Re: [Futurework] WTC was hit by a Military Jet

Sun, 01 Jul 2007 15:16:27 -0700

If circumstantial evidence was actually the more reliable around the most important attack on US soil, then one must have great faith in the CIA, the FBI, the Pentagon, and the Bush White House to tell the truth, even following subsequent daily revelations of deception around the Iraq war. In the case of 9/11, the evidence was non-existent because it was almost immediately removed in New York, and at the Pentagon, they discredited the only credible evidence that was there -- the hole in the wall.
Choosing to believe that only terrorists' ID's can survive explosions that bring down sky scrapers, that Building # 7, impenetrable head quarters for the CIA, can commit structural suicide despite not being hit nor physically attached to the Twin Towers, that terrorists on the most expensive and significant mission ever orchestrated would perform with flunky pilots without real weapons, whereas a New York City mugger wouldn't dare consider it on the streets for fear of feisty New Yorkers striking back, even if armed only with a purse or a briefcase, is proof positive that advertising works. 


But, this preferred, faithful version puts so many at peace, in North 
America any way. Helps keep the conscience protected over the (again, 
well advertised) need for compulsive revenge executed in guiltless Iraq. 
But eventually the truth manifests, too often in twisted ways...


Natalia


Harry Pollard wrote:


Arthur,

The insufficiency of witnessed evidence is often why
circumstantial evidence has greater strength.

Harry

**********************************
Henry George School of Social Science
of Los Angeles.
Box 655  Tujunga  CA  91042
818 352-4141
**********************************



 


-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On

   


Behalf Of

 


Cordell, Arthur: ECOM
Sent: Monday, June 25, 2007 1:07 PM
To: Darryl or Natalia
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Christoph Reuss
Subject: Re: [Futurework] WTC was hit by a Military Jet


Wow.  I see that you "believe" in The Conspiracy.

Nothing I do or say can change your views.  Nor do I want

   


to

 


change or
trivialize your position.

I am agnostic by nature so have a hard time taking a

   


faith based

 


stand
pro or con vis a vis The Conspiracy, no matter how many

   


grainy

 


videos
are put forward.

I actually viewed the material on YouTube but found it

   


lacking.

 


We can
argue all day whether a bomb went off, whether there was
something under
the plane, etc.  (speak to anyone at the scene of a

   


traffic accident

 


or
crime scene and try to get a straight story of what

   


happened and

 


who did
what....there will be conflicting accounts)

arthur




-----Original Message-----
From: Darryl or Natalia

   


[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

 


Sent: Monday, June 25, 2007 3:52 PM
To: Cordell, Arthur: ECOM
Cc: Christoph Reuss; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Futurework] WTC was hit by a Military Jet

Arthur,

When you respond to people's reasonably supported

   


theories

 


around the
most corrupt government in US history, whether or not you

   


find

 


any
credibility therein, with trivializing and belittling

   


one-liners, then

 


further direct people to draw comparisons to unrelated

   


tripe, you

 


utterly fail to soften or diffuse your underlying

   


disdain.

 


I'd prefer to see you take a stand, and back it up, than

   


to have you

 


release this insulting dribble that is as provocative as

   


was Harry's

 


remark. Harry used this favorite incendiary topic to

   


deflect heat

 


from
himself. But the 9/11 topic is more than relevant to this

   


list for all

 


that has been and continues to be affected by its

   


economic and

 


emotional

impact. That you ridicule the significance of conspiracy

   


theories in

 


the

face of admissions by the White House of fabricated

   


intelligence,

 


let
alone the daily reports of misconduct, secrecy and

   


criminal actions

 


within its far reaching authority, reveals a naive trust

   


in US GOP's

 


intentions and integrity.

Natalia


Cordell, Arthur: ECOM wrote:


   


http://skepdic.com/pareidol.html

You may want to review some of the material re: seeing

     


the face

 


of the

   


Virgin Mary just about everywhere in just about

     


everything.

 


-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On

     


Behalf Of

 


Christoph

   


Reuss
Sent: Saturday, June 23, 2007 5:37 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [Futurework] WTC was hit by a Military Jet

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ri7rZ6Bi6C8

Harry, who needs conspiracy theories when reality says

     


it all?

 


Chris



_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
Futurework@fes.uwaterloo.ca
http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework

_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
Futurework@fes.uwaterloo.ca
http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework




     


_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
Futurework@fes.uwaterloo.ca
http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework

   





 




_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
Futurework@fes.uwaterloo.ca
http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework






















					Reply via email to