that someone is complicit in the cover-up as opposed to complicit in the crime. I would only put someone on a suspect card if I suspect them of being complicit in the crime. Harley dude, for example, seems to have known just how to explain the towers' collapse to jibe with the official lie. Coincidence? Bridge for sale.
Obviously Oprah is not legally bound to expose the truth about 9/11 on her show. Is she, however, morally bound to acknowledge this huge issue instead of ignoring it and thus helping to perpetuate the official and very destructive myth? If you don't think so, then you are possessed of a curiously ambivalent moral compass, and you might as well join those who believe that the 9/11 lie serves a greater good by helping the govt do what is necessary to protect people where the people would otherwise oppose the required actions. Because you know, that's going to be the last stop for a lot of people...
I asked you if you thought Oprah, Big Bird, and David Letterman should be blamed as complicit after the fact and you said the only one you would leave off the list was Big Bird. But I don't need to scour this board for the quote because you've provided the quote above:
"Do I think that Oprah is knowingly and with malice withholding the truth from the American people? No. She is probably doing so out of self-interest."
You've just said that Oprah is knowingly withholding the truth about 9/11, only not out of malice but out of self-interest. So she's complicit after the fact.
Let me ask you this, is there anybody in the major media who isn't in on it?
Let me ask you misterguy--you know the OCT is BS. I know the OCT is BS. My mailman knows the OCT is BS. Do you REALLY think that Oprah doesn't know the OCT is BS? Give the woman some credit for having two brain cells to rub together--she is a billionaire after all.
SO many people know. Did you think it was just us?
My point all along has been that if you know, as many people do, then you have a moral duty to speak out. If you are especially wealthy, and/or if you are extremely influential, your failure to act is that much more damaging than the silence of those who can only reach people immediately surrounding them.
So my point, again, because you seem to require things to be clarified multiple times--as Martin Luther King said, "there comes a time when silence is betrayal". Nigh on 6 years after 9/11, I believe that time has come. I would expect, misterguy, as a fan of the official holocaust narrative that you are, you wouldn't have such a problem wrapping your brain around the concept of collective guilt.
I am not the one who keeps digging himself deeper into a hole by failing to deal with the truth. David Letterman and Oprah and so many others have had PLENTY of time to figure this out. You can keep waiting as long as you want for them to do the right thing before complaining. You'll just have to deal with the fact that I am done waiting. And I know I'm not the only one.
If your mailman suspects but doesn't speak out, or worse is in denial and refuses to know, does that make your mailman actually complicit? There is a difference between appealing to people's better nature, talking about the kind of complicity that everyone shares in, and real criminal complicity after the fact. If a newseditor had documents that proved 9/11 was an inside job and chose to shred them that would be complicity, if this newseditor secretly suspected that something was fishy about the OCT but didn't act on that suspicion that would not be real criminal complicity.
that did it for me. Just no getting around how thoroughly guilty and ashamed armstrong looks. his comment in the white house was weird, agreed. Anyway it's not so offtopic--part of the 9/11 coverup seems to be to link it with Apollo and the holocaust so as to force people to confront all of this at once. At first of course it seems to do the trick, but the more you look into things the more it all makes sense. Like why they thought they could get away with 9/11--because they knew that bigger lies had been successful before, going back ages, I bet.
I had though a while back that we were entering a new dark age, but it seems that after the renaissance at somepoint we lapsed back into one from which the internet is extracting us. One can only imagine how much real progress humanity will make once it sheds this husk of false consciousness. As long as the holdouts don't blow everything up out of spite! Heck, at least we can say we were awake even for a little while--so many people lived their whole lives in a total fantasy world, all things considered...
was fed by successful hoaxes past, I agree. It must've been, because blowing up 3 buildings in broad daylight with the world watching and expecting to get away with it required boundless audacity - and information superiority, which as we all know is what makes 9/11 different. I'm sure somewhere, in a secret think-tank, someone is being slapped.
I'm not sure if Apollo and the Holocaust are being associated with us in terms of an "overload" strategy, I think it has more to do with the still prevalent orthodoxy regarding both. Anyway, I too hope they won't go all out when their bluff is called...if they don't, then let's all one day come together and celebrate - like the Ewoks when the Death Star was blown up, aight crew?
Just whom do you think I'm trying to protect? I am motivated by a few things in addition to and in pursuit of my desire to see the truth come out. One of them is insisting that this issue be addressed, not in dribs and drabs but with the intense focus one has come to expect from a runaway bride at LEAST.
Another is making it clear that in pursuit of the truth we (I at least) will not be cowed into silence on any subject that I deem worthy of discussion. Not because it will offend or alienate anyone or because someone thinks it is wrong. I will not tolerate censorship, encouragement to self-censorship, or unfounded smear tactics. I reserve the right to be critical of others and accept that others will be critical of me. When our freedoms are under attack, I think the best antidote is to exercise them with gusto, especially when it comes to our freedom of speech.
I suppose this all sounds very self-important of me, except that everything I say applies to everyone else, not just me. Anyone who has pledged to do everything possible to expose these crimes and the lies that hide them has more than earned the right to express their views. What a shame it would be if they didn't.
I don't know who you're trying to protect. Perhaps you don't either. Need to know basis ring a bell?
Whether there is somebody who has hired you to misdirect or not the fact remains that you misdirect people. You blame the victims of 9/11 as perps, you conflate the most heinous lies with 9/11 skepticism, and you are quick to cast blame here and there based on nothing but self-righteousness and belief.
I'm not sure why you're talking about the right to express your views. Nobody is calling for your views to be censored. I'm just trying to cast some light on your views.
Well, this seems like it might go on for a while. Hours of drama, oh boy.
BTW: I can agree RT is a bit of a loud mouth--but so am I. He can--and has-- WAY over stated his cases--cases I mostly agree with. But--monsieur "guy"--you're over-stating your case too. You could make some constructive critisizims of RT's framing and occasional execess "enthusiasm"--but instead you're cherry picking his words and reframing it as "shilling". And we're not talking about the spice.
I have noticed a small group of users who are targeting the "loud mouths" with anything that can be dredged up and cast in a dim light. I'm blogging this phenomenon soon. Suffice it to say, the op is misguided: we may be loudmouths, but we aren't "leaders". We are each our own leader--rating the loudmouths down or trying to clumsily smear them will not change 911activism one jot.
I may be wrong, but I'm not overstating my beliefs. I truly do believe that RT misdirects, intentionally or not, in the same way that a Nico Haupt or a Fetzer misdirects people. I have no trouble with loud mouths, I have trouble with people who don't cleave to actual evidence and who nurse pet theories or worse, propagate known falsehoods.
You seem to be suggesting that I'm acting in an authoritarian way, but I don't see how that is the case. I'm merely "calling it like I see it" just as RT says he is.
I disagree with you on this point. Given his positions I think RT relies on people's feeling of comraderie with a fellow traveler. I don't see how his positions hold up to scrutiny. For instance, he conflates 9/11 skepticism with denying the Holocaust and this is not something that holds up if one engages in any critical thinking.
On the other hand I am relying on people to engage in some critical thinking. If I thought people were incapable of thinking critically here I would give up on convincing people of my point of view.
If you were confident that most of the people at 911blogger were proficient in critical thinking, you would spend more time posting about what interests you, and less as RT's self-appointed Inquisitor. As for your fantasy that intelligent, thoughtful people are so swayed by his charisma that they are unable to disagree with him -- as Tom Peterson is wont to say, "Wake up! Wake up!"
Moreover, your constant ham-handed distortions of his positions ("conflates 9/11 skepticism with denying the Holocaust") reflect either profound disingenuousness or a real impairment of your reading comprehension ability.
What interests me, at the moment, is the fact that the 911 movement seems to be up to its ears in disinfo.
As to whether or not RT conflates Holocaust denial with 9/11 skepticism I can quote him to you:
"Issue number 1: I have never ever come across anyone who says that it simply "did not occur." [note-Holocaust deniers redefine the Holocaust rather than denying it occured]
Issue number 2: The numbers are inflated. Note they say "the extent described by current scholarship" You know why they say that? Because the numbers have already had to be revised down. The managers of the Auschwitz memorial had to change a plaque because it overstated the number killed there by millions. That's simply a fact.
Issue number 3: Not even revisionists deny that the Nazis rounded up Jewish people. They question whether places like Auschwitz were literally "extermination camps" where people were taken to be killed en masse. In fact they were taken there to work. They were considered prisoners of war and they were used as slave labor. Nothing nice about it. They died in great numbers, mainly from disease. There were no "huge ovens" just regular crematoria.
Issue number 4: Gas chambers were used to delouse clothing and other supplies--lice were a major problem as they spread typhoid, from which a large number of inmates did die. The gas chamber at Auschwitz has a peculiar history, as can be seen in the documentary by David Cole, who is himself Jewish: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=9176742040462080597&q=auschwitz
David Cole was threatened by the JDL after making his documentary, the FBI categorizes the JDL as a terrorist organization (responsible for bombings in the US) They posted his name, picture, and address online and suggested that he should be "dealt with" until he publically "recanted" and claims he was suffering from self-hatred.
Deal with these facts however you want, but it's clear that there is more to the holocaust (or less maybe) than is generally known. This is not denial, it is literally revision, and as we know from 9/11, revisionism is not inherently evil. The exploitation of the admitted tragedy that befell Jews during WW2 is clearly documented by Norman Finkelstein, whose own parents survived concentration camps. In other words, they were not exterminated. The fact that even his work is maligned by people like those responsible for www.masada2000.org should make it clear that there is a reason why holocaust revision is treated like it was pure evil.
Sorry misterguy, but methinks you doth protest too much."
Now explain to me how this is not Holocaust denial or point out how he fails to conflate the issues of 9/11 skepticism with Holocaust denial. Or do both.
I'll quote Peterson back to you now: "Wake up! Wake up!"
I find that "denial" as in "Holocaust denial," is a bankrupt concept in the post-9/11 world. To paraphrase another of RT's posts, the truth needs no taboos to protect it. Taboos prohibiting the investigation of any historical narrative should strike any Truther as suspect. Therefore, when you set forth a list of facts to which anyone who wishes to discuss the Holocaust must stipulate or be called "denier" instead of "inquirer"-- as you did in that other thread, before the Williams stuff came up -- you end up sounding like Kos with his Creed of 9/11 "facts."
If you're worried about disinfo, I suggest you direct your energy toward producing more "signal" rather than fighting the "noise" as you perceive it -- because in general, attempts to fight the noise just add to it.
I find your response very discouraging. First off, you evidently don't understand what Holocaust denial is or why it's a problem. Someone is a Holocaust denier if they claim that there was no Nazi extermination program aimed at Jews and Roma, that there were no extermination camps, and that the millions who died did not in fact die. The reason this is such a reprehensible thing to deny is because millions did die, they were eliminated in an extermination program, and many were gassed in the camps.
There are perhaps as many variations on the reasons why people might want to lie about this part of history as there are people who lie about it, however the primary reason people lie about the Holocaust is because they have a political agenda that requires minimizing the crimes of the Nazis. However, in this case, the primary function Holocaust denial has is to muddy the water. By mixing questions about the official story of 9/11 with righteous demands to lift the taboo on Holocaust denial people like RT are mixing our sincere skepticism, our honest questions, and our legitimate recognition that we've been lied to by our own government about the worst attack on US since the civil war with...well, with Holocaust denial.
There is truth to the notion that the European laws that make Holocaust denial illegal are draconian and backwards, but that doesn't mean that the Holocaust deniers aren't liars. In fact, that's what people like RT are, they're Holocaust liars. They lie about the Holocaust. Forget the word "denier" you can deny anything you like, as long as you don't have to lie about it in the process.
For instance, RT likes to talk about the plaque at Auschwitz and claim that this plaque has bearing, that it was an important piece of data used by historians to factor the Holocaust death toll. But, in fact, that isn't true. That plaque doesn't have anything to do with how historians arrived at the excepted numbers, and it never has. He'll quote people who lie about what was required to burn all the bodies, or who lie and claim they used the gas to delouse the prisoners.
I don't expect you to believe me, but really look into the subject. Find out for yourself about Holocaust denial. Investigate for yourself.
Are you really claiming that zyklon-B's primary use was NOT as a delousing agent? And you call ME a liar?
By no means is my agenda to minimize the crimes of the Nazis. I see, however, more and more, that your agenda is to preserve a fantsasy narrative of the Nazis being more evil than anyone ever was, is, or has been.
Well sorry, but after 9/11 I was done dealing in fantasies, and decided to learn for myself the things which the world was obviously not prepared to let me know without a struggle.
There exists such a thing as war propaganda, practiced by both sides in a conflict. There exist such things as war crimes, practiced by both sides in a conflict. There exist such things as false flag attacks, practiced by both sides in a conflict. The exaggerated demonization of the losers of WW2 and the subsequent appropriation of historical "truth" by the winners, both the western allies AND Stalin should not come as a surprise to a genuine student of history.
To insist that the Nazis were incomprehensibly evil is to attempt to support the idea of WW2 as a "just war". It was not. No war is just. Allied war crimes were swept under the rug while Nazi war crimes were exaggerated. Does pointing this out make me a Nazi or Nazi sympathizer? Only in your messed up world, misterguy. In the real world it means I can handle reality more objectively than you. I'm a pacifist and a humanist who understands (finally, and thanks to 9/11) the folly of taking the dominant world order at its word, even when I benefit materially from inclusion in that order (particularly as a white male).
Because I am 100% commited to peace and because I know that that will require abandoning some cherished but false beliefs, I see no room for compromise on historical accuracy to the extent that it can be ascertained. If you can provide proof that homicidal gas chambers were used by the Nazis I would be happy to reconsider what I otherwise see as a fabrication. I have to say though that since you disagree with mainstream scholars who know that zyklon-B was used to delouse prisoner clothing, bedding, etc., I don't hold out much hope for your ability to provide any proof to back up your claims.
Here's why I think you should: A group or culture, that would sit 8 to 12 year old children down (such as myself) in front of a movie screen... and show them creepy grainy films of bodies being bull-dozed into ditches... then lamp shades, bars of soap, piles of hair and mountains of shoes... all mixed between swastikas and the rantings of Adolf the dip-shit... regularly scheduled on Saturday mornings before Synagog... where the "plant a tree" collection plate gets passed... because olive trees must like-wise be bull-dozed to make way for Gods only chosen people in the Holy Land... by the force of gun and tank... assured by God to a select people where some people seem to be less selected by God....
... is NOT a nation-state, culture, group nor religion... beyond reproach. Thus SOME exaggerations of the Jewish suffering during WWII would hardly surprise ME.
SO even though the Nazis still looked like pure bastards... and project paper clip makes me wonder if brilliant American heros of WWII where really smart enough to keep that bastard smell from rubbing off... I'm still not done with the Historical Cuisinart just yet (you can call this "denial" all you like... I call it shit pâté)...
Particular Christians can't seem to get their fucking head out of their crusading hypocritical war mongering ass trying to make the world safe for Jesus Christ in a white robe and black sandals.
Just as some Islamo-fundies talk the love of Allah... back-dropped by AKs and RPGs...
I'm not going to hear ANY foaming defense of an historical untouchable like the Holocaust Of Jews, as if millions of other people didn't suffer the grinding of tank-treads on their face, poison gas, and throat slitting... for bullshit reasons ALL AROUND!.
So long as modern Israel is doing something that looks a hell of a lot similar to the suffering they claim justifies their grinding of humans under their own tank treads... putting the Holocaust under the microscope which justifies it all... hardly bothers me one little bit.
If we want to end the cycle of global violence we have to begin thinking of victims of war as equally victimized. Crimes such as the mass imprisonment or mass murder of any group of people are bad enough without having to keep score and compare for some kind of sick "victim bragging rights". CLEARLY that practice, distasteful as it is, is less about honoring the dead than about manipulating people for political gain. One need only look at the difference in the treatment of the holocaust from the treatment of the atomic bombing of two Japanese cities, where scores of thousands of inncoent lives were incinerated in literally a fraction of a second, leaving thousands more to die slow painful deaths. Or the firebombing of Dresden, where more conventional but no less lethal means were used to slaughter similar numbers of innocent german civilians.
Add to that the european genocide of the native peoples of America. Where is their holocaust museum?
Some of us, as we learned of these historic crimes against humanity, vowed to ourselves that we would not allow such things to happen on our watch. Some things are more important than nationality, ethnicity, and religion, and preventing horrific acts is one of those. And yet... they happen. If we are weak, we may give up and say that it's just the way things are--the world is an ugly place. But that's only OK if you want to live in an ugly place. I do not. I believe that all peoples want to live in peace with one another. That they can't seem to is an illusion created by the powerful to keep peoples divided from one another, and loyal to the convenient groupings assigned to them by the elite, who think they own the world because the concept of property has gone to their heads and made them think that everything is negotiable.
Anything that enables these divisions to persist, like powerful historical narratives not founded 100% in truth, is squarely in my sights. The truth is not negotiable for those who are determined to stop the insanity gripping humanity. 9/11 will be remembered as the straw that broke this camel's back, and returned the world to its senses, perhaps in the nick of time.
Right. For the record, I believe the Nazi's did have a program of extermination dirrected at Jews and others they wanted rid of, much as the Federal government of the US had a deliberate program of extermination against the First Nations(small pox infected blankets, anyone?).
At the same time we all know history is written by the victor and the victor is highly motivated to gloss over any inconsistanceies in their own propaganda.
So, misterguy, it's 'splainin time: how would YOU discuss the various historical inconsistancies of the Nazi regime and their reported actions during WWII whilst still acknowledging the Jews were the primary target of the Nazi's inhumane policies?
Keep critisizing without offering possible solutions it just makes it look like you ARE here to disrupt.
I'm trying to push the idea that Holocaust denial is repugnant and wrong and warn people off those who push lies about the Holocaust while espousing a commitment to uncover the truth about 9/11.
You want to know how I would deal with inconsistencies in the historical record regarding the Nazis and their extermination program? I'd deal with those inconsistencies honestly and carefully. Keep in mind that these inconsistencies have not yet come up. I'd be glad to hear about any real inconsistencies, but RT has yet to mention any real inconsistencies. RT is pushing very obvious disinformation about the Holocaust.
You know of none? You don't know that the commandants of the camps would have informal contests with each other over kill figures? And that therefore their own records may not be that accurate?
This is just the sort of thing, when brought up, can get someone accused of Holocaust denial. But it is in a respected book, no where near revisionist land , called, "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich", by William Shirer.
You say you'll deal with inconsistancies honestly and carefully--well, get to it, mate!
You say, "By no means is my agenda to minimize the crimes of the Nazis." Of course you go on to describe my cleaving to the facts about the Holocaust, my insistence that there was an extermination program, that there were gas chambers used, and that millions of Jews were killed as "an agenda to preserve a fantasy."
As to the delousing question, of course the question isn't whether or not Zyklon B was used to delouse clothing and bedding, but whether or not the gas was also used to kill the prisoners.
Here's a quote from nizkor.org
" Zyklon-B is a powerful insecticide which serves as a carrier for the gas Hydrocyanic acid, or HCN. It usually comes in the shape of small pellets or disks. (See Breitman, 203, for more detail about the early use of the gas at Auschwitz) HCN is the cause of death following the application of Zyklon-B. While interacting with iron and concrete, it creates Hydrocyanic compounds, which Leuchter admitted were found in the ruins of the gas chamber in Krematoria II. His finding was confirmed by findings of the Polish government.
HCN is extremely poisonous to humans. It is used in execution gas chambers in the US; the first was built in Arizona in 1920." http://www.nizkor.org/faqs/auschwitz/auschwitz-faq-06.html
Pointing out that zyklon-b was used to delouse bedding is much the same as pointing out that WTC 7 was damaged on it's South East corner, it's a bit of misdirection and that's all.
As to whether or not World War 2 was a "just war" I'll say this. The only thing I can think of that is more disturbing than your outright denial of the Holocaust would be those who use the reality of it to justify similar atrocities. The Holocaust, for instance, did not justify the atomic bombing of Hiroshima or the bombing of Dresden. Howard Zinn has written very well on this subject, just as you have written so terribly. You smear this denial, this inhumanity, on everything. One need not deny the reality of the Holocaust in order to stand in opposition to wars.
(http://polymer.bu.edu/~amaral/Personal/zinn.html)
As to whether you are a Nazi, a disinfo agent, or just exteremely misguided I couldn't say for sure. Whatever the case may be I've always found that people who come right out and tell me how spiritual they are or how smart they are or how kind they are generally aren't any of these things. You come right out and tell me how uncompromised you are in your commitment to truth, peace, and justice while almost everything you say is in opposition to that assertion.
Here's another quote:
"Not all 'conspiracy theories' are true - some are blatant revisions of history to snare the gullible or those who let their anger get in the way of the facts." http://www.oilempire.us/holocaust-denial.html
Yeah, and after my dust-up with the Screw Loose Change crew during the Arizona confrence that ended in a bizzare twist worthy of " Jeeves and Wooster" episode, recorded here:
I am MUCH less impressed with misterguy and his alledged concern about H. deniers. Where the hell was he when Concrete Man, our only actual H.denier, was posting? And where the hell was he when I was engaging Screw Loose Change about their double standard? I even went back to one of his posts and left an invitation with links, but the tosser never showed.
You're a loud-mouth too, Chris(be proud!), so you know how this works: we get assigned gits to harrass us. I've got tims/S.King shadowing me whining about licencing re: my avatar. misterguy is the git assigned to RT. That's the only explaination I can see for his very selective engagment on the Holocaust issue.
i'll trade you...
my amy goodman rookie card for the harley guy. here's an idea...maybe you could superimpose someone like tony snow or doug feith on the infamous billy ripken error card.
http://www.collegehumor.com/picture:67835
http://anti-neocons.com/
Great!
More of this!
Some suggestions:
The air is safe to breathe- Todd-Whitman
We've been offered a unique opportunity- Bush
This has Bin Ladens fingerprint all over it at 8.50 am- George Tenet
I gave John O'Neill the job - Gerome Hauer
Go massive- sweep it all up, things related or not, not only U.B.L., but also S.H.- Cambone
Definitely Whitman
and the PNAC/Clean Break team... obviously
The Eleventh Day of Every Month
these are great
I want a set printed out - they need stats though
I want to see Jerome Hauer, Guy Smith and Davin whathisname
The Eleventh Day of Every Month
Richard Clarke!
Richard Clarke! Great work and I hope to see more. Harley guy is hilarious.
The Eleventh Day of Every Month
how about the outrageously disgusting
George Monbiot?
The Eleventh Day of Every Month
Gary Hart
"Hey guys, let's use this oppurtunity to build a New World Order!"
The Eleventh Day of Every Month
I'll trade my Philip Zelikow for....
....two Dov Zakheims and one Billy Kristol...
Any takers?
Interesting point
It's a valid question I think to ask if this helps us or not.
Doesn't seem like it would have much good effect. Maybe if it was "People to ask questions" - I'd like to subpeona them for sure.
William F. Pepper was
William F. Pepper was recently on the radio program called Visiblity 9/11 and he spoke about COINTELPRO efforts to disrupt activist groups. He suggested that the best way to protect yourself from such efforts to disrupt was to be very careful about your facts, to keep away from speculation, and to try to keep your head and not get overly excited by any particular theory until it could be verified.
The Harley Guy is a bit of evidence that means nothing on its face. Without discovering who he is and who he might have been working for there is no way to demonstrate that his comments were anything but his interpretation of what he saw. We might watch his video and believe that he's a plant, but the belief is based on nothing without evidence.
Silverstein's "pull it" comment if taken to mean "pull building 7" also does not, on its own, demonstrate any involvement on his part in orchestrating the attacks. Instead all this shows is that he knew that WTC 7 was demolished and has chosen not to publicize the fact. Perhaps he knows what happened that day, perhaps he has simply received word that it would be healthier for him to keep what he knows about WTC 7 quiet after his flub. Perhaps "pull it" means what he says it means. Without more substantial evidence we can't know.
We've got to be careful. On the other hand if somebody can provide substantial evidence against any of these "suspects" that might lead to an indictement then I for one would be very eager to see it or hear it.
loosen up, misterguy...
have a bowl of shilli and take some of your own medicine.
http://anti-neocons.com/
He's right
The sensitivity of this issue requires the utmost responsibility out of all of us.
wherefore suspicion?
With apologies to the representatives of Larry S's defense team present, when property is destroyed under suspicious circumstances that are not adequately explained, suspicion falls quite naturally on the owner/insurance holder.
Given that the owner in this case has also made suspicious comments, and failed to clarify them unequivocably, in person (i.e. not through a spokesperson), if anyone belongs on one of these cards it's Lucky Larry.
Do you guys also think OJ is innocent?
____
♠
Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero
WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force
oj's signed confession
http://youtube.com/watch?v=IKfEtYYqSl4
http://anti-neocons.com/
Then again...
...if the quotes are factual and outrageous enough then, it may cause some people who have never seen or heard them to wonder if really it was said and why it was said. Hopefully, this would give rise to their investigating the circumstances surrounding the quote, it's relevance, and importance.
RT's found a niche. Let him run with it.
New series????
"Disinfo Agent"
"Media Whore"
"Useful Idiot"
They can make for interesting revolving/random graphics for web sites, too.
--
The true threat to liberty comes not from terrorists but from our political leaders whose natural inclination is to seize upon any excuse to diminish them.
~~ Walter Williams, Nightly Business Report, September 2001
Let's not forget
Hamilton:
"I had not see any evidence for a conspiracy"
With a blind belt on.
Rice:
"I don't think anybody could have predicted..."
with the PDB 01-08-06 in back and all 6 FBI agents stopped by higher ups named. (Wright, Samit, Rowley, Floyd, O'Neill, Williams) and let's not forget Randy Glass and Able Danger.
plus OP Bojinka plus exercise pictures of Pentagon.
Powell:
[We]"put before the world, the American people, a persuasive case that ... it is al-Qaida, led by Osama bin Laden, who has been responsible."
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/40035_main24.shtml
***
More?
Also...
Philip D. Zelikow
and
Condi Rice
and then you have a big bunch of PNAC
RT will have to start a magazine, free packs with the first issue.
Maybe modelled on Top Trumps...
Criminal History : 100
Bribe Ability : Unknown
Personal Fortune : 500 Million
Hands Dirty : 5
blah, blah blah :)
Great Job RT, reminds me of the Iraq Playing Cards !!!
Nevermind.... PokeMon.....
Everyone should be playing...
PokeCon
any other suggestions ?
The Bush Regime Card Deck...
The French at Reseau Voltaire made a full deck of card of the Bush Regime. I ordered it last summer. it's awesome. Check it out here:
http://www.voltairenet.org/librairie/product_info.php?products_id=38&lan...
Oh la la, ça déchire !
Ces cartes sont magnifiques. Les cartes sont en français, mais si quelqu’un les aime, nous pouvons faire des traductions des cartes les plus intéressants.
Mme. Casseia!
tu n'arrêtte jamais de me sorprendre! I bet you even cook better than Jules Naudet!!
But VoltaireNet is run by Thierry Meissan, and he believes AA77 did not hit ze Pentagon!
I... I just don't know WHAT to think anymore!!
____
♠
Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero
WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force
That's it--I'm never going
That's it--I'm never going to use my toddler-level francais around YOU again!
Let's see how bad I am:
"Those cards are great. The cards are in french(?), but if [something] the friends, we can do very interesting translations of the cards."
I await my (bad)grade from ma professeur casseia. ;-)
Impeachment. Accountability. A better world.
Aw, come on - was that babelfish?
"These cards are great. The cards are in french, but if someone likes them, we can make translations of the most interesting ones."
[/show off]
"babelfish"? Cheater! I
"babelfish"? Cheater! I worked HARD on my honestly come by self-taught (intermitantly, by book) bad French! :-P
Impeachment. Accountability. A better world.
Yeye
[insert obligatory remark about how when it comes to French, your aptitude at speaking it is only of secondary importance]
Love 'em!
Keep it up RT. These are great.
Gotta link to the entire collection?
--
The true threat to liberty comes not from terrorists but from our political leaders whose natural inclination is to seize upon any excuse to diminish them.
~~ Walter Williams, Nightly Business Report, September 2001
all the ones I've collected so far
http://truthaction.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=63
The Eleventh Day of Every Month
9/11 trading cards
As always, thanks for the feedbag... :)
I realize some people think that making light of this is in some way unhelpful. Obviously I disagree, but let me explain why.
First of all, just look at how a semi-random selection of suspects led to people suggesting others to include on the suspects team. I think that making a list of people who have some splainin to do is helpful not just in the absence of a real investigation, but if and when we get one it will be a good way to judge their performance. Don't like being considered a suspect? Fine. Let's have a trial so you can, under oath, clear your name. We have a right to a redress of grievances, and our grievances involve these people. It isn't our fault that they are suspicious, they have MADE themselves suspicious.
The sooner these folks are investigated and put on trial, the sooner folks like me can stop worrying about what other crimes they may be plotting and go back to simpler worries like making a living, saving for retirement, finding true love, etc.
This is not something any of us ever thought we would end up having to do with our lives, having to set aside all kinds of other worthwhile pursuits to do what is right. If we can't at the same time find the lighter side in all of this absurdity, we will not last long as an opposition movement. If we don't display creative energy and a positive disposition, if all we do is doomfully predict the coming police state, prison camps, and further false flag attacks we may as well give up.
As a movement with the lofty goal in mind of destroying a paradigm, we have to grow organically--no one can direct our efforts. If someone decides to make light of the issues as a way of venting steam, and you disagree, voice your disagreement. If you feel that their work is flawed in some way, point out how. Or better yet, take it upon yourself to outdo them, and make a more accurate set of trading cards from your point of view, and then, like Fleer and Topps, we can let the free market sort out the good from the mediocre. Keep in mind though that since I don't believe in intellectual property or copyright, mine will be free for anyone to print. :)
Or maybe I'll just half-ass the whole project like I usually do. In any case, print, steal, copy, borrow, or help if you're so inclined! There's a limit to what we can accomplish as a movement at any given moment--until we get our investigation and trials, we can afford to have some fun. Hell, we can't afford NOT to!
____
♠
Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero
WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force
MAS POR FAVOR
The Eleventh Day of Every Month
Harley Guy Truth movement
I think it is funny as all hell, but the joke is really on them. What about having the betrayal cards or agent provocateur cards Fetzer Reyonalds Thorn Etc.. Those morons are just as guilty as the Perps. There got to be a way we can find out who the Harley guy is. Does anyone know any cops FBI or we all can pitch in for a Private investigator lets start the Harley guy truth movement
If we're not careful about
If we're not careful about our facts the joke will be on us.
I love this game... kinda like Life!
Collect'm all, but you can start playing now!
Should be played NOW with printed face cards (until on-line version is released), with stats and space for note-taking additional stats on the back of each card in circulation.
Internet access a plus, and should be rotated as a responsibility for each player in turn to search for best results. Time is a factor, as well as key strokes locating best resourced search results. Fellow players are encouraged to offer amicable consensus as to the quality of results.
New details should be periodically typed, with up-dated cards printed and shared with the world through the internet.
Best played with at least two people, no minimum age, no real losers so long as they hold up a hand and practice with the internet.
Rules of the Game:
Deal out all available cards to the players so that no cards remain.
Place or hold your cards, so that others players may view your current line-up.
Beginning with the player holding the "Joker", player one looks around the playing table for the All-Star they feel is most reprehensible for either perpetrating AND/OR covering up the crimes of 911. Player must voice the historical moment at which time they feel the All-Star earned a listed Stat Star. Person holding the All-Star, confirms whether or not that Star is actually listed in the stats. If its the first Stat Star, the All-Star is immediately taken into custody by player one.
If no other player is able to challenge the primacy of the First Stat Star, nor list at least two ADDITIONAL Stars in the Stats, card remains in custody until such time. (Here in enters the internet, to confirm, challenge accuracy, and for locating additional Stats on the All-Star to be noted on card for future play. Please up-date cards often and share new playing cards with other good people.)
Player one now releases the Joker into "protective custody" in the center of the table. This Joker is not off the hook, and may be selected to join the dock with other All-Stars in future play. Other overflow All-Star from any hand, may be sent to protective custody in exchange for challenging All-Star Stats yet unspoken in play.
Next player in turn, to the "left" of player one (they still need a chance), scans the line-ups for their choice of All-Star... and the game is afoot.
Winner is declared when no other players are able to better the listed stats on the back of the All-Star cards held by the player with the most All-Stars in Custody.
WOW.
This is intense, and I'll have to look it over with more time, but it looks great. Every year a news eries could come out with updated stats, that way the older ones become collectible... the mind reels just considering the possibilities! In fact, this could be extended into a whole "power elites" game that could be used/played to keep track of major players in world events generally... somehow we can tie the value of the old cards to enable the market to sort out who is seen as wielding lots of influence.... hrmmm... buzzzz... whirrrrr..... ding.......
____
♠
Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero
WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force
they're coming, under disinfo...
Harley Guy better be warming up his hog....
:)
____
♠
Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero
WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force
Oprah=Gatekeeper
But she hasn't really attacked the truth movement so for now she's off the hook. We have to incentivize coming forward but more importantly disincentivize speaking against the truth.
____
♠
Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero
WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force
Oprah was not elected, did
Oprah was not elected, did not have direct power-control-responsibility on 911. She is a show woman--nothing bad about that, but there is a big distinction between people who are directly obligated to respond to the public and people who have influence due to their popularity.
The right wallows in this mistake all the time--for instance if you were to believe them, Marilyn Manson was more responsible for the conditions at Colombine High than the useless teachers who did nothing about the severe abusive behavior they personally witnessed every day--behavior that would put any adult in jail or prison for assult. But the right worships power--so you must blame the victim or anyone else they don"t like--anything but actually hold authority accountable, which is anathama to them.
So, no, I don"t think "going after" Oprah will accomplish anything--but make us look a bit silly. As long as she doesn"t leap on the condemnation bandwagon, I consider her a future ally--she has been willing to come out against the bastards on other issues. Yes, it would be nice if she took up the cause like Joan of Arc, but face it---few people can be Joans. She will have to answer to her own conscience if she knows and is avoiding it--but so will some firefighters and other first responders who fear for their pensions if they speak out.
Save our outrage for those who had primary responsiblity in 911, and those who were in direct positions of access to have the secondary responsibility to blow the whistle.
Impeachment. Accountability. A better world.
I'm so relieved that you
I'm so relieved that you don't want go after Oprah. Halleliujah! Of course, RT considers her complict and has said so. That was the point I was making. Going after Oprah would be absurd. Really dumb, but only slightly more stupid would be to make this Harley Guy a suspect based on nothing more than the fact that we don't like what he said on TV.
Contacting Oprah...
If you want Oprah to cover nine eleven truth you have every right to contact her and ask her to do so. Otherwise she runs her show and isn't responsible for our governments corruption...
http://www2.oprah.com/email/email_landing.jhtml
http://www2.oprah.com/email/reach/email_showideas.jhtml
I've asked her numerous times to interview Dr. DAvid Ray Griffin and others. She surely could handle that I feel. Anyway. What else are you going to do in the next five minutes. Might as well. Click above.
I LOVE Oprah.
No I don't. I think she's like so many other people these days--either amazingly ignorant, pathologically deluded, or extremely cowardly. Do I think that Oprah is knowingly and with malice withholding the truth from the American people? No. She is probably doing so out of self-interest, which may or may not be justified given her immense wealth that, unless she has been threatened with violence, should provide ample protection for her to do the right thing.
If misterguy would like to dig up wherever I said Oprah was complicit in the 9/11 attacks I would like to see that. If, as I suspect, he is twisting my words (again) I would like to ask him to stop doing so. It makes a big difference, I should note, to say that someone is complicit in the cover-up as opposed to complicit in the crime. I would only put someone on a suspect card if I suspect them of being complicit in the crime. Harley dude, for example, seems to have known just how to explain the towers' collapse to jibe with the official lie. Coincidence? Bridge for sale.
Obviously Oprah is not legally bound to expose the truth about 9/11 on her show. Is she, however, morally bound to acknowledge this huge issue instead of ignoring it and thus helping to perpetuate the official and very destructive myth? If you don't think so, then you are possessed of a curiously ambivalent moral compass, and you might as well join those who believe that the 9/11 lie serves a greater good by helping the govt do what is necessary to protect people where the people would otherwise oppose the required actions. Because you know, that's going to be the last stop for a lot of people...
____
♠
Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero
WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force
where have I heard this line before?
"So, you think EVERYONE is in on it?"
Hmmm, let me think--don't tell me... Ummmmm....
A-HA! I know! It's the defenders of the OCT!
Let me ask you misterguy--you know the OCT is BS. I know the OCT is BS. My mailman knows the OCT is BS. Do you REALLY think that Oprah doesn't know the OCT is BS? Give the woman some credit for having two brain cells to rub together--she is a billionaire after all.
SO many people know. Did you think it was just us?
My point all along has been that if you know, as many people do, then you have a moral duty to speak out. If you are especially wealthy, and/or if you are extremely influential, your failure to act is that much more damaging than the silence of those who can only reach people immediately surrounding them.
So my point, again, because you seem to require things to be clarified multiple times--as Martin Luther King said, "there comes a time when silence is betrayal". Nigh on 6 years after 9/11, I believe that time has come. I would expect, misterguy, as a fan of the official holocaust narrative that you are, you wouldn't have such a problem wrapping your brain around the concept of collective guilt.
I am not the one who keeps digging himself deeper into a hole by failing to deal with the truth. David Letterman and Oprah and so many others have had PLENTY of time to figure this out. You can keep waiting as long as you want for them to do the right thing before complaining. You'll just have to deal with the fact that I am done waiting. And I know I'm not the only one.
____
♠
Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero
WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force
If your mailman suspects but
If your mailman suspects but doesn't speak out, or worse is in denial and refuses to know, does that make your mailman actually complicit? There is a difference between appealing to people's better nature, talking about the kind of complicity that everyone shares in, and real criminal complicity after the fact. If a newseditor had documents that proved 9/11 was an inside job and chose to shred them that would be complicity, if this newseditor secretly suspected that something was fishy about the OCT but didn't act on that suspicion that would not be real criminal complicity.
Two thumbs up!
Going offtopic:
RT, you made a comment about Apollo somewhere, but I can't seem to find it. Anyway, take a look at 4:43 into this video...
That did it for me.
it was the press conference
that did it for me. Just no getting around how thoroughly guilty and ashamed armstrong looks. his comment in the white house was weird, agreed. Anyway it's not so offtopic--part of the 9/11 coverup seems to be to link it with Apollo and the holocaust so as to force people to confront all of this at once. At first of course it seems to do the trick, but the more you look into things the more it all makes sense. Like why they thought they could get away with 9/11--because they knew that bigger lies had been successful before, going back ages, I bet.
I had though a while back that we were entering a new dark age, but it seems that after the renaissance at somepoint we lapsed back into one from which the internet is extracting us. One can only imagine how much real progress humanity will make once it sheds this husk of false consciousness. As long as the holdouts don't blow everything up out of spite! Heck, at least we can say we were awake even for a little while--so many people lived their whole lives in a total fantasy world, all things considered...
____
♠
Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero
WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force
The audacity to pull off 9/11
was fed by successful hoaxes past, I agree. It must've been, because blowing up 3 buildings in broad daylight with the world watching and expecting to get away with it required boundless audacity - and information superiority, which as we all know is what makes 9/11 different. I'm sure somewhere, in a secret think-tank, someone is being slapped.
I'm not sure if Apollo and the Holocaust are being associated with us in terms of an "overload" strategy, I think it has more to do with the still prevalent orthodoxy regarding both. Anyway, I too hope they won't go all out when their bluff is called...if they don't, then let's all one day come together and celebrate - like the Ewoks when the Death Star was blown up, aight crew?
Why does it always sound
Why does it often sound like you're trying to start a fight, misterguy?
Impeachment. Accountability. A better world.
Primarily because I think RT
Primarily because I think RT is misdirecting people almost every time he types a comment and I spend too much of my time trying to call him out on it.
misdirecting? away from what?
Just whom do you think I'm trying to protect? I am motivated by a few things in addition to and in pursuit of my desire to see the truth come out. One of them is insisting that this issue be addressed, not in dribs and drabs but with the intense focus one has come to expect from a runaway bride at LEAST.
Another is making it clear that in pursuit of the truth we (I at least) will not be cowed into silence on any subject that I deem worthy of discussion. Not because it will offend or alienate anyone or because someone thinks it is wrong. I will not tolerate censorship, encouragement to self-censorship, or unfounded smear tactics. I reserve the right to be critical of others and accept that others will be critical of me. When our freedoms are under attack, I think the best antidote is to exercise them with gusto, especially when it comes to our freedom of speech.
I suppose this all sounds very self-important of me, except that everything I say applies to everyone else, not just me. Anyone who has pledged to do everything possible to expose these crimes and the lies that hide them has more than earned the right to express their views. What a shame it would be if they didn't.
____
♠
Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero
WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force
Well, this seems like it
Well, this seems like it might go on for a while. Hours of drama, oh boy.
BTW: I can agree RT is a bit of a loud mouth--but so am I. He can--and has-- WAY over stated his cases--cases I mostly agree with. But--monsieur "guy"--you're over-stating your case too. You could make some constructive critisizims of RT's framing and occasional execess "enthusiasm"--but instead you're cherry picking his words and reframing it as "shilling". And we're not talking about the spice.
I have noticed a small group of users who are targeting the "loud mouths" with anything that can be dredged up and cast in a dim light. I'm blogging this phenomenon soon. Suffice it to say, the op is misguided: we may be loudmouths, but we aren't "leaders". We are each our own leader--rating the loudmouths down or trying to clumsily smear them will not change 911activism one jot.
So you lot have fun with that. ;-P
Impeachment. Accountability. A better world.
I may be wrong, but I'm not
I may be wrong, but I'm not overstating my beliefs. I truly do believe that RT misdirects, intentionally or not, in the same way that a Nico Haupt or a Fetzer misdirects people. I have no trouble with loud mouths, I have trouble with people who don't cleave to actual evidence and who nurse pet theories or worse, propagate known falsehoods.
You seem to be suggesting that I'm acting in an authoritarian way, but I don't see how that is the case. I'm merely "calling it like I see it" just as RT says he is.
I think that RT probably assumes
that his readers have a capacity for critical thinking.
I disagree with you on this
I disagree with you on this point. Given his positions I think RT relies on people's feeling of comraderie with a fellow traveler. I don't see how his positions hold up to scrutiny. For instance, he conflates 9/11 skepticism with denying the Holocaust and this is not something that holds up if one engages in any critical thinking.
On the other hand I am relying on people to engage in some critical thinking. If I thought people were incapable of thinking critically here I would give up on convincing people of my point of view.
Really doesn't look that way, misterguy
If you were confident that most of the people at 911blogger were proficient in critical thinking, you would spend more time posting about what interests you, and less as RT's self-appointed Inquisitor. As for your fantasy that intelligent, thoughtful people are so swayed by his charisma that they are unable to disagree with him -- as Tom Peterson is wont to say, "Wake up! Wake up!"
Moreover, your constant ham-handed distortions of his positions ("conflates 9/11 skepticism with denying the Holocaust") reflect either profound disingenuousness or a real impairment of your reading comprehension ability.
What interests me, at the
What interests me, at the moment, is the fact that the 911 movement seems to be up to its ears in disinfo.
As to whether or not RT conflates Holocaust denial with 9/11 skepticism I can quote him to you:
"Issue number 1: I have never ever come across anyone who says that it simply "did not occur." [note-Holocaust deniers redefine the Holocaust rather than denying it occured]
Issue number 2: The numbers are inflated. Note they say "the extent described by current scholarship" You know why they say that? Because the numbers have already had to be revised down. The managers of the Auschwitz memorial had to change a plaque because it overstated the number killed there by millions. That's simply a fact.
Issue number 3: Not even revisionists deny that the Nazis rounded up Jewish people. They question whether places like Auschwitz were literally "extermination camps" where people were taken to be killed en masse. In fact they were taken there to work. They were considered prisoners of war and they were used as slave labor. Nothing nice about it. They died in great numbers, mainly from disease. There were no "huge ovens" just regular crematoria.
Issue number 4: Gas chambers were used to delouse clothing and other supplies--lice were a major problem as they spread typhoid, from which a large number of inmates did die. The gas chamber at Auschwitz has a peculiar history, as can be seen in the documentary by David Cole, who is himself Jewish: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=9176742040462080597&q=auschwitz
David Cole was threatened by the JDL after making his documentary, the FBI categorizes the JDL as a terrorist organization (responsible for bombings in the US) They posted his name, picture, and address online and suggested that he should be "dealt with" until he publically "recanted" and claims he was suffering from self-hatred.
Deal with these facts however you want, but it's clear that there is more to the holocaust (or less maybe) than is generally known. This is not denial, it is literally revision, and as we know from 9/11, revisionism is not inherently evil. The exploitation of the admitted tragedy that befell Jews during WW2 is clearly documented by Norman Finkelstein, whose own parents survived concentration camps. In other words, they were not exterminated. The fact that even his work is maligned by people like those responsible for www.masada2000.org should make it clear that there is a reason why holocaust revision is treated like it was pure evil.
Sorry misterguy, but methinks you doth protest too much."
Now explain to me how this is not Holocaust denial or point out how he fails to conflate the issues of 9/11 skepticism with Holocaust denial. Or do both.
I'll quote Peterson back to you now: "Wake up! Wake up!"
That's not conflation -- it's drawing a parallel.
I find that "denial" as in "Holocaust denial," is a bankrupt concept in the post-9/11 world. To paraphrase another of RT's posts, the truth needs no taboos to protect it. Taboos prohibiting the investigation of any historical narrative should strike any Truther as suspect. Therefore, when you set forth a list of facts to which anyone who wishes to discuss the Holocaust must stipulate or be called "denier" instead of "inquirer"-- as you did in that other thread, before the Williams stuff came up -- you end up sounding like Kos with his Creed of 9/11 "facts."
If you're worried about disinfo, I suggest you direct your energy toward producing more "signal" rather than fighting the "noise" as you perceive it -- because in general, attempts to fight the noise just add to it.
I find your response very
I find your response very discouraging. First off, you evidently don't understand what Holocaust denial is or why it's a problem. Someone is a Holocaust denier if they claim that there was no Nazi extermination program aimed at Jews and Roma, that there were no extermination camps, and that the millions who died did not in fact die. The reason this is such a reprehensible thing to deny is because millions did die, they were eliminated in an extermination program, and many were gassed in the camps.
There are perhaps as many variations on the reasons why people might want to lie about this part of history as there are people who lie about it, however the primary reason people lie about the Holocaust is because they have a political agenda that requires minimizing the crimes of the Nazis. However, in this case, the primary function Holocaust denial has is to muddy the water. By mixing questions about the official story of 9/11 with righteous demands to lift the taboo on Holocaust denial people like RT are mixing our sincere skepticism, our honest questions, and our legitimate recognition that we've been lied to by our own government about the worst attack on US since the civil war with...well, with Holocaust denial.
There is truth to the notion that the European laws that make Holocaust denial illegal are draconian and backwards, but that doesn't mean that the Holocaust deniers aren't liars. In fact, that's what people like RT are, they're Holocaust liars. They lie about the Holocaust. Forget the word "denier" you can deny anything you like, as long as you don't have to lie about it in the process.
For instance, RT likes to talk about the plaque at Auschwitz and claim that this plaque has bearing, that it was an important piece of data used by historians to factor the Holocaust death toll. But, in fact, that isn't true. That plaque doesn't have anything to do with how historians arrived at the excepted numbers, and it never has. He'll quote people who lie about what was required to burn all the bodies, or who lie and claim they used the gas to delouse the prisoners.
I don't expect you to believe me, but really look into the subject. Find out for yourself about Holocaust denial. Investigate for yourself.
You might start here:
http://www.nizkor.org/
oh misterguy...
Are you really claiming that zyklon-B's primary use was NOT as a delousing agent? And you call ME a liar?
By no means is my agenda to minimize the crimes of the Nazis. I see, however, more and more, that your agenda is to preserve a fantsasy narrative of the Nazis being more evil than anyone ever was, is, or has been.
Well sorry, but after 9/11 I was done dealing in fantasies, and decided to learn for myself the things which the world was obviously not prepared to let me know without a struggle.
There exists such a thing as war propaganda, practiced by both sides in a conflict. There exist such things as war crimes, practiced by both sides in a conflict. There exist such things as false flag attacks, practiced by both sides in a conflict. The exaggerated demonization of the losers of WW2 and the subsequent appropriation of historical "truth" by the winners, both the western allies AND Stalin should not come as a surprise to a genuine student of history.
To insist that the Nazis were incomprehensibly evil is to attempt to support the idea of WW2 as a "just war". It was not. No war is just. Allied war crimes were swept under the rug while Nazi war crimes were exaggerated. Does pointing this out make me a Nazi or Nazi sympathizer? Only in your messed up world, misterguy. In the real world it means I can handle reality more objectively than you. I'm a pacifist and a humanist who understands (finally, and thanks to 9/11) the folly of taking the dominant world order at its word, even when I benefit materially from inclusion in that order (particularly as a white male).
Because I am 100% commited to peace and because I know that that will require abandoning some cherished but false beliefs, I see no room for compromise on historical accuracy to the extent that it can be ascertained. If you can provide proof that homicidal gas chambers were used by the Nazis I would be happy to reconsider what I otherwise see as a fabrication. I have to say though that since you disagree with mainstream scholars who know that zyklon-B was used to delouse prisoner clothing, bedding, etc., I don't hold out much hope for your ability to provide any proof to back up your claims.
You suggested a site, so I will too-- www.codoh.com
Let's let people make up their own minds, or at the very least, understand why they believe wht they do.
____
♠
Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero
WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force
Please back down, misterguy.
Here's why I think you should: A group or culture, that would sit 8 to 12 year old children down (such as myself) in front of a movie screen... and show them creepy grainy films of bodies being bull-dozed into ditches... then lamp shades, bars of soap, piles of hair and mountains of shoes... all mixed between swastikas and the rantings of Adolf the dip-shit... regularly scheduled on Saturday mornings before Synagog... where the "plant a tree" collection plate gets passed... because olive trees must like-wise be bull-dozed to make way for Gods only chosen people in the Holy Land... by the force of gun and tank... assured by God to a select people where some people seem to be less selected by God....
... is NOT a nation-state, culture, group nor religion... beyond reproach. Thus SOME exaggerations of the Jewish suffering during WWII would hardly surprise ME.
SO even though the Nazis still looked like pure bastards... and project paper clip makes me wonder if brilliant American heros of WWII where really smart enough to keep that bastard smell from rubbing off... I'm still not done with the Historical Cuisinart just yet (you can call this "denial" all you like... I call it shit pâté)...
Particular Christians can't seem to get their fucking head out of their crusading hypocritical war mongering ass trying to make the world safe for Jesus Christ in a white robe and black sandals.
Just as some Islamo-fundies talk the love of Allah... back-dropped by AKs and RPGs...
I'm not going to hear ANY foaming defense of an historical untouchable like the Holocaust Of Jews, as if millions of other people didn't suffer the grinding of tank-treads on their face, poison gas, and throat slitting... for bullshit reasons ALL AROUND!.
So long as modern Israel is doing something that looks a hell of a lot similar to the suffering they claim justifies their grinding of humans under their own tank treads... putting the Holocaust under the microscope which justifies it all... hardly bothers me one little bit.
Just the same as the Holy Myth of 911.
beautifully stated, Erin
If we want to end the cycle of global violence we have to begin thinking of victims of war as equally victimized. Crimes such as the mass imprisonment or mass murder of any group of people are bad enough without having to keep score and compare for some kind of sick "victim bragging rights". CLEARLY that practice, distasteful as it is, is less about honoring the dead than about manipulating people for political gain. One need only look at the difference in the treatment of the holocaust from the treatment of the atomic bombing of two Japanese cities, where scores of thousands of inncoent lives were incinerated in literally a fraction of a second, leaving thousands more to die slow painful deaths. Or the firebombing of Dresden, where more conventional but no less lethal means were used to slaughter similar numbers of innocent german civilians.
Add to that the european genocide of the native peoples of America. Where is their holocaust museum?
Some of us, as we learned of these historic crimes against humanity, vowed to ourselves that we would not allow such things to happen on our watch. Some things are more important than nationality, ethnicity, and religion, and preventing horrific acts is one of those. And yet... they happen. If we are weak, we may give up and say that it's just the way things are--the world is an ugly place. But that's only OK if you want to live in an ugly place. I do not. I believe that all peoples want to live in peace with one another. That they can't seem to is an illusion created by the powerful to keep peoples divided from one another, and loyal to the convenient groupings assigned to them by the elite, who think they own the world because the concept of property has gone to their heads and made them think that everything is negotiable.
Anything that enables these divisions to persist, like powerful historical narratives not founded 100% in truth, is squarely in my sights. The truth is not negotiable for those who are determined to stop the insanity gripping humanity. 9/11 will be remembered as the straw that broke this camel's back, and returned the world to its senses, perhaps in the nick of time.
____
♠
Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero
WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force
A thought to really focus upon....
"9/11 will be remembered as the straw that broke this camel's back, and returned the world to its senses, perhaps in the nick of time."
Please rethink this
Here's why I think you should:
A political group that tolerates Holocaust denial will rightly never make any headway with thinking people.
Maybe,
... if I was part of a political group.
Right. For the record, I
Right. For the record, I believe the Nazi's did have a program of extermination dirrected at Jews and others they wanted rid of, much as the Federal government of the US had a deliberate program of extermination against the First Nations(small pox infected blankets, anyone?).
At the same time we all know history is written by the victor and the victor is highly motivated to gloss over any inconsistanceies in their own propaganda.
So, misterguy, it's 'splainin time: how would YOU discuss the various historical inconsistancies of the Nazi regime and their reported actions during WWII whilst still acknowledging the Jews were the primary target of the Nazi's inhumane policies?
Keep critisizing without offering possible solutions it just makes it look like you ARE here to disrupt.
Impeachment. Accountability. A better world.
Re:Inconstisancies
You know of none? You don't know that the commandants of the camps would have informal contests with each other over kill figures? And that therefore their own records may not be that accurate?
This is just the sort of thing, when brought up, can get someone accused of Holocaust denial. But it is in a respected book, no where near revisionist land , called, "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich", by William Shirer.
You say you'll deal with inconsistancies honestly and carefully--well, get to it, mate!
Impeachment. Accountability. A better world.
"Why does it often sound
"Why does it often sound like you're trying to start a fight, misterguy?"
you get that vibe too huh?
Yeah, and after my dust-up
Yeah, and after my dust-up with the Screw Loose Change crew during the Arizona confrence that ended in a bizzare twist worthy of " Jeeves and Wooster" episode, recorded here:
http://coljennysparks.blogspot.com/2007/02/screw-loose-change-gets-rid-o...
I am MUCH less impressed with misterguy and his alledged concern about H. deniers. Where the hell was he when Concrete Man, our only actual H.denier, was posting? And where the hell was he when I was engaging Screw Loose Change about their double standard? I even went back to one of his posts and left an invitation with links, but the tosser never showed.
You're a loud-mouth too, Chris(be proud!), so you know how this works: we get assigned gits to harrass us. I've got tims/S.King shadowing me whining about licencing re: my avatar. misterguy is the git assigned to RT. That's the only explaination I can see for his very selective engagment on the Holocaust issue.
Impeachment. Accountability. A better world.
dont forget henry kissinger
dont forget henry kissinger and dick cheney
And Chertoff
and the Clintons.
The Eleventh Day of Every Month