A 911blogger story is on the frontpage of netscape, i was wondering can u paste the traffic for blogger?

Thanks

http://tv.netscape.com/story/2007/05/15/wtc7-collapse-to-be-discussed-by...

I say let the guy get as close to the presidency before he starts talking about 911 truth.
I realize we're on a tight deadline where the truth NEEDS to get out as soon as possible, but Paul will be of no help if he talks about 911 truth now.
After his popularity grows and he becomes a real prospect for president, THEN he had better start discussing desires for a new 911 Investigation.

I had wondered why everyone believed Paul was a truther because he hadn't really come out saying he was. However, that is a good idea at this point! He can't come out with something Americans aren't eductaed about yet, aren't prepared for. He would shock the hell outr of them and he wouldn't have a chance. As of now, he is gaining support and getting people to open their eyes to other corruptions like the tax and federal reserve system. He is doing so good right now. He is our best chance as far as I see it.

Remember... we are "advanced" you cant just come out for MIHOP. These things must be done in stages.

1. Blowback
2. LIHOP
3. MIHOP

Revolution.

From Day 1, the 'blowback' theory has done service for the official theory, because it IS the official theory--reinforcing the dread fear of Muslim extremists; making a show of criticizing US foreign policy even while reinforcing the very psychology among the public which facilitates the foreign and domestic policies sought by the perps of 9/11; the very psychology which induces people to vote for creeps like Giuliani. It may well be (alas) that blowback is really what Ron Paul thinks concerning 9/11; but if he believes something much more pernicious was involved in those events, then he's completely mistaken in thinking 'blowback' talk is going to give him some kind of political advantage. I know it takes an incredible amount of courage, when operating within the milieu where Ron Paul finds himself, to encourage real questioning--with the possibility of repudiating--the official 9/11 story. But we kid ourselves if we think the political climate is going to change any other way. Have you seen the posters that say 'Only 9/11 Truth Will Set Us Free'? Well, I happen to believe that that's how it really is, folks, and would doubt I'd be alone in that opinion on this blog. So are we now going to start qualifying it with things like, '...except in Republican presidential debates,' etc.?

And besides, what would Paul really have to lose? Newsflash!--The forces in control of the Republican party will never allow someone like Ron Paul to become their nominee (just as the Democrats will never nominate Kucinich).

Is that they hate us for our freedoms.

Here's the revised stages of 911 truth ;-)

1. They hate us cuz we are free. (BUSH)
2. They hate us cuz we blow them up. (OMISSION)
3. They hate us cuz we blow them up and the mil-ind-complex let them use this hate so we could go to war. (LIHOP)
4. They still dont like us cuz we blow them up, but 9/11 was a 100% black op. (MIHOP)

Have patience.
Here he is saying the commission was nothing but a cover up:
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=VIZSCHAS

is that horrifying attacks were carried out on U.S. soil by autonomous foreign actors, and that subsequent U.S. invasions of predominantly Muslim countries--however ill-advised in the opinions of many--are the result of trying to fight back and protect ourselves. Differing with the administration as to the 'why,' the motives of the alleged attackers, does nothing to raise one's awareness of the falsity of the official story so long as it takes the 'who' of that account for granted. This only keeps people arguing on the administration's turf, keeps them wallowing in the backwaters of the official theory (where many, many remain stuck, going on six years later), keeps them from proceeding to the more telling matters of 'how' (how it was possible for the attacks to be carried out successfully) and 'who' (who was in a position to thus make them possible)--and the realization that among the latter were people with motives which have nothing to do with 'blowback'.

No matter how you slice it, blowback is NOT a stage on the way to the truth of 9/11. It is something from which people need to break free before they can start advancing toward the truth--and if you're going to consider that a 'stage' on the way to truth, you might just as well claim that darkness is a 'stage' on the way to light, sleep a 'stage' on the way to being awake, being wounded a 'stage' on the way to healing. Those who believe the perpetrators of the official story acted as they did out of anger towards U.S. policy are no closer to realizing we've all been told a Big Lie re 9/11 than are those who swallow the administration's 'they hate us for our freedoms' line. It is therefore hardly surprising that proponents of the 'blowback' line of argument are typically hostile to the 9/11 Truth movement itself--some even claiming that we're 'racist' for doubting that Muslims from the Middle East couldn't have done it on their own.

with all the things you just said. However, blowback can be an important step forward for a lot of sheeple to realize. Most of the people who are so adamantly staunch about 9/11 not being anything other than the msm version can't even begin to acknowledge that America has has ever done anything wrong to other countries because of all the bs they've learned in school. They can't even put two and two together that if a group of big-oil players takes control of the White House and then invades the Middle East that it's about the money. So for a lot of people blowback is an important step in realizing that the USA isn't exactly the stalwart mainstay force for international "Good" that they think it is. To admit blowback is to admit that our leaders have wronged different peoples across the world and that they (the average citizens) fully supported wronging other peoples on a massive scale. That's a hard pill to swallow. Once it happens, though, people have the ability to recognize that there are governmental leaders that just don't give a fuck about human life and would kill anybody just to make a buck. That's when they'll be able to accept the reality of 9/11. It becomes quite apparent after they've taken that step.

This doesn't mean that full-on 9/11 Truth can't be the first breakthrough of such nature for a person, but that blowback can serve to bring people closer to understanding the realities of the way the world works.

And, by the way, I don't buy any of the bs from people who don't already accept the reality that 9/11 Truth gets at. I just try and help people towards a bigger understanding at whatever level they can get to.

For blow-back, be it real OR wrapped within a colorful tapestry of "islam-o-fascism"... is still blow-back. Which inescapably implies an origin of cause; be it by taking natural resource inequitably, at gunpoint now the case may be... AND/Or by the crafters of a tapestry colored with brilliant fiction.

Who's holding the gun of inequity, and who's the master of fiction? One in the same.

Inescapable questions that everyone has, or must yet, take. We must trust this logic, but only after people have processed it... one step at a time.

but not about Ron Paul. For starters, he's the best presidential candidate in the field ANYWAY. I think he will push for full truth WHEN THE TIME IS RIGHT. Look how he reacted when Hannity tried to corner him. He knows it was an inside job, he just wants to get deeper into the race, and maybe have a chance to win. He'd be destroyed if he said anything yet. It's in our best interest that he stay in the race as long as possible anyway, because he is talking publicly about many issues that are in line with what we need to do. He is speaking the truth about the CIA, the FED... He is helping shif the public consciousness. If the media is sucessful, and he does fall behind in the polls, maybe he will go out with guns blazing and say the magic words. Until then, THIS IS OUR RESPONSIBILITY. (And AFTER too.)
------------------
"Peace comes from within. Do not seek it without." - Buddha
"What you do will be insignificant, but it is very important that you do it." - Gandhi
"The Sun never shined on a cause of greater worth." - Thomas Paine

Does anyone know whether he's a truther at all? Or are we just hoping? If I was a truther in Ron Pauls situation, I would use the opportunity to spread the message in the TV debates, rather than waiting until I might get elected, which there is no guarantee for.

Wake up & smell the fixed elections people. The next puppet has already been chosen. Paul needs to speak NOW while he has the spotlight. I love the optimism of fellow 911 truthers but to someone who's known the truth long before 911 it reads more like self-delusion.

When pressed, he says he doesn't think it was an inside job. I think he knows deep down it was, but I don't think he'll ever get behind 911 truth completely. Still, his philosophy of government is anathema to the forces that led to the inside job of 911. You really can't say that about anyone else in the race.

.....he has to stay in the game and not give them something as big of a hot potato as 9/11 Truth to destroy him with.....(George Romney, Barry Goldwater, Thomas Eagleton, Howard Dean were all eliminated for less controversial things, blown out of proportion).

Basically, we haven't done our jobs well enough.... in that we haven't got an overwhelming majority of Americans on board with us and are willing to act upon that knowledge....

...he wants to see the evidence more directly for himself. He's an old-timer and most of the discussion is taking place on the Internet, and he probably doesn't trust the Internet as a reliable source of information.

Maybe if he manages to make his way into the White House he may find the evidence he needs.

Of course, I've come to think it's possible certain government agencies/agents or people paid by government agencies (directly or indirectly) *collaborated* with eager terrorists to orchestrate 9/11. Hypothetically, it sounds sensible to me: Radical Muslim groups have been given every reason to hate US policies, and wanted the desperate opportunity to "strike back" at the corporatocracy, and the people aiding and abetting them wanted their new pearl harbor.

Hmm...This hypothesis may explain just about everything I've read. Kinda a combination of blowback/LIHOP/MIHOP.

The answer almost always lies in the middle, between the lines, between the extremes.

just not likely they were muslims or arabs!

____

♠

Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero

WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force

just a thought. a possibility. I don't have access to classified documents. i don't know any of these people. I've never even been to new york. all i know is what i see online. and i don't have time to sort through everything. i don't have high-quality footage of the events. i certainly wasn't on any of the planes, or anywhere near the pentagon (I was a couple of counties south of there at the time.)

maybe not muslims, maybe israelis. maybe someone else entirely. but it sounds like something some greedy/shady characters would do, hire some people pissed off at the corporatocracy and simultaneously arrange things on the local end so that the attacks are more devastating than they would've been otherwise - and have some perfect scapegoats to boot. though osama's involvement seems highly unlikely given his medical condition around the time of the attacks. *shrug* Maybe not. The whole truth still remains to be seen.

Any way you slice it there's an inside job to be uncovered, that NEEDS to be uncovered and people held accountable. But the bigger picture is the entire system has been in need of reform..."A republic, if you can keep it", we were given, and we're squandered our freedoms for too long and forgotten the responsibility that goes with them, the responsibility to protect those freedoms, not from communists or terrorists or dictators afar, but from greed and treachery within. But we should all know that by now.

the "threat" of international terrorism is definitely exaggerated, but at the same time, there have *been* people pissed at our empire-like tendencies for decades all over the globe. the whole world gaped open-mouthed at our invasion of panama in 1989 and hardly any US papers covered it. and for what? money. it's all about greed. it doesn't take a *vast* conspiracy - it's an almost predictable result of a system that rewards greed that the greedy rise to the top faster. and when the suffering you inflict is physically disconnected from you, it makes it easy to not notice it, or internally justify it somehow that it's for some greater good...

BTW, recommended reading: Confessions of an Economic Hit Man [if you haven't already read it. It's an easy read at 300 pages] Granted, the author buys the official 9/11 story to some degree, but he also recognized that (even if the official story were true) we're still responsible for it. and many people bought the osama connection because we'd all heard the '93 bombing story. [Is anyone claiming perchance *that* was an inside job too? Of course we all should know by now anything osama has done against us is entirely our fault for using him like a pawn in the 80s.]

That's exactly what they're trying to do.

9/11 truth well BEFORE the election!

If he brings it BEFORE the election, he will be ousted from it, those pushing for Ron Paul to discuss 911 Truth before he is elected are actually doing him and the movement a dis service, the general population can not and will not swallow the red pill.

We already know his stance on one of the energy sources behind those that were behind 911, the Federal Reserve, and Foreign policy. That should be enough, when and if elected I feel that he would address 911 appropriately.

We are the ones who have to force the issue on each and every candidate.
No candidate should be allowed to give vague answers to 9/11 Truth--"What? never heard of that before," or "WTC 7? What's that?" or "Give me your evidence and I will look at it and get back to you."
And if any one of them tries to say we're wrong or crazy, be sure to ask them: "Why do you say that?" or better "How dare you say that!"
This is a real issue with widespread voter support and hard science.
2007 is a crucial year.
Push the system. Force it to pay attention. This is the time to act.
Maybe cut Paul some slack for a month or two. But the main thing is to get the candidates talking about it.
Let the Republicans try to paint the Democrats as 9/11 crazies. That'll be GOOD.
Time to force answers, force them to focus on this subject.
They are masters at squirming and dodging the truth, at being vague.
Be tough, remember what they have said, hold their little feet to the fire.
No more bullshit!

loud and clear to those you support and $9.11 to those you want to annoy with the same message (LOL).

That's my approach, anyway.

Keep up the good work, we're winning this one day and one person at a time.

The truth shall set us free. Love is the only way forward.